Reality show and sound on the field

KINOKS

KINOKS

Well-known member
So, I'm putting together a crew and equipment list for a short webisodic reality. My concerns are currently with the sound. The shooting crew is going to consist of a camera man and a sound man. The sound guy is going to use a boom with a mike. The problem is I don't want to burden the crew with a wired set up - don't want to hook the sound guy with a cable to the camera. Then I started to think about using a zoom or a tascam recorder but then the editor would have nightmares syncing the material. And doing long 60 min takes is out of the question.

How should I go about this problem? Is there a way to sync the two sources in any way? Matching timecodes or something...? I've heard of some plugins for editors that sync material based on sample plots. Has anybody used this?

What about wireles transmiters...?

Oh, post will be done with Avid and Pro tools...

thx

Br
S
 
Which camera are you using?

If you have a camera that uses TC, and a recorder that uses TC, then you'll have no problems syncing in post (assuming you jam the two devices together properly).

If you're using non-TC devices, there's a bit more of a challenge. At that point, you may be better off using the recorder as a backup and then using a wireless hop from mixer to camera.
 
Hy Alex! Don't know which cameras we'll use at this moment. Maybe an HPX171... But what ever cameras we'll be using they will surely have TC as they will be professional.

How would the timecodes be synced anyway? I was thinking of using a Tascam DR-100 recorder.
 
While the HPX170 can utilize time code internally, it cannot send or receive TC. That's what I meant by a camera that uses TC.

Between that camera and a DR-100, you have no way to sync with TC in the field without some pretty drastic workarounds, and even those aren't practical. So your best bets are:

1) A wireless camera hop, and using the DR-100 (or other recorder) as a backup. Get a dumb slate and make sure to use it every time camera and recorder stop and start recording. Take some production sound reports with you and take diligent notes.

2) A TC-capable recorder with a smart slate and TC generator. The TC at that point is really a reference for post. Using the visible TC whenever the shots are slated (again, every time the camera/recorder stop and start) allows easy location of the audio. And again, a diligent production sound report is a must.

For what it's worth, I'd suggest something above a DR-100 if you're going to go completely non-TC. The DR-680 will allow your sound person to record all mics separately, which can save your duff in post if you're using multiple mics. If you're only running with one or two mics, a 2-track (stereo) recorder will be fine, such as the Fostex FR2-LE (non-TC) or the Tascam HD-P2 (TC-capable).
 
TC locked audio kits are standard for reality show shoots. At least every one that I've worked on (mostly shows on ABC and similar networks). The above suggestions are good ones. Some of the ENG work I've been involved with used wireless adapters to run to the camera. Those were local programs, a lot lower budget than network reality shows. The level under that is to deal with the syncing issues by calling out relevant file information, TC information and using a slate.
 
There's also pluraleyes that synk the external sound with that of the camera. I don't know how well it works though, but I know some people like it. TC is a better alternative, but it's an option.
 
Jema said:
There's also pluraleyes that synk the external sound with that of the camera. I don't know how well it works though, but I know some people like it. TC is a better alternative, but it's an option.
Click to expand...

I think PluralEyes is ok for the most part. Working through a project right now where PluralEyes was about 1.5 frames off. I'd say go for TC.
 
You should probably decide what cameras you are using, and then your workflow will be developed from there. If you want to use a TC camera, then you need to make sure it's real timecode, not just an internal counter.
 
Alex H. said:
While the HPX170 can utilize time code internally, it cannot send or receive TC. That's what I meant by a camera that uses TC.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought that that's what you meant. Thanks for all the suggestions.
I doubt that a slate is going to be used or a clapper of any kind - maybe at long takes. Otherwise I presume that it would be to uncomfortable and obtrusive to use.

I've looked at "PluralEyes". It looks interesting, but I have doubts of it syncing a boom mike with a camera omni mike. The boom mike is going to hear something totally different than the internal camera mike. You guys think it would work?

What about wireless? It's been mention only briefly. Is there a reason why nobody suggested a wireless approach? Why not use a receiver (stick it to the camera) and a transmitter (with a boom mike on it)? Or what kind of a set-up should I get for the crew?
 
KINOKS said:
What about wireless? It's been mention only briefly. Is there a reason why nobody suggested a wireless approach? Why not use a receiver (stick it to the camera) and a transmitter (with a boom mike on it)? Or what kind of a set-up should I get for the crew?
Click to expand...

That's basically what "wireless camera hop" is, and I've suggested that twice. It takes two wireless channels (two transmitters and two receivers, or two transmitters with a dual receiver unit). Set the transmitters for line-level in (be sure they have that option) and feed them with the mixer's two output channels. If you're going to do this, it's probably a good idea to use a recorder from the mixer's tape out as a safety. The challenge with the camera hop is that your sound person cannot actually monitor the audio that the camera is recording, only the audio that's leaving the mixer. So if there's a wireless hit or dropout, how will s/he know? The camera person can wear headphones/earphones, but that's not a guarantee.

The wireless setup you suggest, giving your sound person a mic with a wireless transmitter and attaching the receiver to the camera, leaves your sound person not only with no way to monitor the camera's recorded audio but really no way to monitor audio at all. That's a huge problem. Your sound person should be monitoring audio at every moment that the camera is rolling.

Of course, one other factor that will help determine what kind of sound kit you get is your budget. Do you have an idea of how much you can spend on sound?
 
Editors syncing image and sound...well....it's there job... so they're used to it...And if the guy is new and not used to it...well...then he has to learn to get "used" to it.

Don't worry to much.

if you slate (clapperboard) every take and write down very well every scene/shot/take and shout it loud "8 ON 7 TAKE 5 !!!!!!" (scene 8 shot 7) or SLATE 47879 (don't know which one is used in US...)
then you're good to go.

And...learn from your mistakes
 
Yup. Timecode-based audio recorder with timecode capable camera. In shooting situations other than interviews, Pluraleyes is really only good with some sort of scratch track sent to it, not just the camera mic (for boom-only purposes). The idea is to match the peaks and valleys of the waveforms to each other. If the boom you want to use is so different that what the camera mic will get, then it's kinda useless. If you send at least one mono channel to the camera, you're in better shape. Hops to camera is your best bet. Unless you have multiple wireless lavs, then I'm not sure you really even need to multitrack/record. Just send it straight to camera and you won't have to worry about sync. If you do need multiple wireless, then your sound guy should know what to suggest or operate. Don't get burned by going cheap.
 
Well I'm still waiting for the budget, so all options are opened now I guess. I've been looking at the wireless option and a friend of mine (who is a audio producer) suggested I get a Shure mixer and there wireless transmitters and receivers. This would run me about 2k just for one shooter. Is there maybe a bit cheaper alternative?

If all else fails I'll just opt for a recorder and be as diligent as possible with clappers. Alex, you recommended DR680 and HDP2 from tascam along with a Fostex recorder. The fostex and the HDP2 both have a rotating audio volume on theirs front side but the dr680 doesn't. Is that not an inconvenience when shooting in a ENG situation?
Are this all the recorders one would recommend?
 
dre83 said:
Editors syncing image and sound...well....it's there job... so they're used to it...And if the guy is new and not used to it...well...then he has to learn to get "used" to it.

Don't worry to much.

if you slate (clapperboard) every take and write down very well every scene/shot/take and shout it loud "8 ON 7 TAKE 5 !!!!!!" (scene 8 shot 7) or SLATE 47879 (don't know which one is used in US...)
then you're good to go.

And...learn from your mistakes
Click to expand...

Yeah I know they are, yes - I to have worked as an editor on reality shows. But the sound was always recorded to a camera with wireless and in multi camera shots a clapper was used.
I wanted that the shooter wouldn't have to take long takes as this takes up alot of space and not to mention alot of P2 cards - if we'll be using a P2 system. That's why I wanted to give the crew an option to freely pause and record without the need of doing a clapper every time. This is going to be a "house make-over" type of reality - only it's not a house but a night klub. It's probably going to be a one big mess and that's why I would like to avoid using a recorder and a clapper.
 
KINOKS said:
Well I'm still waiting for the budget, so all options are opened now I guess. I've been looking at the wireless option and a friend of mine (who is a audio producer) suggested I get a Shure mixer and there wireless transmitters and receivers. This would run me about 2k just for one shooter. Is there maybe a bit cheaper alternative?
Click to expand...

Shure mixers had their day. I had an FP33 for years when it was the industry standard, and it was a great mixer in its day. Sound Devices took the prize, though, and has pretty much become the go-to. Wendt and PSC still have a user base, but having used them all I do find Sound Devices to be preferable. As for cheaper, well... $2k is a pretty reasonable starting budget for a mixer and boom kit, without wireless or recorder. Audio can cost much more than the camera.

KINOKS said:
If all else fails I'll just opt for a recorder and be as diligent as possible with clappers. Alex, you recommended DR680 and HDP2 from tascam along with a Fostex recorder. The fostex and the HDP2 both have a rotating audio volume on theirs front side but the dr680 doesn't. Is that not an inconvenience when shooting in a ENG situation?
Are this all the recorders one would recommend?
Click to expand...

Sound Devices, again, would be the best thing you could do as far as a recorder. Didn't mention that earlier due to budget uncertainty, but if you can afford it a 702 would give you a splendid (and durable) option. The 744 is a 4-track, and both have time code options (702T, 744T).

As for the DR680, it has a rotary control... it's just that there's only one, and you select the channel you want to adjust before you make the adjustment. A little less practical for mixing, but while it does have the option to record a stereo mix of the 6 individual inputs it is a device really intended to record the 6 individual ins.
 
The 702 is certanly above budget as there are recorders for half the amount and they produce good audio - or atleast that's how I understand it (HDP2, DR680, Fostex, DR100).

For the mixer I've heard the Sound devices MixPre-d is OK?

When calculating the cost of 2k I actualy didn't include a mic and a bom with blimp in that as we already have it. The mic is Sony ECM 673.

What wireless transmiter and receiver would you suggest? I see this vary in price alot. Also I see that most of them include a lav mic...
 
KINOKS said:
The 702 is certanly above budget as there are recorders for half the amount and they produce good audio - or atleast that's how I understand it (HDP2, DR680, Fostex, DR100).

For the mixer I've heard the Sound devices MixPre-d is OK?
Click to expand...

Yes, there are less expensive recorders that can do a fine job. Sound Devices are more rugged, more durable, and will hold more value over time. But if you go with something less expensive, I'd go with something other than a hand-held.

The MixPre-D is a fantastic little box. I have one, and I love it (and it makes a killer front-end for a Fostex FR2-LE). If you're only dealing with one or two mics, it should suffice. If you'll be dealing with more than two mics at a time, you'll obviously need to look at something more (Sound Devices 302, or 552, or a good deal on a used 442).

KINOKS said:
What wireless transmiter and receiver would you suggest? I see this vary in price alot. Also I see that most of them include a lav mic...
Click to expand...

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...n-or-quot-What-cheap-system-should-I-get-quot
 
Okey, I think I know what I want to do:

boom -> mixpre-d -> Tascam DR100 or Olympus LS100 (which one?)-> absolutely the cheapest transmitter and receiver I can get (just for syncing in post + the camera man can hear what the sound person is recording which is a big plus) -> PluralEyes

I think that this is a nice workaround that gives me all that I need, ie. good sound, ability to properly sync and a nice small budget! Do you agree Alex? Is there something that I'm missing? Do you see any possible problems coming out of this?

If going from a mixer to a recorder does the sound degrade in contrast to going directly to the recorder from the mic? To my non-audio head it sounds logical because the signal passes one additional amp... Or is this a non-issue?
 
Actually, could I skip the mixer altogether and just get a better recorder HDP2?? Can the reference sound be sent from recorder to transmitter? This would be better as there would be one less device to worry about...

Edit: I also saw that I can get the Edirol r-44 cheaper than DR680.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top