Actualsizeaudio

This is the very scenario where AuxTCapp works really well, and Plural Eyes does not. Also, I just did a five day ENG shoot like this of a bike race in Tobago. Slating would have been completely out of the question.

Just bought my 8 track Nomad from Gotham. I'll be comparing it to my 788t extensively next week. I'll start a thread about it in the equipment section. If anyone has anything specific they want me to address I'd be happy to do that.

Yep, file names mean nothing. That's a huge plus. And yes, the TC is printed as "Aux TC" to an audio track. I used it today with a 5Dnand it really is rock solid barring any operator errors. Using it on a 3 camera shoot in Trinidad for ESPN next week. Wish I had my Nomad!!! I have to say the Zaxcom file naming scene with the TRX900AA is pretty cool if you don't mind all the numbers. I like seeing TC in the name of the file. It would be great if the zax convert software gave you an option to turn that stuff off though. I've used my Ambient lanc logger and lockit boxes with auxTC app, as well as the ERX IFB boxes. They also work great. Nomad interfacing with those ERX boxes will be great, and a huge part of why I'll get one.

If the video files are properly TC stamped then BWF QT merge from Videotoolshed does it in about 5 minutes. You simply pick your QT folder, pick your BWF folder, then the program makes a synced list of files. You then tell it to paste self contained into the QT movie and the audio is actually pasted into the QT movie in perfect sync. Multiple video files can sync to one audio file, and vice versa. It's great, fast, and I use it constantly.

That is great news Jack. I appreciate your updates.

Yeah, I've heard a lot of stuff deemed usable that I wouldn't consider good. Seems like the bar for usable has dropped considerably in the mind of many producers. I'm biased because I've had a batch of stuff show up here lately that was over limited . The de-noising doesn't work as well if there is any pumping of the dynamics. I find the release times of many analog limiters in these mixers to be too slow. If the noise is shifting in amplitude it just doesn't work as well. Yeah it still works, but it just isn't as artifact free. That being said, I do have a few clients that it will be appropriate for. The ones where I know the stuff is going straight to the web out of FCP, but those clients are a minority. Frankly, I'm sure some stuff will get processed simply due to operator boredom. I can't say I'll always be able to resist the temptation.

My understanding is that there is a delay caused by processing time when compressing the video that is not accompanied for when the audio track of the QT is recorded. It is about 100ms actually. I use AuxTCapp, and account for this offset there. I have a 60D and the offset is not the same as the 5D. It's less on the 60D. Not sure why.

I can't wait to read the manual

I'm with the Senator on this one. I do mostly audio post, but also a fair amount of location sound. In post I use different limiters and compressors for different types of program. I implore all location sound mixers, even ones doing internet stuff, to only use the limiters as a safety valve for when dynamics get out of control. You can not hear what is really going on inside those headphones while out in the field. If I have to de-noise your audio, and you've been hitting your limiter with any frequency, well then, the results are......what word is suitable here? Glen, this is great news. The big advantage of digital processing is the ability to look ahead at what is coming, and to be able to deal with the waveform with zero latency. Kudos for this design. I'm very excited (though I promise not to use it).

I'll be passing through that part of the state at that exact time. Hmmm...I'd love to join you if I have the time. Would be fun.

I modified the one that came with the unit, and the one I bought after I broke the one that came with the unit. I see this in your future.... The only problem I had with the purchase was that they used Fed-ex ground and a shoe-box sized box for 2 of the smallest connectors I've ever purchased. Kind of a waste, but that's picking nits.

I think it came out nice. Much sturdier then the old non R.A. version. Not too hard to solder either. I was surprised by no crimp collar, but with the shield soldered to the connector, and the coax itself soldered to the pin, it's pretty tough.

I got my connectors and am re-wiring one right now. One question: does the shield of the cable need to make contact to the housing of the connector in a coaxial situation like this? I'm assuming yes. The connector is nice, but there is no crimp piece, so the solder will be the only strain relief. Still, I think it will be a more sturdy connector then the original. I'll try and upload pics if I can.

Well said Larry, though I'm pretty sure no one in here was comparing you to an evil mega corp. I think you have the right attitude about this since an app that does what the RM2 does would add value to your product. Get some intern on it right away......

I think you have to look at how small the market is, and base your pricing off that a little. You won't have the volume to sell it for .99. I think Lectro should just look at what they make in profit off of an RM2, and make an app that would do the same thing, and charge the same. Better for the environment, and better for users. If I'm willing to pay $100 for the RM, I'm willing to pay $50 for the app frankly. Others might balk at that, so somewhere in between $10 and $50 is probably where they should price it. If someone on here knew how to program apps, and they simply recorded the dweedle tones off of an RM2, is there anything stopping them from making the app? I can't for the life of me see how Lectro can own the rights to those little samples of sound.

That's why I bought it as well. I like Ambient a lot, so I don't mind sending them $10. Seriously, can't they just record the different tones for the gain and include them in the app? I imagine Lectro would get angry. It should be noted, if I was willing to give Ambient $10, I'd also be willing to give Lectro $50 for what is on the RM2.

I lost my Lectrosonics dweedle tone remote (RM2) for the SM series transmitters about a month ago. During these 2 months, I've been pondering why we couldn't just record the tones and play them back via our iphones. The reason I lost the rm2 was that it kept going off at unwanted times no matter where I kept it. This wouldn't be a problem with an iphone. Well, Ambient tapped my thoughts (must wear foil cap) and released Lectromote app for the iphone. Sadly, there is no transmitter gain, just lock, unlock, sleep, and unsleep. Almost a perfect solution. HEY LECTRO! MAKE YOUR OWN APP AND INCLUDE ALL THE TONES!! http://www.ambient.de/index_e.html

So, I tried this out with my ALL601 and it worked. Pro tools saw the unit once I specified it as a midi input device. with MTC reader port set to "any" it saw the 23.976 TC and locked to it immediately when I put the Pro tools into online mode. If Pro Tools sees 23.976MTC from this device I would think it will see it from others. I could not however get the ACC501 to work. My computer doesn't see it, which will prompt an email to Sebastian Fell.

In this case you really do need to genlock, I would agree whole heartedly.

I do realize that, and it explains the price difference. I own 2 of these cables, both of which need new SSMA ends. They have both failed on me, and my fixing of them has been a hack job. I'm hoping that this solder type RA SSMA will do the trick. I'll keep you posted. If it works it might just be worth replacing the end instead of using an adapter. -Mike

Thanks! Very helpful info on the ipod classic case scenario. I feel a trip to best buy coming on.

I've found that the red I work with most often drifts about 1-3 frames an hour from both my 788T, and Ambient lockits (which are both tuned periodically to my ACC501). That's way too much to just jam to twice a day. As far as rolling for 10 minutes at a time or less, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be noticeable. However, this is just this particular camera I see often. YMMV

I need to actually use my ERX IFB receivers like IFB units next week. So, I need to be able to get the things clipped onto a belt. Anyone have any suggestions? Anyone do this yet?

I just bought 2 right angle connectors myself, and yes, they were pricey: $22.50. While much less then you paid, still steep. I hope they work, I'll let you know when I get them. https://avnetexpress.avnet.com/store/em/EMController/Connector-RF/TE-Connectivity-AMP/1045423-1/_/R-1015579/A-1015579/An-0?action=part&catalogId=500201&langId=-1&storeId=500201&listIndex=-1

Dave, I didn't know that about the 601. I have one of those as well, I'll have to try that sometime. Sounds like for this application you want LTC to MTC anyway. I'll still give it a test if I get a chance.