Philip Perkins

Have you ever gotten Venice files with more than 2 channels of audio recorded? Do some folks use studio decks in XDCAM to record more than 2 channels of audio?

The data was written differently, with more redundancy and error checks. I"m not talking about systems that used audio dat recorders for data.

How much of a deal breaker is that slot RX? How about a scratch hop for syncing that's relatively innocuous like Comtek or G3 or a Zax deal? If a DP's wirelesses were hosing my talent wireless I would talk to the producer about priorities in their sound world..... And what is up with this DP who knew going in that his gear would make trouble for the talent wirelesses?

The two current BM pockets use the same connectors and menus and both do the mini input LTC>metadata TC trick. We never tried getting TC into the older version of the camera, I don't think it had the ability to convert LTC to metadata TC, ditto with the super-weird original BM4k camera (the one with the 1/4" input jacks).

At least some were made by Kyocera. The original design for the portable "top loader" style transports was I think by Aiwa.

WC has allowed me to use multiple machines to record live music shoots where there was lots of leakage between mics/instruments, since it kept the recorders in strict sample lock. This could be just 2 744Ts up to multiple JoeCo 24 track machines in lock with computer interfaces etc..

Did you notify the PSM that they were that low? I will say that in recent years I've been "hitting" my 633 harder level wise, w/o undue artifacts.

I just did some shoots with the current version of this camera and it all worked fine. I sent audio to the TA3F jack and TC in through the left chan of the mini, then worked the menus to have the signals end up on separate channels. The camera picked up the TC right away and made it into metadata TC for the camera files. We mounted a small wireless RX (G2) + a small TC box (Moze) to the threaded hole on the cam for one deal, for the other the shooter had a camera cage that was easy to mount to. BM has come a long way in the clarity of its menus--other co.s (like RED) should take note. A side note--I ended up making my own mini>TA3M cables for the audio dfeed to avoid having to run through XLRs, which are kind of out of scale for this rig.

Familiar scenario--lotsa talkers of very diff volume on lavs, aggressive uncontrollable HVAC, panty-bunched clients, no time. I sent blessings to Dan Dugan all day long.

DAT data backup was different from RDAT audio recording.

No, certainly NOT DAT.

Was your Neve formerly owned by a mixer in the SF area? The main deal with PA boards anymore is scene and routing saving+recall, tons of FX plugins, and Dante interfacing. Even small churches and clubs have digital PA boards now...

There is probably no more film-sound centric mixer than a Cooper, other than the PSC boards. Almost nothing about them is suited to PA work, particularly the EQ band centers, routing etc. OK in a pinch, but long term you'd be better off with a cheap Mackie, QSC or AH for PA work. The reverse is also true, this is spoken as someone who was forced to use cheap PA boards for film sound...

I had extensive experience with Sony PCM F1+1/2" video formats (Betamax, and VHS) and found that setup far more reliable than DAT. I've said it here many times before, but the great awful revelation about DAT was that the most important part of the machine--the tiny helical scan based transport--was not made by any of the companies who made the rest of the machine. Thus a super-expensive StellaDat was no more reliable than a $500 Casio DA7, Fostex DATS were no more reliable than HHBs and very expensive studio decks like Sony 7030 were no more reliable than MI market decks like Panasonic 3700. The various makers added many cool features to their decks (HHB external syncability, Fostex 3-input mic mixer) but they could not change the fact that once the machines had some serious hours on them they acquired "personalities", and then became unreliable in a very bad way.

You might also keep in mind that people (lawyers) aren't big on having you poke visible holes in their clothes with vampire clips etc either. The thing with talent wiring is that the talent has to be down with it or it won't happen. If you are going to be shooting these people over a long period of time I'd go in easy, polite and respectful, and then as they get to know you (and hopefully trust you) you might get some cooperation on micing. The producers have to contain their ambitions, at least at first or you won't get much that they want from these people.