Jump to content

Back Up (tangent continued from CL9 equipment thread)


cjh

Recommended Posts

This is a continuation of the CL9 thread that was started in the equipment topic.

Glenn, can you explain more about the digital outputs still allowing signal pass through in the event of a processor (machine lock up etc) in a Deva/Fusion, does this still mean the attached Mix8/12 would still operate to some degree? Personally I would only ever back up my mono mix track so ideally would use something like the small zax rec that does one track + TC or is this analogue input only?

I am of the opinion that both the SD and Zax digital board / rec combo's are very reliable but good to know what all the back up options are.

Also when recording to both CF cards and an ext drive in mirror mode from a Fusion does all metadata editing cover all media, no need to input metadata twice etc. Presume so, this was a big pain in the SD 744 set up.

I would most likely run the above workflow with the ext drive and be happy with that, if the whole lots packed a sad and we lost part of a take then we would go have to go again as we normally do, happens very rarely in my experience.

The 788 does offer very good multiple drive and track allocation rec options, as does the Deva, the Fusion seems a great rec for the price too and only lacks an int HD which is very good for keeping the whole shoots rushes immediately accessible. (very handy on my last job as we had lots of short notice dialogue playback requirements and it was very easy to find the audio rec weeks early and dub it off). This can be easily overcome with the Fusion by adding an ext HD, please correct me Glenn if I am wrong in any of my assumptions.

Regards and hopefully still continuing happy holidays to all.

Chris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glenn, can you explain more about the digital outputs still allowing signal pass through in the event of a processor (machine lock up etc) in a Deva/Fusion, does this still mean the attached Mix8/12 would still operate to some degree? Personally I would only ever back up my mono mix track so ideally would use something like the small zax rec that does one track + TC or is this analogue input only?

The digital direct outs are unprocessed copies of the analog inputs of the Deva or Fusion. The output is the result of Deva/Fusion hardware that has no DSP interaction. If the DSP were to lock up the digital direct outs would not be affected. A MIX12 or MIX8 has no effect on this signal path. If this output were connected to a backup recorder the iso tracks would be available to replace the mix track that would be lost due to the DSP lock up.Since the topic is now "Back UP" I should point out that with the Deva and Zaxcom recording wireless some of this is a moot point as the Deva can command the wireless system to replay any take so it can be remixed after the fact. A full backup of all of the days audio is available on the wireless virtual multi track recording.If Deva meta data is changed after the fact the files are simply re-mirrored to copy the change to the backup drive. There is never any need to enter the data twice. Glenn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" What does "marf files are generally more recoverable" mean in the context of this guy I know who´s Li-Ion battery went down during a take and after that the drive wasn´t recoverable? "

I have edited my phrase: " marf files are often more recoverable "

it means what it says!

the situation you bring up proves that, just as Murphy says: CRAP HAPPENS, and we will need to deal with that!

no matter what equipment we select, no matter how careful we are using it, and regardless of our very best efforts to avoid it, some day, somewhere, Murphy can and will strike; it has happened or/and will happen to all of us!  Count on it

" guy I know who´s Li-Ion battery went down during a take "

exactly!

and even with airbags, some folks still get killed in car crashes.

" some of this is a moot point  "

so one might think: impregnable, absolute backup!...but Murphy's law sez:

What if the connector on the end of the lav goes wonkie and makes noise during the take?"?

the backup system Peter is about to describe is also susceptible...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fusion records to 2 CF cards. One is MARF, the other is FAT32 to give to production at the end of the day. So in the end there actually is no additional backup unless you dump the MARF recordings to an external drive or a fresh cf-card. But at certain points there won´t be a backup after you have handed the FAT32 card to production up to the point where you copy another one.

With the 788 I do this: Record to internal drive, internal CF and external HD. The moment we wrap, I pull out the CF-card. Hand it to the driver and still have 2 copies with me.

So in a way at any point there are at least 2 copies of your audio that carry identical meta-data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As with many of the backup discussions we've had here over the years, part of the question is "what are you backing up"  which kind of failure are you protecting against?  Operator error (forgot to roll, blew the mix, overloads etc)?  Recorder DSP lockup due to heat or something more mysterious?  Media failure (all media fail eventually)?  Power kickout or battery died?  Mic cable issues?  Wireless interference?  We deal with all these and more, and they all have different solutions.  In concert recording, for instance, the ONLY backup anyone seems interested in is a full track-for-track redundant recording taken as analog off the outputs of the mic pres.  For location dialog recording, one recorder recording to 2 media (or one media and a camera) seems like what most people do, if they do a back up at all.  I guess I think if the job you are recording seems REALLY uptight about retakes for whatever reason, then you'll be more relaxed knowing you have a backup rolling, and being relaxed, will probably do a better job.

phil p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" What does "marf files are generally more recoverable" mean in the context of this guy I know who´s Li-Ion battery went down during a take and after that the drive wasn´t recoverable? "

I have edited my phrase: " marf files are often more recoverable "

it means what it says!

the situation you bring up proves that, just as Murphy says: CRAP HAPPENS, and we will need to deal with that!

no matter what equipment we select, no matter how careful we are using it, and regardless of our very best efforts to avoid it, some day, somewhere, Murphy can and will strike; it has happened or/and will happen to all of us!  Count on it

" guy I know who´s Li-Ion battery went down during a take "

exactly!

and even with airbags, some folks still get killed in car crashes.

" some of this is a moot point  "

so one might think: impregnable, absolute backup!...but Murphy's law sez:

What if the connector on the end of the lav goes wonkie and makes noise during the take?"?

Exactly. So with all that in mind. What makes marf so much more superior? In the end it´s just an unrecoverable drive on your desk. What I mean is that the argument that marf is superior to fat32 is like comparing apples with oranges. There has never been a case of the same drive being recovered because it was marf and the same failure with a fat32 drive.

So unless Zaxcom presents some kind of statistic (or proven facts) of permanently unrecoverable recordings during power failures for me these arguments are just promo-talk. They are simply claimed pseudo-facts that suggest between the lines that FAT32 machines lose data often and MARF drives never. Quote from their site:

helps eliminate the loss of audio data due to bad media and constant directory accessing common to all FAT32 based recording systems.

That line suggests that Marf eliminates the loss of data or not?

Just like this weird claim:

In comparison, some compact multi-track hard disk recorders can easily exceed the 140F degree maximum hard disk operating temperature causing erratic operation and lost data.

What does that mean? Where are they getting their info to make such bold statements? I guess this line is aimed at SD788. But if you actually read the SD forum or talk to the service dept. of SD there hasn´t been a single proven case of lost of data due to heat issues. Zaxcom states that the heat causes lost data. I ask: Where are all these people that lost data in the heat? Reading the Zaxcom site there must be an army out there. Does axcom have an inside man at SD or all the other makers of machines that run hot?

I just can´t follow this style of promoting a product, sorry. Having said that I am actually a user of their products.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the 788 I do this: Record to internal drive, internal CF and external HD. The moment we wrap, I pull out the CF-card. Hand it to the driver and still have 2 copies with me.

So in a way at any point there are at least 2 copies of your audio that carry identical meta-data.

Peter, What do you do with these 2 backups that makes it different then having one backup?  The workflow with a Deva/fusion seems exactly the same to me.  Do you always take your external drive with you? In reality, what are you backing up? Your internal HD from failing? The production from losing your CF card?  Recorder theft?

As a fairly young person in the sound biz (7 years professionally), I have never come across a "failed" CF card. I've had HDs crash, I've had DATs record with bad head alignment, Ive had corrupted files on external drives (on 788t, though the internal HD and CF were fine) and I've had productions lose my disks. Frankly, before I decided to buy a Fusion, I was intrigued by the triple-safe recording of the 788t, until I thought about it practically:  there's no piece of gear in my kit that I trust more then my internal CF card (and that includes the many times I have used a 788t). Two things that pushed me towards the Fusion were the Double CF recording, and the fact that if my system crashed (many times with 788t, thankfully none yet with my Fusion), that the MARF was a much safer "backup".

Beyond that, I don't feel that I need a separate backup at all. To me, my gear is so reliable these days, that I can't imagine running a separate backup recorder to cover my gear's ass (though i could definitely imagine carrying a 2nd fusion in a sealed pelican case in the event that catastrophe struck--even then, i bet the files on the CF cards would be fine). It is 100 times more likely that I forget or otherwise fail to roll, and having a backup isn't helpin me there--and its 1000 times more likely to distract me from doing my job in the first place)

The only reason I would run a backup is if the production insisted. Even then, I find it a bit insulting that the sound department is the only one who is expected to carry redundant gear, despite the camera department using FAR less proven technology.  If theres a hair in the gate? Reshoot. RED overheats? Reshoot. Bulb bursts mid take? Reshoot. Don't see why it should be any different for sound.

E.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end it´s just an unrecoverable drive on your desk. "

OK, Peter, you need to avoid mixing apples and bananas:

do not intermix failure of file management systems with failures of the drives themselves.

FAT 32 and marf (don't forget UDF) are file formatting systems, and all of them are capable of being corrupted; a damaged hard drive is pretty much one that is physically unreadable.

Some systems using FAT32 file formatting do periodic "close-open" operations via the operating system to minimize (not eliminate) potential data losses.  Guess we need to be sure to temper our use of really absolute terms like "eliminate" and use less precise terms like "reduce" or "minimize".

The bottom line is that no system is completely foolproof, so perhaps the weakness lies with the fool who didn't properly change the battery ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly. So with all that in mind. What makes marf so much more superior? In the end it´s just an unrecoverable drive on your desk. What I mean is that the argument that marf is superior to fat32 is like comparing apples with oranges. There has never been a case of the same drive being recovered because it was marf and the same failure with a fat32 drive.

Your last sentence doesnt make sense.

The reality is that FAT-32 files--in this case WAV files--often (if not always) become corrupted if they are not closed up tidily, while this is not an issue with the MARF.  While Fat-32 has the benefit of being more easily read by conventional software (a disadvantage of MARF, certainly), MARF was built to be a bit sturdier as a production sound format. If you need proof, I think you need to do more research on the JWsound archives. I personally love the 788t, and generally found it to be very reliable and with several advantages over the competition, but I find my Fusion to be even more reliable, and for me, a lot of that has to do with solid-state media and MARF primary drives.

E

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end it´s just an unrecoverable drive on your desk. "

OK, Peter, you need to avoid mixing apples and bananas:

do not intermix failure of file management systems with failures of the drives themselves.

FAT 32 and marf (don't forget UDF) are file formatting systems, and all of them are capable of being corrupted; a damaged hard drive is pretty much one that is physically unreadable.

Some systems using FAT32 file formatting do periodic "close-open" operations via the operating system to minimize (not eliminate) potential data losses.  Guess we need to be sure to temper our use of really absolute terms like "eliminate" and use less precise terms like "reduce" or "minimize".

The bottom line is that no system is completely foolproof, so perhaps the weakness lies with the fool who didn't properly change the battery ??

Missunderstanding. I meant the unrecoverable data on that marf-drive not a physical damage of the drive. Ironically that would be easier to save. Just send the drive to a data-recovery company, they take out the cylinder and read out the data and send you a copy on a streamer tape. Recovering corrupted data is much harder.

Guess we need to be sure to temper our use of really absolute terms like "eliminate" and use less precise terms like "reduce" or "minimize".

Well, that´s in fact the bottom line of my litte "crusade" here. I wish they wouldn´t use all these terms that suggest nothing less than supremacy.

I have nothing agaist comparative advertising but in the end it does them no good if they don´t stick to the facts.

It´s not good for a company to point out what´s bad about other products to promote their own. And it gets even worse when the things used as an argument are arguable at best and wrong at worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your last sentence doesnt make sense.

The reality is that FAT-32 files--in this case WAV files--often (if not always) become corrupted if they are not closed up tidily, while this is not an issue with the MARF.  While Fat-32 has the benefit of being more easily read by conventional software (a disadvantage of MARF, certainly), MARF was built to be a bit sturdier as a production sound format. If you need proof, I think you need to do more research on the JWsound archives. I personally love the 788t, and generally found it to be very reliable and with several advantages over the competition, but I find my Fusion to be even more reliable, and for me, a lot of that has to do with solid-state media and MARF primary drives.

E

I am aware of that. Maybe you didn´t read what I wrote in the threat where this all came from.

I know that marf does fail and there are cases of lost audio. And we´re not talking about just the last recording not being closed. I´m talking about half a day´s work. Anyway, I don´t want to start from scratch about my point.

Just because there are no reports about lost recordings of devas on jwsound doesn´t mean they don´t exist ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Solid Goldberger,

I always keep two backups. When shooting on walk-away sets. I always take the ext. drive with me. especially in walk-away set situatios where my gear stays on set over night and the driver is still on the road with the delivery CF.

I wish you good luck with your strategy. I choose to better be safe than sorry.

When shooting abroad imagine the delibery cf being still in transit while you have to load you ear into a shipping box. would you not take another backup that travels with you on the plane? There are some scary reports about lost and damaged audio gear over at ramps. I definitely don't want to get into a situation where I have to explain to the producer why I skipped a backup on a 50$ drive when such thins are lost. Do you know what an hour of ADR costs plus accomodation of actors etc. etc.

why risk such a thing when you can get another drive for almost nothing and stick into your pocket?

I don't see the advantage of NOT recording a second backup. In the above situation the so called second backup becomes your ONLY backup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fusion records to 2 CF cards. One is MARF, the other is FAT32 to give to production at the end of the day. So in the end there actually is no additional backup unless you dump the MARF recordings to an external drive or a fresh cf-card. But at certain points there won´t be a backup after you have handed the FAT32 card to production up to the point where you copy another one.

With the 788 I do this: Record to internal drive, internal CF and external HD. The moment we wrap, I pull out the CF-card. Hand it to the driver and still have 2 copies with me.

So in a way at any point there are at least 2 copies of your audio that carry identical meta-data.

Your stated procedure above is what you choose to do regarding backup of your production recording. I will assume that you arrived at this process based on logical and likely scenarios and it is this process that you feel is necessary to achieve your comfort level. It really is not terribly different than what I do and most other Deva users do, with the exception of one additional piece of media, the external hard drive. I record to the internal hard drive and the internal (disk, not CF in my case) disk and at wrap I turn in the internal (removable) disk. So, I am left with the recording on the internal hard drive (MARF format, which I challenge anyone to demonstrate is INFERIOR to FAT32, forget about whether MARF is superior or not) and the other copy is on its way to transfer facility. Once transferred, there is then another copy of my tracks so any other copies I might have made to protect the time between turning in the dailies and having them transferred, are irrelevant.

"So in a way at any point there are at least 2 copies of your audio that carry identical meta-data" also seems to indicate confusing a file format, an operating system and media deliverables --- every sound file I record, whether it is on a hard drive in MARF, CF in FAT32, optical disk UDF, will have the identical meta-data.

I think it is about time to assess how much of this discussion thread is really about backups (we certainly have had lots of other lively conversations in the past regarding backups) and how much of it is about "my machine is better than your machine" or MY way is the best way, etc., etc. Most of us are fairly clear that NONE of the gear we use is absolutely bullet-proof and fail-safe, and NONE of the manufacturers including Sound Devices and Zaxcom have ever made such claims. ALL the manufacturers will promote those features and functions of their machines that they feel set them apart to their competition. I have owned a lot of professional gear from a whole lot of companies over the last 40 years and I don't think I have ever seen a company make flat out false claims as you are implying Zaxcom has done. I don't think anyone really wants to debate here the possible advantages of MARF over FAT32; I will continue to mention to anyone who is interested why I feel MARF has an advantage over FAT32 but the bottom line is that ALL of the recorders out there that are in constant use everyday, do a wonderful job of recording our sound, reliably, predictably and with little or no failures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter, What do you do with these 2 backups that makes it different then having one backup?  The workflow with a Deva/fusion seems exactly the same to me.  Do you always take your external drive with you? In reality, what are you backing up? Your internal HD from failing? The production from losing your CF card?  Recorder theft?

As a fairly young person in the sound biz (7 years professionally), I have never come across a "failed" CF card. I've had HDs crash, I've had DATs record with bad head alignment, Ive had corrupted files on external drives (on 788t, though the internal HD and CF were fine) and I've had productions lose my disks. Frankly, before I decided to buy a Fusion, I was intrigued by the triple-safe recording of the 788t, until I thought about it practically:  there's no piece of gear in my kit that I trust more then my internal CF card (and that includes the many times I have used a 788t). Two things that pushed me towards the Fusion were the Double CF recording, and the fact that if my system crashed (many times with 788t, thankfully none yet with my Fusion), that the MARF was a much safer "backup".

Beyond that, I don't feel that I need a separate backup at all. To me, my gear is so reliable these days, that I can't imagine running a separate backup recorder to cover my gear's ass (though i could definitely imagine carrying a 2nd fusion in a sealed pelican case in the event that catastrophe struck--even then, i bet the files on the CF cards would be fine). It is 100 times more likely that I forget or otherwise fail to roll, and having a backup isn't helpin me there--and its 1000 times more likely to distract me from doing my job in the first place)

The only reason I would run a backup is if the production insisted. Even then, I find it a bit insulting that the sound department is the only one who is expected to carry redundant gear, despite the camera department using FAR less proven technology.  If theres a hair in the gate? Reshoot. RED overheats? Reshoot. Bulb bursts mid take? Reshoot. Don't see why it should be any different for sound.

E.

Well....I HAVE had CF cards fail.  They are very reliable, but CAN fail or get corrupted--that is one why SanDisk etc cards come with "Card Recovery" apps.  See the discussions here and elsewhere about low-cost vs. name-brand CF cards....

phil p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil,

Very interesting. Could you link to that thread? Couldn't find one that seemed explicitly about that looking through the archives.

Did your CF cards themselves fail? Or was it just the data written to those?  I have heard about Solid state media failing, but don't really know what the signs are. Again, I've used CF cards as my primary deliverable for several years without ANY problems (though certainly less often then some of you feature/serial tv mixers who have their cards working for months at a time).

E.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phil,

Very interesting. Could you link to that thread? Couldn't find one that seemed explicitly about that looking through the archives.

Did your CF cards themselves fail? Or was it just the data written to those?  I have heard about Solid state media failing, but don't really know what the signs are. Again, I've used CF cards as my primary deliverable for several years without ANY problems (though certainly less often then some of you feature/serial tv mixers who have their cards working for months at a time).

E.

It wasn't here--over on a taper thread or the GS "Remote" forum there was some discussion as I recall.  The thread wasn't mine--I didn't write up my own problems, but I've had 3 instances of CF card failures since I started using them, 2 of my cards and one of someone else's, in 3 different recorders.  Lessons learned: 1: no ultra cheapo media, only SanDisk anymore for me.  2: backup is still important even w/ CF cards.

phil p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff,

I made these point because I was asked directly how and why I record to 3 media.

I would bet that if it was vice versa, and the 788 only recorded to 2 media and the deva recorded to 3 it would be up on the zaxcom site as being a phantastic advantace over "other" recorders.

IMO it's silly to argue that something that is definitely a great feature in fact isn't because the deva can not do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff,

I made these point because I was asked directly how and why I record to 3 media.

I would bet that if it was vice versa, and the 788 only recorded to 2 media and the deva recorded to 3 it would be up on the zaxcom site as being a phantastic advantace over "other" recorders.

IMO it's silly to argue that something that is definitely a great feature in fact isn't because the deva can not do it.

The Deva system of recording to two media at the same time is an advance over other recorders. At the time it was invented it was the only recorder to do it. In present day it is the only recorder to use an infinite buffer. This means that the internal drive is used to store the audio data. The backup drive gets its data from the internal drive. If the external DVD-RAM media has bad sectors the drive can stay off line as long as it needs to in order to lock out the bad sectors. In this way the Deva makes perfect backups on inexpensive DVD-RAM media. This eliminates phone calls from post requesting another backup to replace the bad one.

Recording 2 perfect copies of the audio beats 3 or more that can have issues.

Glenn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Well, here is a BIG problem I'm facing at the moment. I do a Back up of my Primary CF, which does DevaProgfilebin file and the ZFiles, and hand out the Backup card.

When I try to re-load a Primary card backup onto a CF and try to play it on the Fusion, it just does not work at all.

I'm missing a few slates as I recorded them in a different day folder by mistake and, although having them backed up, I can't play them on my machine.

I'm really sacked and need help.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...