Frustration Galore

CineMischief

CineMischief

Active member
Searched for 2 hours, couldn't find satisfactory answer.

After reading a ton of these posts over months, I thought I figured out the route to go on our upcoming short: shotgun outside, hyper inside, hire sound dude w/ mixer. Fair enough. We primarily shoot dramatic shorts/features, both interior/exterior with dialogue. Got into huge argument with dumb producers over equipment tonight. Blah blah blah. Here's the poop:

I want to record onto an external recorder with a mixer. They want to use a 416 for both interior and exterior and go directly into the camera for sound (still with a mixer). I know what y'all gonna say about the mic, but what about the external recorder situation?

I've heard that you can manipulate more in post by not going into the camera. True? I know this might be speculative/subjective, but how much better will the audio sound by recording to an external device i.e. flash recorder something or other? Is the mixer the more important of the two? Will my audio sound $1000 better by recording externally? Why?

I'm not trying to downplay sound...just wanna learn more as I'm primarily a writer. I agree sound is super important and want to get the best audio I can. I'd love to purchase my sound gear too. Was thinking about the Tascom HD-P2.

Sorry for the long post...just need help ASAP for shoot. Basically, I want to put together a sound package that is on the low end of the really good. I.e. the AT 4073A of the mixer and external recording worlds. Really appreciate any help...:)
 
What camera are you using? The DVX has a great audio system. As good as some externals made for the job of recording audio? No, not the super expensive ones, but you probably won't hear a $1000 difference.

Also, digital audio files are digital audio files. Once they are in the computer you can do the same stuff with them. Now, Mini DV records audio in 16 bit/48kHz as opposed to something like 24bit/44.1 or 96kHz. You can search for what this means (Google) but understand that you are mainly capturing dialogue and I doubt the difference will warrant new equipment in that situation.
 
Here is a shootout I did a few months back using a few combinations of the DVX100a, an external preamp and an external recorder.

http://www.2629.com/?p=6

There is a thread somewhere about it, but I believe most people were in general agreement that the external recorder made a big difference.
 
Having done shoots both ways I will never do a shoot direct to camera with out a recorder I have control of again. You can do both, just split out of the mixer or recorder. That way you have the ease of using the DV files (if they are OK) and you have a backup. It is very hard to monitor levels when going direct to the camera. THe sound guy probably wont be able to see them and the cameraman is hopefully looking at the shot not the levels. The DVX has a good audio section. It's not fantastic but if recorded well it can come close to a DAT.

I did one shoe that had two DVX's and didn't want to use an external recorder. THey lost all the sound on two major scenes. The A camera had some how switched from line to mic after we set op (it was on a jib and someone must have bumped it) the B camera didn't get anything (nobody figured out that one). We had done tests and it was all fine before the first take??? They were shooting wide-screen and taped off the LCD's so they couldn't see the meters at all and were of course in a rush and didn't check playback after the setup.

SK
 
The safest thing would be to record on both camera and separate (CF) recorder, either by splitting from mixer or feeding thorough the recorder line out to camera. Use 24/48 on the recorder and set levels safely. If the camera audio is usable, fine, if there are problems, then use the recorder tracks.

One way of adding safety woud be using DVRack, where you can see both video and audio levels exactly, catch all clipping and record both video & audio on a PC as a backup (or use the camera tape as backup). This of course does not work if you have to run around with the camera or use a stabilizer.
 
Yo Fellas-

Thanks for the input. So basically, the external device is for safety and the ability to watch levels...and it sounds better too, right? Yes, we are mainly capturing dialogue, but other stuff as well. I guess I'm a little unclear about that...I mean, it's a film and has people talking, right? But, I also want to get footsteps, the shades being drawn, etc...other non-verbal things to sound good as well.

I really want this thing to sound great. I know a lot has to do with the mic, technique, acoustics, whatever. But my main goal is to get that great sound without the noise hiss in the background and the uneven levels. Can a mixer do all that or is the recorder needed as well?

Tigeba: Yeah, I saw/heard that thread and that's my concern here. Your first sample sounds fantastic, but don't have 10 grand to put into the audio. The other samples are ok, but I don't like the hiss in the background when the voice stops speaking. Is this an issue that can be resolved by using a recorder or is this an issue of putting that money towards some kind of software/editing program to fix in post (Ugh...I know...fix in post.)?

DV rack would be great, but I'm a Mac user and heard that dvrack doesn't work with it? Regardless, there are going to be a lot of dolly movements and shots with a stabilizer.

Again, cheers for the help. I respect you sound guys tons and trust your expert opinions. But like I said, while I am sold, I need to convey this to the dumb producers that the extra cash justifies the final product. And I need to come up with reasons why. Safety, quality (will sound better than just running through camera?), convenience. Anything else? Thanks so much for all your help...invaluable.

Besties,

Mischief
 
Noiz2 makes an extremely important point about the risks associated with on-camera dialogue recording (line inputs switched to mic level, unplugged cables, etc.), but there's a simple solution: the mixer's headphones should always be plugged into the recording device's headphone jack (in this case the camera's). Many ENG/EFP mixers (including the old Shure FP-33) will let you run a headphone return from the camera to the mixer, and some of the nicer ones (Sound Devices, PSC) will even run a headphone return along the breakaway cable. Just remember to tell the camera opperator to leave the headphone controls alone.
 
Last edited:
This question is always answered in three broad areas:

1) what's the budget of the production and specifically for sound?
2) who is the intended/expected audience?
3) do you think the production will ever go beyond the home audience?

You could even add to that: What are the expectations and what are they based on as a referrence?

There 'aint no free lunch... "good enough" is in the ear of the beholder... but if you watch some indi films... NOT the ones that made it to the indi channel... but the ones you see floating around the net... and you like what you hear then you can expect to at least equal that with just the 416. If you're watching major theatrical releases and expecting sound like that then you gotta' have a few more tricks up your sleeve.

I don't like the 416 indoors... but it can be passable... you'll at least need to trim off the bass a bit in post if you don't have a low cut on hand. Also I gotta' say good luck in booming several people at once with that mic. Anybody talking off-axis will sound a lot different then they will on-axis... that's one of the main reasons for a hyper indoors... it's narrower then a cardioid... so it can be selective, but it's also got smooth off-axis pickup out to about 30 degrees both ways (or more) so you can effectively boom several people at once.
 
Matt-

1. Budget is fluid right now. Crap answer I know. Obviously, want to do this cheaply, but I know audio costs and I'm willing to pay for it. Specific audio budget: Whatever it takes to have good, even audio without the background "hiss" when no one is speaking. Editing in FCP, but would it be better to put $$ into external recorder or better "cleaning up" software?

2. Intended audience are the festivals. We are putting our name on this, so we want to give it every possible chance of succeeding in being a calling card piece, and well, just telling a good story. I guess most people will watch this on DVD, but I want to be able to see it on a big screen and not cringe at the sound.

3. Hopefully, so we want it to stand up in theaters for festivals as well.

I agree with you guys 100%...audio is huge in telling the story (not distracting) and contributing to an overall high production value. I guess I'm saying why the hell do this if we aren't gonna go all the way? This isn't a let's-knock-it-out-in-a-day and chalk it up to learning piece.

Yeah, 416=good mic, but I want more than "passable" audio indoors. Our sound guys are good, but we're gonna go Oktava indoors (thanks for turning us on to this bad boy). We have limited resources, but we do have wiggle room...just want to know where to get best bang for buck: External recorder or software?

I tip my cap to y'all for taking the time to help me out. Everyone, really, thanks!

P.S. Gotta chat with you Matt bout some cables...
 
SMuir,

I agree that you should always monitor off of the recording device, which is another justification for going with the external recorder. One of the biggest annoyances I have with the 100A is the delay in the headphone out. It makes it extremely difficult to monitor accurately.

Also, another benefit to recording externally is the lack of a tether on the camera. You will save time (=$$$) in your setups by not having to plug and unplug the camera, gather additional wires, etc. Just schlep the sound cart from location to location. I rarely do anything more than put a wireless scratch track on the camera to facilitate dailies and synch.

If you don't have or can't afford a sound cart (the custom designed ones are very expensive), one solution I've used for a long time is a camping table. It folds up like those camping chairs and is very lightweight and portable. Mine is an Eddie Bauer brand, and I picked it up at Target for like $15 on sale. With all my equipment on top, I can pick the whole thing up and move it to the next set up quite easily, and it again keeps me self-contained. (I'm going to be experimenting shortly with a low-cost cart alternative...I'll post the results as I get them.)

Phil
 
SMuir said:
Noiz2 makes an extremely important point about the risks associated with on-camera dialogue recording (line inputs switched to mic level, unplugged cables, etc.), but there's a simple solution: the mixer's headphones should always be plugged into the recording device's headphone jack (in this case the camera's). Many ENG/EFP mixers (including the old Shure FP-33) will let you run a headphone return from the camera to the mixer, and some of the nicer ones (Sound Devices, PSC) will even run a headphone return along the breakaway cable. Just remember to tell the camera opperator to leave the headphone controls alone.
Click to expand...


True the headphone foldback will help a lot but I would still not trust camera only sound. One thing is that headphone amp quality. The DAP1 (Tascam DAT) had a headphone amp that crapped out on hot signals so you had to just know that the grit you heard on some things was not on tape. I would not be comfortable judging quality on a strange headphone return. The other issue is that I believe that the headphone is coming from the mic/line in not off the recording so it seems to me you could still get into a situation where you were hearing fine but nothing was getting to tape. But maybe that's not the case. Certainly in the horror story I told a headphone feed would probably caught at least one of the problems. The catch was I would have needed a 20ft headphone extension with a mini plug end.
The bottom line is it doesn't really matter if it is your decision or some producer trying to save bucks in the end it becomes your fault. I ended up doing a day of ADR for free and a day or two of editing for close to free because I felt I should not have agreed to not using a backup.

SK
 
CineMischief said:
Matt-

1. Budget is fluid right now. Crap answer I know. Obviously, want to do this cheaply, but I know audio costs and I'm willing to pay for it. Specific audio budget: Whatever it takes to have good, even audio without the background "hiss" when no one is speaking. Editing in FCP, but would it be better to put $$ into external recorder or better "cleaning up" software?

2. Intended audience are the festivals. We are putting our name on this, so we want to give it every possible chance of succeeding in being a calling card piece, and well, just telling a good story. I guess most people will watch this on DVD, but I want to be able to see it on a big screen and not cringe at the sound.

3. Hopefully, so we want it to stand up in theaters for festivals as well.

I agree with you guys 100%...audio is huge in telling the story (not distracting) and contributing to an overall high production value. I guess I'm saying why the hell do this if we aren't gonna go all the way? This isn't a let's-knock-it-out-in-a-day and chalk it up to learning piece.

Yeah, 416=good mic, but I want more than "passable" audio indoors. Our sound guys are good, but we're gonna go Oktava indoors (thanks for turning us on to this bad boy). We have limited resources, but we do have wiggle room...just want to know where to get best bang for buck: External recorder or software?

I tip my cap to y'all for taking the time to help me out. Everyone, really, thanks!

P.S. Gotta chat with you Matt bout some cables...
Click to expand...


Last first, Matt makes some great cables...

I'm mostly a post sound guy so there are two parts to getting a good sound track. The first and most important for dialog is what you do during production. But in a "Hollywood" film everything you hear except dialog is added in post. Part of that clean dialog sound is that the hiss is cut out. Well not entirely. All the holes will be filled with room tone but if you have nasty hissy room tone we are going to dip that out when we can. We can do that because we have a stack of background tracks so what the audience thinks is the sound of the room is actually recorded elsewhere (usually). This also helps that "hiss" problem a bunch because instead of static hiss there is an interesting BG going on so the hiss gets eaten up with the BG. We will also work to minimize the hiss (and hums and refrigerator noise etc). Hiss is probably the easiest to remove since it's mostly out of the dialog range. The first tool would be something like a Behringer DeNoiser (for lower budgets) or a Cedar box (for those with $$$). Roland also has a boz that works pretty well. These will usually take out the hiss and not touch the dialog. Noise reduction plugins can also be helpful but until you get to the pricey ones they tend to not work so well on hiss.

If your really going for that "big film" sound you need to layer the sound and do Foley. Those are probably the two biggest post things, editorially speaking. Then you have to mix it. You can mix in the box in a home studio and have it sound good, but you should really be working with someone who has some experience on the big screen or find a way to play test mixes in a big room. Things sound MUCH different in a big room than they do in a small studio.

It's possible but not easy to do all of this in something like FCP. A program like Pro Tools or Nuendo would make things easier, unless your doing it all and you know FCP really well. In that case I would say stick with what you know over trying to learn a new program. They work differently and you have to think differently when using them so thee is a learning curve.

The rule of thumb for narrative films is about 10-20 man hours per screen minute for sound post editorial. That would not include any music composition, nor does it include the time it takes to mix it all in the end. Shorts come out a bit on the high end because a lot of the getting up to speed time is about the same as it would be for a feature.

SK
 
Phil,

Headphone delay can get pretty irritating, but you get used to it eventually (remember the confidence monitoring delay on the Nagra IV's and Fostex PD-4's).

The cable tether's another matter altogether, though. While cable management can be an issue, a breakaway ENG snake simplifies things greatly (both audio lines and the headphone return are carried along a single cable with a quick-release connection near the camera's end).

I, too, have a folding camp-table soundcart (with a groovey little zippered mesh bag attached to the underside).
 
Noiz2 said:
I did one shoe that had two DVX's and didn't want to use an external recorder. THey lost all the sound on two major scenes. The A camera had some how switched from line to mic after we set op (it was on a jib and someone must have bumped it) the B camera didn't get anything (nobody figured out that one). We had done tests and it was all fine before the first take??? They were shooting wide-screen and taped off the LCD's so they couldn't see the meters at all and were of course in a rush and didn't check playback after the setup.

SK
Click to expand...

if i was aproducer you were fired after the take :-)

there is no way you shooting and recording on camera without hear the return - if you hear the mixer out you are one to blame -
i did 5 direct to camera ( 900,790,570) movies for cinemareliese and hundreds of of days for TV - never lost a take .
EXTERNAL RECORDER IS NICE but you definitely work without if you dont have situations where you have to separate from the camera ( steadicam mostly)
 
Noiz2 said:
True the headphone foldback will help a lot but I would still not trust camera only sound. One thing is that headphone amp quality. The DAP1 (Tascam DAT) had a headphone amp that crapped out on hot signals so you had to just know that the grit you heard on some things was not on tape. I would not be comfortable judging quality on a strange headphone return. The other issue is that I believe that the headphone is coming from the mic/line in not off the recording so it seems to me you could still get into a situation where you were hearing fine but nothing was getting to tape. But maybe that's not the case. Certainly in the horror story I told a headphone feed would probably caught at least one of the problems. The catch was I would have needed a 20ft headphone extension with a mini plug end.
The bottom line is it doesn't really matter if it is your decision or some producer trying to save bucks in the end it becomes your fault. I ended up doing a day of ADR for free and a day or two of editing for close to free because I felt I should not have agreed to not using a backup.

SK
Click to expand...


dud i ran 60 meters (180 feet ) from camera returns -you just nned to invest for agood snake 0r 2 and not work as ammatur ass :-)
 
CineMischief said:
Searched for 2 hours, couldn't find satisfactory answer.

After reading a ton of these posts over months, I thought I figured out the route to go on our upcoming short: shotgun outside, hyper inside, hire sound dude w/ mixer. Fair enough. We primarily shoot dramatic shorts/features, both interior/exterior with dialogue. Got into huge argument with dumb producers over equipment tonight. Blah blah blah. Here's the poop:

I want to record onto an external recorder with a mixer. They want to use a 416 for both interior and exterior and go directly into the camera for sound (still with a mixer). I know what y'all gonna say about the mic, but what about the external recorder situation?

I've heard that you can manipulate more in post by not going into the camera. True? I know this might be speculative/subjective, but how much better will the audio sound by recording to an external device i.e. flash recorder something or other? Is the mixer the more important of the two? Will my audio sound $1000 better by recording externally? Why?

I'm not trying to downplay sound...just wanna learn more as I'm primarily a writer. I agree sound is super important and want to get the best audio I can. I'd love to purchase my sound gear too. Was thinking about the Tascom HD-P2.

Sorry for the long post...just need help ASAP for shoot. Basically, I want to put together a sound package that is on the low end of the really good. I.e. the AT 4073A of the mixer and external recording worlds. Really appreciate any help...:)
Click to expand...


there is no problem recording straight to the camera , even it a shitty dvx as long you use good preamp /mixer , the only rule is you alwais hear the camera return ( better direct outs and not headphones amp ) ,
i can put few shekels bet that no one even recognize the dialog was recorded direct - invest more money in other microphones which can help you on hard situations then parallel recording
 
Fellas-
First off, thanks for all the wicked input. But I gotta tell ya, a lot of this stuff is way way behind me and I'm having trouble keeping up. Is there anyway you can dumb it down a bit? Imagine you're trying to make a piece of wallpaper understand...

I'm trying to wrap my head around this...cuz I really do want to understand. I'm getting that the external device is good backup if something goes wrong going directly into the camera (parallel recording=safety), this is the only way sound can be monitored/can't see levels (?? don't want dp monitoring sound as well). But also, the camera's audio is decent (I want great though) and it's better to invest in a DeNoiser and better mics (better than the 416 and the Oktava?).

As I said earlier, would love to buy, but I just want to get great sound so I'm fine with renting the right equipment if we can't buy it outright just yet or hiring sound. I'm just unclear as to what pieces of equipment to advocate we rent.

Hey Scott. Those BG tracks...are they ones that can be purchased somewhere/rented or is it just something people accumulate/record themselves? Should we save money for the recorder or put it into Foley and buy the DeNoiser?

I went to digidesigns page and tried some other research on Pro Tools, but I'm even more confused now then when I started. I know it's the standard, but it seems like there are different systems/software? I work on a mac.

Is this any help to me? http://www.transom.org/tools/editing_mixing/20010416.gettingstarted.jtowne.html

I respect all you guys and am so grateful to the careful responses given, but please lemme know if I'm milking this thread too much...just want to learn quickly as we shoot very soon and I have to convince producers to put more $$$ into sound.

Oleg: We have a mixer, so it sounds like your vote is to go camera and invest in mics. Any other suggestion where to put that money?

Are you a ManUnited fan too!!??
 
I'm trying to wrap my head around this...cuz I really do want to understand. I'm getting that the external device is good backup if something goes wrong going directly into the camera (parallel recording=safety), this is the only way sound can be monitored/can't see levels (?? don't want dp monitoring sound as well). But also, the camera's audio is decent (I want great though) and it's better to invest in a DeNoiser and better mics (better than the 416 and the Oktava?).


you can monitor the levels from any camera , if yor mixer allow it,you can see the calibrated meters as well ( 302,442, ad261 and others , of course any normal large console
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I said earlier, would love to buy, but I just want to get great sound so I'm fine with renting the right equipment if we can't buy it outright just yet or hiring sound. I'm just unclear as to what pieces of equipment to advocate we rent.

Is this any help to me? http://www.transom.org/tools/editing_mixing/20010416.gettingstarted.jtowne.html

I respect all you guys and am so grateful to the careful responses given, but please lemme know if I'm milking this thread too much...just want to learn quickly as we shoot very soon and I have to convince producers to put more $$$ into sound.

Oleg: We have a mixer, so it sounds like your vote is to go camera and invest in mics. Any other suggestion where to put that money?


location- make the location better sounding ( acousticly ) or if you need to eliminate unwontend sounds , that cost allot( double glasing or closing the street for examle) - save you more in post
put more in better booman - that would defeniatly the best investment .

no external recorder/better mic will save you from bad sound - you will just record it better :-)



Are you a ManUnited fan too!!??


yes
 
Last edited:
ExileOnTheMainStreet said:
if i was aproducer you were fired after the take :-)

there is no way you shooting and recording on camera without hear the return - if you hear the mixer out you are one to blame -
i did 5 direct to camera ( 900,790,570) movies for cinemareliese and hundreds of of days for TV - never lost a take .
EXTERNAL RECORDER IS NICE but you definitely work without if you dont have situations where you have to separate from the camera ( steadicam mostly)
Click to expand...

Kind and gentle Oleg,

I guess were even then because I fired you for not slating...;~)
I pretty much agree (and why I did a fair amount of free post and ADR for them). My only excuse (and not a great one) is that they didn't want me to bring anything. They had all the equipt and they di9ctated the set up. So I didn't have an extension because I didn't have my bag. They couldn't fire me after the first take since they didn't rreview anything till after the second setup.

Now while I work on fairly respectable shows in post, production isn't much of my life. So I tend to get low budget run and gun types of shoots.

However in post I have seen a number of cases of really crappy sound that came from direct to camera shoots. On all that also had a feed to an external recorder the sound on the recorder was much better.
So my gross error aside I still think it's a bad idea to not have a seperate recorder.

Unemployed in california...
SK
 
ExileOnTheMainStreet said:
dud i ran 60 meters (180 feet ) from camera returns -you just nned to invest for agood snake 0r 2 and not work as ammatur ass :-)
Click to expand...

Dud,

I am a profesional ass, but an amature production recordist. Just in case you missed the other times I have said this, I work in post and do a few production gigs. And as I mentioned before I was not using any of my own equiptment on this. My production rig is pretty basic since it is used 99% for FX recording, but I do have about 200 feet of mic cable and headphone extensions. At the moment most of my investment is in post gear, my production equiptment is an evolving entity. And it probably wont grow that fast since production is a very SMALL part of my work and I have a very substancial investment in equiptment geared to post and that leaves not too much for production.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top