Mark Orusa Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 To me, the biggest con against using the faders as pan is that then this fader extension thing doesn't solve the problem of virtual faders... there's 10 inputs but only six faders, now extended by 8, but those extra faders are now assigned as pan knobs so now I have to mix virtually anyway? And still there are pan knobs missing for two channels. Does not compute to me. And I agree with johnpaul that panning that many inputs is a bit redundant. I'd just be panning center and mixing mono anyway.. If we had the option to use them as panners you would end up with A, D, T, Z, and P for fader assignments, or: A = analog input fader D = digital input fader T = trim Z = ZaxNet P = pan With this 8 fader unit you'll have 14 knobs. Theoretically, you could have seven audio sources and be able to mix and pan all of them. Mark O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 I'll be happy to just be able to mix them all in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 " any tv show that has a musical Instrument component, I want to make a good sounding stereo mix. " you don't really know the spatial relationships until after it is cut. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted October 25, 2013 Report Share Posted October 25, 2013 If we had the option to use them as panners you would end up with A, D, T, Z, and P for fader assignments, or: A = analog input fader D = digital input fader T = trim Z = ZaxNet P = pan With this 8 fader unit you'll have 14 knobs. Theoretically, you could have seven audio sources and be able to mix and pan all of them. Mark O. Exactly. Thank you. The new faders will likely have menu selectable functions. Having soft pan option, or "P" as Mark suggests, would be the killer feature for me. Daily use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Goldberger Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 Nobody is saying you need to use the extra faders, as pan/trim or anything at all. When you're using 10 inputs, obviously you wouldn't, but it would be great for 5-6 channels to have a fader and pan for each channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 Nobody is saying you need to use the extra faders, as pan/trim or anything at all. When you're using 10 inputs, obviously you wouldn't, but it would be great for 5-6 channels to have a fader and pan for each channel. Exactly. I'm frankly baffled by the resistance on here to panning in general. Calling it 'silly'? Really? Most of my TV work is still mixed down to two channels on a camera. Often on these gigs production are not paying for (and don't want) multitrack recordings. If I'm running about with a boom and three Lavs, you're damn right I'm going to pan them to seperate channels. Ditto if I've just got a couple of wireless but one is suffering from a heavy breather or a 'mic toucher' I will split them to give post a fighting chance. I know this is not as effective a solution as using ISO, but until very recently this was standard procedure for ENG work. It's no coincidence that the 664 has all those usual - and frequently accessed - mixer controls (pan, trim, LFcut, PFL) laid out front and centre. And just like the 664, Nomad was designed to fill that gap between ENG mixer and recorder. It just has a more eccentric way of implementing this when it comes to some of the ENG style features. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnpaul215 Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 James, and you don't find the nomads panning adequate for that? In the old days with just a mixer feeding camera covering a bunch of people running back-and-forth between cameras I was panning and mixing like a madman. It was totally different panning that needed something quicker. I absolutely wouldn't mind dedicated switches or knobs, but not if it cluttered the operation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 James, and you don't find the nomads panning adequate for that? In the old days with just a mixer feeding camera covering a bunch of people running back-and-forth between cameras I was panning and mixing like a madman. It was totally different panning that needed something quicker. I absolutely wouldn't mind dedicated switches or knobs, but not if it cluttered the operation. I find that there are less shows where it's complete madness now (without multitrack) but still lots of stuff where I'm using the pan function. Even then, the odd reality show works without multitrack - Britain's Top Model is largely all camera mix. It's...passable. In that, yes it functions - I can hard pan my tracks left or right. But like a few of the Nomad UI options it seems to require an inordinate amount of button pushing (though LF cut is worse). The lack of a hardware fader for things means that if one navigates away from the one single screen that displays the relevant information (ENG pan layout or the Setup page for LF) you have no visual reference to go on. It's stuff that I work around for the sake of other Zaxcom features and the machines diminutive size, but I remain largely unconvinced by the particular piece of design choice that led to the removal of any knobs or switches bar the master faders (and membrane buttons - ARGH!). In some ways I think it's ironic that the fader panel is being released - with all that new real estate we probably could have had pan/trim/LF/PFL switches in the first place! ; ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 I think they could easily make the panning faster and remove a few steps via software adjustments. My idea: Use the same approach that auto trim does. To pan an input simply touch the fader assigned to an input and then press the "bus" button repeatedly to cycle through L C R. If you need to access the "bus menu" simply press and hold the bus button. If combined with a "pop-up" message that shows your your pan selection as you're making changes you could pan your inputs from any screen. I really don't know why the auto-fader sensing is only used for trim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 More ideas on the above pan idea: To avoid unintended pan cycling to your outputs the software could wait until your selection is "parked", I.e. you've stopped pressing the bus button for 1-2 seconds, and then cross fade the channel input over to the designated output. I think this kind of arrangement would feel more intuitive to me since your hand is already over the faders and left side of the machine. You could also probably learn to do this without looking whereas with the current system you need to look down, hit bus, turn the knob, press the knob, press the other knob etc.. Maybe Zaxcom should make the Nomad/max software open-source so we can all tweak to our hearts content! Just kidding... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 Or instead of pressing the bus button maybe just the menu knob button? If you need to get into the menu just press and hold? That way like Zack mentioned you're not fumbling for the Bus membrane button. Also, this gives you both trim and pan control on one knob. Used in conjunction with the brilliant fader-sensing feature already built into Nomad/Maxx I think it would be awesome. For variable pan?Maybe just add that to the channel setup page for each input. Then if you go back to using the "ENG" pan mode it defaults back to hard LCR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg sextro Posted October 27, 2013 Report Share Posted October 27, 2013 If I did a lot of reality work where I had to quickly pan L to R for camera feeds I would simply go with a 664. I for one am disappointed that the PFL buttons on the expander are the same as on the Nomad...not that I expected differently I guess, but the problem is the same - that one really has to look down at the unit to get to the PFL. Major hassle IMO. The beauty of the 442, 552 and 644 for that matter is that you can largely "mix blind" - things like the PFL and pan are easy to adjust and get to without really looking. So, for that matter, are the trim pots... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 I think they could easily make the panning faster and remove a few steps via software adjustments. My idea: Use the same approach that auto trim does. To pan an input simply touch the fader assigned to an input and then press the "bus" button repeatedly to cycle through L C R. If you need to access the "bus menu" simply press and hold the bus button. If combined with a "pop-up" message that shows your your pan selection as you're making changes you could pan your inputs from any screen. I really don't know why the auto-fader sensing is only used for trim. Yes, this is a great idea - I think you mentioned it on the Zax forums? I would also like to see something like this for the LF roll off using the autotrim knob and the setup button. 'Pop up' windows would make things so much easier, but I'm not a software engineer. I think the 664 uses some? A nod to Glenn - this isn't supposed to be a big old moan about the Nomad or the new fader module. I love my Nomad and the new module looks sexy - but I would love Zax to see how far they can improve things on a software level. There is still quite a lot of round-the-housing on the UI that flys in the face of straightforward ENG use. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arnold Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 If I did a lot of reality work where I had to quickly pan L to R for camera feeds I would simply go with a 664. I for one am disappointed that the PFL buttons on the expander are the same as on the Nomad...not that I expected differently I guess, but the problem is the same - that one really has to look down at the unit to get to the PFL. Major hassle IMO. The beauty of the 442, 552 and 644 for that matter is that you can largely "mix blind" - things like the PFL and pan are easy to adjust and get to without really looking. So, for that matter, are the trim pots... Yeah, I'm a bit gutted too. Was also hoping that being in PFL 'mode' would be a thing of the past - I need to get to other menus while still PFLing!!!! Dunno if that has evolved? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 My idea: Use the same approach that auto trim does. To pan an input simply touch the fader assigned to an input and then press the "bus" button repeatedly to cycle through L C R. Actually there has been some discussion about doing something similar to this. So stay tuned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Using the trim knob. Assigned as a fader potentiometer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Orusa Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 How about using the * key next to the menu button to cycle between L, C, R? Mark O. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 How about using the * key next to the menu button to cycle between L, C, R? Mark O. For me, the star key is hard to use. My fingers don't fit there easily. I love the idea of pressing the menu button to cycle L C R for the active channel. Auto trim and auto pan on the same knob. Great suggestion. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek H Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Yeah I think the menu knob button would be the best choice, most tactile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afewmoreyears Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Coming to a track monkey near you soon..... When will the 64 track bag rig recorder be ready?.... Oh and, no boom op or Utility.... sorry... BUT!!!! Comes with a trailer for the radio units.... It straps to your waist and follows around behind you as you walk... Expectations of Producers will increase.... Ability of mixers and ability to do their job will decrease.... FUN.... and NEAT!!! but the direction is disturbing IMO.... It IS a nice looking unit though.... They do a good job.... not a knock on ZAX, just a knock on the direction and expectations of things to come.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 Coming to a track monkey near you soon..... When will the 64 track bag rig recorder be ready?.... Oh and, no boom op or Utility.... sorry... BUT!!!! Comes with a trailer for the radio units.... It straps to your waist and follows around behind you as you walk... Expectations of Producers will increase.... Ability of mixers and ability to do their job will decrease.... FUN.... and NEAT!!! but the direction is disturbing IMO.... It IS a nice looking unit though.... They do a good job.... not a knock on ZAX, just a knock on the direction and expectations of things to come.. I think they call that trailer a radio flyer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McQueen Posted October 28, 2013 Report Share Posted October 28, 2013 will its connector cable be long enough for it to be located in another part of the bag other than on top of the unit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandering Ear Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 will its connector cable be long enough for it to be located in another part of the bag other than on top of the unit? You can always use a short usb extension cable if it isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wwsound Posted October 29, 2013 Report Share Posted October 29, 2013 I, for one, am super excited about this. In the worst case scenario, it will add four physical faders for inputs 7-10 (with autotrim) to my nomad, which would be a very valuable addition for me. It will undoubtedly be able to do much more than that, but just being able to run all 10 analogue inputs (or 11 if you include slate mic) without the vFaders alone is a valuable addition to my nomad rig. How valuable? I guess we'll see when they release the price... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted November 10, 2013 Report Share Posted November 10, 2013 Just curious, wondering the actual/physical reason it cannot be mounted below the unit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.