Jump to content

Thomas Beach

Members
  • Posts

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Thomas Beach

  1. Curious to know what others have been choosing regarding TC rates for double-system in either 5.3K or 4K in 24 or 30/25 FPS? Are these frame rates to be approached like previous TC settings we have come to know over the years (24 and 29.97ND/25 respectfully)? Or is the GoPro a completely different animal? Has there been any tests to confirm/deny drift rate, assuming it will drift without TC? 

     

    Thanks for your input.

     

    Thomas

  2. Thanks, guys. I too noted the non-tilt as a concern and the IP-only adjustments of the Blackmagic. But again, a great price point. But warranty troubles must also be  considered. And I know the Marshall's have been a longtime favorite of many mixers. I was completely unaware of the Feelworld D71 and family of monitors. Thanks! They look pretty darn good and offer twice the resolution.

  3. I'm considering a rack-mountable dual monitor and have seen primarily Marshall and Blackmagic Design systems as the go-to's out there. So I'm just wondering which monitor brands the group likes and why?  

     

    I am especially interested in the Blackmagic Design Smart Duo given its price point of $495.00. Then there is the Marshall M-LYNX-702 V.3 at $800.00 and the M-LYNX-702W at $1250.00. If there are other brands or models recommended please feel free to do so. 

     

    My needs are basically standard corporate/commercial work and low-budget indie features.

     

    Thanks for your input.

     

    Tom

  4. Foolishly I didn't keep my v2.03 prg file. But am getting help with that from SD. Am going to try another troubleshooting work session before going backwards with Firmware to see. But will resort to that if needed and report back. Thanks.

     

    I might add that upgrading to 4.51 has proven to be disastrous. My CL6 went completely bonkers after doing so and I was forced to remove it. So I'm dealing with SD on that as a separate issue. The other mixer I borrowed a 664 from said the same with 4.50. The problems so far with this firmware has been legion with me.

    here is a pic of what my CL6 looked like after breaking for dinner and coming back to it a half hour later. It was in REC but not recording and couldn't be closed out without rebooting.

    But I digress from my original post.

    GoofyCL6.jpg

  5. I am reviewing a 2014 thread dealing with the Zaxcom IFB200 and 633 RF interference problem. But as that thread is three years old and doesn't deal with the CL900 CamerLink and the 664, I wanted to get a fresh perspective from users here.

    I purchased the CL900 last August and have been using it successfully in my ENG bag directly (2" or less) above my SD 664 and in tandem with with Zaxcom ERXTCD3 RX's only for Time Code send via 2.4GHz Zaxnet send to cameras. This has also been without using the 2-ch. audio feed side of the CL900. Again... not a single problem since last August in this same configuration.

    Three weeks ago I bought a new CL6 and successfully installed it. I used the 664 with the CL 6 on three commercial shoots, all without incidents. A week ago I upgraded my 664 Frimwarre from 2.03 to 4.51.

    The first job after the upgrade was a weeklong shoot in FL on a doc shoot. On day two I began hearing constant high-pitched RF bleed creeping into my tracks. After several minutes of troubleshooting (cables, connections etc.) I determined the only way to lessen and/or eliminate the RF bleed was to remove the CL900 from my bag and get it at least 6"-8" away from my bag (IFB TX Power of 7) or reduce transmit power to 5 or less, which still bled into my 664 if held close to the 664.

    I called Zaxcom. Was told perhaps a break in the Zaxnet antenna. I was also told that this is a 664 problem which has arisen before and had seen a "fix" by Sound Devices made to the units. Bought and replaced the Zaxnet antenna. It did nothing to fix the problem.

    I called Sound Devices. They denied any known problem nor any "fix" conducted by them for it on the 664.

    So in other words, Zaxcom and Sound Devices appeared to push the problem back and forth to each other.

    I removed the CL6 (other problems with it!) a few days ago. That said, the RF bleed still exists without the CL6.

    Yesterday I borrowed another mixers 664 (v4.50) and conducted the same test using my CL900. The RF bleed was also in his unit as well. And just as bad.

    I want to know why after almost a year of no problems, I'd suddenly have these issues which are now irreparable without the removal of my CL900 from close proximity to my 664? Clearly I cannot operate in this fashion. At this point I don't know which gear to send in. Both? All I do know is that I am not getting substantive support help from either Zaxcom or Sound Devices. And I would appreciate an immediate response by both companies in order to work together to resolve this issue as quickly as possible.

    Thanks

    Thomas Beach

     

     

  6. Please forgive the very late reply to those who have posted here in order to offer opinions, thoughts and help. I want to thank all of you for your contributions.  For what it is worth, I went with the Zaxcom Camera Link and a pair of ERX3TCD.  I have now used them several times and I couldn't be happier with the audio quality, range and reliability where Time Code transmission is concerned.  I'm looking forward to adding QRX200 RX's in the very near future.

    Again, thanks to all.

    Tom

  7. Thanks, Philip. Lots of wisdom in that last reply.

    Thanks, John.  Sounds like you've been around the block with Zaxcom and with good results. I appreciate your insights, configs and experiences.

    Had a good long conversation with Trew L.A. and think I've settled on something of compromise. I think I'm going to take the plunge with Zaxcom TRX900CL and a pair of ERX3TCD's to start out. Much greater flexibility in lieu of IFB200 for future step-ups to the RX200 or QRX235 w/QIFB option.

    Thanks again to all for your invaluable insights and recommendations.

  8. Thanks, Abe. Yeah, the Secuirty workaround did the trick. Much appreciated.

    Thanks for the ZaxConvert info and confirmation.

    Thanks too for ID'ing Glenn Sanders. Thought it might be him but couldn't tell.

  9. Thanks, Philip. Didn't realize that was Lectro policy forever. Guess I'm confused though as Lectro said yesterday each 411A/TX would come in at $1150.00 approx. That strikes me as a whole lot cheaper than $2800.00 p/ch. Yes, the 100's are toast based on cost to re-block.

    Thanks again for your thoughts and opinions!  So would you support the IFB200/ERX3TCD solution as an interim ramp-up solution as well?

  10. Yes, I am deeply disappointed in Gordon Moore's current stance of tossing off anything 7 years or older for re-blocking. Turning me off to Lectro.  I was told yesterday by Lectro that I may want to consider getting my BLK's 24 and 25 done soon as well ($1150.00 p/ch) just in case (no decision yet) Lectro tosses them into the 7 year old pile as well (mine are 2005).

    Just discovered the ERX3TCD also offers a locking 3.5. That's nice.

  11. Great and helpful posts from all.

    Glenn, thanks for the system config advice. But quick calculations send me over $5K, which was the reason I was considering lesser expensive options. I think the system you recommend would be awesome otherwise. I have no illusions about what I stand to give up if I go cheaper/cheapish. Not the least of which would be the lack versatility using the IFB200/ERX3TCD set-up as I already have a full Comtek system.

    Derek,

    Thanks for all of the insight. Some considerations, both good and bad I definitely overlooked. 

     

     

    Quote

    The IFB100/200 would give you Zaxnet, which is what would get you to the ERXs. 2.4G system - not perfect but it's been great for me. There are almost always holes and you can scan with any android phone.

    Abe,

    Tried downloading ZaxConvert on my MacBook Pro 10.9.5) but got the block due to unrecognized developer. Whats up with that? And will I have to carry around my laptop to do file conversions from .zax MARFF to .bwf files for all of my clients?

  12. 13 hours ago, EnotsMedia said:

    I'm sort of in the same boat w/ Thomas...i'm in need a single Ch scratch for 2 cam shoots... I was looking hard at the G3's, I have a G2 and it has served me well..I've been looking for a 2nd in the same block "B" but now I'm leaning towards a set of UCR100's paired with a SMQV. Really wish they had a AA battery version of the UCR100's..I hate 9v's. Can anyone give their opinion on the UCR's sound quality vs a G3/2 setup? My thoughts were to get the UCR's in a BLK I already have that way I can at least scan and coordinate easier. 

    Jeremy, I just got a call yesterday from a NYC company I worked for telling me my scratch track was only 70% there in post. See my previous post admitting I've been having hints of trouble with my 100's (that's on me). And considering they are BLK 29 (I know my 100's are illegal) combined with the disturbing news from Lectro under Mr. Moore's tenure that they will be simply throwing off doing block conversions for anything 7 years or older (no, I'm not happy about that, as the owner of four BLK 24/25 411A's from 2005) I've pretty much confirmed that my 100's are fast becoming deep-sea fishing sinkers. And as such, I must replace them for both my own and legitimate Lectro reasons.

    My points are twofold. I need to replace my 100's with something different, and now, and I am not pleased with Lectro for their current stances as it relates to older product support, not to mention all of the expense-to-need I previously expressed.

    So I'm looking both at Lectro as well as Zaxcom/Senny.  Right now I'm leaning towards IFB200/EXR3TCD. BUT... as part of my investigation, I trried downlaoding ZaxConvert and discovered my MacBook Pro blocks it due to unrecognized developer reason. Plus I'm not keen on the idea of having to tote around my computer for file conversions. So any thoughts out there on ZaxConvert issues would also be appreciated.

    I apologize in advance for ignorance of Zaxcom software/products as I'm still getting up to speed with them.

  13. 14 hours ago, Johnny Karlsson said:

    I use Lectro UM100/UCR100 for scratch mono hops. I've picked them up on eBay (for very good deals) one by one and now have three of the rx. UM100 is not a current product, but pop up occasionally on eBay.

    The UCR100's 1/8" output is not locking, so make sure to use RA connector and bongo to prevent accidental unplugging.

    Thanks, Johnny. I've been using a pair of 100's (BLK 29) for years in that role but now have severe issues with them. And given the very slow set-up for clear freq's, I'm just going to replace them.

    14 hours ago, Philip Perkins said:

    The locking mini was one of the reasons I went with G2/3 for scratch hops.  The weight (esp with lithium AAs) was another.

    Yes, Philip, I made quick note of that benefit as compared to say the Zaxcom ERX3TCD's. But in the role of hops, I'm hoping the camera op isn't going to be putting the connector to the test too often! Seriously though, I know how a quick hand movement might disconnect a simple 3.5mm connector, although I've pressed my old PR-72b's into hop service when needed and have never had a real problem in that way. Still, the locking mini is a good point. Thanks.

  14. My oversight in the wideband must be a result of not digging deep enough on their gear. To reiterate, you use the IFB TX and the ERX3TCD as single channel camera hop and with good results?

    A quick review of Zaxnet reveals I don't have a handle on that system yet either. More digging to do.

  15. Really looked hard and long at Zaxcom, Abe. For the life of me I can never seem to make sense of what appears to be their revolving door of products. They change and discontinue so quickly it makes me nervous. Plus they haven't stepped up to wideband either yet, I see. Another limitation compared to Lectros. Also, w/o the Nomad I wouldn't be able to benefit from the ZaxNet feature, although TC is a huge shiny object in their favor. I will look at the config you've recommended. Thanks.

    Abe,

    The Zaxcom IFB route is interesting. So you use the ERX3TCD as a single channel camera hop? This would appear to be like using Comtek PR-72b's or PR-75/216's, yes? Higher quality I suppose? 

  16. Thanks, Abe. Smattering... big city, rural, countryside. 

    I was speaking of 2x SRc's for two-cam shoots. Good deal of what I shoot is two-cam, hence two SRc's. That more than anything else is what gives me pause on price-to-need. 

     

    Wow. I completely overlooked the LR. That would be a nice compromise perhaps. Thanks.

    Thanks, Philip, for the very objective assessment and the real-world experiences. Yes, I do nothing with a camera hop that isn't backed up by my own audio. And again, every client I deal with wants it that way. 

    You touch upon my real dilema; I never do high-end ENG-style work where the client demands they be able to use the camera audio. Which is why I struggle to justify SR's.

    Indeed. The added last-minute additional wireless channel for talent etc. is definitely an added bonus.

    Plus I see that the new G3's have IR tuning and (I think) scanning as well as the benefit of the display panel. 

    Thanks again.

    I'd add, its not that I can't afford SR's, which probably also contributes to my dilemma. It's the other thing you talked about, that being how much they will get used. Yes, I need hops all the time it seems now. But to a client its always scratch for post-synching speed. And therein lies the rub on price-to-need for me.

    Perhaps the reality is, I WANT Lectro's but I only NEED G3's. 

    But you have both given me much new insights to consider and I am most grateful

  17. I'm in need of a pair of reliable camera hops for standard fare; documentary, ENG, corporate, commercial. 

    I am struggling to justify the huge layout for two SRc RX's and a pair of LT/LMb TX's.  I always buy the best when I've determined I need something. And I know Lectro's are the best camera hops I can get (Okay, Zaxcom is great too). So naturally I am predisposed to buying Lectro's. But... everything I do keeps me within 10-15 ft. of cameras and is always a simple request for scratch track audio (almost always a single mono sum mix)  for Plural Eyes, and not primary audio as that is always delivered via 664/668.

    So I'm actually considering the new generation of Senny G3 with: 

    • 1 EK 100 G3 diversity receiver
    • 1 SK 100 G3 bodypack transmitter

    This new generation seems much improved at least on the features front over the last ten years. And if they can accomplish the task, given my needs, I don't see why I should shell out for Lectro's.

    So knowing all of the step-downs in qualities and features of the G3's, my question, for those who have ACTUALLY used these as I've described, is whether these can be reliably counted on to give me quality scratch tracks at the camera or not?

    I would also entertain any alternate suggestions or impassioned entreaties for spending so much more on Lectro's.

    Thanks much for reading, guys, and taking time to weigh in. It is appreciated!

    Tom

  18. Thanks Mike and Matt.  Greatly appreciated.  

     

    So it sounds like the issue of the ACL204 taking jam from my 664 but being re-jammed by the Alexa will be overcome by choosing manual/once in the Jam TC sub menu.  But after jamming the ACL204 in manual/once, the Alexa will definitely take the jam from the 204, correct?  

     

    Thanks

     

    Tom

  19. Thanks, Jason.  That's clearly the issue I've been having as well.  I am using a Sound Devices 5-LEMO > 5-LEMO coiled TC cable. What were you using?  And what did you find finally worked for you?  Also, I've only tried the B: TC/ACN LEMO output.  Would using the A: TC/TUNE output be a possible workaround?

     

    Tom

  20. Thanks, SB.  Will try that.

     

    The other issue I've had is that the Alexa only prefers to be the slave when the SYNC signal is active with one of the numerous selections available.  When the SYNC signal is 'OFF' it then wants to act only as the master, instead jamming the ACL204 and not the other way around.  While I agree that the use of the ACL204 seems logical enough, the manual is horribly written.  

     

    Best,

     

    Tom

  21. I'm having a helluva difficult time trying to understand how to properly use the ACL-204 and would like to ask for some help.

     

    I have an Alexa shoot coming up this weekend and would appreciate knowing what the menu settings in each of the menus should be ( GEN, SYNC, TC, SYS, ACN).  

     

    All I need to do is continuously jam Time Code to the camera and would prefer that my 664 be the Master and the Alexa be the slave.  Not worried about the Genlock signal.

     

    I would be very grateful for some help here as soon as someone can lend it.

     

    Best,

     

    Tom

×
×
  • Create New...