BAB414

I wouldn't say standard, just the only game in town since the Invisity's were discontinued... until now. If I have to choose, I always go for the analog ones first.

The microsone pack is a transceiver as I understand it. It receives RF from a regular transmitter and transmits it out via Bluetooth. So talent should only have to wear that one pack and the earwig itself. That, plus their regular body mic transmitter that they would have anyway. The range is regular Bluetooth range so talent might not even have to wear the transceiver depending on the shot.

That might work but if you need continuous recording for an extended amount of time, you probably want to be plugged into AC power.

I had an on set emergency where they thought the actors could just be on the phone with each other (as per the script) but there was no cell service. Haha! So I gave the actors the full mix in their ears and they were total pros about it. YMMV. Try to ask or do a test with the actors. They may not mind hearing their own voices at all.

Check out this article: https://www.lectrosonics.com/press-releases/836-gotham-sound-gears-up-for-lost-in-space-with-lectrosonics.html Also, I'm pretty sure there is some knowledge out there from Simon Hayes who did Prometheus (a space-suit movie with practical comms). This article is about The Martian: https://www.local695.com/magazine/the-martian/

That's what I figured. If the routing is flexible in the DSR4, you could do analog outputs 1&2 through superslot and then 3&4 out the ta5 on the front I suppose.

So is there no way to get AES out of an src/srb that would work with the sl-2?

Does the DSR4 really have better RF performance than the DSQD like the headline above implies?

I always make sure to wipe the bottom of the shoe with the foam right before I stick it on, to remove any dust and dirt. It probably helps marginally. But yeah, foot foom's usefulness lasts half a day at the very best in my experience. Use it for the wide shots and then it's time for carpet-chess.

Neither system is perfect but the Roger 2.4GHz digital system or the older analog Phonak system (discontinued but available for rent).

I just wrapped a film where the lead actor had to have an earwig at ALL TIMES. Not just shooting and rehearsals - they could not be on set without a fully functioning earwig that was tested and confirmed working. It was their security blanket just as much as it was needed to deliver lines. It was a very sensitive situation and everyone from the director, the actor, and their people were nervous about it. I thought this post might be helpful on the technical side of things to illustrate our workflow. We were more or less forced to use the Roger 2.4GHz system which ended up being fine with only 2-3 little range issues throughout the entire shoot. I had built a rig that was essentially a Roger Base Station and a BST 216-75 with a mini-mite antenna so I could seamlessly switch between the digital system and the analog system if there were issues. These were both powered off an Omni Charge 20+ battery and either could be fed by a 411 for unlimited mobility and portability. Of course the system could be broken down as needed if it had to go under a couch, etc. The problem with the digital system is that the range is sub-par for what we do, but the 411 makes up for that. All of this sadly ended up becoming the backup system since talent and their people demanded they use the exact pieces of gear they had been rehearsing with in prep, which was the Roger Touchscreen Mic (a mic and transmitter in one), which alone, could not cut the muster because again, the range is not the best and the reader had to be far enough away so as not to disturb the scene/ruin the sound. So we used x4 Roger Repeaters, usually 3 between the reader's station and the talent (with one or two being hidden on/near set), and then usually the 4th one in the boom op's pocket. Day 1 was an overnight with a medium length walk and talk and the reader was forced to walk with the scene to keep within range, which was my original suggestion despite an absurd amount of pushback. The other half of the equation was monitoring. It had to be a 2-way communication system. The reader always had to be able to hear talent. I knew this would need to work during company moves while they rehearse the next scene, or first thing up while we're unloading the truck. So after some trial and error, I tuned an LR directly to talent's SMQV and fed it into a headphone amp, so no matter what I'm doing or where my cart is, the reader could always hear talent as long as they were wired. It bypassed my system completely. The only downside is that the actor has no privacy from the reader, but their relationship was such that this was not an issue. Sometimes talent was being wired while we needed to test the range on the earwig, so their transmitter was not available. For this, we used a separate talent transmitter in IFB mode and an R1a. This was because I don't like having two transmitters tuned to the same frequency, even if only one is used at a time, just in case the reader is off somewhere with the rehearsal-mic and we can't turn it off for them when talent lands. A stand-in would wear the earwig and the rehearsal mic while the reader wore the touchscreen mic and the R1a. They would assume their positions and the stand-in would walk through the marks and report back if it went out of range. In the end, everyone was thrilled with how well it worked. There were only a couple hiccups, which, for what we were doing, was to be expected.

Just set the tx to ifb mode and match the freq on the R1a.

These are fixed and are always in line in my signal chain. Note that they introduce 1dB of loss if I remember correctly. The company makes them in different flavors for different bands.

Just note: Filters are different from attenuators. Both are handy to have. I use filters from a company called Professional Wireless Systems that go from 470 to 608 MHz I believe.

Thanks for that advice

Additional tools, yes. Extra features, not necessarily. Do people who use Zax transmitters charge extra when they decide to record with them? Or do Lectro owners charge more when they have to bump up the power to 250mW? Or tuning a wideband transmitter to a different block of freqs? To me it's a slippery slope. However, these are PAID plugins Sound Devices has offered up instead of free firmware updates, so I totally understand the argument. Why invest money into something you can't make additional profit on? The thing is, the producers don't know or care which features are free and which cost extra. They just want the job done. All that said, I think everyone should charge whatever they can get for their gear and services and I support people trying to maximize their revenue. I don't see it as free. I see it as expanded functionality of the same piece of hardware they are already renting. Would you all be making the same argument if these plugins were free firmware updates?

This has been discussed elsewhere and I agree with those who say that charging to use extra features, tracks, channels etc as opposed to charging for the straight-up hardware is not very viable. It's like a camera owner charging to shoot at a higher framerate to me. If you can make extra money for it, great, but I don't see it becoming a standard practice nor do I think it should.

I'm interested to see if my LR batt elim can somehow work with a Betso TCX-2+

Definitely can't move as fast as leg motion is partially inhibited (at least the way I wear it) but the tradeoff is completely worth it to save my back.

I got a similar situation. 633 with a dashboard and 3 SRb's. Antenna and power distros, ifb and comtek transmitters. It's heavy. Haven't weighed it but I use the harness that goes around the waist. I mainly do narrative so it's very unlikely I'm booming at the same time with this setup.

Atlas Sound Half-Width Rack Power Conditioner (15A)

No experience with Wisycom but lot's of real world experience with various generations of Lectrosonics plug on transmitters. I use a short jumper between the mic and the transmitter, which is attached to the pole with an ambient piece of hardware and I've made it through hundreds of different projects with no problem. As someone said above, just having the transmitter high above the obstructions does wonders for your reception. I've also on occasion seen the transmitter at the back end of an internally cabled pole (~18 feet) with the same great results.

I can see charging more for more wireless, but to use more inputs/tracks on your mixer/recorder?

That makes sense. I guess we should bump up our equipment rentals to match.

Not exactly on topic but I had an older colleague tell me he was a recordist for many years. I asked him what shows he mixed and to my confusion, he said he never mixed. He then explained that he would "record" (transcribe) the sound reports for the mixer, which was the primary job of the position which would later become known as the utility back then. I haven't heard that anywhere else...