milkmanFILMS
Member
is it worth using DAT or does it matter if i just stick my shotgun mic right into the camera?
Whats the point of using DAT with DV?
Whats the point of using DAT with DV?
on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
- Thread starter milkmanFILMS
- Start date
fixitinpost
Well-known member
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
It depends on what you are doing. If you want to record DVD quality audio (24 bit 96khz) you definitely need to use DAT. Otherwise use whatever has the best signal to noise ratio and frequency response.
It depends on what you are doing. If you want to record DVD quality audio (24 bit 96khz) you definitely need to use DAT. Otherwise use whatever has the best signal to noise ratio and frequency response.
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
sory about idiotic qwestion , since the camera record 16 bit6 / 48 khz and the best the dat can do 16 bit /48 kh ( lets forgot the sonosax for the moment -rest it soul) , what does it have with compressed 24 / 96 compressed dvd
hey - dont know who are you - 5 channels of uncompress 24/96 is 5 g b per hour - the dvd is 4 .7 - where is the picture - stop sudgest something thaat you dont understand .
sory about idiotic qwestion , since the camera record 16 bit6 / 48 khz and the best the dat can do 16 bit /48 kh ( lets forgot the sonosax for the moment -rest it soul) , what does it have with compressed 24 / 96 compressed dvd
hey - dont know who are you - 5 channels of uncompress 24/96 is 5 g b per hour - the dvd is 4 .7 - where is the picture - stop sudgest something thaat you dont understand .
MattC
Veteran
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
I don't really know Oleg, I know a lot of guys that record 24/96 (or higher) and then dither down to 16/44.1. The thought is that you are recording better quality with more headroom and that the end result is better than if you recorded at straight 16/44.1. I don't know if I agree with this or not, but people that I respect a great deal certainly do. On the other hand, folks I also respect a great deal record at the same sample rate as the medium they will ultimately go to. So for CD audio they would record at 32 bit floating point or 24 bit at 44.1, DVD they would record at the same high bit rate but change the recorded sample rate to 48 and then dither down the bit rate. Most studios here in the US would record at the highest quality of both bit and sample rate and then dither down, but then again they are using some VERY expensive and high quality a/d/d/a converters and very complex (expensive) dithering gear. My understanding (and this I don't know, but have only heard) is that many films are handled the same way. Perhaps someone else could clear that up.
My only point is, it is not uncommon, at least here, for someone who knows EXACTLY what he is talking about to recommend doing the initial tracking at as high a resolution possible, even if that resolution is higher than the eventual medium is capable of handling...
I hope that made sense...
Matt
I don't really know Oleg, I know a lot of guys that record 24/96 (or higher) and then dither down to 16/44.1. The thought is that you are recording better quality with more headroom and that the end result is better than if you recorded at straight 16/44.1. I don't know if I agree with this or not, but people that I respect a great deal certainly do. On the other hand, folks I also respect a great deal record at the same sample rate as the medium they will ultimately go to. So for CD audio they would record at 32 bit floating point or 24 bit at 44.1, DVD they would record at the same high bit rate but change the recorded sample rate to 48 and then dither down the bit rate. Most studios here in the US would record at the highest quality of both bit and sample rate and then dither down, but then again they are using some VERY expensive and high quality a/d/d/a converters and very complex (expensive) dithering gear. My understanding (and this I don't know, but have only heard) is that many films are handled the same way. Perhaps someone else could clear that up.
My only point is, it is not uncommon, at least here, for someone who knows EXACTLY what he is talking about to recommend doing the initial tracking at as high a resolution possible, even if that resolution is higher than the eventual medium is capable of handling...
I hope that made sense...
Matt
fixitinpost
Well-known member
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
I would like to point out first that DAT recorders such as the Fostex FR-2 are capable of recording at 24/96. Just as with video, audio on a DVD is compressed, usually using Dolby Digital, DTS, or AC3. This drastically reduces file size while retaing the higher bit rate. It is also useful to record in the highest bit rate possible in order to have the most accurate and detailed sound possible for processing (noise reduction, dynamics processing, etc.) and editing.
I would like to point out first that DAT recorders such as the Fostex FR-2 are capable of recording at 24/96. Just as with video, audio on a DVD is compressed, usually using Dolby Digital, DTS, or AC3. This drastically reduces file size while retaing the higher bit rate. It is also useful to record in the highest bit rate possible in order to have the most accurate and detailed sound possible for processing (noise reduction, dynamics processing, etc.) and editing.
MattC
Veteran
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
Agreed. Myself I split the difference and usually record at the highest bit depth possible with the sample rate of my deliverable (say 32 bit floating point/48k in the studio for DVD or 24 bit/48k in the field for DVD).
Do you think there is a real benefit to increasing the sample rate beyond that? To be honest I can't hear the difference.
Matt
Agreed. Myself I split the difference and usually record at the highest bit depth possible with the sample rate of my deliverable (say 32 bit floating point/48k in the studio for DVD or 24 bit/48k in the field for DVD).
Do you think there is a real benefit to increasing the sample rate beyond that? To be honest I can't hear the difference.
Matt
Dave_Fisk
Well-known member
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
[quote author=fixitinpost link=board=audio;num=1103302317;start=0#5 date=12/17/04 at 13:51:28]I would like to point out first that DAT recorders such as the Fostex FR-2 are capable of recording at 24/96. Just as with video, audio on a DVD is compressed, usually using Dolby Digital, DTS, or AC3. This drastically reduces file size while retaing the higher bit rate. It is also useful to record in the highest bit rate possible in order to have the most accurate and detailed sound possible for processing (noise reduction, dynamics processing, etc.) and editing.[/quote]
Ok, the FR-2 is not a DAT recorder. DAT recorders do not record at 96Khz 24 bit. Their max resolution is 48Khz, 16 bit. Don't get these things confused.
"fixitinpost"....
please don't use that term as an excuse to not do something right on production. I get so much crappy audio that people thought they could "fix it in post" but then realized that either it's too expensive to fix it in post, or just can't be done.
(sorry bout the rant)
-Dave
[quote author=fixitinpost link=board=audio;num=1103302317;start=0#5 date=12/17/04 at 13:51:28]I would like to point out first that DAT recorders such as the Fostex FR-2 are capable of recording at 24/96. Just as with video, audio on a DVD is compressed, usually using Dolby Digital, DTS, or AC3. This drastically reduces file size while retaing the higher bit rate. It is also useful to record in the highest bit rate possible in order to have the most accurate and detailed sound possible for processing (noise reduction, dynamics processing, etc.) and editing.[/quote]
Ok, the FR-2 is not a DAT recorder. DAT recorders do not record at 96Khz 24 bit. Their max resolution is 48Khz, 16 bit. Don't get these things confused.
"fixitinpost"....
please don't use that term as an excuse to not do something right on production. I get so much crappy audio that people thought they could "fix it in post" but then realized that either it's too expensive to fix it in post, or just can't be done.
(sorry bout the rant)
-Dave
MattC
Veteran
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
Dave let me ask you. Do you think there is a benefit to recording at a higher than deliverable sample rate? As you've probably surmised from my posts, I'm coming to this from the audio recording/mixing or composition standpoint so my experiences are probably very different. Even in my home studio, I have the ability to record at 96k but quite honestly, assuming that the audio was tracked well to begin with, I can't really hear any difference between that and audio recorded at 48K. Now my contemporaries are going to even higher sample rates.... Maybe my ears are shot but I'm just not hearing the benefit, especially after it's been down converted. Bit depth I understand a bit better, I can hear the difference there, and maybe more accurately stated, I can see the difference when I'm mixing or processing the audio, but that's about it. And lets not forget that every sample sound effect coming off of a CD is 16/44.1....
I think "fixitinpost" was referring to harddisk recorders, which are taking the place of DAT's, although for digital video, I might pick up a DAT recorder, not sure how I really want to handle that yet - any insights would be appreciative.
I don't find there's a lot that you can really "fix" in post, but if you have a good clean source file, you can manipulate the hell out of in post...
Matt
Dave let me ask you. Do you think there is a benefit to recording at a higher than deliverable sample rate? As you've probably surmised from my posts, I'm coming to this from the audio recording/mixing or composition standpoint so my experiences are probably very different. Even in my home studio, I have the ability to record at 96k but quite honestly, assuming that the audio was tracked well to begin with, I can't really hear any difference between that and audio recorded at 48K. Now my contemporaries are going to even higher sample rates.... Maybe my ears are shot but I'm just not hearing the benefit, especially after it's been down converted. Bit depth I understand a bit better, I can hear the difference there, and maybe more accurately stated, I can see the difference when I'm mixing or processing the audio, but that's about it. And lets not forget that every sample sound effect coming off of a CD is 16/44.1....
I think "fixitinpost" was referring to harddisk recorders, which are taking the place of DAT's, although for digital video, I might pick up a DAT recorder, not sure how I really want to handle that yet - any insights would be appreciative.
I don't find there's a lot that you can really "fix" in post, but if you have a good clean source file, you can manipulate the hell out of in post...
Matt
Dave_Fisk
Well-known member
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
Depending on the voice of your talent, it can be difficult to tell the difference between dialogue recorded at 96 and dialogue recorded at 48. All of my customers with new devas that can record at 96 still record at 48 becuase for most talent, 96 won't really sound any better. Where you hear the difference in the sample rate is in music, and in the sound design arena where we are pitch shifting things down, are doing some severe time expansion. For simple production dialogue, 48Khz 24 bit will be just fine. 16 bit is ok, but if you are doing a scene with some high frequencies lingering around...say a dinner scene with silverware clinking....those high frequencies start to sound a little tinny and distorted. That's why it was a big deal when non-linear recorders were recording at 24 bit.
Now, should you roll a DAT as a back up to your camera? It's not a bad idea, especially if you need to grab some wild system. Hell, even a good quality minidisc is better than nothing. I always recommend that people have some sort of backup recorder around. I've never heard of the audio section of cameras just completely going down on people (no, not that type of "going down on people" you pervs), but still, it's nice to have a dedicated audio recorder with you.
The DVX100 is a little noisy in my opinion, but definitely usable. Sometimes I have to use some noise reduction on the production track to clean it up, which, if I have to use a lot of, can kind of muck it up, and pull out too much of the high end. I had this happen on a western I did. They didn't run a back up machine, so we had to loop a few lines. No big deal, but if they would have had some sort of backup audio recorder running at the same time, I could have just used that.
So, to answer your question...it's really not all that necessary to record at 96Khz for production dialogue.
-Dave
Depending on the voice of your talent, it can be difficult to tell the difference between dialogue recorded at 96 and dialogue recorded at 48. All of my customers with new devas that can record at 96 still record at 48 becuase for most talent, 96 won't really sound any better. Where you hear the difference in the sample rate is in music, and in the sound design arena where we are pitch shifting things down, are doing some severe time expansion. For simple production dialogue, 48Khz 24 bit will be just fine. 16 bit is ok, but if you are doing a scene with some high frequencies lingering around...say a dinner scene with silverware clinking....those high frequencies start to sound a little tinny and distorted. That's why it was a big deal when non-linear recorders were recording at 24 bit.
Now, should you roll a DAT as a back up to your camera? It's not a bad idea, especially if you need to grab some wild system. Hell, even a good quality minidisc is better than nothing. I always recommend that people have some sort of backup recorder around. I've never heard of the audio section of cameras just completely going down on people (no, not that type of "going down on people" you pervs), but still, it's nice to have a dedicated audio recorder with you.
The DVX100 is a little noisy in my opinion, but definitely usable. Sometimes I have to use some noise reduction on the production track to clean it up, which, if I have to use a lot of, can kind of muck it up, and pull out too much of the high end. I had this happen on a western I did. They didn't run a back up machine, so we had to loop a few lines. No big deal, but if they would have had some sort of backup audio recorder running at the same time, I could have just used that.
So, to answer your question...it's really not all that necessary to record at 96Khz for production dialogue.
-Dave
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
i was reffering to dat - digital audio tape - not dar , that can do nore then 16/ 48
and even so the lousy preams on chip recording with crap ato d would give you no benefit in high sample rate
for dialog - and we are talking dialog not musick recording thousands of hollywood and not holliwood films during the last 15 years are more to unswer the qwestion - why that is good enouth
but as i sad you need some good a to d and good preamp to bring it there
of corse there is arool that sas - you fall as high as the the hight you start
and thats ttrue to digital domain as it true to analog
so of corse its better to start 24 /48/96/192 , is just the matter of money and your post production fasillities
to sudgest idiotic idias to some one who doing low budget film - is to make him more mistakes and loose money
if you really need go to exellent dialog in the post ansd some hard work with your sound - go for external device ( only if it better then your camera )
and if not - stay with the dvx
and please fixit inpost - exept the crap you sudgest - change your name since i already dislike you becouse that one
i was reffering to dat - digital audio tape - not dar , that can do nore then 16/ 48
and even so the lousy preams on chip recording with crap ato d would give you no benefit in high sample rate
for dialog - and we are talking dialog not musick recording thousands of hollywood and not holliwood films during the last 15 years are more to unswer the qwestion - why that is good enouth
but as i sad you need some good a to d and good preamp to bring it there
of corse there is arool that sas - you fall as high as the the hight you start
and thats ttrue to digital domain as it true to analog
so of corse its better to start 24 /48/96/192 , is just the matter of money and your post production fasillities
to sudgest idiotic idias to some one who doing low budget film - is to make him more mistakes and loose money
if you really need go to exellent dialog in the post ansd some hard work with your sound - go for external device ( only if it better then your camera )
and if not - stay with the dvx
and please fixit inpost - exept the crap you sudgest - change your name since i already dislike you becouse that one
BLUESPIDER
DVXuser Ninja
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
[quote author=LeeCitron link=board=audio;num=1103302317;start=0#0 date=12/17/04 at 08:51:57]is it worth using DAT or does it matter if i just stick my shotgun mic right into the camera?
Whats the point of using DAT with DV? [/quote]
If you can get acess to a portable mixer, hook your shotgun to the mixer and out the mixer to the camera. Make sure you have good headphones and check both levels carefully making sure levels are good. Theres no need at all right now for a DAT because your audio is already sync. Getting a DAT requires you to resync the danm thing in post. Can be a pain when if your not using timecode properly. I use to used DATs for film shoots because the film don't have builtin sound. Audio has to be recorded seprately. Lee, just plugin your shotgun to your cam. Hope this gives you alittle idea.
AS FOR THE REST OF YOU, LEAVE FIXITINPOST ALONE! We don't need that kind of **** here! I am tired of you guys hating people because of their names. Thats like being racist in a way. Its like saying I hate you because your black. Cut that **** out please!!
[quote author=LeeCitron link=board=audio;num=1103302317;start=0#0 date=12/17/04 at 08:51:57]is it worth using DAT or does it matter if i just stick my shotgun mic right into the camera?
Whats the point of using DAT with DV? [/quote]
If you can get acess to a portable mixer, hook your shotgun to the mixer and out the mixer to the camera. Make sure you have good headphones and check both levels carefully making sure levels are good. Theres no need at all right now for a DAT because your audio is already sync. Getting a DAT requires you to resync the danm thing in post. Can be a pain when if your not using timecode properly. I use to used DATs for film shoots because the film don't have builtin sound. Audio has to be recorded seprately. Lee, just plugin your shotgun to your cam. Hope this gives you alittle idea.
AS FOR THE REST OF YOU, LEAVE FIXITINPOST ALONE! We don't need that kind of **** here! I am tired of you guys hating people because of their names. Thats like being racist in a way. Its like saying I hate you because your black. Cut that **** out please!!
BLUESPIDER
DVXuser Ninja
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
Well oleg, I love you too because you like blue.
I hope we answerd Lee's question....
Well oleg, I love you too because you like blue.
I hope we answerd Lee's question....
milkmanFILMS
Member
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
thank you all for your wonderful help.
I really appreciate it.
Thanks again
-Lee Citron
milkman films
thank you all for your wonderful help.
I really appreciate it.
Thanks again
-Lee Citron
milkman films
fixitinpost
Well-known member
Re: on camera XLR inputs or DAT?
To get the name thing out of the way: It is mainly an inside joke. I prefer to everything right on set, no matter how many takes it may take. The name refers to digital effects, color correction, etc. It origionated at a greenscreen shoot. The equiptment to the sides of the screen were showing in the viewfinder. I said we would fix it in post. Someone asked what I meant. What I meant was that I would apply a garbage matte to eliminate the equiptment at the sides of the frame.
As to the FR-2. Sorry, I either misread info somehwere, or it was labeled wrong in a catalogue. Since it was a B&H cataloge, I probably misread. My bad.
For on set audio, I not only record with the camera, I run a shotgun into my M-Audio FW410, and from there into Adobe Audition on my laptop. I record 48k 32bit. I would use 96k, but the production will never be used on anything but dv. I use 96k for everything else when possible. We use a slate for syncing purposes. The audio is only recorded on the DVX for a backup and viewing dailies. Other than that I don't find the signal clean enough. There was one case where our grip was doing audio, and was fiddling with the mic while we were recording. Since the noise generated by that was in the same frequency range as the voice of the actor, and the DVX backup audio came in very handy.
I can hear the difference between 48 and 96k in a studio enviornment. The difference isn't too great, but it does sound better, especially with music.
To get the name thing out of the way: It is mainly an inside joke. I prefer to everything right on set, no matter how many takes it may take. The name refers to digital effects, color correction, etc. It origionated at a greenscreen shoot. The equiptment to the sides of the screen were showing in the viewfinder. I said we would fix it in post. Someone asked what I meant. What I meant was that I would apply a garbage matte to eliminate the equiptment at the sides of the frame.
As to the FR-2. Sorry, I either misread info somehwere, or it was labeled wrong in a catalogue. Since it was a B&H cataloge, I probably misread. My bad.
For on set audio, I not only record with the camera, I run a shotgun into my M-Audio FW410, and from there into Adobe Audition on my laptop. I record 48k 32bit. I would use 96k, but the production will never be used on anything but dv. I use 96k for everything else when possible. We use a slate for syncing purposes. The audio is only recorded on the DVX for a backup and viewing dailies. Other than that I don't find the signal clean enough. There was one case where our grip was doing audio, and was fiddling with the mic while we were recording. Since the noise generated by that was in the same frequency range as the voice of the actor, and the DVX backup audio came in very handy.
I can hear the difference between 48 and 96k in a studio enviornment. The difference isn't too great, but it does sound better, especially with music.
