dat recorder question

[chris f]

i'm going to be videoing a wedding this coming weekend and i'm planning on capturing audio straight off the church soundboard. i have a few options on what kind of audio recorder i can use, but the guy that rents out the equipment at my school suggested a dat recorder. i've never used one before and was curious about how well they work and what is the best way to go about digitizing the audio so i can edit with it? thanks

 

[ptalsky]

I strongly recommend that you do not use DAT. There are many non-linear recorders that you can rent that store your audio directly in files that your editor can read (with DAT you still have to capture the tape in real time after the event).

At the low end, you will hear names like Marantz PMD-660, 670, 671, Tascam HD-P2 (be careful with Tascam...they have a DAT with a very similar model number), and the higher end, you will hear names like Sound Devices (722, 744T), Deva (II, IV, V) and Cantar (my new dream recorder). The Sound Devices recorders start to be over kill, and the Deva's you need to have experience with before you try to do something in production mode with them. My recommendation (and the recorder I'm currently using) is the Tascam. But you will also need about 6-8GB of Compact Flash memory for use with the Tascam.

Phil

 

[ullanta]

On the other hand, if DAT's what you've got, DAT'll work fine. Just ask the rental guy what equipment he has to get the audio from the DAT into a computer; he'll likely help you with that. Suffice it to say, DAT has been one of the most popular standard dual-audio recording devices and is still used and loved by many.

 

[chris f]

we have recorders at school that create files that go on flash cards, but i think they only have like 256mb cards and i can't justify buying 8gb of memory for just one job. i'd much rather use one of those so i don't have to go back and capture the audio, but oh well i guess. i don't know much about dat recorders, but i'm assuming the quality will be fine since it's coming straight off the board?

 

[Petrus]

DAT specs are equal to DV-video audio standard, so the qualty of the audio is only dependent of what comes before DAT. It is just that new CF/HD recorders are easier and faster to use, it is not the quality improvement * why they are preferred.

*) there is some, as CF/HD recorders are able to record at 24 bit depth which makes levels seting easier and safer reducing the possibility of mistakes.

 

[ullanta]

i'm assuming the quality will be fine since it's coming straight off the board?

Not really a safe assumption, in general.

1) The easy one - you still have to match your input levels to whatever the board operator's style is. Make sure you leave time and sound check to make sure you don't have any peaks, which are ugly and irreperable. Err on the low side.

2) The hard one - the board operator is mixing for speaker set-up that is unique to the location and its acoustics. It's often far from the sound you'd want to hear on normal stereo playback. Church acoustics are really funky, and if the soundboardguy is really mixing to optimize for the space, it'll be even farther from the mix you'd want. But, it may well be better than what you'd get with, say, camera mics. Have a listen. Bring a gift for the sounboardguy and see if he'll set you up a nice stereo submix.

3) The soundboard will be clean. The church will likely be really reverby and have sounds of people etc... meaning... the sound won't seem "real" and won't match the video. This may or may not be what you want. If you want the sense of the live experience, the soundboard is NOT the way to go, unless you can somehow tap into just, say, a single distant stereo pair that picks up the room. If there's a pair like that, and the main mix is different, and you can't get a submix of just those mics, see if you can grab some direct outs of just those channels...