Digital recorder instead of mixer?

mainstreetprod

mainstreetprod

Veteran
I'm tossing around the idea of getting an SD 302. Since the HPX500 has 4 channels, I would seldom use it for mixing, just need the good preamps. Supposedly this Korg recorder (MR-1000) has great preamps and can record
at incredible fidelity, and a similar price to the 302.What do you think? It's only 2 channel though.




http://www.korg.com/product.aspx?pd=289
 
I don't follow your logic. You say you don't need a mixer because your camera records four channels, and somehow that leads you to 'I should get a 2 channel recorder'.

In any case, with regard to the Korg, it appears to me that they've basically decided to implement features that sound impressive on paper, rather than features that will actually get used on set.

The only 'reviews' I can find on it appear to just parrot the specs from a press release, and reports from the field indicate that the battery life is terrible.
 
I actually have heard good reports on sound quality, but only if your using the one bit mode and then you will have to convert to something others can play. It's intriguing as an FX recorder but I wouldn't use it for production recording.

Oh and I also miss the logic. Not sure why you wouldn't need a mixer going to the camera OR why four is a big deal if two is enough.
 
It just depends on your ultimate goal. A mixer would be very handy if you were limited on channels and were going to use the camera to record audio.

A field recorder is also good, especially if it has TC in/out. That broadens things out a bit for audio possibilities. But then, you will want a mixer to go with it, as the 302 has only 2 channels.

One question to ask, are you going to have someone on set as a sound mixer? If you are planning on running this gear by yourself, then just get the mixer. A camera and an audio recorder are just too much for one person to handle easily, without beaucoup experience. I have done it, and invariably, one or the other suffers (audio or video) Asking the cam op to monitor the levels, is like asking a NASCAR driver to keep track of his gauges to make sure everything stays in the green. He needs to monitor his driving, not the gauges. Same thing for cam people (at least the pro's I know), they need to pay attention to their framing, the action, and the function of the camera. The audio dept., are the one's that set levels and ride faders.

I am not giving you the horrible line of "go and hire a pro", but at least get someone to help you, like a friend or something. Doing it yourself is going to hurt in the end.

Wait, didn't you just ask this question in another post?
 
Last edited:
I haven't ruled out hiring a pro - but $450 a day for someone with the experience/equipment I'm looking for times 20 or more shooting days = too much on an ultra low budget flick. I already own an Oktava, an AT 4073a and a $1200 Sony broadcast shotgun. I have mounted them on a fixed boom (painters pole on a light stand) and had success in the past. The feature I am about to shoot has many scenes where this would work . I also have three AT 3000 wireless (comparable to G2's but with many more channels) with Countryman B6 lavs. And a working knowledge of audio in general, and Barry's DVD on the way. And someone besides me to monitor the levels. So I'm not sure the hired sound guy will make enough difference to justify the cost. The main concern I have is losing something by using the camera's internal preamps.
 
What about a friend or someone to help on the audio side? oops, just saw that you have one, good. Pro guy would be good/nice. But as you said you don't have the budget.

As to fixed mics, you are going to get too much room sound. Unless your talent will be speaking with their sound projection only going one direction. The wireless stuff is decent, and should work. But how many mics do you need to have hot in one scene? That is where you will get your answer. 2, either option is open to you. 3 or more, then it is obvious that you will need a mixer first. Every mic used on set at one time is a channel used. 2 lavs and a boom=3 channels Two room mics and a lav, 3 channels.

Go with the 302, more channels
 
Last edited:
This started out as a way longer post, but I can't come up with any more diplomatic way to put this, so I'll just put it out there.

Frankly, if you're planning to go with a static boom and non-portable wireless kit, you're not in a place that you really need to worry that much about your preamps.
 
OK, Ill admit the static boom is lame. But what difference does portable/non portable have on sound quality, assuming these are equal or better than a G2? Especially considering I've never, ever had a dropout. Why do I need portable lavs for a scene in a living room?
 
My prob was the static idea. I have used a non-port rig before, it did the job. I am getting a feeling about you. You have studio recording experience (ie, music) right? That is where I came from, and although there are similarities, it is a different animal.

Right now, get what will work for you the best and give you the most options.
 
The wireless gear doesn't impact the sound quality (barring ground loop issues). I guess it's just more indicative of your focus, which is on something other than sound, and there's nothing wrong with that.

I'm assuming you're not looking to become any sort of sound guy (otherwise you wouldn't be looking at hiring someone). Your goal is to get the job done for your personal projects, not to put together the most versitile/adaptable kit to deal with every possible job.

So as someone who's not looking to be a sound guy, does it make sense for you to be spending time worrying about incremental improvements in your signal chain instead of directing or whatever your passion is?

In the future, if/when you are able to hire someone for sound, they're going to bring their own kit and yours will sit in the corner gathering dust, so does it make sense for you to drop $1200 or so on a mixer or recorder?

You've got 4 channel recording on the camera, which you've gotten satisfactory results from in the past. So as it stands, you've got the capacity to record the stationary boom and the three lavs at the same time. With the stationary boom, the lavs become much more important, and having them all on separate channels is going to make you a much happier guy when you get to post and actually have the time to worry about the audio. You wont have to fight with a poor mix that you or someone inexperienced attempted on set. The isolated tracks are absolutely worth a tiny bit of noise from your camera preamps.

I guess what I'm trying to say is simply 'save your money'.
 
Yep, sitting here in front of an AKG studio mic and assorted interface equipment. Just want to make the existing stuff work where it will.
 
mainstreetprod said:
Yep, sitting here in front of an AKG studio mic and assorted interface equipment. Just want to make the existing stuff work where it will.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much the point I'm trying to make, if you've already got gear that you can make work and you're happy with the result, then go with that. Just don't try booming with the AKG, those things get heavy. :)
 
Last edited:
mainstreetprod said:
OK, Ill admit the static boom is lame. But what difference does portable/non portable have on sound quality, assuming these are equal or better than a G2? Especially considering I've never, ever had a dropout. Why do I need portable lavs for a scene in a living room?
Click to expand...

Portable, as meaning "wireless?" There's a Hollywood adage "Whenever you are able, always use a cable." But depending on the action and the shot setup, you might not be able to hide cables coming from the talent or give them the freedom of movement you want in the scene. As for static booming, if there's just one person speaking and they're static, you can do it if you're careful. But with multiple speakers or if the talent moves, you need to shift the mic with the flow of the scene in order to keep it aimed within a circle about 8 inches or so in diameter centred on the speaker's throat. If the dialog flows from one person to another, the aim of the mic needs to shift accordingly.
 
Steve House said:
Portable, as meaning "wireless?".
Click to expand...

I think that's about field/camera wireless systems vs. rackmount systems (i.e. the G2 vs. the aforementioned Audio Technica 3000 systems).

In that case, you're talking about compact systems that are non-diversity vs. true diversity systems. And though you've "never had a dropout," expect to have one or two eventually. It happens... that's the nature of wireless.
 
Looks like I may not have to invest in more gear. Was contacted by a boom guy today and we met on price. I have not heard of his mixer (Boss BR-525) but it may not matter much since as you say, it's not critical with 4 channels. He has a good internal cable boom pole and shockmount. Maybe this will solve the problem and get me off the hook with sound, to concentrate on the camerawork. I have asked him to post something online he's done before hiring.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, Boss' BR series are sold as 'recorders for guitarists', though I can't actually find that particular model online anywhere. The specs of the ones I can find state that they only sample at 44.1kHz.
 
mainstreetprod said:
Looks like I may not have to invest in more gear. Was contacted by a boom guy today and we met on price. I have not heard of his mixer (Boss BR-525) but it may not matter much since as you say, it's not critical with 4 channels. He has a good internal cable boom pole and shockmount. Maybe this will solve the problem and get me off the hook with sound, to concentrate on the camerawork. I have asked him to post something online he's done before hiring.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm,

The BOSS box is not a mixer it's a "portastudio", a multi track recorder with FX etc. It records in a compressed format and only at 44.1.

I did a documentary that had a lot of concert footage on a device like this. It actually sounded OK however they had to out put a stereo pair at a time to get the concerts off of the drive. So if you have an intern you can spare to do some big transfers...

HOWEVER, as I have said before you are not hiring the box your hiring the talent. If you get along with this guy (this is SO important) and you like his work ( I would ask for the name/ contact of the sound post person or director for some past project and see what they say) then he can probably make the box do a good job, even though it is not all that well suited to the task.
 
mainstreetprod said:
OK, Ill admit the static boom is lame. But what difference does portable/non portable have on sound quality, assuming these are equal or better than a G2? Especially considering I've never, ever had a dropout. Why do I need portable lavs for a scene in a living room?
Click to expand...

The best pre-amps on a portable are on the Nagra VI (which is what I use) and these are better than most non-portable devices. This is a 6-track with 4 superb mic. pres.

Second best would be the Nagra LB - 2-channel. Followed closely by the Sound Devices 700 series (788, 744, 722, 702).

All these are top quality pro machines.

PS - G2 has now been replaced by G3. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top