Constantin

makes sense, thanks

I don't know. I don't actually use Cool Edit Pro anymore or Audition now. My suggestion was in response to the OP, however, and he did not mention a TC or metadata requirement. Nonetheless, I agree that it would be useful to have that.

Or if Mac really is a requirement, get windows on a mac and then of the various windows options mentioned. Way cheaper than Nuendo

Should every PC user bow down to Steve Wozniak then? Yes. And every Sound Devices user should bow to Zaxcom. And so on. Oh no, why does it suddenly feel like I'm burning?

Looks very interesting. Just out of curiosity, why didn't you just attach a HotBox or something similar (or self-made) to one of the outputs?

Oh my, I am so excited! I can't wait for the X3!

No, I don't know. But I do know that they don't have endless amounts of money to spend. So maybe I should've said that they shouldn't spend more money on it that would be better spent on recorder development. I didn't realize the brief was to find a Mac compatible software. But maybe Courtney is interested? That's also one of the things I don't know He's on this group, though, isn't he?

I'd prefer for Sound Devices to stay focused on developing recorders. But I'd say the guy/company who developed the BWF widget would be in great position to add such function to theur software. They certainly know about Timecode and other Metadata

And indeed Sound Devices specifically recommend it to overcome rf problems in certain blocks. I wonder though, is there a possible downside other than the extra work? Starquad cables only exhibit HF loss at pretty long runs, you can safely do at least 100ft. Given the many problems with EM interference on a typical set, I would highly recommend starquad cables. I rarely need cables longer than 100ft so I don't see a problem there

No, I don't think so, either. The g3 series and the 2000 series (which to me is the expensive end of g3) all use the HDX compander, whereas the 3000 series use the HiDyn plus compander. You will still hear something, but it'll sound weird. You could use the fairly cheap skp3000 plug-on as the tx instead of the 2000 tx.

Audition has got cool and very fast batch functions. At least it used to when it was still known as Cool Edit Pro. Windows only, but it could do a whole bunch of tasks on hundreds of files very very fast

Yes they will. With Pilot. But, be assured, if you switch off the pilot, there will be no loss in quality

Not true, the 2000 series works fine with the 100/300/500 series. I haven't checked just now, but I think the 2000 series is the successor to the 500 series.

Ah, I see, Simon. Yes, Vincent, the only way to send a stereo mix is with the rackmount stereo tx. I used to have one on my cart for director and others. It works really well and the infrared settings sync helps a lot. For the camera, I'd use a simple ek100 receiver. No need for the stereo version in my mind. Plus there is the headphone situation. I had all rx on the same frequency, even the mono one on the cam, but I was sending a mono mix, anyway.

What do you mean? It it a stereo receiver, outputting via the stereo headphone socket. That makes it a 2 channel audio device. But it can only receive one rf at a time

It's a stereo receiver. So 2 channels of audio, one of radio.

Yes, but he also said that the signal is internally matrixed to L/R which pretty much implies M/S. To rephrase: I think you two meant pretty much the same thing

You guys just said pretty much the same thing

Yes, but the Sennheiser G series plays nicely with its own. You can mix and match them all. I would guess that you have to switch off the pilot tone on the iem's as they are really stereo receivers while your txis mono and their pilot tone circuitry expects a stereo pilot tone. even if you use the actual stereo tx in mono mode you have to turn off the pilot. the quality of the signal will not be affected by this. But since it's the only way to make this work, your choices are rather limited - even if you are worried about quality

Last month I had to choose between a Wisycom system (MCR42 plus 2 MTP40 transmitter plus 2 cos 11) for 7000€, and a Lectro (SRB, 2 SMDB and 2 cos 11) 5000€. 664 and Nomad are costing less than them. 788 less than Wisycom's wirelless. I was refering to a single channel. And those are some of the most expensive systems

I still don't get your point. A car can be more expensive than a house, but who cares? If you don't like that just buy a Cantar and some Sennheiser G3s. The relationship may be more to your liking then. A mixer/recorder rig will still be more expensive than most wireless systems. It does depend on the number of channels in both cases. Also, if you arr cart based, the mixer alone could be way more expensive than several channels of wireless

Not sure what you are really asking? Are you concerned about the price of high quality radio mics? Or are you worried that Zax and SD are not making enough money on their recorders? Are you asking for advice on what to buy? You know what, I'll wait for the Senator to get here

I doubt the Nomad will be able to record any sound below 0dB. I would assume it only start at maybe 10-20dBspl? I don't know, though. That means the max would be at 147dBspl. But that's only the converter. What's the max for the preamp?

I agree, using two mics the most practical solution and the Schoeps variant certainly sounds great. Someone said that the two mics are also more susceptible to wind noise. I cannot confirm that myself, but if there ever really is a risk of wind noise, it's best to use a single basket solution, I think. It's not pleasant to record stereo with two windshields and only one mics gets affected by wind. Rycote also build a stereo kit which is the same length as the standard one, but is a bit larger in diameter. This may help those who are worried about the 8 getting too close to the edge. Sound-wise I think MS is best suited to docs and all projects where a small setup is important. If you want to use for ambiance recording out on your own, I'd use something else

Maybe Senator Wikipedia would be more fitting