robertw

Turns out that that was the second of CBC Music's/Tom Allen's forays into one take music videos. Here's the first:

There's also a "behind the scenes" for the video that Jason Porter linked to at the beginning of this thread:

 

Great stuff. Thanks to Jason for pointing it out.

Mike Thornton, who made the above videos, has a bit over four hours of RX 3 tutorials at http://groove3.com. On the same site, he also has 80 minutes of tutorials on iZotope Insight, which comes bundled with RX 3 Advanced. Access is by purchase of the videos ($35 for RX, $25 for Insight) or a monthly site pass ($15).

I downloaded trial versions of RX 3 Advanced and Insight a few days ago, and watched Thornton's tutorials yesterday. He's easy to listen to and his tutorials are both methodical and thorough. The videos that I posted above are not part of his Groove3 tutorials, apparently having been made more recently. iZotope's own Help files are also good.

While checking out iZotope's web site, I also came across this video with Bob Brownow about his use of RX on The Deadliest Catch: https://www.izotope.com/en/community/artists/post-production/bob-bronow/


P.S. Subsequent to writing the above, I decided to purchase RX 3 Advanced/Insight. This package, and RX 3 Standard, are priced at significant discounts until the end of the month. Very smooth transaction. Less than two minutes after ordering from iZotope - which says that it could take 24 hours - I had serial number authorizations for both RX and the Insight plug-in.

I purchased the package in part because I really like the interface (very clean and focused) and tools (both the selection tools which, if you use Photoshop, will be like old home week, and the modules themselves), and because I think that RX Advanced/Insight will be useful for more than fixing audio problems. I plan to use the package for audio analysis, I think RX 3 is interesting both for sound effects development and as a general sound editor if one needs to deal with not more than two tracks at a time, and that Insight's metering capabilities (apparently US$500 by itself as a plug-in) will prove to be useful both analytically and as an output control.

I ... generally really dislike the overcleaned' dx that is prevalant and devoid of any normal location indicators. Some programs are so overdone ( not that I watch much TV ) my brain struggles to relate the voice to the source.

This statement by iZotope on the capabilities of its de-reverb function just might be a little zealous:

"Take control over the amount of ambient space captured in a recording: make large cathedrals sound like small halls and make roomy vocals sound like they were recorded in a proper studio space."

Presented by Mike Thornton.

 

Part III was just posted yesterday, so it's possible that there's more to come.

 

Part I: De-reverb

 

 

Part II: Dealing with clipping

 

 

Part III: Removing unwanted background sounds

 

Thanks, love it.

Got to be more fun recording the ocean and shoreline in all it's glory, than to record dialog at the same location.

CrewC

For sure.

But looking at it that way, there's really good info in his two posts, and associated links, on when and how to record dialogue so that it isn't overwhelmed by the sound of surf.

This strikes me as a hugely helpful resource on the subject: http://blog.quietplanet.com/how-to-record-waves/

For his views on mixing/sound design for waves, see the link at the end to his post of last week.

He uses a binaural recording technique (there's a documentary about him, which I have and is well worth downloading), but what is said in these posts is independent of mic setup.

The boycott/buycott bit is getting tired within contentious areas. "Coexist", man

 

When a vendor makes a political statement that some people might consider highly offensive - namely, that the US is headed in the same direction as Europe as a nanny state - it can hardly be a surprise that someone might react by saying to that vendor that he or she will not buy that vendor's product.

 

Which is all I said, in one sentence.

 

Others have taken up the subject on behalf of the vendor, which I guess is their right, but I would have thought that the whole point is that the owner of Lectrosonics has no business making political pronouncements in at least this part of the forum.

 

I do find it a bit odd that people are pushing me over and over on my one sentence statement that I will not buy his products, instead of telling the owner of Lectrosonics that this forum is not a vehicle for his political views (left or right).

Wrong thread and section of the board for such shameless posturing. 

 

What say we 1) resume the tolerance, and 2) get back on topic.

 

Totally cool with that. The owner of Lectrosonics made an overtly political statement and I said, in one sentence, that in light of his statement I would not be buying his products. I expected to leave it at that, and I'm quite happy to leave it at that now.

I'm sure Lectro can survive without your custom.

 

I'm sure that you're right.

 

And I respect the owner of Lectrosonics for saying publicly that he is a fellow traveller with the two great warriors against the "nanny state" - against unions, the minimum wage and a social safety net - Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

 

Although it's interesting that Thatcher, rather to the right of Reagan, drew the line at telling Brits that they were on their own when it came to medical care. As she said in her autobiography: “I believed that the National Health Service was a service of which we could genuinely be proud.”

 

So yeah, I'll spend my money elsewhere and Lectrosonics will enjoy the patronage of people who agree with the owner's right wing, anti-"nanny state" (aka anti-union, anti-minimum wage, anti-safety net, anti-universal medicare) "philosophy".

OK.  But for the record, you're the one that made a post that begged an answer.

 

Cheers

No, what started the discussion was this:

 

The good news is, after a few more years of the nanny state expanding in the US, prices will be equalized.

Best Regards,

Larry F

Lectro

Mirror,

Don't want to get into this.

The owner of Lectrosonics has made his political views clear, we fundamentally disagree, and as a result I won't be buying his products.

There's a company called DPA, which some people think make OK mics, and which has a corporate view that I find more in line with my own.

It's that simple.

Larry,

It's not nice calling the GREAT state of New Mexico a Nanny State.....LOL....

I had no idea it is expanding....

So I guess all that free social stuff that Americans like to admire about euro countries aren't all that free in the end.

Not sure what's driving these posts.

The owner of Lectrosonics has been clear in this thread about his politics. We disagree on such a fundamental level (I believe in unions, a livable minimum wage and universal medical care) that I have said that I will not buy his products.

Don't know why my comment has now led to a LOL about the "nanny state" and someone suggesting that Americans are so stupid that they don't know that citizens of all of the European countries, Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders pay for universal health care with their taxes.

Gee whiz, that is indeed how universal medical care is paid for, and - big surprise - none of the countries that have it - are about to give it up.

In 20 years, Obama's legacy will be seen as health care.

The good news is, after a few more years of the nanny state expanding in the US, prices will be equalized.

Best Regards,

Larry F

Lectro

Thanks, you've just helped me reduce the list of manufacturers that I'll consider by one.

The good news is that Avid is not going subscription ONLY. You have multiple options.

For now.

Adobe initially rolled out its cloud and subscription-based service in Australia on a test basis. Then it expanded the rollout elsewhere. Until relatively recently, it was possible to either buy a license/upgrade or subscribe, although Adobe offered significant discounts (for the first year) to those with existing licenses to move to subscription. Now buying is no longer an option unless one finds a retailer with new old stock.

I use Adobe products and I'm one of those people, when upgrade time came, who moved to subscription. I have to acknowledge that the cloud/subscription service offers enough benefits that I'm happy with the decision.

I don't purport to have a detailed understanding of Avid's business and clientele, but just looking at what is going on elsewhere (Adobe isn't pioneering, companies like Oracle are doing the same), I figure that there's a strong probability that Avid will move to a wholly cloud and subscription based model over the next three to five years.

P.S. The use of the word cloud is a bit of a misnomer as it relates to the software itself. It isn't a matter of calling up the software from a central server. The software, as and when one needs it, resides on one's computer. So it's a hybrid system. A clarification, but for some people an important one.

Cloud based tools and storage/software as a service is rapidly gaining traction. At the moment, it looks like Adobe's move to this approach is going to be very successful, and I think it is likely that we will see competing vendors copy Adobe's model. The monthly fee is annoying, but if one looks at the whole package it has distinct attractions. In any event, and while it may not be for everyone, the actual reaction of Adobe's clients, and the numbers, suggest that Adobe has called it right.

 

It would not surprise me at all if the next round of upgrades from Avid go cloud-based as well.

 

philp

 

Speak of the devil...

 

NAB:

 

http://www.stockhouse.com/news/press-releases/2014/04/05/avid-announces-flexible-licensing-and-deployment-options-for-artist-suite-video

http://www.avid.com/static/resources/common/documents/datasheets/Media_Composer/Media_Composer_License_Comparison_Guide_cs_A4.pdf

I think Pro Tools is a better choice when you do have to hand sessions back and forth to post, but there's no reason why simple playback tools couldn't work in different situations. I've used Courtney Goodin's BWF-Widget Pro quite a few times on a real cheap netbook, and it's been stellar for that purpose. The trick is, I have to use Pro Tools to prep the file, providing embedded timecode and also audible timecode on channel 2 for a wireless slate display. I'm sure there are other programs that can do that as well, but Pro Tools is what I know, plus I'm confident it's reliable for what I need it to do.

 

Talk about a blast from the past. I haven't heard about Mr. Goodin or his software in years, although I will never forget buying his "product".

 

Dealing with Mr. Goodin, his sale to me of BWF-Widget Pro and his treatment of me as a customer was the worst experience that I've ever had buying software, but thankfully not serious money and the sole bad experience that I've had with vendors of recording gear, hardware or software.

Following a recommendation from a couple of mixers on this forum a few years ago I have been using Adobe Audition for playback which has been excellent IMHO. I'm now told that things would be better if I used Pro-Tools instead of Audition but couldn't explain why. Anyone like to give some input?

Malcolm Davies A.m.p.s. CAS.

Meanwhile, no one has responded directly to Mr. Davies's question.

I have been using Adobe Audition for playback for a number of years with good results. Typically, I don't want or need all the bloated stuff that comes along with PT (unless we are doing some very complicated playbacks).

I have been staying with older versions to avoid paying the fee, which I agree is quite annoying. A real mistake on Adobe's part if they hope to gain any more traction in the marketplace.

Cloud based tools and storage/software as a service is rapidly gaining traction. At the moment, it looks like Adobe's move to this approach is going to be very successful, and I think it is likely that we will see competing vendors copy Adobe's model. The monthly fee is annoying, but if one looks at the whole package it has distinct attractions. In any event, and while it may not be for everyone, the actual reaction of Adobe's clients, and the numbers, suggest that Adobe has called it right.

Depending on what you are doing with Audition, be aware that when Adobe adds features you will not be able to upgrade via purchase. Adobe no longer sells its products or upgrades, instead charging a monthly fee, which in the case of Audition is currently $20/month or $240/yr plus tax.

 

Here is Adobe's page on how it now markets Audition: http://www.adobe.com/products/audition.html

 

Upgrades may not be an issue if you're just using Audition for playback, although in that case Audacity, which is free, may work just as well for you.

I think Richard Meredith was sound supervisor on this - he might chime in at some point he does post here. It is all radio mic's ( wireless ) I believe. Well hidden( that is our business) maybe boom on the vox pop's ?

 

Thanks. He has a website at http://www.meredith.tv/MBA/MBAHome.html which says they were using Lectrosonics for this show. Well hidden indeed. Judging from the photo above, looks like they also use a boomed mic.

 

Hope he'll chime in on whether rain drumming the roof presents any difficulties.

The lady in white, look at the small of her back

 

Hmm. I assume you mean the blond woman. She's one of the presenters.

 

I watched the show on a computer and paused several times at shots where one might see evidence of a mic. If these people are wearing lavalieres, they are really well hidden.

 

And look at the photo below, from the first link above to the site of the manufacturer who made the marquee...

 

By the way, the credits for the episode that I watched credited one sound mixer, three sound recordists and two sound assistants. There are two presenters, two judges and 12 contestants. The show is apparently shot, rain or shine, over about ten weekends.

 

This is a "behind the scenes" story about the third series (which includes the episode that I watched). Note the reference in the first sentence to "rain [drumming] steadily on the marquee roof": http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9411189/Behind-the-scenes-at-the-Great-British-Bake-Off.html

Jim-- do you have a photo of the vinten? I'm super curious to see it!

 

Pretty sexy, huh? So the shoulder strap is padded under the Vinten embroidery. And there's a handle at the top of the bag (where the tripod head would be). The whole bag is padded in a protect-the-expensive-tripod manner.

 

Several tripod manufacturers make soft cases for their tripods. Search tripod case at B&H for a selection. Also, Reis tripods makes beautiful cases in a few different sizes, although they are expensive: http://www.riestripod.com/products/accessories

I watched an episode of this BBC show tonight (series 3) and I have a question.

 

The show is shot in an open area outdoors in a large marquee (tent) with a plastic roof and walls, apparently regardless of weather.

 

The company that makes the marquee has some photographs here:

 

http://www.academy-marquees.co.uk/news/the-great-british-bake-off-tent

http://www.academy-marquees.co.uk/tvandfilm

 

I've added two screen shots from the show, showing the marquee in context and the interior.

 

Does anyone know what measures are taken when it is pouring rain to get good sound?

 

Also, watching the show, I did not see any sign of lavalieres. It appears that all of the dialogue is boomed. Is that correct?

 

Thanks

How do you NYC folks deal with bringing backup systems to gigs? If you own a car, I'm not really interested in hearing from you. If you need to carry everything onto the subway sometimes-- these are the folks I'd like to hear from.

I'm bringing this up because I often see people not in NYC saying-- "just throw a full second rig and the kitchen sink into the car." But EDIT-- sometimes --EDIT I find that what I can carry on my person is what I'm able to bring to set...

I live in New York. I have a car but often use the subway because it can be more convenient and indeed faster. I would have thought that the solution to your problem, as it is for many photographers, would be an appropriately sized knapsack, or indeed fold-up granny cart if you really need that much volume. But apparently not. Why?