DanieldH

They have a studio version, too. http://north-america.beyerdynamic.com/shop/hah/headphones-and-headsets/studio-and-stage/studio-headphones/custom-studio.html Same accessories. I wonder how (well) the cable locks. http://images.sonicelectronix.com/images/1438341/main/headsetgear.jpg

+1

My dremel butane soldering torch served me well and has been a "lifesaver" when no AC power was around. http://www.dremel.com/en-us/Tools/Pages/ToolDetail.aspx?pid=2000-01

"Auto frequency management" Would that mean the RX talks to the TX to administer frequencies? "AES 256 encryption" I wonder if they will elaborate on the implementation.

The upcoming 1x10 "Marco" will be this seasons finale. http://breakingbad.wikia.com/wiki/Season_1_%28Better_Call_Saul%29

Not a recommendation, since I've hardly used it (and never on set), but ardour beside audacity (on a linux of your flavour) might save you some buck on software licences.

@Jeff, I am happy you made this clear. @Constantin, it really depends what government/militia is your thread. Scenario: Of course encryption is no protection against "rubber-hose cryptoanalysis". But it might buy time and options you would not have without and rubber-hose techniques on you may not be an option for local authorities. You can still cooperate with officials and give them the keys, but at least, you can decide. IS is not the best example here, as they would insist on accomany you anyway (like with Todenhöfer) and already know what you shoot. The scenario is rather, that some local official does not like you filming there and seizes all your stuff (and maybe has you deported). Of course this is a loss to you, but if your material is encrypted, maybe the dissident you have interviewed does not loose his life, after your stuff makes it up the chain and someone takes a closer look.

Well Jeff, as much as I appreciate you and this forum, you might have not thoroughly read what i've wrote within this thread or I've not made it clear enough. The secenarios I've discussed, LP deals with or I presume chrisnewton's question referred to are the rare situations "our industries most common workflows" do not apply as such (or need a sufficient backup). I have had two situations I uploaded "files" am happy to bore you with technical details of suggested and conducted security percautions with. Both cases, were 1 day documentary shoots and initial coping of files was not conducted by me or my responsibility. In both cases I deleted the files after post assured me, they have finally imported everything and everything was fine. So yes, when e.g. chrisnewton or his production plans a shoot in a place with uplink and server ressources they've tested and wish to rely on, and post validates the material, and there is a necessity of keeping recording media unquestionable, why not. I made clear, that I'd doubt that a reliable uplink source is likely present.

Yes, if - you replace "delete" by "sufficently overwrite" - your hotel, internet cafe or whatever uplink you rely on is capable of transporting some hours of high quality video footage in a reasonable ammount of time (witch is probably not the case) - your substitution footage fits your legend. Maybe a project called "World cities by night" or "Busses around the world" ;-) Edit: I do not see what thread you suggest to face with uploading to multiple locations. Snowdens material stored by Guardian and Greenwald is not the video footage, LP shot in Honkong (or anywhere else she wishes to have encrypting cameras for). For the Snowden material the same rules apply as for any valuable data (childhood photos, accounting records, certificates...). You want to protect them from fire, water, riot looters or any other local thread and therefor you want to put copies in your parents attic, bank vaults or whatever you think of. The Snowden material was presumably "documents", as in text/powerpoint illustrations, etc. A fragment of the data volume, a video shoot has to deal with and easy to email, upload to whatever cloud or send via some thumb drive in a postal service envelope all thorougly encrypted and done way before the meeting in honkong. No need for any body orifices mentioned before.

IBH, I agree with most of your perspective or approach, though I think such a feature can more easily be implemented technically than will be by the usual players due to the rules of the market game and its necessity of keeping firmware development a company secret. This is very true and the current way to go for a delicate production (, apart from recording directly to an encrypting laptop.) But it does include more stuff to carry (eventually through borders any on planes), leaves a possibly dangerous timeframe in witch the data is unencrypted and requires time to copy, veryfy and overwrite the data (including more steps of failure in a possibly tense situation). Encrypting recorders for video and audio are definately more desireable. you do need long passwords, sometimes called passphrases. However these have been implemented for quite a while in keyfiles or keydevices. Basically they are the stored passwords. As with any other key, you would not want to carry/keep, let's say a microSD card serving as such, beside your encrypted media (be it internal or external to your recorder). However you might want to have the same (or a second) key stored in your head, just in case you loose your microSD. This way, you only need your mSD inside, when you boot up your recorder, there is no need to enter a password manually(, unless you loose your mSD). I have used such systems on various computers for years. I do not either, at least not from our usual suspects. Not because it is in technical terms very difficult to implement (although there are issues like a limited selection of processor platforms implementing hardware support for encryption) but rather the fact that Zaxcom or SD do not provide open source firmwares so that the user to whom this feature is critical can veryfy if an trusted up to date version of, e.g. LUKS/dm-crypt has been implemented correctly. I'd doubt, they would soon be approached by government institutions. (EU, Swiss or Japanese companies even less likely). There are encrypting photo cameras on the market, based on alternative community developed firmwares https://sites.google.com/site/nxcryptophotography/ http://magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=10279.0 Now I do not see a community coming up with alternative firmwares in the Zaxcom/SD market, but i could well imagine people coming up with something in the Edirol/Tascam/Zoom pricerange in case magiclantern manages to encrypt video.

@CraigF In what way do you see a problem of a delay in writing to disk? This would maybe add a few ms, maybe even some hundert, but does not affect the way timecode data is aligned to audio data. Yes there is a higher risk in loosing data, less due to data coruption but even more due to physically loosing your keyfile/device. Yes encryption does add a further level of complexity that makes data recovery more difficult. But who would not favour an SSD over a HDD, even though data recovery from SSDs is less likely to be successful? @crisnewton MRWsound Thank you for the flowers, though it was not my idea and it's probably not a new one. It was Laura Poitras claim regarding cameras so the question for soundpeople is somehow obvious (but so far academic). I'd imagine very few of us had ever the necessity of such a feature and therefore it will not soon or ever be a selling point for manufacurers. However I can very well imagine that such a feature could literally save lives on delicate productions or even "simple" production secrets on a dayly basis.

It'd be a feature, that - could easily be turned on or off in the firmware menu - would consume more battery power. How much depends on hardware implementation of supporting processors/chipsets. - would require some sort of keyfile, e.g. some microSD, a bluetooth device, etc. - Whatever system provides the keyfile could also provide allocation information of encrypted content within a plausible deniability concept Edit: Syntax correction

Thnx for your answer. Regarding B: Do you see any downside (apart from higher development costs included in street prices)?

I am not sure in what forum on this board this issue belongs best or will develop, so I post it in general discussion, but it may be free to be moved to workflow or whatever else. Also, I hope this will not derail into a political conversation about Snowden or US administrations but stay on a technical perspective. Before Laura Poitras won her oscar for "citizen four", she held a talk at the 31c3 conference in witch she called for encrypted storage cameras as an important tool for investigative journalists, since video footage can be seized and crews be held accountable for by whatever government. https://media.ccc.de/browse/congress/2014/31c3_-_6154_-_en_-_saal_1_-_201412272300_-_crypto_tales_from_the_trenches_-_nadia_heninger_-_julia_angwin_-_laura_poitras_-_jack_gillum.html#video (I'll post the exact position of the relevant claim as soon as I find time to review it) The referenced part is at minute 33:50 If this is true for cameras, it is just as true for sound recordings, maybe even more. However, just as in video cameras, non of the usual suspects (I am aware of) SD, Zaxcom, Aaton, Aeta, Tascam, etc provide such a feature. If you have a job, requireing this feature, you could realize this with some direct to computer setup (with all its caveats regarding mobility and ruggedness). Apart from governments or powerful organizations, there are other threads. Just imagine, your Nomad/788t/whatever gets stolen (or copied by some janitor after work) and the content of the upcoming episodes of the TV show you're working on appears in some torrent, spoiled on reddit... you get my idea. For the latter thread, whatever proprietary encryption, like Zaxcom uses on its wireless might be sufficient. For any potential thread involving government or big organization interests, you would probably want a public peer reviewed implementation of the code and hardware. However, even if our usual suspects implement such features, they'll probably never provide open source code for their firmwares (or the relevant parts). In the past, I've been working on a foreign feature film, that included crossing various borders and dealt with some national cultural taboos most political parties there including the government of that time "dislikes". Encryption whould have (at least) made me feel more comfortable, but resources did not allow it. Now, my question is: Do you ever had the need or the wish for encrypted storage? Whould you like the usual suspects to implement such a feature? If your answer to the latter is "yes", whould you say that even some proprietary encryption is better to have than no encryption?

I've used a DIY coat made from the white grease filter fleece for kitchen hoods. In light rain (without wind, small drops), I 've used a shower cap from the hotel room.

"Remotely" monitoring/controlling RX might appear redundant but it is not. Just try to operate any slotin with thick winter gloves below -10°C/14°F. Any concept/standard to remote RX is a step to have less stuff at your belly in the future.

Welcome Indrasetno. I think buying a Wisycom set (e.g. MCR42+MTB40) is very expencive, if you already have a wireless boom system (smqv+48V box on the belt or on top of the boom?) and you only want PTT. It is much cheaper for you to take the boom out off the mix when your boom op wants to speak in private (or switch off e.g. the 48V box) and use cheap WalkieTalkies. when I boom-operate, I do not like big headphones, especially with a mic. I use some like these:

Indrasetno, the MM1 does not implement a boom operator "headphone mic" or a "private line" switch. Your boom op already has the boom microphone he can talk in. If you give him/her a second "headphone"mic, he/she still can not control, if the boom mic is open to the director or the recording mix. Wisycom offers a PTT option that enables your boom op to switch the signal to a secondary output of the receiver, that can be routed only to your headphone. Other than that, you could buy a cheap PMR446/freenet "WalkieTalkie" (with headphone output) for communication to you and use your G3 for communication and monitoring to the boom op from an 788t-output. When the communication needs to be private, your boom op can turn off his smqv or phantom power. The PMR446 might or might not disturb your Lectro and Comtek systems. Apart from that, "headphone mics" come as dynamic, condenser and electret variants.

If it has to be an 8 x PrefadeISO + 2 MixTrack recording, an Option might be an additional 702t (slaved via c.link) for the 2 MixTracks. No CL8/9 needed.

Topic pretty much says it. My experience with all the functional outdoor sports stuff is, the more rainproof and stiff the outer fabric is, the noisier it gets. What do you wear booming/close2camera in harsh weather conditions to avoid noise (and advise Camerapeople etc to do also)?

My hopes: 1. Some open source community developing a hardware platform for mobile recorders and/or even Rx/Tx, or reverse engeneering existing platforms. 2. More and better boom mounted or integrated user interfaces. Edit: 3. Recorded files accessible via Ethernet even during take. Not for 2015 but in a forseable future: 1. Boom internal signalling via visible light (be it an audio signal or remote signals or even duplex) 2. Smartglasses/virtual retina displays for all device displays and camera frame in an augmented reality projection (including eye tracked control for recorder RX/TX) Sorry, if I derail this thread with scify

There are commercial products like: http://tritonaudio.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=4&id=23&Itemid=43 or http://www.sescom.com/product.asp?item=SES-IL-PPB. More elegant and lighter might be to implement that into an XLR or cable. https://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/geekslutz-forum/232400d1304024213-phantom-power-blocker-phantom-blocker.pdf I have not tested (or therefor recommend) any of the above. My point is: Even if Lectro did not build their RX phantom proof (which i doubt), there would be a solution, that makes this issue probably irrelevant. Anyhow, I am sure, a certain individual on this forum (to whom I am extremely grateful) will assure to us soon that the L RX is phantom proof (or will provide a more official solution than me).

I've had a similar effect when feeding some EK 100 G3 from the same Hawkwoods Vmount plate as a 788t. (Though it was more LF irregular garbage than a constant hum). My quick&dirty solution was not to feed the 788t from the plate, but instead use the batteries build in DTap to power the 788t. Edit: After all, the DC2 cables isolation layer wore off. (poor design?) and I went back to AA batteries.

Does not sound silly at all to me. But why does your location affect this? Quick service? You could consider using phantom blockers.

Sorry for your loss and the distrust you feel. Pretty much everybody working on filmsets is aware of the worth of the tech around. Luckyly the vast majority of collegues are professional and trustworthy. I don't see the necessity/probability of a sound related person. Think as a thief: Apart from mags and stuff on the magliner, what piece of equipment is around on a set with a maximum worth and a minimum volume/weight relation? What is easy to hide in a pocket? What is rather easy to sell or to pawn? Mics are ideal. The ebay seller does not have to be aware that it is stolen good (or the thief himself). Apart from mics and few other sound tech, he is selling used watches. I guess he is aware that his listings could be stolen. Did you get back to the police and ask them, what they will do about it? Did you talk to your insurance about ebay?