Magic Lantern, H4N, Beachtek and JuicedLink

Y

yoclay

Veteran
Ok folks now that we have the new Magic Lantern firmware released for improved audio, where does that leave the H4N ? (Everybody's baby for the last 15 min.) Is the JuicedLink unit going to be the new darling? (You bet they were helpful during the hack process.) What's the new deal?

Would I be able to replace the JuicedLink unit which was used in the Magic Lantern tests with my Beachtek Dual Phantom Adapter DXA-6VU (with led levels):

http://beachtek.com/cgi-bin/online/storepro.php

The argument is that mine is merely a passive adapter:

juicedLink is more than just an adapter
juicedLink is a low-noise preamplifier and a fully buffered mixer.
Camcorder amps are noisy. A better overall signal-to-noise ratio is obtained when the camcorder amps are throttled back, and their noisy gain is replaced with the clean gain of the juicedLink preamplifiers.
Passive adapters can’t do this for you.
Also, adjusting the volume control on passive adapters loads down the adjacent channel, reducing it’s output signal level and further deteriorating its signal-to-noise ratio.
juicedLink’s are fully buffered mixers. So, adjusting the volume control on one channel, has no effect on adjacent channels.



So should my Beachtek go up on the auction block? Should I buy an H4N? Should I go for a JuicedLink?

I will be working in a wide variety of circumstances and my audio needs fluctuate. Short films, talking heads, you name it. I am a newcomer to this audio stuff so perhaps you can give me your perspectives...
 
The recent testing of the beachtek vs the juicedlink wasn't favorable for the beachtek in the noise dept. We really need someone to test the MKII A/D converters with the juicedlink pre-amps vs the H4n A/D converters and pre-amps to be sure.
 
I still think that the best method is dual system sound with the H4.

Syncing the audio in post is dead simple and the quality can't be denied.
 
The H4N will give you 24 bit recording if you need it and up to 96KHz. This may be useful if you want to work on the sound in post.
 
In my opinion, both methods should be used.

But if you'll ask it to a sound guy he won't say the same.

I remember when I was @ filmschool, one of my sound professors was used to say that without balanced XLR inputs was impossible to even think to use whatever device.

The other one -- with an engineering background, not exactly a sound recordist, said that any adapter can do the right job if you're using a short cable distance.

So...

It is too much important that you may figure out who is your source and which are the side motivations. There are no absolute truths.

To me, the test shows us that we can go onboard sound (JuicedLink on all the way, Beachtek is out of equation with such results) with a minimum of quality requirement comprehending essentially dialogues recording. This is something. For the rest, external recording for sure. Where the JuicedLink can give you an extra hand too.
 
I know. I was mentioning an old example from film school, ten/eleven years ago.

One of the instructors (sound recordist) didn't even want to hear about devices with unbalanced connections (e.g. a common consumer mini-disk unit) while the engineer said it is more than enough.

Do you understand my analogy here? Is the JuicedLink CX231 Magic Lantern Firmware combo good enough for sound recording onboard?

I'd guess one of my former teachers would say «No way!», the second one, «Of course, go ahead. What for do you need 24-bit?»
 
I'm using the 5dmkii and looking to shoot some comedy sketches for the web. Thinking of using Magic Lantern for simplicity sake (even though syncing dual system is reportedly easy). I'm trying to talk my "sound guy" into getting a Sound Devices MM-1 so the boom-op can monitor and control our dialogue audio.

Do I still need to get a juicedlink to get a good signal into the camera from the MM-1 or is this overkill? I'm thinking I'll use the MM-1's phantom power and juicedlink will be set to lowest gain with the trim up to avoid distortion. It seems like the juicedlink will be just an expensive XLR to 1/8" converter. Is there something else I should consider? Does dual-system recording solve this completely and easily? I have the old H4. Will there be any problems syncing it vs. the H4N?
 
I'm sorry if this is a dumb question but can you just plug the Zoom recorder into the mic plug of the 5d mk2? If you are running Magic lantern will the zoom replace the turned off preamps in the camera?

Howard
 
Howard,
I think that is being done. Zoom directly into the 5D. Some shooters are using an attenuating audio cable to eliminate noise, but some are reporting no noise with a regular 1/8" cable.

I've decided to record audio with the Zoom H4, and upgrade to the H4N if necessary. I already use PluralEyes software in FCP. So, Dual System it is. I just can't get around thinking it's a waste to send $1000 worth of audio equipment through a cheap 1/8" connection and a free Magic Lantern camera hack. I'm excited about having the boom op on headphones and untethered from the camera. The extra post production to sync seems like nothing compared to loading the Magic Lantern firmware for each shot.
 
And my mind set was that doing the post sync was the pain. But I'm not on a Mac. I have the h4n and a 5d mk2, the rode ntg2 and the next money out will go for the Sennheiser g3 mic. When I plug in direct from the zoom I will let you all know how it worked.

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