Friendly Field Audio Suggestion...

E

evstommy

DVXuser Sponsor
I know many of you have thought about this before, but there are many new members inquiring into field recorders for audio.

Now, as we know, real pro gear like the Fostex DVDram recorder or the Sound Devices HD recorders are amazing... but over $4k. Smaller DAT machines (Tascam DAP1) are cool as well. Why, I've seen a lot of people using Sony MDrecorders and DATmen. Hey, if it works, it works. But here's an "outside of the box" solution: use a miniDV cam.

For instance, I bought a Canon Elura65 camcorder ($575) because it had the mic-in jack I needed. The audio is recorded at 16bit/44k (Dat quality) and it's EVEN TIMECODED!!!! I've got the venerable ME66 shotgun going straight to it and when I'm done recording, inputing the audio into my NLE is simple for obvious reasons.

Of course, there is an added benefit of... um... oh yeah, AN EXTRA CAMERA (for taping car chases here in LA).

Once again, just a friendly reminder.

Tommy Mack
 
Re: Friendly Field Audio Suggestion...

yeah I alway's said that the sound pulled of the camera was better when a shotgun was attached. in film school we'd have lot's of guy's with dat's and nagra's running around but it sucked alway's having to sync stuff up down the road, just another long process. when I do I have 2 mini disc recorder's and the sound that I get off of those is great especially if I don't have a sound man and want a long shot where you can see the actors lips, I use a small sony lav and you can hide them and still get good audio. but the extra camera is a good idea aswell.
 
Re: Friendly Field Audio Suggestion...

Just beware some Mini Dv cams don't have the option of controlling the audio levels. So you are stuck in auto. that is a major deal because the background will be constantly changing its volume between the dialog/sound pauses, a major problem.
 
Re: Friendly Field Audio Suggestion...

I would actually advise against doing this. You are relying on a not so good mic pre and crappyA/D converter. Also 44.1/16 bit is not DAT quality. 48/16bit is. Now, production sound is at 48/24 bit on the hard disk recorders, and can go up to 192/24 bit on some machines. Also, my guess that the timecode may not be actual SMPTE timecode, but rather an absolute time on the camera, similar to a CD player, or non-timecode DAT. If the camera actually has timecode capabilities, then it should have a timecode i/o port on it, which no consumer/prosumer camera does.

Recording on an dedicated audio recorder should be the way to go. You will have much higher quality mic pres and A/D converters, plus having a machine that is made to record audio, not picture. When I was at NAB, I talked to various camera manufacturers about why the audio ends of their cameras were not good, and they all said the same thing. "We make cameras, not audio recorders."

If you have to record audio right onto the camera, then I would suggest the DVX100 as the camera, and you use a mixer in front of the camera, like one of the sound devices mixers, or a PSC mixer. I have done some post sound where the audio was recorded right onto the camera, and the DVX100 was always the best sounding camera out of the others that I have heard (no I do not work for Panasonic, or sell their stuff, or even use it).

-Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top