HVX200, Tascam HD-P2, and timecode

HVX can downconvert to SD monitors but I am not sure if it feeds the raw 16x9 squeeze. I will have to check.

Blocking for 4x3 if you are shooting with say the DVX100 is nice because you can adjust your shot later and tweak it more easily for a 16x9 output.
 
I would want an HD monitor so I could get better focus. I have output from the HVX200 to a HD TV and it filled the screen properly without any bars or distortion.
 
Mike,

Having spoken with several distribution experts, they all recommend this for SD because quite often you are forced to release something in 4:3 if it is straight to video. So, it really depends on how interested you are in distribution.

Phil
 
There are plenty of movies released today that are only widescreen releases. In fact, I think most are widescreen only. Someone correct me if I am wrong. Either way, though, I still won't frame for possibility of 4:3.
 
flmmkr said:
Okay, then I'll ask the stupid question. Why bother with external recording at all? If the camera will record 16bit/48kHz and automatically be sync'd to the video why not just record straight to the camera? Keep in mind that between lighting setups we will be checking the shots for focus and sound and to make sure the shots are okay in general before breaking down the lighting.
Click to expand...

A couple reasons:

1) 24bit >>>> 16bit. You can theoretically have your peaks at -48db in 24 bit and still capture all the quality of 16 bit. So, play it safe, peak at -12ish and you should have plenty of nice sounding audio in post without having to worry about sudden yells during recording.

2) Most likely, the input electronics before the recording stage is much better on an external recorder than on the camera. This means mic pres and HP filters. Also, you won't be draining the battery with the 48v power.

3) It gives the sound guy something to play with. Seriously though, it gives the sound guy a place to control levels and monitor levels without being all up in the camera guy's face.

I'm sure there are more points.

Points 2 and 3 are negated if you have a nice external mixer (like a Sound Devices 302). Point 1 is huge in my book though.
 
Does anyone have any samples of the same audio recorded to the HVX200 and an external 24bit recorder at the same time. This way I can compare the two and decide if it's worth the expense for me. That would be very helpful.
 
I don't have an HVX, but I have used the DVX. Assuming things only got better with the HVX (or remained the same), the DVX had a pretty good audio section. I would still highly recommend using an external mic pre (maybe the SD MixPre), but I think for many kinds of projects it is probably acceptable to go to the camera. I'm sure others can offer more advice...

Remember, if you do get an external recorder, when the time comes to record foley, sound effects, and ambience, you don't have to lug your camera around.
 
Sounds like a plan.

It's just my take that I don't think the super high sampling rates are all they're cracked up to be.

It has been said that 192k is nice for sound effects because there is a lot of data for extreme manipulation/warping (like slowing down 300%), but the simple fact of the matter is that our mics, speakers, and most importantly ears don't hear up to 86khz, so why go through the storage and processing hardships of using 192k?

I could be convinced that 96k/88.2k is a nice place to be, but at twice the file size... but I do think that 192k is a bit unnecessary for everyday recording.
 
dont bother with external recorder if you can skip the money for more useful stuff - like a better mixer /more microphones /better sound acoustic .
24 bit - for music only 16 /48 will give enough for dialog recording
 
Coming in late on this thread, hope someone is still out there!!!

I have an HVX200 and need to step up my sound recording abilities for doco / corporate and my own drama projects.
I was keen on the Tascam HD-P2 as I love the idea of it but I can see keeping on top of syncing everything, by shooting slates in the field and then having to line them all up in editing as doing my head in. Call me lazy!!
So now I'm thinking the Sound Devices 302 Mixer for most of the time when the Soundie will be tethered to the cam anyway and sync's not an issue.
There's still times when I'll need the Soundie to be a free agent, ie taking a feed from a desk, where I'll need some way of recording the sound from the mixer without the camera. Ie a mini disc or DAT or Compact Flash recording thingy.
The Tascam HD-P2 seems like overkill with the 302 as well so can anyone suggest a cheap and easy option.

Thanks very much.
 
you can go with small non tc recorder for the shots you need go alone and slate orrecord sound on camera and mach in the editing
there is allot of stuffin 500us$ range
go o tapersection.com
recorders rubric , you will find allot of info about these
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top