Jump to content

Vincent R.

Members
  • Content Count

    973
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

Everything posted by Vincent R.

  1. Vincent R.

    Schoeps MiniCMIT

    No lawyer can stop you from having an opinion.
  2. Rumor has it, the Tentacle BT system/access points are about to be made public in form of an SDK (software development kit) so third parties can sync to/from it (or develop for it) over... BT.
  3. So a (first?) hands on example of the capabilities. Audio example starts at the 5:40 mark:
  4. Maastricht University (in The Netherlands) or Berlin (capitol of Germany)?
  5. Some comments in a facebook group regarding this:
  6. It is an issue with the earlier units of the F8 indeed; as acknowledged by Zoom, they changed some RF shielding design in the later production runs, as well as with the F8n. I can say from my (still limited, not tested throughout due of lack of time..) experience that the later Zoom 8s don't have this issue. Other recorders I or others tested/are using with success; Mixpre 10T, SD 633, Sonosax SX R4+, lower cost Zoom devices, Zaxcom Nomad. Like I mentioned before, we had interference on the Lectrosonics SRc receiver when in close proximity, but in the same bag there was a Sennheiser G3 RX and that one didn't had any problems. Extra note; the fact there is "RF spill" or how you wanna call it, is the fact there are 2 transmitters in the receiver as well, for the bi-directional functionality. As with all systems, that might explain the problem with the Lectro unit, since it is a known fact that TX and RX close to each other is not a wise idea.
  7. They (SMPTE) are busy with the successor of the current standard for a while, it is called TLX (Time Label, eXtensible) and most likely the choice of synchronisation will be over IP: https://www.smpte.org/webcasts/standards-feb-beyond-smpte-time-code-tlx-project
  8. Ha yes, forgot about that! 10nS accuracy they claim. "Dish" at 60 nanoseconds. Still close enough.
  9. You mean more than 1 RX next to each other? Not anytime soon, maybe middle/end of May. Yes they and they sold the first batches very quickly!
  10. I am kinda in the same boat as Constantin; I don't get the babysit comment, besides that the operator has to make sure the cable is connected and the device is on and the batteries are not flat, which would probably be the same case with your device. So if i make a comparison to what is already commercially available vs your system by the info you gave; Similarities: Both systems need a cable to camera Both systems need to set frame rate Both systems need a battery or external power Both systems run at least a production day without problems or babysitting Differences: The Dish system takes initial time from gps, thus you need to "jam" it to a satellite, the traditional systems need to jam to each other (takes 2 seconds jamming the devices with a cable, just plug in, plug out, done. some more expensive ones do it wireless) As the Dish system relies on satellite for the initial jam, you need access to one, whilst that might be the case in 99.99% of the real world situations, the traditional systems work without that. The Dish continuously checks the time (code) with the satellite (also has internal clock if it is not possible), whist the traditional systems are set and forget (for the day), so completely relies on the internal clock after initial jam (more expensive systems have wireless options though, to cross check TC all the time as well. With the Dish we need to go out and get reception to re-sync/jam if it drifts to much Question marks: What I have seen floating around from you on the interwebs, I couldn't see how one sets a frame rate; on conventional systems we do that on the device or we can access those (and more) parameters with an smartphone app Size; We have devices now the size of a 9v battery, I saw the "Dish" design next to a US coin, and that seems a lot bigger Flexibility; I know the intention is to make a monkey proof system, but from time to time we need to set extra parameters; for example if one does a night shoot, we typically off-set the TC time to not get a 00:00:00:00 TC when we pass midnight Internal clock; The cheapest systems out there can run autonomously for like a very long shooting day (a frame drift over 24h or so), how long can we NOT SEE a satellite before the Dish goes off? And last but not least; cost. We can get a small bulletproof conventional device for like 250$ give or take. That is already down from about $1000 5 years ago. I read price is not set yet, but I would say to really get the stamp "affordable" on it it must be drastically cheaper than the 250$ (which for most of us, is already very cheap, since we came from the aforementioned 1000$...).
  11. I guess you missed my post? As it answers about 2/3 of your questions and you can see hear a comparison with a modded G3.
  12. You dial in the delay on the other channels. So per example; your hardwire boom mic you dial back 19ms, your lectro you dial back 14, since the Lectros already have a 5ms (?) delay of its own. And like Bouke says, The half frame delay this all causing is not that big of an issue. if everything is delayed the same way. A word of caution; We did a quick test with the Connect in combo with an SRc last weekend, and the SRc was subject of interference of the Connect, so we gave it a bit of distance in the bag, like 4 inches, and that solved it. Indeed the 100 mw for 2.4 ghz you can not compare with 100 mw on our "conventional" UHF. We did a walking test last weekend see video, in my crowded domestic neighbourhood i would say 50 meters is a fair range to give these thingies, all things considered. In house we did a test, not in the video, and we had drop outs; It turned out I put the TX on my smartphone, connected to wifi... When I did a test without the phone, I could walk all around my house, all rooms, with thick concrete walls and no dropout. I will test further, both audio quality and range, also try to get my hands on some high gain antennae. The RX antennae are 3 db now, since it is 2.4 ghz a 9db antenna is not that much bigger (in the bag. For cart use the sky is the limit... Loads of big/far range antennae out there for low cost, to improve range.
  13. Don't know what you mean with 4 hours; if memory services me right the editor came in in the morning, started to sync, grabbed some coffee and have the morning routine chit chat, came back 15/30 after that and he went on with work. Yup, it's personal. Yet who cares what the editor/sound guy thinks, the DP is the king. When I started out in the bizzz we had to capture 40 minute betacam tapes to media 100 in real time. Now that was a pain. Yup, indeed if one doesn't know what he is doing, shit happens down the chain. The workflows I mentioned before where obviously tested before we started the projects, because time indeed is money. The equivalent in a TC workflow would be that one doesn't know how to set up TC, causing the same enjoying problems in post.
  14. It did it effortlessly. And the "renders" where relatively quick; it was a documentary series and it just took a couple of minutes (maybe 15? 30?) per day to do it, every day after shooting, so indeed effortlessly in the way of; transfer files to machine, start software, drag the files and PRESS A BUTTON, grab a drink and when you come back the dailies are synced. I know it so well because I was setting up the workflow with the editor, since at the winter of 2009/2010 this was all relatively new. The doc series was running for like 10 episodes, 2 series, you do the math. This was 2009 indeed, in the time that timecode boxes where big and heavy, especially for DSLR cameras. So after this initial big project, we had several more of them. The last time I did a "big" documentary with plural eyes was 2014; same story, last day at location I sat down with the producer (at the swimming pool, a travel day, the director had to start offline editing herself immediately for a quick turnaround), showed him how pluraleyes worked, and we found out it worked on all the 15 days, except the one morning that the audio Jack was fallen out of the camera. It got some files of synced up with the internal mic, but not all. Hence, my initial post that the 1 channel hop to camera is essential to make this work effortlessly, then you get a 100% succes rate. Lately it is pretty rare, since TC boxes are smaller and cheaper (I was the first beta tester of tentacle sync back in 2014, right after the last big doc I did with plural eyes..), but from time to time some people still want it for some reason, and it works, but yeah me too advice against it. You can say fuck you all day to me, no hurt feelings, just I guess it's a bit, well, exposing some personal issues I guess you have with the matter of subject... I know some editors get quite frustrated with the pluraleyes workflow, and all I can say is that if the "set people" are keen on handeling the scratch/hop sound properly and disciplined, it can work as advertised. Also most editors are freaking out if things are off from their usual workflow, causing them to think outside of their natural/standard way of doing things. Luckily I work with amazing editors who don't take a sweat over a change of habit, and personally I like to think along for a project and tinker about getting things done and to go smoothly for every department.
  15. It is already out there since indeed the 16th. Don't know about the US but in the Netherlands/UK/Germany they are available. Always worth to call your dealer. Although indeed TC is the way to go, I did a lot of documentaries since, well, let's say the first DSLR cameras and pluraleyes came out in 2009, and if you do what I did, it was always effortlessly; always send 1 channel if the recorder wirelessly to the camera, so the waveform will always be "identical". I think your advice comes from the practice that a lot of people want to sync it with the camera microphone as one of the two sources. Indeed that will make things worse. So again, a wireless hop of 1 channel (not a mix!) And I can say I have a 100% result (I'm literally talking 1800/2000 hours of footage over the years by the way, my experience is not based on some tests or something).
  16. I think what I took from the poll results and all the responses from the post people in the group, is to ask the post person what they prefer, if at all (some really are not bothered with ambience stereo files at all, go figure). Of course that is that you already know the post house. Basically what I already try to do if possible. To put it very blunt; it doesn't matter shit what WE like or prefer (Location sound recordists), but it matters what THEY want (post houses).
  17. I actually ran a poll last time in a post production group, what the post guys and galls actually prefer. These where the results (I think we can ignore the first option...);
  18. Last time I did a scratch to helium with a G2 (same as G3/4 in therms of output etc) it was pretty straight forward. Didn't need a mono cable, just use a standard short angled trs cable, So i don't know what @Constantin means with the mono cable actually. My standard workflow for these things is to set 1K tone from the recorder into the TX, set the level of the tx healthy (something you can do now already, go to the Red and connect everything and "line up the levels". I believe I had my output set to 0dB but don't know for sure. All in all this should take 5 minutes max. The director I give a G series IEM tuned to the same channel, so he can listen during the take, if he wants to hear it on speakers it is a matter of setting up a powered speaker at the "video village" connected to the monitor, taking the audio from the video feed. Be aware this always needs to be powered down or turned down during the take, so I always advice against it unless the village is far away, because that is an "accident" waiting to happen. If the HP output of the monitor is low, you can always put a headphone amp between the monitor and the headphones.
  19. Yeah for shit and giggles I read this threat again a while ago at Gearslutz about that...😁 Spoiler alert; most people preferred the cheap as shit Behringer over the Aurora... https://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-shoot-outs-sound-file-comparisons-audio-tests/335267-lynx-aurora-16-vs-behringer-ada8000.html
  20. Interesting. Just found this writeup: https://redesigned-1.stagetec.com/en/stagetec/stage-tec/know-how/truematch/1036-better-than-the-microphone-pauler-acoustics.html
  21. Sure, but in your line of thought, a whole computer is analog then, since they have transformers/resistors/caps etc... 😁 And that depends; if indeed the claim being made by Patrick/Sam is true, and there is no amplification in there (yes, maybe some circuitry to get it all proper, but NOT gain), it is getting interesting. Hence my previous mentioned "Pseudo MESS" microphone (these MESS mics, usually in phones and tablets, also take the direct electricity from the mic into the digital domain, kinda).
  22. Although it is contradicting (Sam/zoom statement), it is not unknown in the audio/music bizz, to bypass a preamp. Lots of people use "hotter" microphones straight into compressors without preampfification, they do it for an effect, usually to really PUMP the sound, but it is not unheard of. SO, since we are speculating here ANYWAYS, it is an interesting theory, if the AtoD (32 bit?) converter indeed can handle lower signals, thus do not need the amplification a preamp gives (all in all, a preamp is there just to add gain), It is all up to the microphone what the actual noise/spl specs are.
  23. Thanks Richard. Looks interesting. Definitely for documentary work.
  24. That is not the claim, the claim is that there is no preamp involved (making up mic level to line level). You confuse me now. AES3/42, hence 67, are digital distribution protocols. Indeed it needs to be stabilised/controlled/whatever (and because of the high freq nature of a digital signal, a high impedance cable is preferred, the 110 ohms for example, to resist interference/reflections/return loss) to get properly into the "receiver", but besides the initial A to D conversion at the "transmitting" end, there is no D/A/A/D conversion involved anymore with the aforementioned protocols.
  25. AES doesn't need any amplification on the receiving end if that is what you mean? Also, it can be carried over optical fiber (Toslink); https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3250.pdf
×
×
  • Create New...