Philip Perkins

I was hoping the new-model Schoeps would be less moisture sensitive...

It's only conventional for sound dept.s to do data management if they are being paid conventional wages to do it, ie compensated for the extra time involved. Data management should not be free, unless it is very simple. I can imagine a conversation with an AD along the lines of "would you like me to manage and package up all my data and reports for a mid-day upload or would you like me to record the scene you are getting ready to shoot?" Further: "you've pushed the shooting down to the last minute of the regular crew-day, would you like me to do some data management for OT wages?". I have asked this question many times, the answer is almost always "no", because the data manager is going to stay on the clock anyway to deal with the pile of camera files. Sound data they can do on the side while they deal with picture.

What the OP is proposing sounds a bit like what a camera truck is on USA productions: fairly large, with enough work space for multiple camera crews and their gear (as well as a spot for a coffee maker etc).. These sorts of trucks are rentable, but they are not cheap. In the USA, what is rentable cheaply are small box trucks meant for people moving house. It used to be common for bands, small dance companies, small theatre troupes to rent these and do a temporary build out of the interior (shelving and tie-downs mostly). Not very secure, and with the rental company's logo plastered all over the sides--a somewhat obvious theft target. Is your production paying for this vehicle? Will they have secure overnight+day off storage for it? Will your production cover the insurance for this truck?

You can train your muscles all you want but at the end of the day a boom op needs to be able to make a judgement about the sound they are pulling in. It takes some experience to understand how to feather a mic between multiple speakers in a group scene, while continuing to "pattern-off" an interfering sound. If this is done merely by eye then all you are doing is guessing about whether or not your mic placement is working. In modern dramatic scenes with multiple actors the mixer might be managing and monitoring a large number of lav mics and plants at the same time as a boom or two. As the mixer I can't keep my monitor feed only on the poles all the time, so I rely on the boom ops (with cans) to tell me how they did on a given take. I also need them to report to me about problem BGs with info on whether or not that noise is on-axis enough to their mic that we need to get help with it. Out on the set an AD is going to hear a possibly problematic sound issue and ask the boom op if they are picking that up. The boom op needs headphones to be able to give a good answer.

With these early machines SD really wanted to prove themselves, and did. All the 7xx machines are amazingly versatile, well thought out, rugged and sound great. That 2006 post mentions the Tascam HD-P2 as well. I had one of those for a few years before having enough $ to get a 702T. The Tascam was a really good deal for what it cost, but it was NOT well thought out, not super versatile (although it would lock to tri-level sync from HDCAMS, quite useful in those days), very illogical in use and sounded only "meh" compared to the 7xx SDs. I see lots of folks still using 7XX SDs, I rarely hear of anyone using the HDP2 these days.

toys for rich tech bros.

I would want a lot better support for a new wireless system than I've gotten from DPA (re: wired mics) in the last while. No thanks.

I would suggest that you get with everyone else on this production about how to get it done, and what their tolerance is for seeing mics and TX. I'd also advise that you be clear with production that they must fully insure any gear used in or near water, especially talent wireless. If it was me I would use ONLY rental gear, or gear the production has bought for the show for this work, not my personal gear that I would expect to be able to use on jobs after this one. In truth, equipment used in water kind of becomes an expendable.

One of the greats. RIP

Well, that's always the hard part, the communications! Not so hard for 1-way (mixer>boom op), a lot harder for that plus boom op>mixer. There are many solutions out there, you might check in with one of the pro audio dealers about what is currently available off the shelf for this purpose. You very well may find that you have to modify something to suit your gear and working style, especially if you want your boom op to be 100% wireless.

You won't get much of any transmission from a submerged TX. They have to be out of the water no matter how you waterproof them. Are you working in the ocean, in salt water? I found that many rental houses would not rent TX to me if I was going to use them in salt water. Aquapacs can work fine for many hours if they aren't submerged all the time. The necklace mics you show are pretty elegant, actually. What mic is inside the ball?

They all have headphones or buds on every shoot I've ever been on in over 50 years in the business. Many years ago it was somewhat customary for Euro and non-USA boom ops to work without headphones, since the equipment in use might not have had a good 2nd monitor feed. With current equipment at all levels there is no excuse for this any more. Booming without being able to hear what the mic is getting is unprofessional and downright stupid. Mic positioning is a game of inches, exactly where the mic is pointed when is what separates the great boom ops from the amateur hacks.

It is absolutely true that if you don't fully notate audio extras, then tell post, production and anyone else who will listen about them you might as well not bother to record them. They will never find them on their own. I have personally delivered such recordings to editorial after the shoot to make sure they got them and understood what they were and why we recorded them. On several shows we decided to roll certain kinds of sound WITH picture, to make sure that they got to editorial. On those shows they really only paid much attention to sound that was WITH picture, and wild extras not at all.

The bigger the budget the more the iso stack is likely to be used. The lower the budget the more likely your mono or 2 chan split mix will be used. There are lots of reasons to make a full mix as you go regardless of where the iso stack is going, but don't expect the sort of sympathy, rehearsal or support that the sound dept got to do this in the '80s and before.

Really old wireless stuff is rarely worth the trouble to use and even more rarely worth the service cost at current USA bench rates. If this rig doesn't work for you the first time you test it (hopefully before you buy) then don't bother. There is SO much more recent wireless gear available used.