Nomad 12 based cart backup recorder

[jKennedy]

Apologies in advance if this has been covered elsewhere I couldn't find much about this.

 

After years of working out of a bag system I'm considering building a cart with the Nomad 12 as the brains of the operation. I would also like to be able to have a backup recording system in place (bonus if it can work as a stand alone system as well) to capture iso tracks. For me using all available Nomad outputs for this is not an option. I was thinking that something like a Ferrofish Dante32 could sit between my wireless and my Nomad and route the tracks to a Macbook with PT or BoomRecorder or if I'm really spending all the monies feeding a Pix970. The biggest drawback here is that any hard wired mics needing 48ph would need a separate pre-amp or have to go through the Nomad first and then back to the FFish for distribution.

 

Is this idea simply overkill? I'm open to any and all suggestions and I appreciate and am humbled by the amazing knowledge base you all offer. Thanks.

[Philip Perkins]

I'd consider carefully how badly you need the backup system before spending any $ on it.  What you propose would work (along with extra mic pres as you say) but you are greatly increasing the complexity and thus the number of potential points of failure in a system that is supposed to be (I assume) "all-weather/all-terrain/location-rugged".  The Nomad is a pretty well proven device--if the 2nd system is purely for backup (vs extra non-redundant tracks) I'd reconsider.  Virtually all of the issues I've had with recorders since file-based machines came in were due to human error, not machine problems.  Media in any format is going to get you sooner or later, which is why most pro recorders record to 2 media (that and the human error factor in handling that media once it has been removed from the machine, ie losing it or reformatting it before it was downloaded).

[jKennedy]

Thank you Philip the more I think about this I'm inclined to agree with you. I suppose if my cart work increases and I'm expanding to larger projects I may re-visit this later. For now I'll take that money and buy an Oasis lol. Maybe a back up Nomad in case of catastrophic failure. 

 

[Philip Perkins]

Having a backup machine along on a job is what a professional does, unless the circumstances of the gig prevent it (super run-gun doco etc).  If you are lacking confidence in your primary recording system to the degree that running 2 machines at once seems important, then you have deeper issues to deal with.  In the DAT-Dark-Ages many of us ran two decks at once on high-stress gigs because there were so many issues with that format, which was one reason we dumped it when a better alternative came along.  With file-based recording it seems like if you "curate" your recording media well, keep up with the firmware updates and don't get fancy with things like routing and file name changes while you are rolling on a wide spread of tracks you will be fine pretty much all the time.

[David Waelder]

I favor making backup recordings wherever possible and reasonable. 

 

Like others, I began the practice when working with unreliable DAT recorders but continued even with more dependable file recording systems. The redundant recording provides me with piece of mind and also some insurance in high pressure environment of expensive productions. 

 

There are are two philosophies of backup recording:

1. Complete redundancy with each ISO track duplicated on a second recorder. 

2. An independent recording of the mix track only. 

 

I favor the second method of a single track recording. That permits using a less expensive recorder as the backup machine. I use an SD744 as my second recorder and these, or similar, machines are easily acquired for about $1000 or a bit more. I reason that the mix track ought to work in the production in almost all cases. If it’s not sufficient, it does at least provide a suitable track for looping, eliminating the need to reshoot. That seems insurance enough given the remote likelihood that a backup is needed. 

 

On some occasions, the second recording can even guard against operator blunders. Goofing the “roll” and thinking that the recorder is running after a half-pressed switch is rare but it can happen. Goofing both the primary and secondary machine rolls is almost unheard of. Something of the sort did happen (just once) in my career. 

 

David

[jKennedy]

Thanks David that is solid wisdom! 

[Philip Perkins]

Unless you can trick out a method where a single button push rolls everything, increments all metadata and makes entries into a common electronic sound report then I think with multiple recorders you have made a situation that is more failure prone instead of less.  There are high-level PSMs who have built location rigs which do what I said above, but those rigs are complex, bespoke and have been used and practiced with on a daily basis.  The issue of data entry in a live-fire movie set situation with all the constant changes that entails into two sets of metadata, especially on radically different machines like Nomad+a laptop rig, as well as then having to combine the media for delivery is not trivial.  One has finite attention/concentration "bandwidth", and the busier you are rolling and tending the gear on your cart the less you will be aware of what is going on on the set.   I vote for keeping things as small, light and simple as your gig and the technology available will allow.  

[glenn]

While a backup recorder can be a very good thing if everything goes wrong, with Nomad there is another option. Use Zaxcom wireless with Nomad and allow the wireless to be your backup. With Nomad you can replay all the tracks of the wireless in sync to re-record right from the Nomad. This will save you from not just a media failure or a cart hardware /power problem but it will allow remixing from the wireless and will allow you to recover audio in the case of an RF issue that might interfere with transmission. 

 

The other benefit is that it is likely that if the master recorder does not roll, a traditional backup recorder may not roll either. Zaxcom wireless is always recording if you set it up to work that way.  It does this with automatic time code reference and no need to jam any transmitters with a cable.

 

Something to consider....

 

Glenn

[David Waelder]

47 minutes ago, Philip Perkins said:

The issue of data entry in a live-fire movie set situation with all the constant changes that entails into two sets of metadata, especially on radically different machines like Nomad+a laptop rig, as well as then having to combine the media for delivery is not trivial.  One has finite attention/concentration "bandwidth", and the busier you are rolling and tending the gear on your cart the less you will be aware of what is going on on the set.  

 

Yes, there is some truth to that assertion, especially as it applies to using a laptop for your backup machine. 

 

I’ve always worked with the premise that a backup was just that and nothing more. There is no necessity to duplicate all aspects of each file to make a useful backup. At the start of the day, I would log the date and basic production information in metadata. Then I would simply allow take numbers to accumulate throughout the day. If there were a need to use a backup recording, the editor/edit assistant would need to hunt through the files to find the needed take. But that should be a manageable chore as each take would still have the classic voice slate and all digital recorders include TOD in metadata. 

 

A dedicated recorder, like an SD 7-series, rolls with only a single button press. It’s very minimal additional complication. (But I wouldn’t employ it in handheld situations.)

 

David

[paul55]

I have Nomad 8 back from Zax that has been totally gone through that I don’t need much for if it would help you and me