Independent Audio....

I

Indy

Well-known member
What are people using to record audio independent of the HVX?

I've looked at both the Edirol R09 and another one whose name eludes me for the moment but is of the same form factor and price.

Are there any better options? The one thing that concerns me is that I'll need some pretty large or many smaller media cards i.e. taking the price up hugely :(
Cheers

Indy....
 
Dont know about the edirol,

but i am working with a tascam HD P2(nice name heh?) and i am happy with it.

It records on Compact Flashcard, and i got a 1gig card, which is 1 and a half hour for a stereo track in 48000 Hz, so i am fine with it.

But even 4 gig CF-cards arent very expensive anymore, its a nice workflow, like p2, compared to systems like DAT!

The only thing i dont like is the fact, that it has no XLR out, so i had 2 get a special cable to take the signal from the mixer to the camera...but you dont want to do this all the time..!
 
hvx_germanboy said:
I am working with a tascam HD P2(nice name heh?) and i am happy with it.
Click to expand...

hmmm that was my FIRST choice but its twice my budget hence the salesperson sugesting the Edirol.

I'll do some more research! I might be back with some techy type questions on the Tascam though!

Out of interest what sort of price did you pay for it?
Cheers

Indy.....
 
Hey Indigo,

you are welcome with questions, tech.things will be easier to find somewhere on their hp, but i can tell you about "real-life"-experience!
The Listprice is 1100 euro here, maybe you can find it a bit cheaper, but i dont think less then 1000 euro.

I can understand your doubts on the budget, but i am making my decission that i dont want to find myself in 2 or 3 years with the need to grade up.....so i found a way to pay more once, and enjoy longer!

EDIT: i just watched the edirol closer: i think in this case you definitly shouldnt by it and do what i mentioned above, cause its recording just mp3, and thats trash for professional sound-needs!

In this case it would be better for you to mix the sound via SQN and send it directly to the hvx, that one records without compression!
Everything else isnt woth it, also if it 600 "cheaper" then the tascam or anything comparable!
 
Last edited:
I have an Edirol R09 and have been very happy with it.
However, I just use it for foley, voice-overs, ADR and to record music and other stuff....
I do not use it to record dialogue while shooting or anything like that....
The onboard mic is an omni-cardial (which I don't like)... but work extremely well...
ALSO it records SUPERBLY as uncompressed 24-bit WAV files 48khz..
I use 48khz at 16-bit WAV...
It can ALSO record to mp3 which I have found quite useful for longer recording sessions...
OVERALL, it is a greatly recommended tool, and cheaper and smaller than most...
I use a 170x 2GB SD chip (at $50)... great price...
here's more info:
http://www.edirol.net/products/en/R-09/
 
I usually use a ProTools LE system, but for some ultra-portable setups I've had some success with the M-Audio MicroTrack. It's a little tricky on levels for a number of reasons, and you'll get better sound with an external preamp of some sort... but it's serviceable, and cheap....
 
Could you guys also talk about how you sync up the audio that's recorded onto these external units?
 
The Edirol is OK, but I don't think you could do any better that the Sound Devices 744T (4-channel) or the 722T (2-channel) hard disk recorders. It records to both it's internal HD and a SD memory card. The converters are awesome. This unit is taking the lion's share of the serious film market by storm based upon quality and price.
 
carlone said:
Could you guys also talk about how you sync up the audio that's recorded onto these external units?
Click to expand...

I'm sure many of the film-style production folks will offer you a very different approach... but the nature of my classical music work requires that I sync by hand. When watching, e.g., the motion of a pianist's hands, for a "natural" feel, it's important that corrections be made for the relative distance between mic and camera, and the "perceived" distance in the shot. Thus automatic synchronization is not ideal.

So, my tendency is to sync by eye using waveforms for a rough match, then go by feel to get the feeling as natural as possible.

Typical dialogue, and many instruments with soft attacks can be synced automatically without any annoying effects, but anything vaguely percussive, or with ultra-fast motion tied to the sound will likely need hand-adjustment.

It's also a good idea to check fro drift if you have any long shots... check the sync by eye and ear at both the beginning and end of the clip to make sure the two devices haven't diverged. Not likely a problem unless your shots are over 20 minutes or you've had to do any sample-rate conversion before syncing...
 
Hey Ullanta,

why should there be any sync-problem if you record on both(camera and sound device) 48khz?
I think theoreticly there should be no shift...!?
 
No clock is perfect; and the clocks in devices like cameras and low-mid-price audio equipment are not the best. Not bad, but not perfect. So over time (like two watches or clocks), the tiny differences will add up. If one clock is .001% faser than another, then after about 3 hours, they'll be about a second apart. Most devices still have clocks better than this; but it's not uncommon to get a few frames of difference after an hour.

So, theoretically, you're right, there should be no shift... but the clocks aren't quite up to theory...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top