Jump to content

The Immoral Mr Teas

Members
  • Posts

    726
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by The Immoral Mr Teas

  1. Wow - 99 dollars the Neumann - I’ve seen everything (tho with Neumann i’ve seen it all before I guess)

     

    the Smallrig (images) of the shock absorbers with (seemingly and hopefully) 3/8” (+ camera) threads look interesting to me ... I've collected several of the old rycote absorbers over the years but now it’s easy to pick up M5 (and M3) absorbers which can work with the - also sadly discontinued (older) - rycote modular bars: cheers Dan, I’ll look into those

     

    hmm, actually 99 bucks for anything Neumann seems genuinely cheap in retrospect!

     

    Heh, Jez

  2. Audio Technica AT822

     

    as a starting point. Simple, reliable, around the same quality / price point as the rode blimp, and once again, simple: slightly spaced from an XY pattern and you’ll get to learn how its fixed pattern works with the recordings you make so that eventually you will have a good idea from experience what mics and patterns you want to use for what purpose.

     

    Another alternative for nature recording would be two DPA 4060 lavalier mics, just spaced to either end of the blimp (so the mics each lie centrally where the end cap starts), but 4060s are expensive.

     

    Really, the best place to look and ask is nature sound recording groups who will have a much more thorough discussion of mics and accessories over a range of budgets - ie, two much cheaper omnis, or subcardioids like the Line Audio CM3 (I think) spaced either end of the blimp could be perfect for your needs. But you have to start recording to gain the experience of what works and what doesn’t, for differing subjects, recording conditions and desired results: most here record dialogue for film or ‘the needed sound’ for documentary etc, and end up with a wide range of tools to achieve the job.  www.naturesounds.org?

     

    Omni mics are more forgiving of wind (whilst keeping often a superior low frequency response) than shotgun types like the NTG2 and it’s pretty much a scale of forgiveness between omni and directional/fig 8. A wider (fatter) windshield (stereo AD, AE, AF type rycote etc) offers more wind protection than a narrower one as there is more dead air between the mic capsule and the wind protection, regardless of mic type. You should be looking at keeping the capsule 3cm plus from the basket wall so attempting to fit stereo assemblies within a single basket is tricky even with a larger width ... and some mics (often the better ones!) need better suspension and wind protection than others.

     

    Best, Jez

  3. About a year ago Michael this would possibly have slightly increased my enthusiasm of TBL’s dark web or whatever it calls itself these days. But if we are unable to second guess the RUR faction and they are happy to play the long game tantalising us with Kudelski parts then it seems Asimov was right. And we are doomed. I am now making sure ALL my Nagra accessories are wrapped up in extra thick black leather and safely zipped and press studded away. Thank you!!

     

    Jez

  4. Bumping this as I expect there are folks who may be able to answer ...

     

    assume Nothingham was an unexpected prediction of NAGRA, so “khaldrogo”, if you are able to change the thread title to Nagra Stabiliser Roller you might get the answers you need

     

    good luck, Jez 

     

    Oh, and if it is a Nagra let us know what model (III, IV-L, IV-S, 4.2 or other). And if you don’t already know there is a very popular long running thread on all things Nagra on the Images Of Interest pages.

  5. Ivanovich - excellent comparison; Jim, I’m with you!

     

    But somehow I’ve ended up with two sets of Genelecs, four pairs of Sonys, and not an NS10 in sight. Though I rather like another cheap Yamaha monitor my friend uses ... my cheap choice is the Fostex FM series

    edit (new to jw changes sorry)

    fostex pm 

  6. 17 hours ago, Faustus said:

    [not wishing to misquote, Faustus, just wanted to quote this middle part!]

    (...) Not only the earpads were crumbling (literally), but the sound had changed in a way I couldn't explain: bass and midbass completely gone, treble harsh and overwhelming (...)

     

    Not sure if it was because I was the last of the thread previously or because I’ve just had a few socially distant beers bought for me ... but,

    I’ve actually recently picked up my FOURTH set of 7506s despite what I’ve said and think about them, this time second hand because they were a cheap extra set of level limited phones which I can always use. All my sets now have crumbling pads (with new covers over them) but the “treble harsh and overwhelming “ was always there from new!

     

    For me, so far, apart from the earpads (in all cases less old than my DT phones where the ear pads are fine) I am pleased to say that they have not changed one bit!

     

    Jez

  7. Hi Merijn,

     

    welcome to JWS. I’ve had my stereo pair of MKH 8040 cardioids since pretty much they were introduced, 2007 or 2008. I use them with softies, homemade softies, light waves and BBGs but always cover the back end with a short cut strip of tubular foam to catch the microphony wind noise when doing so. Find some cheap (pound shop) bicycle handlebar foam strips and cut them to just cover the remaining body length and a tad more over the XLR ... it’s the body of the MXS which is sensitive so you don’t have to cover the entire XLR. I prefer using a slightly softer handlebar foam than the more rigid but I doubt it actually makes any difference, it’s just covering the MXS xlr mic shell that’s important.

     

    Depending on how you’re using clips /suspensions it’s fairly easy to cut slits through handlebar foam to accommodate them without compromising where wind might hit: if using the mic clips which come with 8020 etc series just cut a slit 3cm at the bottom where the clip goes and all is covered fine. If using suspensions or whatever have a play about but I’ve never not been able to sort it out. If using supersofties I would be personally tempted to pull a nylon short stocking over the whole apparatus just as a final thing but again, that’s just me- I wouldn’t say it’s necessary.

     

    Really, in more than ten years this has solved the microphony noise problem whenever wind has been light enough to not need a full contained zeppelin- and possibly like you when wind is not an issue at all I am happy to use my Bruel and Kjaer omnis outside with absolutely no wind protection at all ... but this doesn’t happen all that often! In comparison, I would think that my 8040 body shells are more sensitive to wind/touch etc than my MKH40 but not even as much as my Schoeps which I couldn’t imagine using without suspension or cover.

     

    Hope this helps (and sets your mind at rest when you get a chance to find an open shop), best,

     

    Jez

     

     

     

  8. Hmm, don’t have one (and prob never will) but is it not a question of the air around it optimising the successfulness? So a BBG or similar would be a good outdoor choice (long enough - I think so?) otherwise, going thinner, a ‘lightwave’ tube with windjammer? Yep I know this is not much help (ie there probably isn’t a ready made suspension with windshield option available) but I reckon it’s diy... possibly just a softie with a little extra foam for suspension and the softie attached somehow to the boom? Like I might do with 4060s (albeit not booming..!) ???

     

    Jez

  9. Hi Nicky,

    I filmed an octogenarian choir on the Polish Ukrainian border several years ago - a great time and a great bunch of folk and I hope they’re all getting close to or surpassing the 100 years ...

     

    Too many useful replies already to try to quote examples, but I would say this is one situation where I would try to get an MS rig in there :

     

    I am saying this as a post person and potential dubbing mixer ...

     

    1: boom (swing boom) in mono - the S is both useless and a distraction in a non-fixed position for post and ambience can or will be added or faked even for the “deliverable necessities” so don’t worry about that - ‘content’ requires mono - “the message”!

     

    2: if you decide to try MS (and having an MKH30 I think you should) use it only for fixed mic positions for subjects when there is a likelihood they may burst out in song (=all the time as far as your director is concerned!!)

     

    So, with that in mind: try to work out - can you swing a boom and have a stand ready with an MS rig? Does the MKH50 always have to be paired with the 30 on a suspension? I kind of go with Fred saying have a separate stereo ambience rig on a stand and two boom options for inside/outside. I also think that a wider mic than the 50 (even the 40 is a narrow cardioid) could be a nicer choice. But will you have this opportunity or speed to set up on the job? I don’t know- you might have a leisurely shoot or a frantic shoot.

     

    I would consider either having a totally separate MS rig (with stand) for all the music stuff (even the ambience, but for me this is secondary and less important from a content point of view) and a boom with indoors/outdoors choices, or have the mkh50 always ready with the 30.

     

    Just know that when “booming” MS to act like a tripod not like a boom. And let post know when, why and how you recorded the MS tracks (so if there are sudden shifts then post is aware).

     

    Big (stereo) rycotes are I believe considerably harder to boom than normal ones: I’m not sure what you have yourself. I would consider quicklocks between say 50 and 416, and maybe some easy way to mount a 30 to the 50 if you go that way - compromising the 30 but ensuring the 50 is good for sound. But it depends on what you and the director expect to record in what condition (specifically interior or exterior). There’s the possibility of keeping the 50 in a suspension with a clip to add the 30 when desired? Be aware the 30 will be microphonically (handling noise) more sensitive if it’s on an extra cable - which is why I like the older stereo connbox with plug in cables when working with either/or mono and stereo.

     

    One bonus for MS worth thinking about beyond filming is the (once in a lifetime) voices recorded have an extra ambience for eg a record release beyond the documentary.

     

    Enjoy the job. Best skies I have seen besides the Himalayas...

     

    Jez Adamson

  10. On 21 July 2020 at 1:50 AM, PMC said:

    CineW,

    I couldn't agree more about current day final stage studio mixers stretching the bleeding edge of audio dynamics. The last 5 to 7 years i have had to have the remote in hand in order to gain up  whispering dialog only to then hear nuclear bomb SPL sound from a roaring jet that blows my hair straight back as I mash the volume button down. I think these mixers get an evil pleasure from what they are doing. My next AV amp is going to have and AGC control.

     

    I have ranted about this before on this forum. I'll crawl back into my whole.

     

    6 hours ago, Izen Ears said:


    Nice find Mark!!
     

    Great and depressing thread!  Musta been great back then.  Fisher booms...  Projecting actors...  Quiet sets...  No wires...  Single camera shoots...

     

    Those were the days; how I wish I could remember them rather than fantasize about em.

     

    But as we are seeing human history isn’t an upward arc, but rather a sine that we’re in a downward leg of.  The negative polarity of our alternating culture.  Maybe these things will come back if people’s sense’s ever return.  HAH!  That’s a laugh!

     

    I agree this is a really great thread with some good information (not to mention pics too)!

     

    To some extent I don't think it is the broadcast rerecording mixer who is to blame for the excessive dynamic range (although sometimes it most definitely is). It is usually the 'direct employer' of said mixer (who indeed may employ said mixer because they have a mutual understanding what dynamic range ought to be on a TV show)!?

     

    Have loudness standards really improved the intelligibility of dialogue ... ?

     

    Next, Izen Ears, "Those were the days"  ... they're still with us in part: for every unconcerned team there's a concerned team; for every lousy location there's an ideal location; for every star who alternates SHOUTS and (whispers) there is an old stalwart who provides the same performance take after take...

     

    Hell, if it wasn't fun why the hell do it?

     

    Interesting thread from the same question we periodically ask ourselves! The stage pictures and RCA ribbons are a delight for me, thank you!

     

    Jez

  11. Hi Dan,

     

    to answer your question to me first, as dialogue editor I would be looking for mono fill for the dialogue track(s) - being the 'fill' track which may have been recorded by the PSM specifically to help me with the edit. Of course there is nothing to stop me just using one leg  of a stereo track if room tone has been recorded in stereo.

     

    If I'm handling the ATMOS tracks (which I might well do as a dialogue or effects editor on a job with a few editors) as well as the fill I would most usually put a couple of tracks of stereo room tone, although if I had a good track which fit the scene of a 4.0 or 5.0 I might use that (those). Although this really does depend on the film how we decide to prepare the tracks. Note that I am talking here about "bland" room tone, NOT a detailed ambient recording. Two stereo tracks is often sufficient to be blended and panned multichannel and fill out the mix (remember that the dialogue tracks and more characterful Atmos tracks are also present). In fact an added difficulty of recording a 'plain air' track in 4 or 5 channels rather than 2 is that attention-grabbing little sounds or areas become far more noticeable. Of course this 'difficulty' becomes an asset when recording an ambience (like a country or city scape) where you want to breath life into the sound and to some extent draw the audience attention toward it. I have recorded room tones (as opposed to atmos) in multichannel but it is only when conditions are very good (location acoustic) that you will get tracks suitable for this purpose. Again, if the conditions, and thus sound, was more characteristic, bingo, you are recording not a room tone but an interior and there is nothing to stop an editor using two legs of a blandish multichannel interior to reduce the stereo perception. You probably weren't asking me for a differentiation between room tone and atmos but you did use the term so got my answer thus.

     

    Back to the issue of ambisonics. I avoid it in film generally (search elsewhere why). For recording multichannel ambiences I actually favour a 4.0 approach but often go 5.0 (or am asked to) amusingly for its 'resale' value perception (people [think they] know what 5.1 is and it is surely superior to four point ... whatever it is you just did)! I often go for spaced omnis for all types of film effects but would push people to consider IRT recording.

     

    So a brief look back to your original post (which I'm afraid I can't be much help with either).

     

    On 22 July 2020 at 8:05 PM, Dan Wake said:

    I’m looking for those goals:

    1) taking field recording audio for 5.1 mix (the mics needs to be enough silent for room tones). Needs it for documentaries and short movies

    2) build sound libraries to sell online

    3) make field recordings for VR audio (for videogames development). 
     

     

    For 1 and 2, I would say the first mics to buy for film making are a hyper and a shotgun. Perhaps you already have these, perhaps you have no intention to record dialogue but ONLY find jobs where you record effects and atmospheres. I'm not sure what your position is so couldn't think to give advice. For recording effects and field recording in general I would suggest a pair of cardioids or a pair of omnis, or both pairs. For multichannel that's 4 of either or of both.

     

    For 3, I have no experience so wouldn't have commented, but I notice that many are using ambisonics so that's very probably the route to go down. Again (2 again) if you want to sell ambisonic recordings then get an ambisonic mic: I am not in the marketplace for such recordings however.

     

    Personally I had several other mics before I bought my Soundfield or put together my first MS rigs. I use neither generally for film fx recording generally though but they both have other uses. My principal mics for fx are cardioids and omnis although others get a lot of use. My inkling, especially if '3' is really a plan, is to buy, hire or indeed build(?) an ambisonic mic and start experimenting with it.

     

    I must say I hadn't realised but am much impressed by your proposed intention to build an ambisonic mic, and a second order one at that! Me, I'm scared to solder a hirose ....

     

    Best, Jez

     

     

    Addendum for Werner - are you talking about post for broadcast or for feature film? It is the latter I do not like ambisonics (nor indeed MS) for. I also worked (over the decades) in TV, radio, music where I consider such phase related techniques an asset rather than an issue to manage.

  12. Hi Dan, I wasn't planning on commenting on your original post simply because I have no experience (nor knowledge of for many) the mics you mention, nor really the understanding of what you really plan to do with ambisonic mic technique - but

     

    5 hours ago, Dan Wake said:


    Hi, do find the NT-SF1 to be good enough for room tones recordings? Thx

     

    As a dialogue editor, if confronted with room tone recorded on an ambisonic mic, I would:

     

    1. swear

    2. listen to decide if it was any good ...

     

    3. if, as expected, it was no good, swear again, then laugh, then find something in my library

    4. if it actually seemed useful, say "oh ok" (possibly swear again whilst laughing) and either choose (if possible) or randomly select a single channel of the 4 (to NINE?!?) available and delete the rest.

     

    Although I would expect '3' to be the final stage and if pressed for time just '1'.

     

    Different recording techniques for different purposes. Different media even. Buy the mic that suits what you REALLY want to do ...

    1 x hyper, or

    2 x cardioid, or

    1 x ambisonic

    ... none of these options (for instance) can be a desirable replacement for any of the others.

     

    Jez Adamson

     

     

  13.  

    14 hours ago, sonnenstudio said:

     

    @The Immoral Mr Teas , if I may ask, could you elaborate on what you said about MS not sitting nicely with multichannel encoding? I'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts about this.

    Personally, I've always found the stereo image of M/S recordings (especially of ambiences) a bit "weird" or "unnatural", for reasons I can't really grasp. I often have this feeling that there's a clear center image, combined with a L-R stereo field that sounds as if it's "behind" my ears, rather than in front, and that (even when reducing the S part of the M/S) the stereo part of the sound is somewhat disconnected from the center part - an issue I never experience with ORTF or XY. When listening on headphones this effect becomes even more pronounced. Does anyone else experience this?

    The attractive part of M/S is that it's so much more compact than an ortf setup, and you have a real center, as opposed ot a phantom center.... you win some, you lose some...

     

    I think MS is an excellent technique for many, generally 2 channel, systems or purposes: the two obvious being radio (taking advantage of the inherent mono compatibility) and vinyl (it was rare for me to encounter a tracking or mixing session where MS didn't come up somewhere). I would add any (2 channel) scenario where the sound in front is 'documentary' essential and the sound around it is 'a beautification' which could be the case for radio documentary, podcast ditto and Alan Lomax/David Lewiston/Harry Smith style folk song collection.

     

    It does of course also work in multichannel formats (re ambisonics) but I have personally found that the side signal just becomes a complication in the 5.1 etc formats of film - both in itself within the LCR soundscape and in the encoding to eg Dolby Digital. I'm afraid I cannot comment regarding Dolby Atmos or other more recent systems, perhaps things have moved on. But in my experience 'phase tricks' never worked easily in a film theatre. (Indeed in some ways they don't with vinyl either but there has been many decades of knowing what does work in this field).

     

    I would be interested to hear if there are indeed problems associated with ambisonics in 3D VR production since this is where (after sports broadcasting) the more recent boom in the technique seems to have come from. I have a Soundfield and as mentioned several MS / MSM combo possibilities- I just don't use them for film effects. In fact for film I like the opportunity to go to the opposite extreme from coincident to spaced techniques - although I probably go for the middle ground of semi spaced (such as ORTF) most of the time.

     

    11 hours ago, henrimic said:

    ideally, one should use a cardioid as Mid.This would theoretically result in a perfect XY after matrix.

     

    Absolutely - a perfectly perceived XY sound angle at least.

     

    10 hours ago, Ken Goodwin said:

    I wish that Sennheiser would make a 5pin MZX 8030 series module that would allow you to screw on different Mid capsules rather than using the MKH30 strapped to a MKH8040, 8050, or 8060. (Sennheiser, if your on here and take my idea, I want a t-shirt) 

     

    I can only wonder why they never came out with the expected if not promised MKH8030 ... was it expected relative low sales (yet they gave us the 8090) or would they have needed to make it slightly fatter or longer (who would really care)? A mystery. Personally I would prefer to keep the side capsule vertically coincident hence piggy backed but it's not a bad idea at all - particularly for double MS in a blimp.

     

    [edit addendum] - actually when I think about it I would probably prefer such a module over a standard mono MKH8030 purely for the added usefulness even if you didn't intend to screw another 80 capsule in front. There would also be the possibility of screwing a second 8030 capsule in front at 90 degrees (admittedly some fine manufacturing needed here) for a sweet blumlein mic (like a midget SM69 or that nice old Schoeps model) or as part of a WXY array.

    Jez

  14. Well you could always try to deaden the room when shooting video, although perhaps the clients being seen to wouldn't like the visual change in ambience. Carpet on the floor out of shot, certainly below the mic stands, and some thick curtains or padding on the (out of shot) walls, particularly behind the mics if they're not intended to be seen. The entire Sennheiser MKH 8020-90 range is pretty much the most sensitive and quietest mic you can get beyond extreme specialisation so it's a case of working out a way of improving the acoustics of the room. Once that is addressed I would even consider the 8020 omni mic (up as close as possible out of frame) or the less common wide cardioid (8090 I think). The point Sennheiser are making with cardioids is to have a decent 'null' at the back of the mic (to point to a problem area often) as opposed to more directional mics (8050, 60, 70) where the back of the mic or tube characteristic of the mic picks up more unwanted reflection from the room. As I said before, if you want 'nice', rather than merely documentary, sound the thing to do is to look seriously into changing the acoustic properties of the room itself for the video shoots.

     

    Having sound edited similar scenes you might indeed consider, if duration is not long (ie promo videos) getting an editor to do 'foley' sound editing, similar to the 'super up close' sound of natural history documentaries, although I would only recommend this if you went with suitably skilled people and / or quality studios ... Although getting the acoustic deadened and recording the real thing close is the best first step anyway.

     

    Where in Poland are you anyway? Warsaw and Lodz are both central for tv/radio/film and there are theatre based studios elsewhere. I would highly recommend finding a local sound engineer to guide you.

     

    Best, Jez

     

    (I worked in Poland at TVP and elsewhere so I know what my name means to you)!

  15. Are you talking about a small single channel mic pre? Sound Devices have made two such models in the past and Fostex I think made one more recently. There's probably an older one by Shure too? If nobody chimes in have a search for these three.

     

    Best, Jez

     

    If you're thinking of something you see regularly when a boom op is working with a production mixer and the second person is feeding the camera (or recording double system) however it could be several other things you're thinking about. Zaxcom is another brand to search for the gadget you're searching for. Obvious thing is to reach out to one of the folks you've worked with you remember wearing such a thing ...

  16. I like the way the Albino Rat makes up for his presumed social disadvantage by his deep voice (yes I know ...).

     

    But thank you Jason - an excellent contribution to probably THE most important topic on JW just now .... now if I could just figure out a way to juxtapose these animals with the instruments of the orchestra I could ... make a piece of art!

     

    Jez

     

    (actually I will remember to print a copy out of this, cheers!)

    and (further edit) I've just realised what the 'C's are down at the bottom ... so more musical than scientific the original compiler ...?

  17. Fred, thank you, that was a great write up. I was also briefly stagier in 1994 to Laurent Quaglio who did films with Ruh (and didn't mess his sound up in post)! I am particularly fond (for Ruh) of Saint Jack (Bogdanovich - Corman - Hefner!!) which is one of the most incredible rostra of actors/ production / tech I can think of and doesn't disappoint. Sadly I never met Ruh but it was a name even in international (meaning non-French here) films when you generally knew you would be in for a good soundtrack.

     

    Cheers, Jez

  18. "Do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth"?

     

    - "Yes, you're ugly"

    - "See that woman over there, I'd really like [...]"

    - "Should I continue or are you going to start asking me some questions"?

     

    (Remembered from a Steven Wright gig sometime in the last century ...)

  19. And just to add my useless tuppence per bag I've seen Dan 'snood-up' regularly way before the current situation to kid himself he's protecting himself from London's fumes!

     

    As it is, if there are two things I hope to see at the end of all of this it is

     

    i. All the twats who started cycling about with no regard for anyone (indeed, "like there was no tomorrow"!...) put their Mountains and their Cromptons and their Framptons back in their garages and forget they were ever there

     

    ii. We all go off-li 

  20. On 13 July 2020 at 2:03 PM, TomBoisseau said:

    Well... for me, the only work I've had recently is because of Zoom and Microsoft Teams!

     

    One of my corporate clients wants to continue to communicate with their employees, so they use Microsoft teams.  But they're doing it a little differently.  They have each presenter call into their own individual "Teams" meeting.  The only other person on these individual meetings is "us", in the control room.  This allows us (from their control room) to crop and grab almost a full screen iso shot of each presenter that they can switch to at any time and not be at the mercy of "Teams" auto switching.  Then we sent it back out to their employees on yet another separate "Teams" meeting. 

     

    The dilemma is the audio, for which they've been hiring me.  Because they have set up all the presenters into different "meetings", and because the employees log into still another meeting to watch and listen, I have to get audio out of all the various meetings (multiple computers) and feed them to the others via multiple mix minuses.  

     

    Not all of these "meetings" are sent out live.  Some are edited and sent out later, which allows them to switch to other presenters for reactions shots, something that's not so easily done with multiple people logged into single meeting. 

     

    Of course none of this is "location sound", but I'm sure grateful to have the work!

     

    Tom

     

    Tom, DAMN! Is it good to hear a happy story! Thank you!

     

    J

×
×
  • Create New...