Yasgur Posted September 25, 2011 Report Share Posted September 25, 2011 First post and I just joined the forums about an hour ago. Great site guys! I am on a reality based show that shoots with an HPX 370. We have 2 and also an F3. The 370 has 4 channels of audio but you can only monitor two at a time. My issue is we use 2 lectros for talent lavs, 1 G3 for boom pole and another for getting a line feed from an audio board. I am considering a new workflow and want to be "The GUY" that can be the expert to secure more confidence on the team. Here is what I am considering. I want to buy a 552 mixer and link it to the new Pix 240 recorder. I will be tethered by an sdi cable sending video and t/c to the pix240 and 4 wireless transmitters sending to the 552 and direct out to the 4 channels of audio on the pix 240. This way, I can monitor all 4 channels of audio in the mixer and actually preview video so I know my pole is out of the way. Our main problem has been that to hear channels 3/4 on the 370, you have to flip switches on the camera which is not practical. Also if we get drop outs, I may miss that by staying on 1/2 or 3/4 too long. Also, on this camera, you can't adjust levels on 3/4 *or 1/2 if you have the routing changed) It would be nice to have a chest pack for the mixer and the pix 240 somehow mounted to a cheeseplate with the articulating arm holding the monitor into clear view. Comments appreciated. Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProSound Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Just send a mix to 3/4via a wireless link and leave cam mic on 1/2 multi track show on788t or Zaxcom fusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Interesting idea Yasgur, recording the video as well as audio. Possible snag is that while the 552 may allow you to output 4 channels via AES it does not provide a ton of flexibility in routing. I think you would still end up making a two track mix with the 552 and then just isolating two of your sources. I wonder also if in this scenario you could mount a mic on the camera and have that audio carry over on the sdi and then your 4 AES channels would be recoded as additional tacks somehow making a total of 6 audio tracks on the pix. Good luck, you'd probably be the first one to try this kind of workflow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Perkins Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 You DON'T want to be responsible for picture recording too....really. Don't you have enough to do dealing with the sound? phil p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Sjostrom Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Whenever I'm on this knd of multitrack-into-camera gig I just make sure the levels in the cam are OK then listen to one return signal from the cam occasionally. If I want to check lavs and stuff I can just solo that channel on the mixer. If I'm confident that my levels into cam are OK, then just soloing a channel like that on the mixer, shouldn't be any different than listening to a return feed from the camera. Personally, I wouldn't go with the PIX. I think you'd be busy watching your video rather than checking you boom pole position IRL, and not monitoring levels. And BNCs in my experienced (however limited) are very easy to break. One little hard pull might be enough to snap it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 " want to be "The GUY" that can be the expert to secure more confidence on the team. " I see a red flag here... You describe yourself as " a new boom pole operator" " I am considering a new workflow " Is that your job on the project?? changing workflow?? We don't know much about you (your experience, for example), but this isn't just about buying new cool technology toys, and wanting to record image, too, really warns me you may be biting off more than you, or the others doing sound (production and post) on the project want. You mention "getting a line feed from an audio board" so I'm guessing there is a sound supervisor, and you really need to work with that person, and be a good team member... Do your job, and let your "leadership" develop properly and naturally... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasgur Posted September 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Guys, thanks for the responses. Mike, the reason that I am considering this new workflow is because this new project is unlike any that the producers have done before and we are seeing the kinks in the armor. The company has been producing shows for thirty years, most notably The Hank Parker fishing show. Primarily all of their shoots have been single camera with one wireless, maybe two if there is a guest. They all have been very small, camera operator self sufficient kind of shoots. Now, we (me included) are producing a new docu reality show called Troubadour, TX. It aired this weekend across the country. When we go on location, we are utilizing all 4 channels on the camera. I know this is an audio forum but we are not getting good audio a lot of times because we are trying to come out of the self sufficient camera operator mode. The camera does not allow for good monitoring. We realize that to get good audio right, all of the time, we need to change the workflow to include and audio capture/boom operator guy. I don't think they are ready to consider a boom operator AND a mixer operator. So that leaves me with the dilemma of how to do both with one person. Everything we do is with lectro's and Senns. We have come from sending 4 hops directly to camera to sending lectro's (lavs) to onboard receivers to channels 1 & 2 and boom pole to a SD Mix Pre then hard wired to channel three. And if we are doing a music segment, another Senn coming off of the soundboard directly to Channel 4. So what we often have is an issue being able to switch from channels 1&2 to 3&4 on the fly. Also the 370 camera can only set levels on channel 1&2, 3&4 are set by Auto Gain Control. Compound this all by the fact when we get off our bus to shoot the talent, it's run and gun - don't stop rolling until we run out of tape (P2Cards). I know it;s not ideal but that's the way it is. Mike, this is the part of the workflow I have NO control over. What I could do however is provide a loution that will allow me to hear all 4 discrete channels and then record into a Nomad or a 744T. In investigating that scenario, it would require extra post to marry the sync'd w/ TC audio to the video. The camera shoots AVC intra codec which requires to be transcoded in order to work with Avid. My thought is I could simplify everything by sending all audio to a 552 and send post fader direct outs to the Pix 240 and since the Pix 240 records DNxHD, which is native to Avid, voila, I have a perfect lens to post workflow that require an SDI cable as an umbilical which is what I am doing with a hardline XLR anyway. Lastly, my experience is a music guy. I have produced 11 albums and 4 Concert DVD's. I have relatively little experience in the broadcast world though. My team likes my work and I only ALMOST yanked the camera off my shooter's shoulder like 3 times in 6 months! I am getting better. Jef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Sjostrom Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 The camera does not allow for good monitoring. We realize that to get good audio right, all of the time, we need to change the workflow to include and audio capture/boom operator guy. I don't think they are ready to consider a boom operator AND a mixer operator If you want good sound, you need a dedicated sound person to do it. Booming and mixing is no biggie on ENG really. That's standard I think, at least here. And to be able to know if your audio's going to be good, the chain should be: Mics > Mixer > Camera. Camera RTN > Mixer As it sounds now, it's more like Some mics > Camera Some mics > MicPre MicPre > Camera Camera RTN > MicPre I'd go with a mixer-recorder, like the 552, send the lav channels to the 3&4 on camera and record a stereo mix on the mixer. That way, you have everything in your box, you know it sounds good and you deliver good audio to the camera. It's one way., and the lavs are also isolated on the camera but with AGC which is just sad, but AOK for sync. So get a serious Mixer bag, put all of your wireless, and boom pole, everything into the mixer, send a stereo mix to the camera 1&2, and direct out two of the lav channels to 3&4 on camera. I wouldn't want a video monitor in my bag. I know I'd be watching that instead of watching my levels and IRL boom pole position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasgur Posted September 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 BTW, what does IRL mean in your last sentence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 The additional information adds some clarity, but there is already a lot of other experience in doing such shows, which differ hugely from "11 albums and 4 concert DVD's". I, and I suspect some others believe you are reinventing a wheel that already exists and works, though of course folks are always trying new ideas, too, especially when they have the budget. The more common "general" practice seems to be to record (track) the 4 channels of audio (744T, 788T, Nomads (any week now), and several other solutions, and then line up all the master audio with all the images and (after logging it all) edit away. There are lots of variations on this, of course, and perhaps one day sound will also be stuck recording the VDO, but not me ... I suspect you will be awfully busy trying to mix, boom, and watch VDO, though I know some have done so. (not me!) I trust you'll keep us posted on your new wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasgur Posted September 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Mike I understand whole heartedly and appreciate your opinions. Please don't get hung up on me "watching" the video monitor, I just saw it as a benefit. I was just thinking that video AND audio could be captured in one file, already sync'd with 4 discrete channels. I could hide the video monitor (which has 4 audio monitors as well) and it would be the same as having a 744T at almost half the price with an improved workflow to post. I'll let everyone know where we go. I also understand my previous experience is mostly unrelated - that's why I added the line about jerking the camera off of my shooters shoulder! - and that's why I am asking the experts. Didn't mean to challenge, just thought I had a good idea. Jeff Again, what is IRL boom pole position? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Sjostrom Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Again, what is IRL boom pole position? In real life. I know I suffer from looking at monitors whenever I see one so I know the frame line. But as soon as I look up again I don't know where I was.. So IME it's better to just go with "put the boom where it sounds good, if you're in frame they'll let you know" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted September 26, 2011 Report Share Posted September 26, 2011 Yes, I believe the SD PX240 is actually designed to work on or near the camera for such purposes.... For the 4 channel wireless, lots of folks are using the Lectro D4 systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelo Waldron Posted September 27, 2011 Report Share Posted September 27, 2011 Get a different camera, with 4 channels of audio without the AGC. If you are going to boom, you need to listen to the boom channel in both ears. I need to. There is something psychoacoustic for me.. I need to hear the boom in both ears. Pyscho.... There is no short cut. Give your way a try and report back here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted September 27, 2011 Report Share Posted September 27, 2011 " something psychoacoustic " Angelo makes a good point: listening to a boom mic in one ear and a lav mic (or combination, or a mix) in the other ear can be distracting and deceiving, or even drive you nutz... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manel Posted September 28, 2011 Report Share Posted September 28, 2011 Well, as a Boomie... you have to develop a good relationship with the camera guys. If they trust you, with a look to them you'd know if you are in shot or not, if you are dangerous or if you can get closer... Booming well would keep your eyes and hands busy enough to let you control a 552 and a PX240... Good luck and by all means report back here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebrengun Posted September 28, 2011 Report Share Posted September 28, 2011 I can sympathize with you about working a show where you have little ability to affect the workflow. Many have suggested better and more standard ways to do a show of this style which are of no use to you because, as you have said, you cannot change the camera and you cannot run dual system and sync via timecode in post. However I think your idea will probably not work for the same reason: you are suggesting a radical change in workflow. You are also accepting much more responsibility in addition to your current responsibilities which would ideally be handled by two or even three people! It's hard enough to wire, boom, set up a feed, mix, turn off noisemakers etc. without dealing with video! Who will handle the CF cards/drives? You will have more batteries to keep track of and I'm guessing that the PiX240 goes through batteries a lot faster than most of our sound gear. Since what you want to do is a new idea I imagine they'll still record on P2 cards anyways so you are effectively doubling the footage. Also if there are two cameras shooting, how are they syncing those up? Will there be a noticeable difference between the Pix240 codec and the other camera's transcoded footage? All of that aside, you're problems aren't exactly solved. If you're monitoring on the 552 you can only listen to two channels at a time as well. This means that your 552 meters aren't going to be a very accurate reflection of the levels of your individual direct out tracks since you would be mixing four channels down to two and would be making decisions based on the phasing you may hear etc. that wouldn't actually be present in the isos. And there isn't a way to monitor your post fade direct outs on the 552 that I'm aware of. I actually think this should be a feature for a future update where "double clicking" the PFL switch would allow you to hear that channel post fader. As for monitoring from the Pix I have no idea what that might be like in the field…do you? It sounds like a simple setup: 1 boom, 3 wireless (2 lavs and a feed from a board). I think bringing the Pix into it may create many more problems than it potentially solves. If there are two cameras shooting the same coverage and you have the ability to send 4 channels to the cameras then why not split them 2 and 2? You could put talent 1 and boom on camera 1 and talent 2 and the feed on camera 2. Something like this gets you around the AGC. Or if you have enough receivers, you could send 4 tracks to each camera but configure it so that between the two cameras all 4 tracks are not AGC. For example: talent 1 and 2 on camera 1 are not AGC but on camera 2 they would be. In this scenario channel 3 and 4 on the cameras would primarily be for reference or backup or just to get you through card changes while one camera is down. Or since you're already tethered to the camera, maybe you could have a breakaway cable into camera 1 and mix your two lavs to one channel and the boom to channel 2. Then you can send your board feed straight into the second camera since I'm guessing you don't make many adjustments to its level once it's been set up. Heck you could use another receiver and send an additional board feed into channel 3 of camera 1 as backup (just backup because of the AGC). Depending on how your show usually goes you might find that you do very little booming when you're relying on a board feed for a performance. If your performer is talent lav 1 then I also doubt it would be very useful for you during a performance. If that's the case then maybe you could take advantage of the 552's mixing capabilities and simply find a way to mix to two tracks. This turned into quite a long post that may or may not be terribly helpful but I would encourage you to find a way to make your current workflow better without completely reinventing it. The 552 is certainly a step in the right direction though! Finally I'm going to take a stab at it and guess that "IRL" means In Real Life? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miker71 Posted September 28, 2011 Report Share Posted September 28, 2011 times like this i miss good old audio perspective in relation to mic pickup pattern and picture framing, especially if you are doing PSC. i've been looking at a lot of early Direct Cinema, seeing the recordist handholding directly the shaft of 815T (hmmm, or would that be a 805T) ... hearing about the sync issues on "Primary" because reliable tape transport did not exist outside of some huge rig that was logistically impractical on run-and-gun style. half a century later and is it any easier?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisnewton Posted September 28, 2011 Report Share Posted September 28, 2011 Hi Yasgur. very interesting idea you've got there. I agree with Brengun though; I've done a similar thing on reality/lifestyle shows where production didn't want to have to sync up a shitload of audio to footage (two guys painting a wall or laying carpet etc. for an hour ) cameras are regularly synced up running TOD (time-of-day timecode) and post syncs them up easily. the split of 4 tracks to 2 cameras is quite common in this world. I've also done 4 channel to one camera setups using inputs 3 and 4, with all the caveats already listed previously. It certainly is a lot more effective to use a 744T or such for truly getting the best audio, but that doesn't look like an option for you right now. I'd try to get your production to adopt Brengun's approach first before taking a leap into the PIX world. After all, you would have to make the PIX pay for itself, and that seems unlikely in your scenario. cheers, Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasgur Posted September 29, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 Chris I have received a lot of expert opinions about the 744T and I do see that makes sense. However, I am on the fence to make a purchase to either get an audio recorder only to add to the 552 or add the pix which will not only record but record a video feed in the Avids native codec. No post work at all. Can you tell me what I gain with the 744only? Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 (edited) " what I gain with the 744only? " It is a proven workhorse with an industry accepted, proven workflow. While the PIX is going to be a big product for SD, in your situation, you are proposing a new workflow that is not proven, it requires connection to the camera, which the 744 does not, and it is putting additional work and responsibility on you, for which you will probably not be paid additionally. These can be disadvantages of being the pioneer, the early adopter. Edited September 30, 2011 by studiomprd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisnewton Posted September 29, 2011 Report Share Posted September 29, 2011 Senator, your comments are right on. Jeff, if the PIX will work for you and you can make money on it, go for it. It is a product I've been looking at, but at this point I couldn't justify buying one. A machine like it may be in all our futures. Just dealing with sound and timecode is about all I want to deal with right now. Let us know how you make out. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yasgur Posted September 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2011 These are disadvantages of being the pioneer, the early adopter. Now this was unexpected. I have been told all of my life that I cannot do things and now I am a Soundman/Grip/Stage Manager/Logger for a National TV show and part of a great team. I may be inexperienced in broadcast but as a pioneer I am not. I believe an open mind to new things can be what sets one above the rest. I mean no disrespect to anyone here. I am getting a Pix 240 next week from a supplier to try my workflow. They think it is a great idea and if it works for me, I will post a video and comments. The supplier even wants to possibly write an article on the workflow. I'll be back next week. Thanks guys Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Wielage Posted October 1, 2011 Report Share Posted October 1, 2011 That workflow should work, but I think you'll find it's more stress and more things to check (and potentially go wrong). Ask for more money! --Marc W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.279748a58a2b862b7aa5f3b84126e232.png)
Recommended Posts
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.