Jump to content

Thoughts about going digital


sonic_reducer

Recommended Posts

So I've been a persistent lurker here. Haven't really contributed anything of value, but I've been thinking a lot about this, so here goes. 

 
Some background: I started in the music business, recording garage bands for fun, working as a FOH mixer in small venues, then eventually on tour, and as a tape op, and assistant in small to middling sized analog studios. I've been working as a boom operator and utility for the past 15 years, and only recently did I make the transition to mixing. I'm very proud of my inheritance - I've been very blessed to have worked under engineers and mixers who have taught me a great deal about the technical, the political, and the brass tax of this business. 
 
For the past few weeks, I've been on the fence about going fully digital with my cart. Keeping in mind the FCC spectrum auction, and the anecdotal shrinking of available frequencies in my current setup, I recently acquired some digital wireless, and I'm in the process of folding this new technology into my existing setup. I also got my FCC license, in the hopes that it may reap future benefits. 
 
My reason for posting is that acquiring this piece of gear seems to have opened up a philosophical Pandora's Box for me. For the first time in a long time, I find myself challenged by the puzzles presented by this change. 
 
In the past, the timeline of setting up a recording and communications rig was, for me, marked by a lengthy period of forethought and design, a sort of intermediary period of designing all the interconnects, then a lot of soldering, and finally, a (hopefully short) testing of each interconnect and sub system. In the design of a system that operates mainly in the world of DSP, I'm finding that the process is largely inverted. The initial cabling and setup is the easy part. The challenge lies in faxing out the system from a software and settings standpoint. One only needs to lurk on this board in all things tagged 'Zaxcom' to see that people are spending a great deal of time and effort here sharing what they know about what is essentially a closed and self contained ecosystem, one that is constantly changing with each subsequent software iteration. 
 
It appears that there are a lot of people that share my anxieties about this change. Some seem to worry that commitment to an entire gear ecosystem from one manufacturer places them at the mercy of planned obsolescence. Others chafe at this sort of inversion - they would rather be able to directly control and service their interconnects from one device to another, rather than fuss about with menus and software updates. Others worry about the safety of 'putting their eggs in one basket'. All those concerns have their direct replies, which I have also seen over and over on this board. 
 
Something that I would like to see addressed in a thoughtful way is this idea of software as a constantly evolving process. Those of us who grew up with tape machines, patch bays and interconnects, inserts and busses, and outboard gear have also grown up with a sense of entitlement to equipment that serves one function well and reliably. When seeking digital all-in-one solutions to our evolving needs, what are we as end users entitled to? 
 
Ultimately, we all have to make decisions about the relative benefits and drawbacks of our gear, and work with the tools that are best suited to us. For me, I've decided to embrace the change, and to start learning as much as I can about this ecosystem, and how it works. My hope is to acquire a knowledge base about the products and systems involved in a completely digital recording system, before acquiring any further gear, if only to keep from being left behind as things continue to change. I'm also banking on the power of end-user crowdsharing. Software dependent products seem to improve more rapidly when end users like me get involved, provide feedback, and propel innovations in development. 
 
 
Thoughts?
 
Adam Sanchez
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are folks here who are all digital+all Zax and it seems to be working out ok for them (I am not one of them).  Ping Rado or Jack Norflus, or Our Host J. Wexler--they are all Zax power users.  As for ponying up vs. changes, well, thats the game we're in here.  You have to look at the work you do now, the work you think you might get, the work you WANT to get and WHERE that work might happen re other RF transmissions, and roll the dice for yourself.  And that's just re the wireless part of our world....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We human beings are funny creatures. We'll go from a solid analog system and lament about limited upgrade options to a solid digital system and complain that features are being added too frequently.

What folks seem to forget is that deploying the newly-added features afforded by the flow of evolving firmware is optional.  With a solid digital system you can continue operating with its initial functionality, just as you do with a solid analog system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, Philip, 

Agreed on both fronts. 

"As for ponying up vs. changes, well, thats the game we're in here.  You have to look at the work you do now, the work you think you might get, the work you WANT to get and WHERE that work might happen re other RF transmissions, and roll the dice for yourself."

Certainly we roll the dice, but I've always been in favor of playing the best odds. Or at least trying to roll sevens as little as possible.

I have settled into a nice sort of niche in single camera (or at least thoughtfully shot two-camera) dialogue-driven narrative work. But recently, I've been confronted with more and more directors who would prefer to turn scenes into free-for-all, multiple camera insanity, and who view wireless as a panacea, or at least a welcome excuse for not having constructive conversations about blocking, coverage, or adherence to the scripted material. I'm finding those sort to be less reasonable than they used to be, largely because the 'last sound guy they worked with just wired everyone all the time'. They're usually the sort of people who want my cart farther from set than I'd care to be. Combine that with the constant congestive state of NYC, the presence of crummy, rf belching HMEs, and poorly maintained Paralynx systems that spew rf in the 475-575mhz range, I can see that coming up sevens is going to be a more common event if I don't adjust.

"What folks seem to forget is that deploying the newly-added features afforded by the continual flow of evolving firmware is optional.  With a solid digital system you can continue operating with its initial functionality, just as you do with a solid analog system."

Thank you for reminding me of this, John. I recall that I hadn't updated the os on my iPad using cl-wifi since I installed the damn thing. I have used it exclusively for cl-wifi and freqfinder, and i removed all other apps ages ago. It's been rock solid. My first-gen intel mac only recently died (motherboard failure), and ran like a swiss watch with no major updates since 2007. I suppose there's a lesson to be learned in this.

My current setup/cart system (411/Venue/Cooper 106+1/788T) has worked reasonably well for me, and will likely continue to do so until the levee breaks, or rf becomes too congested. But when the inevitable occurs, I want to be ready for what comes, and not make decisions based on panic. Thanks for pointing me to JW and Rado, Philip. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, John Blankenship said:

 

What folks seem to forget is that deploying the newly-added features afforded by the flow of evolving firmware is optional.  With a solid digital system you can continue operating with its initial functionality, just as you do with a solid analog system.

Very wise words. I've always been of the mindset that if my current setup is working fine, then I don't change it in terms of firmware. It's the old "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" addage. I learned the hard way once WAAAY back when I "updated" quicktime that it completely jacked my pro tools system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "more cams more wireless spray everything" method is how many young non-radical not very creative but very common directors think now (or don't think, or plan).  Without trashing these folks any more I would say that that's just how they are going to roll, and we've all had to make accommodations for this: as we say in the Sound Dept.: "It's Their Movie".  The Zax all-dig thing is one way to go, albeit pretty expensive if you aren't already in that ecosystem, and there are other ways to skin the cat depending on exactly what you need to do.  But being ready for lotsa radios is part of the drama-drill anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

as a fellow lurker commenting on a fellow lurkers perspective {

I'd call myself a generalist kind of sound guy (reality, corporate, doc, narrative-indie/union blah mixer/boom/utility etc.)

I'd like to think of myself more as a boom op than mixer, but this(post #6) was definitely my experience having recently Boomed my first contiguous season of a union show.  Anyway, it was a big shift getting used to the <"tv mentality"> of trying to work out logistics of fitting two cameras in the same room ALL the time (well not literally all the time) and necessarily having to compromise everything for the "perception" that this method will make things faster, versus people that come in f(knowing) what they want, while logistically understanding how to "get it."  Logistically, everything has necessarily moved to wireless (focus assist, iris assist, video, then <our stuff>, plus ambient <whatever>), so its just going to become a perpetually increasing problem.

To the original post, maybe if there was "open firmware" or something, such that these increasingly digital/computer trending solutions don't become complete "black boxes" that magically do arbitrary function.  I think part of the whole fun aspect of the location mixing side is intuitively understanding the various backup plans you can "create" given <your set of gear>.

}

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be the way of "the" future, but whether or not it should be "your" future right now you have to carefully consider.  The field is littered with both the corpses of technologies that sounded great at first but failed to get traction in the wider world (and cost their early adopters a lot of $) and the sales of gear by folks who overbought vs their real needs.   While most of us understand the efficacy of ramping up our package during down-times, the emotional under-score of our lives re gear is that we tend to make changes (esp upgrades) in response to a specific incoming job and what that job will require.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...