Sony Cinema Line & FX6

[puredrifting]

That is cool. The Mixpre3ii is amazing. Tiny and easy enough to use for a novice on small gigs and fun projects. The Zoom recorders had the hit record a second time to actually record, and red and red blinking meaning different things, and then other recorders of theirs just being one tap of record.... made me so unconfident renting a zoom or handing it off to anyone. But the Mixpre’s just hit the big ole REC button and it goes red and time code a running.... easy peasey lemon squeezy!

I'm not a pro sound mixer, but lately I've been doing quite a bit with my Mix Pre 3 I. I used it on our Katzkin SEMA video, used it on a few live streams,
I just recorded a documentary VO on location with it. What an awesome, simple to use, versatile and cool little mixer/recorder, I am so glad I bought it a few years ago.

I've been tempted to upgrade to the MixPre 10 II but then I ask myself, "why"? Same with upgrading to Lectros, they are so damn good but why? If I am shooting material
that needs ten channels and Lectros, I am hiring a pro to do it. I will keep my little Mix Pre 3 just for low budget jobs where I can't afford a sound mixer.
And those always involve a single or perhaps two talent, that's it. I was thinking about getting a 633 and a few Lectro SRCs with some LT transmitters and going out
as a sound mixer but I am making more than I could make doing that in producing livestreams. I live in LA and there hundreds of great sound mixers here looking for work.

If I lived in the boonies or a smaller city, I think I would go for sound mixing, at least part time, doing sound is kind of fun and so different than DPing or producing.

[James0b57]

I'm not a pro sound mixer, but lately I've been doing quite a bit with my Mix Pre 3 I. I used it on our Katzkin SEMA video, used it on a few live streams,
I just recorded a documentary VO on location with it. What an awesome, simple to use, versatile and cool little mixer/recorder, I am so glad I bought it a few years ago.

I've been tempted to upgrade to the MixPre 10 II but then I ask myself, "why"? Same with upgrading to Lectros, they are so damn good but why? If I am shooting material
that needs ten channels and Lectros, I am hiring a pro to do it so. I will keep my little Mix Pre 3 just for low budget jobs where I can't afford a sound mixer.
And those always involve a single or perhaps two talent, that's it. I was thinking about getting a 633 and a few Lectro SRCs with some LT transmitters and going out
as a sound mixer but I am making more than I could make doing that in producing livestreams. I live in LA and there hundreds of great sound mixers here looking for work.

If I lived in the boonies or a smaller city, I think I would go for sound mixing, at least part time, doing sound is kind of fun and so different than DPing or producing.

It seems like the more stable career, as a good sound recordist is still coveted. I've been on more than one shoot where the sound people/person was making more than the DP.

[puredrifting]

It seems like the more stable career, as a good sound recordist is still coveted. I've been on more than one shoot where the sound people/person was making more than the DP.

I think it can be but go read the threads over on JW Sound, I see a LOT of guys not working at all this year or working very little. The problem is that a lot of dumb
producers/clients, esepcially in the mid level to lower end are seeing gimmicks like 32-bit floating point and actually writing sound mixers out of the budget, thinking that
they can get away with an inexperienced PA type using the miracle new technology to hang mics on people and boom because "it's impossible to set the wrong levels". Between
Dugan, automix, 32-but FP audio, all of these technologies are great but are largely aimed at shrinking or eliminating the sound department to a point. Not on higher budget
projects but in the mid to low level, you know, where the bulk of production gets done, the technology definitely is aimed at reducing and paring down the crew positions.

That's the thing, it's just like when higher ISO cameras started becoming popular, dumb producers and clients took that as a sign that they could stop budgeting for 5-10 tons and could
rent a high ISO camera and just a very small or modest G&L package instead of the big stuff. They cut the amount of gaffers and grips too and rented faster lenses. Shortsighted neophytes
will always try to replace talented crew positions with cheap technology, that's what producers do but the end result usually suffers.

Film < Digital Cinema
Tungsten/HMI < LED of every flavor and type
Stuntmen and women < digital stunts
Green screen and compositing for photorealistic digital > real sets, practical effects, optical composites
Armorers with real guns, blanks, squibs < rubber guns and digital muzzle flashes and hits
And soon, professional sound mixers with professional sound gear < 32-bit FP audio and other technologies that make recording sound a more passive, lower skill job

They still have problem solving, bending and tricking physics, microphone selection and placement but how long until producers listen to what a lower skill person
can do in ideal conditions with inexpensive, highly capable gear and just basically start making wholesale cuts to sound mixing teams. Not because it's smart or
good business, but because the producers know just enough to be dangerous?

[James0b57]

I think it can be but go read the threads over on JW Sound, I see a LOT of guys not working at all this year or working very little. The problem is that a lot of dumb
producers/clients, esepcially in the mid level to lower end are seeing gimmicks like 32-bit floating point and actually writing sound mixers out of the budget, thinking that
they can get away with an inexperienced PA type using the miracle new technology to hang mics on people and boom because "it's impossible to set the wrong levels". Between
Dugan, automix, 32-but FP audio, all of these technologies are great but are largely aimed at shrinking or eliminating the sound department to a point. Not on higher budget
projects but in the mid to low level, you know, where the bulk of production gets done, the technology definitely is aimed at reducing and paring down the crew positions.

Woah! that is awful! Every working pro knows that mic handling and knowledge of electronics and acoustics is more important than the dynamic range of the recorder!

I fear this may trickle to cameras. lightweight Komodo style camera bodies on robot tracking operators and AF with 18stops DR.....

That's the thing, it's just like when higher ISO cameras started becoming popular, dumb producers and clients took that as a sign that they could stop budgeting for 5-10 tons and could
rent a high ISO camera and just a very small or modest G&L package instead of the big stuff. They cut the amount of gaffers and grips too and rented faster lenses. Shortsighted neophytes
will always try to replace talented crew positions with cheap technology, that's what producers do but the end result usually suffers.

Can we just replace those stupid decision makers with AI. I feel like AI would understand talent more than those neophytes!

[James0b57]

Anyways, I have live during the best time to be a camera person, so I can count myself lucky. The experiences I have been able to have and the places and people we get to meet, is absolutely fantastic!

[ahalpert]

The end result usually suffers - but if all the producers lower the quality of their output simultaneously, the audience doesn't even notice a difference. Like boiling a frog. And eventually people forget what it ever felt like to gaze on something beautiful

[ozmorphasis]

It seems like the more stable career, as a good sound recordist is still coveted. I've been on more than one shoot where the sound people/person was making more than the DP.

That's actually more than anything else because soundies protect each other. They refer their colleagues for gigs all the time, but if a young and up-n-coming recordist goes and accepts a job for BS rates, watch how fast that same circle will be calling him/her up to read them the riot act. You can get chewed out a couple of times, but if it persists, you're out of the circle. Not getting calls. In other words, they help maintain their rates and protect each other.

Shooters don't do this and arguably they CAN'T do this quite like the audio guys.

Very few people get into audio just because they either have a rich uncle (yay, I'll pick up a Monstro and now want experience shooting and will charge nothing), or because of "the democratization of gear."

Shooters, on the other hand come into this from all angles. Capable cameras are cheap. The allure is MUCH more universal than capturing audio. The audio equivalent is like making beats. Everyone with garageband can practice building up the backing track for a friend to rap over, even if it's crap. Everyone can get an affordable camera and make "cinematic" short content of whatever they like (skating, travel, etc). How many people actually WANT to go hold a boom pole, lav up several people, and mix audio for picture? It's not a huge scene. More of a niche interest.

So yeah. I just hired a recordist and a 2nd camera op for the same gig. I definitely paid the recordist more. That's the market. He also brought way more gear, way more experience, and needed way less handholding.

[James0b57]

So yeah. I just hired a recordist and a 2nd camera op for the same gig. I definitely paid the recordist more. That's the market. He also brought way more gear, way more experience, and needed way less handholding.

Well, I sure hope you pay the main sound person more than the 2nd cam op!!!! They are half the production!

[DLD]

... Can we just replace those stupid decision makers with AI. I feel like AI would understand talent more than those neophytes!

I've had AI write all my DVX User posts since 2017.

Including this joke too.

[James0b57]

I've had AI write all my DVX User posts since 2017.

Including this joke too.

Self aware AI is the best.