Some Newb Questions - a lot to do with the new roland

[Rand]

I have been doing a lot of reading here and trying to figure things out. I have a sony nx5 camera which records pcm and is pretty clean. I'm looking to get a recorder to increase my channels - ie. 1 boom and 2 talent with lavs...I want to have SEPARATE TRACKS IN POST in which I can manipulate...

I'm looking at the Roland R-26. It seems to be an all in one solution including being a computer interface for voice overs. I would prefer sound devices, but can't justify the cost at this point....In regards to the Roland

Q - can you in fact record to your computer with an xlr mic ? People only mention using the included mics
Q - Is it true that almost any recorder will be great if you feed it line level from a good mixer ie. SD - assuming it does all the gain?
Q - when recording stereo pairs with the R-26 - will you get 2 separate tracks in post ? Is panning involved in this ?

has anyone used the roland as an interface and can comment ? My basic plan would be to run my sennheiser lavs to my camera to separate channels...then have a boom guy with the R-26 on a tripod. I have a ME-66 boom, so basically he could monitor from the R-26 and my plan would be to use my Y adapter to the R-26 and record the boom at 2 different levels which is sound advice I have read here....and what about time code ? is there much drift even if you sync up with a clap ? using Vegas 10 on a PC...The roland would be great here cause you could get some ambient with the built in mics, as well as talent with the boom, but again, I'm just not clear on how all this plays out when you import to the timeline....

a lot of questions I know, appreciate any responses from you experts...

Randall

 

[Alex H.]

1) If you're wanting to record more than two mics at a time, to independent tracks, you need a recorder with more than 2 XLR inputs and multi-track recording. The R-26 isn't it. You could conceivably adapt to 1/8" for two more simultaneous ins, but that's more trouble than it's worth.

2) There's no purpose to recording "ambient sound" during dialog production. That sound is useless and using it in the final mix will only make the dialog sound bad. The goal is to get dialog as clean and clear as possible. The other thing you need to worry about recording is room tone, or the natural noise floor of the room/location using the same mics and mixer/recorder as used on the dialog. This is laid in under dialog to smooth out edits. I carry a smaller recorder with me (DR-40) that I use to grab ambient sounds, but that is completely separate from production and has to do with things like neighborhood sounds and babbling brooks and windy forests and stuff like that.

3) There is no time code with machines like this. Use the dumb slate (clapper). You'll only have to worry about drift over long takes, and it's not terribly difficult to compensate for that if it happens.

For not much more than the R-26, you can get a TASCAM DR-680. That will give you the ability to record up to 6 separate sources to their own tracks and have total control over the mix in post.

 

[Rand]

Hey thanks for the repsonse...With my 2 inputs on camera, the ROlands 2 = 4...Enough for what I'm looking for.

I hear you on the room tone, but wouldn't hurt to record with the extra mics anyway, if you don't need it delete..but at least you got it...more interested in the capacity to do that if you wanted

I didn't think the drift would be too bad so thanks for the assurance...

not interested in the 680. Long in the tooth, and apparently the Headphone is noisy...kind of retarded to have that, how can you be sure what you got if its really that noisy ? or so I've read...

 

[Alex H.]

Hey thanks for the repsonse...With my 2 inputs on camera, the ROlands 2 = 4...Enough for what I'm looking for.

Why split your audio recording among two devices? Your sound person, at that point, has control only of the second system, so it's up to the camera op. to deal with the rest of your audio.

I hear you on the room tone, but wouldn't hurt to record with the extra mics anyway, if you don't need it delete..but at least you got it...more interested in the capacity to do that if you wanted

It's wasted space to record using the built-ins while you record using a boom and/or lavs. It's simply extra data (occupied recording space) that you'll never need as it is audio that won't do anything to benefit your project. It's also going to create monitoring hell for your sound person. But then, I've only been doing this for 18 years.

not interested in the 680. Long in the tooth, and apparently the Headphone is noisy...kind of retarded to have that, how can you be sure what you got if its really that noisy ? or so I've read...

Long in the tooth? This recorder isn't that old, really. It's also a pretty capable machine. I'll see if I can't get someone else in here to comment on the headphone amp, but there are several folks around here who use that machine.

 

[Chadfish]

The DR 680 has a fine headphone preamp. If you hear too much noise maybe you don't have enough signal gong in, or the tracks are turned down too much in the internal mixer. But that's not as important as the fact that it records 6 discrete tracks cleanly, +2 if you have a MixPre-D to feed it a sp/dif signal. It's never good to record multi tracks on 2 machines either, unless they are truly synced. Otherwise you get drift, which causes phase issues that are best to be avoided. So if you go external recorder with your audio, go all the way external. The DR-680 is maybe a year and a half old, not really "long in the tooth". A good recorder is a good recorder. and yours will be brand new. These 2 channel hand held things are really designed for musicians to play with or to maybe record a show in stereo, but aside from being a 2 channel recorder, all the other stuff is just bells and whistles that serve no use in video production. You will never need an ambient mic track to go along with your direct track. Also it does hurt to use them when you don't need them, because it burns more battery power to record more tracks, and you have a higher risk of card issues. Anyway, my point is if you need 4-6 tracks, the RD-680 is the best thing happening south of Sound Devices. And I think they are under 700.00 some places. More bag friendly too!

Read up on it if you need those tracks.

Regards

Chad

 

[Rick R]

I concur with Alex and Chad.
Regarding track files. Most budget portables produce stereo pair files. Vegas Pro has an option to automatically place them as two mono tracks on the timeline when loaded, or a stereo file can be split manually in about 30 seconds. (if your slow)
I don't know if the 680 renders separate mono or poly (multi-track) files. Chad?

 

[Chadfish]

The 680 records the tracks as individual mono, or stereo pairs. You can also mix within the 680, so not only do you have 6 individual tracks, but you can mix those down to a stereo track as you record.

In Final Cut Pro you can also take a stereo file and split it to dual mono by selecting the file on the timeline, then in the "Modify" menu, un-check "Stereo Pair".

 

[paulears]

With the money in my pocket to spend - I'd have no doubts at all and go with the Tascam. Not just the quality but the bigger size is critical for me - the current excitement with palm size recording devices means there are so many, and as extra facilities (ok, gadgets) get added on, mini knob count goes up and so does the multi-layered setting systems. The Tascam is designed for people with specific audio needs - and for me the most critical ones are lots of combo-xlrs for convenience, big chunky controls, and real individual switches.

Audio spec is very similar, so if you need small size, and built in odds and ends, then the price makes it very attractive - but smaller for me is less exciting than it was.

 

[Rand]

thanks

thanks

thanks for the replies...I like the idea of the roland and then maybe updating later to a SD mix or usb pre or whatever. Then I can feed line level to my camera...The tascam does not get overly favorable reviews at BH. I mean a noisy headphone amp is just silly - is it noise from the mics or the headphone circuit ? Plus the tascam does not give me the computer interface. I did pick up some other points in the threads as well....This is more of a hobby but I do get some small time gigs every Winter for a few bucks and some fun ...

cheers

 

[Richard Crowley]

The tascam does not get overly favorable reviews at BH.

The "user reviews" on mass-market websites like B&H (and Amazon, et.al.) are frequently written by newbies and are unreliable and mis-informed at best. IMHO, they aren't reliable enough to spend the time reading them. Forums like this one are far more reliable for reviews and opinions about pro and semi-pro gear.

Q - Is it true that almost any recorder will be great if you feed it line level from a good mixer ie. SD - assuming it does all the gain?

That is impossible to achieve for all practical purposes. It is exceedingly rare for ANY device to have true line-level inputs. They are virtually all mic-level inputs with switchable pads ahead of them. So you can't really bypass the mic preamps. There is SOME improvement available by using (presumably cleaner) external mic gain, but it is incremental and not a guaranteed win.

 

[Noiz2]

Q - can you in fact record to your computer with an xlr mic ? People only mention using the included mics
Q - Is it true that almost any recorder will be great if you feed it line level from a good mixer ie. SD - assuming it does all the gain?
Q - when recording stereo pairs with the R-26 - will you get 2 separate tracks in post ? Is panning involved in this ?

1) not directly you need an interface of some kind and software.
2) not great but you are bypassing or minimizing the noisiest part of cheap recorders so in general there is a big improvement.
3) you will probably get a stereo pair, but you can always separate those in post.

With my 2 inputs on camera, the ROlands 2 = 4...Enough for what I'm looking for.

Not a good idea. The camera, you don't mention what camera, is likely to have a very weak audio section and you won't have a sound person working it so other than as a scratch track the on camera sound is probably a waste. If your shooting DSLR, and who isn't, then waste may be generous.

I hear you on the room tone, but wouldn't hurt to record with the extra mics anyway, if you don't need it delete..but at least you got it...more interested in the capacity to do that if you wanted

As a post person, this is a waste of time.
First it's NOT Room Tone it's just set ambience. You "might" get some room tone out of it but your confusing background sounds with Room tone.
Room Tone is the sound of the set with nothing happening. You want a min or so per set up. What you seem to think you will get is Background Sound. That would be longer takes of the environment that you would use in post to create the world of the film. Unless you film takes place on a set then the "ambient" recordings during shooting are useless for your film.

This is a common trap of new filmmakers. It's important to remember that you are shooting on a SET and not in the WORLD of your film. You will create that world partly by what you shoot and what you don't show, and partly in editing and visual FX, and through creating the sonic world of your film with a full sound track (I'm not talking music here but all the sounds that create the world of the film, you will add music later). This happens in POST not on the set. If you try to do it all in one on the set you create a nightmare for your editors in post.

RE: 680. None of the portable recorders under a couple of grand have great headphone amps, it's the last place they spend money. But Tascam is a good company and the headphone amp is not going to be bad. Reviews by non professionals are often very misleading because they blame every mistake they make on the equipment. Tascam's headphone history (DA-P1) is not noisy but a bit under powered. Any non pro complaining of noisy headphones I would assume to be really bad gain staging. Turn the input way down and crank the headphone and ooooo noise. The recorder is not "old" and is many times the recorder you are leaning toward. Personally I would not try to use a mini recorder for production recording. People do it but they also constantly complain about things that are related to the fact they are using a tiny recorder with a tiny display and a hard to use interface. Little buttons and small displays are a big issue in the field when the pressure is on.

If you want silly, well 1/8" connectors in the field, that's silly.