Sync Sound with Recorder and HVX...

LighthouseMedia

LighthouseMedia

Well-known member
Okay I'm a little confused ya'll I'm looking at the FR-2 as a sync sound recorder but I'll be recording in 720/24PN so I need to make sure it will record 23.976 (right?) natively without the added TC card. In reading the description I'm unclear as to whether I can do that or if I can only do that with the add on card. If I can't how do people feel about Tascam's HD-P2 recorder I know its a little less rugged which is why I 'm looking at the FR-2 so hopefully you guys can help me out here. Or do I need the timebase the same I assumed I did a little help would be nice. Help me out what is the best way to do this?
 
okay...this may sound dumb...
but why bother with a dual system when you can record uncompressed audio
right in the hvx??
If you do go dual systems...just go about getting things done the same way,
the recorder doesn't care if the visual goes to film or HD.
 
Well I was really wanting to utilize a 24BIT audio track, does everyone else feel that 16BIT HVX audio is really sufficient? My sound engineer highly recommended using an external recorder. Barry, anyone any thoughts? Also still looking for a confirmation on my original question as well...
 
What program will you mixing the audio in?
If Avid or FCP I'd say the HVX is fine (in fact it sounds pretty good). Be aware that you can sometimes hear when you zoom if using the internal mics or a shotgun mounted on the camera.

If you're mixing in Pro Tools having the 24 bit files will come in handy if you plan on adding plug-in effects (eq's, reverb). The extra headroom you get from 24 bit really helps if you have to sum ALOT of tracks (30 or more).

I'm biased because I'm a Pro Tools guy and I can hear the difference.
 
16 bit uncompressed audio is definitely good enough, and is one of the great features of the HVX200 over the HDV competition. Unless you need more than two channels or are flying the camera on steadicam and don't want the xlr tethered, I could never justify the hassle of double sound recording for 24bits. Using 24bit audio is more important for the multitrack mix/edit (like in Protools) where you're adding lots of plugins etc. I just export the audio as 24bit audio from my NLE and import into ProTools for the sound mix.

I soundmixed an MOW that was filmed on F900. Unfortuneately the production went with double-sound recording to DAT and only sent a mono mix to the F900 as reference for the editor. Not sure where the screw-up happened, but the DAT timecode did not match the F900 HDCAM tapes. The DAT audio had to be manually re-synched and new dats were made with timecode matching the HDCAMs. I used these new DATs to auto-conform the location sound. This extra bit of re-synching cost the production just over $10,000.00.

If you do record to an external recorder, send the audio to the HVX as well. You never know when you might need it!
 
LighthouseMedia said:
Okay I'm a little confused ya'll I'm looking at the FR-2 as a sync sound recorder but I'll be recording in 720/24PN so I need to make sure it will record 23.976 (right?) natively without the added TC card. In reading the description I'm unclear as to whether I can do that or if I can only do that with the add on card. If I can't how do people feel about Tascam's HD-P2 recorder I know its a little less rugged which is why I 'm looking at the FR-2 so hopefully you guys can help me out here. Or do I need the timebase the same I assumed I did a little help would be nice. Help me out what is the best way to do this?
Click to expand...

The hvx200 audio section is mediocre if anything and if you are going line in with a good mixer in front. I would only record to the camera as a guide track and rely on my separate audio as my production track. The tascam and FR2 both have really good, clean sound. I never use the recorder's preamps and put either a SD 442 or Cooper 106 in front and go line in.

Set your slate and recorder for 29.97 NDF, not 23.976. 16 bit/48khz is fine or record 24bit if you want. The tascam is rugged even though it is plastic. Their DAT machines are built the same way. I've dropped mine 2 times and A ok.

Always use separate audio if sound quality matters, take good notes and everything will be good.
 
Why set the recorder to 29.97 if he is shooting 720/24pn? There is no pulldown in this mode, no extra frames to to remove right? So isn't 23.976 on the recorder the right recorder speed?
 
We're on the same page for sure. I think the subject you brought up is important and something that should be discussed because even though I think the sound on the HVX is great I still believe like ddent that sepreate audio is the only way to go for pro work. I worked on "Bamboozled" which was shot with the sony pal pd150, a well as a bunch of single chip sonys and some super 16mm, and they recorded sound only to a recorder. Never the camera. Because the on camera sound wasn't up to par and it freed them to move around quicker without any cables attached (just the monitor cable when they needed it).
So that brings up the question, because the HVX is so new and sound people may not understand the different shooting modes, as to what the recorders should be set at.
And since , I believe you cannot sync a digital slate and recoder to the hVX because there is no timecode in wouldn't the need for a digital slate and timecode card for the recorder be uneccessary?
 
There's a trick to the question here. And I am talking DIGITAL SOUND here, not analog tape recorded sound. Back in the old days of analog tape for sound, you HAD to have SMTE timecode. Now, that's changed.

First, sound, nativley, is not recorded, nor meassured, in the same way as video/film. You can get a digital sound unit that will use SMTE time code, but the bottom line is that your sample rate and bit depth must match the Sequence in your NLE is set for. SMTE timecode on sound recordings is only a convienience, as the sound itself has nothing to do with "frames per second."

Having come from music studios and a sound background, it's not even the 24-bit that helps. Well, it does, by itself it does, but just a little bit. What really makes for great sound it the sample rate that goes with the 24-bit word length. If you want really good "professional studio" quality sound recordings, make sure your unit will also give you at LEAST a 96kHz sample rate, along WITH the 24-bit word lenght.

Then, if you set your Sequence up to be 24-bit/92kHz, they should sync up fine. I've been doing 24-bit sound recording with a few different devices for many years. It always worked out for me very nicely. Even units that didn't give me a SMTE time code convenience.

SMTE timecode doesn't mean squat to the machine recording the sound. Only to the editor who needs to sync that sound. If both the sound recording and the sound file handed to the editor is the same sample rate and bit-depth, sync should not be an issue.

For example, Apple has a statistic they quote that claims the overwhelming majority of sound/video sync issues in FCP that are reported to them end up being someone who used a DV camera that was set to 32kHz/12-bit, and capture into FCP as 48kHz/16-bit. THAT throws it out of sync, not the SMTE time code. I can vouch for this, as I get this a lot in my classes. A few times students argue with me, bring in their cameras the next day, we turn on the DV cam, go into the menus (that they 99 out of 100 times didn't know about) and find I'm right.

Also, higher bit-depth and higher sample rates are just like color space. You have much more room to correct in 4:4:4 color space than in 4:2:0, right? Same for sound. When you go to sweeten it in post, the higher sample rate along with the higher bit depth will give you much more room to work with. When I began recording live concerts with, what at the time was a cutting edge Roland VS-1680 (yes, that long ago), the 24-bit/64kHz sound we got was way nicer to work with than what came off of our DV cameras. Much easier to sweeten in post, as filters and such reacted with much more precision than lower grade sound.

If forced to make the choice, to me, higher sample rate is more important than higher bit depth, BUT higher on both together is the best.

Also, because there's not direct sync generator connected to the HVX and your audio unit, you COULD logically use a slate clap to help sync the two tracks at the begining when at the edit bay. A digital slate would be wasteful, to be sure. But just an old fashioned one that lets you actually make the CLAP sound really loudly. And the audio track would have the voice telling what shot/take/etc and you'd see it on the head of the video clip from the writting on the slate. That way you'd have some saftey measure if someone started naming digital files funny names, like with Panasonic's P2 (sorry, couldn't resist the jab)...

Ok, there's my rant for the day, back to work...
 
Last edited:
Excellent a friend of mine explained it almost that well over the phone the other day. :)Thanks for weighing in Ben. So yeah I 'm looking at recording at 92kHzas that seems to be the highest I can go in FCP at the moment.
 
mico said:
We're on the same page for sure. I think the subject you brought up is important and something that should be discussed because even though I think the sound on the HVX is great I still believe like ddent that sepreate audio is the only way to go for pro work. I worked on "Bamboozled" which was shot with the sony pal pd150, a well as a bunch of single chip sonys and some super 16mm, and they recorded sound only to a recorder. Never the camera. Because the on camera sound wasn't up to par and it freed them to move around quicker without any cables attached (just the monitor cable when they needed it).
So that brings up the question, because the HVX is so new and sound people may not understand the different shooting modes, as to what the recorders should be set at.
And since , I believe you cannot sync a digital slate and recoder to the hVX because there is no timecode in wouldn't the need for a digital slate and timecode card for the recorder be uneccessary?
Click to expand...
I own (2) hvx200s so I understand this camera very well including its P2 workflow. Sound guys, including myself, don't need to know VFR or other things the hvx200 may offer, we need to know a couple of things. What the editor (producer) wants (get it in writing if necessary) and never record at 23.97 for 24p shoots. You set your slate and recorder to 29.97 NDF. Film set to 30.

The time code slate (eg Denecke TS-3) can read or generate LTC. Set the camera in free run (TOD) and get the recorder to match close as you can to either TOD or whatever you preset the hvx200 to. Just don't start at 0:00:00. This will help your editor find things easily. A timecode slate is not a necessity but a convenient tool to have. It also prepares the crew on set for the scene which is overlooked.
 
Last edited:
The correct acroynym is SMPTE. Record dialogue at 16/48khz, minimum. I record at 24/48khz. There is no need to record dialogue at a higher sampling rate. You cannot tell the difference and you only wasted space. The tascam records at 192khz. IMHO a marketing gimmick and a waste of space. For music or other applications, maybe, but not for recording dialogue. The only times i record higher than 48 is doing live events or production sound effects, but then I only go to 24/96khz.
 
Actually, QTPro can go up to 192kHz, but FCP seems to have a 96kHz limit. Not sure why. Because in FCP you can also do up to 24 independent audio ins and outs, IF you have the hardware to support it.

But 96kHz/24-bit is pretty standard these days for recording studios.

Now, one situation to think about is this. Record higher than 96kHz, take the sound file into your DAW that supports higher rates, sweeten, then take it back into FCP.

Not sure why FCP and STP have that audio sample rate limit. I think it's cause that's all the hardware we have in these machines will handle. I think if you install an audio card or something that will support higher rates, your apps will, too.

BTW, it's 96kHz, not 92kHz... And yes, it is SMPTE, I just type funky...

As for wasting space for dialog, I have to very strongly dissagree. I can clean up anything at 96kHz a LOT better than at 48kHz. It is good enough, but not optimum.

And yes, you CAN tell the difference on studio quality sound monitors. But no, not on your averatge computer stereo speakers. But then, I'd never color correct on a 12" TV, either. It's all about the space you have to work in, color, sound, same thing applies.

What is acceptable? 12-bit is "acceptable". But if you ask me to work a professional sound job in only 48kHz and I'll turn your project down flat. But then, I've spent more time with sound than video, and I'm really picky about it. ESPECIALLY if you are going out to FILM.
 
BenB said:
And yes, you CAN tell the difference on studio quality sound monitors. But no, not on your averatge computer stereo speakers. But then, I'd never color correct on a 12" TV, either. It's all about the space you have to work in, color, sound, same thing applies.
quote]

If you can tell the difference between 48k and 96k on dialog alone, I will buy you a case of beer....

Up until not long ago alomost ALL dialog was recorded on a Nagra at 7-12 ips...boy that must have been awful...
Click to expand...
 
Ok, ksteiger, go back and re-read what I wrote. I said DIGITAL AUDIO. If you measure in inches per second, it's not anything that relates to the digital signal.

And I never said 48kHz can not do good dialog. I said "I can clean up anything at 96kHz a LOT better than at 48kHz. It is good enough, but not optimum."

In fact, for some time now Nagra has been doing 96kHz digital audio, just check the product line on the web site.

I never said you can not get good dialog with only 48kHz, I said you can do more in post with higher sample rates. Don't put words in my mouth.

And if I feed the cameras though the TV 19" in my work shed, both the HVX200 and GL-1 look the same.
 
96k Dialog would be great (in a perfect world). Typically it's 16bit 48k.
The musical score is typically recorded at 48k 24 bit (unless it's a real orchestra) then it's recorded at 96k 24bit.

Can you hear a difference?

192k 24bit (for organic sounds like acoustic guitar, Tenor Sax, Flute, Violins) it can be an amazing experience if the playback environment is up to par. Vocals (singers) can also benefit from 192k if it's a very dynamic performance. But today - this is only for audiophiles. No need to go there.

96k 24bit - The next standard for professional audio recording. The added detail that's captured can't be denied. Any original recorded music should be recorded at this rate (but alas, it will most likely be delivered at 48k 16bit). It's still a pain to capture dialog at this rate and most people don't even consider it.

It should also be noted that the biggest improvement in audio over the last 10 years was not the higher sample rates but the larger Bit Debth.

Again, if you're editing in FCP don't bother with 96k audio. Final Cut is good for alot of things but 96k ..... not.

85% of the market uses pro tools and anybody that gets a chance to hear their audio in FCP or AVID and then hear it played back in pro tools (even before any processing) will hear the improvement.
 
I own (2) hvx200s so I understand this camera very well including its P2 workflow. Sound guys, including myself, don't need to know VFR or other things the hvx200 may offer, we need to know a couple of things. What the editor (producer) wants (get it in writing if necessary) and never record at 23.97 for 24p shoots. You set your slate and recorder to 29.97 NDF. Film set to 30.

The time code slate (eg Denecke TS-3) can read or generate LTC. Set the camera in free run (TOD) and get the recorder to match close as you can to either TOD or whatever you preset the hvx200 to. Just don't start at 0:00:00. This will help your editor find things easily. A timecode slate is not a necessity but a convenient tool to have. It also prepares the crew on set for the scene which is overlooked.
Click to expand...

Thanks Ben, ddent, and everyone else for the info. Putting aside the khz thing for a second could anyone take the time and elaborate on what ddent wrote above. I'd like to know more specifically about why you would never record at 23.97. Is 29.97 for every kind of 24p output, even film? So any frame mode on the HVX has no effect on recording sound to a seperate device? And using a digital slate can get you close to the time code, not exact, but that would still help the editor?

Thanks again
 
I've filmed the display screen of my sound devices 722 field recorder to know what timecode is for a given frame of video. It's a nice way to find things quickly. In Soundtrack pro you can easily hear the difference between 96/24 and 48/16 on a pair of Genelec speakers. The DVD standard supports 96/24 for PCM audio for stereo mixes.
Cheers,
Sam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top