Jump to content

Michael Capulli

Members
  • Posts

    166
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Michael Capulli

  1. In my experience with using the common Lavalieres with Lectrosonics systems, the DPAs were the odd ones with positive polarity. The other common lavalieres from sanken & countryman were negative polarity. There was one particular job that requested we kept on top of this. I'm not sure how common knowledge it is or practice.

  2. 7 hours ago, syncsound said:

     

    How does it implement the 32 bit recording? Are they using the mixed output of 2 converters like other recorders?

    I don't believe the X3 has dual ADCs and to my ears you dont get any more headroom when using 32 bit float. 

  3. On 8/6/2023 at 9:10 PM, IronFilm said:

    However, things are always changing. I watched a video recently where someone from Lectrosonics hinted they'll be coming with remote control features too (that is  not tweedle tones) in the future?

    interesting considering the new wireless line has recently launched without any such feature

  4. This has been a reliable setup for me once I had my older SRCs updated to the Rev B boards. Occasionally If I am dealing with DMX interference I will swap out the passive LPDAs for dipoles / they seem to bring less crud in - and I keep a few of the PF25 filters handy and drop inline as needed. If you want to go with LFA there are many happy users and they are very well made, I personally prefer to just pop in the PF25 which is more narrowband anyway. I tend to keep all my talent within 1-2 TV channels so I haven't needed a tunable filter on top of the tracking filter inside the receivers. I prefer to keep things passive and simple if I remote my antennas its 75ft of RG8X after that I am moving closer or going over the shoulder. If I am having RF issues it seems 90% of the time its interference not range so I pay close attention to the spectrum and my coordination. If I start adding tunable filters and amplified antennas It's just going to be too much for me to troubleshoot. 

     

    I'm not sure how much you are to gain by bypassing the RF distro built into the PSC?

  5. I've seen strong RF upset the internal RF oscillator inside the MKH50 as have a few other folks I would imagine. The strength of the MKH design can make it sensitive to RF whereas the Schoeps will be sensitive to humidity and moisture IE reaching the dew point on an overnight shoot although in Schoeps' case they have newer CMIT capsules that are more immune to moisture. Having boomed for years with 41 I'll say that the 50 is not as natural on the edge of the pattern if you are playing the mic that way - but its strengths are a strong off-axis rejection that feels like a shotgun, very low self noise and a rich quality to the voice you are miking.

  6. I'm not sure what the filter bandwidth is on the A10s or G3s but a rule I've been using that has worked for me is to try for at least 15 MHz of separation between the IFB carrier and your talent channels. Digital transmissions will really get into an analog IFB receiver for example a boom op standing in close proximity to a handful of digital transmitters on the set, and his IFB is trying to receive an FM signal 150ft away - doesn't work well without some moderate separation in your tuning - The G3s receivers I would think will be affected most here, how much you need to separate them in tuning will depend.

  7. 1 hour ago, Philip Perkins said:

    I'd be interested to know if any sound folks here working in drama or docs are using Axient (or other Shure) these days?  Where I live it is all Lectro, Zax and a few Wisy, with the solo-shooters using low-end Senn G4 or the Blutooth stuff.  I like Shure, but what with diffs in mic connectors etc it's hard to change horses.

     

    The Axient system has a lot going for it - I enjoyed using it extensively over a period of two TV seasons. Disadvantages are the receiver rack channel density and they are very power hungry. No real complaints about the talent transmitters once you get used to them- battery telemetry is accurate down to the minute which is refreshing, but unthreading the lemo plug feels like it takes forever! The interface is not as user friendly as Lectro (but if you are running ShowLink you only need to power them up and settings are made on the receiver) Spectrum Manager and the ability to instantly change frequency sounds great in practice - haven't seen it in action too often, and I believe the spectrum manager requires A/C. The newer generation may not, and it is very nice but pricey. My main issue with the spectrum manager is that there is no way to exclude a group of frequencies IE land mobile. In fact I just dealt with this the other day an Axient system was retuning transmitters below 488. I'll also add that the Shure twinplex lavalieres sound great and can really take a beating - comparable to DPA, much more durable than the regulars. I was seeing folks commenting on long wait periods for the Axient stuff FWIW...

  8. Fox News Article

     

    Has anyone seen these A.I. Generated fake Joe Rogan podcasts? I immediately started thinking about how it could be used for ADR or even to clean up reference tracks.

     

    I remember reading years ago about Roger Ebert and how they used a large sample library of his DVD commentary to create a synthesized voice / sampler for him to use with a keyboard. 

  9. 13 hours ago, OB1 said:

    For those who have used both, is there a discernible difference(upgrade) from the R1A to the IFBlue (aside from the wideband)? My whole IFB/Comm workflow revolves around a dozen R1As across 3 blocks, signal boosted by SNA as needed.

     

    Does it make sense to move to IFBlue

     

    Differences - lighter and more slim, AAs, programmable preset channels via LCD interface, better sound, As good if not improved RF performance in my experience and priced below R1A and its successor. If I were only buying a few for crew I'd go for the R1Bs just because I like the housing on those but I use M2Rs instead. It wouldn't fit my workflow to spread them across 3 blocks, but they are the same IFBs so you can use them how you want.

  10. yes- the letter is your output preset / config. If you create an output preset for 'A' that just outputs the mix bus and talk 1, you can use the 'A' preset on other outputs like Line Outs as well. This makes it easier to duplicate commonly used configs or to quickly toggle and reassign an output without creating a new matrix each time. 

  11. Dante outputs are individually user configurable, or can be patched to track buses or AES outputs. These settings are specified in the Audio & TC Parameters crown position 4. If user is chosen, go to your Dante outmaps from Test or PreRec screen by pressing F2, then toggling F3 until you see Dante outmaps. If you don't see this screen your Dante might be set for OFF in the Audio & TC Parameters menu. You can jog through 32 outputs in this screen and set each output to a specific configuration. You can set up to 54 custom configurations. If you are already using these output configs for other outmaps, it may be better to setup your track buses how you would like and then patch your Dante outputs to your 24 tracks. I do not have the Dante + add on option so there may be even more options that I am not aware of.

×
×
  • Create New...