Tascam DA P1 DAT
- Thread starter avr
- Start date
thisiswells
Retired
Yeah--pretty much better in terms of sound quality--Yes, it would be a better choice than
the Marantz you mention because the Tascam has a better S/N ratio and that makes it better.
DAT is a dying animal. Here are the problems in my experience of owning two DA-P1's:
1. There is no timecode Jam-sync on either the DA-P1 or the DVX100a.
2. The batteries for the DA-P1 are a real problem. They are older Ni-CD technology and don't last
more than about an hour or on a day of shooting with one hour of actual record time, you'll
need about four batteries, at least. They're $90/Each.
3. Post production workflow. DAT machines don't have any easy, "firewire-type" interface like our
camcorders do. You'll need some new hardware for your computer and specialised software to
copy the DAT's into your computer with S/PDIF. The SoundDevices USBPre is a good option, but mine was $600.00.
4. You only get two channels and they're the same quality as the sound of the DVX...so why use DAT?
Many people believe their sound will be exponentially better if they use DAT because they hear that is what they use in the movies which isn't really true anymore. A lot of commercial production still uses DAT more as a legacy/this is what we're used to type of thing and also because commercials usually only require a single microphone. Movie sound is being recorded onto multitrack portable HDD systems that cost alot more than DAT, but offer better workflow, they do offer higher fidelity recordings than DAT(Besides Sonosax 24/96 DAT, in which case it's about the same) and you can record lots of tracks at once.
Recording externally is sometimes necessary when you can't rig ENG cable to the camera--like when you're using a Steadicam. That is the only time I would use DAT now with video. And, really I'd prefer to have a HDD system, but it's not worth the extra cost for the few times I'd need it. You might check out the CoreSound PDAudio system for a portable, high quality stereo 24/96 system with excellent preamps and good post workflow for under a grand... remember though, there is still no timecode sync.
In summary, no I don't think you should buy DAT because it's a real hassle to use when we have modern conveniences like HDD's now... digital tape doesn't make any sense for audio, anymore.
brian wells
the Marantz you mention because the Tascam has a better S/N ratio and that makes it better.
DAT is a dying animal. Here are the problems in my experience of owning two DA-P1's:
1. There is no timecode Jam-sync on either the DA-P1 or the DVX100a.
2. The batteries for the DA-P1 are a real problem. They are older Ni-CD technology and don't last
more than about an hour or on a day of shooting with one hour of actual record time, you'll
need about four batteries, at least. They're $90/Each.
3. Post production workflow. DAT machines don't have any easy, "firewire-type" interface like our
camcorders do. You'll need some new hardware for your computer and specialised software to
copy the DAT's into your computer with S/PDIF. The SoundDevices USBPre is a good option, but mine was $600.00.
4. You only get two channels and they're the same quality as the sound of the DVX...so why use DAT?
Many people believe their sound will be exponentially better if they use DAT because they hear that is what they use in the movies which isn't really true anymore. A lot of commercial production still uses DAT more as a legacy/this is what we're used to type of thing and also because commercials usually only require a single microphone. Movie sound is being recorded onto multitrack portable HDD systems that cost alot more than DAT, but offer better workflow, they do offer higher fidelity recordings than DAT(Besides Sonosax 24/96 DAT, in which case it's about the same) and you can record lots of tracks at once.
Recording externally is sometimes necessary when you can't rig ENG cable to the camera--like when you're using a Steadicam. That is the only time I would use DAT now with video. And, really I'd prefer to have a HDD system, but it's not worth the extra cost for the few times I'd need it. You might check out the CoreSound PDAudio system for a portable, high quality stereo 24/96 system with excellent preamps and good post workflow for under a grand... remember though, there is still no timecode sync.
In summary, no I don't think you should buy DAT because it's a real hassle to use when we have modern conveniences like HDD's now... digital tape doesn't make any sense for audio, anymore.
brian wells
So what is the alternative to a protable DAT? I know you mentioned HDD but that doesn't seem like a viable alternative for many of us (becasue of cost). I know some people are using MiniDisc. I have recorded ot MiniDisc before, but have had the same issues you mentioned, no tiemcode, which is, I find, the biggest problem of all. There has got to be a better way.
Maybe this isn't the right forum, but I know the big cameras you can hook up a wireless video feed from your camera. Why can't we hook up a wireless audio feed from a mixer into our cameras? I have done this before for synch, in a round about jimmy-rigged way by using a wirless lav mic in reverse, but like I said, it was just for a synch track, the live audio was put to DAT.
Maybe this isn't the right forum, but I know the big cameras you can hook up a wireless video feed from your camera. Why can't we hook up a wireless audio feed from a mixer into our cameras? I have done this before for synch, in a round about jimmy-rigged way by using a wirless lav mic in reverse, but like I said, it was just for a synch track, the live audio was put to DAT.
thisiswells
Retired
You can hook up a good wireless audio feed to your camera with a Zaxcom ENG System.
It's Stereo Digital Wireless and cost around 4000. Wireless is subject to dropouts and heavily
reduced sound quality that I would consider unaccaptable anymore. The Lectrosonics Digital Hybrid
systems may be another option, but only come in single channel versions, and are 2500 per
channel. Certainly you could get away with a less expensive system, and I have done that, but
the range is terribly reduced, I've had dropouts and fuzzy reception, and reliablility issues even with 1200 systems before.... So wireless isn't the best option for optimal sound quality without
spending big bucks.... Sound guys only use wireless as a last resort.
What you mention about sending timecode to a camera and then to DAT is a relevant point. Absolutely that is a good idea. Unfortunately, the DA-P1 is a not a timecode recorder (unless you're using channel two for timecode, otherwise there is no Jam sync to a Timecode slate for visual reference) and the problem with this approach is FinalCutPro does not have a software function to tell it one of your audio channels is actually timecode and has no way of interpreting this information. One of the Avid systems does let you do it, but I think it's the Symphony, and it's definitely not in any of the DV-targeted products.
I would seriously consider using a CoreSound PDaudio system now. It's a PDA with onboard preamps that captures incredibly high fidelity audio and costs under a grand for a package as my DAT-replacement. I sold both my DAT's about a month ago. I never want to own another DAT machine, ever! Way too much hassle when you've got things like PDAudio for the same price.
The thing to really consider when doing Steadicam shots are footsteps and shadows. It requires a high level of shot blocking to get rid of shadows and the sound of footsteps is terribly distracting. I used a couple of Sanken lavs with Lectrosonics wireless systems on a recent independent film during the Steadicam segments, which definitely helped swift things along, but it certainly wasn't up to par with the quality level I would have liked... and you could still hear the Steadicam operators feet tapping the floor/ground as they moved... So probably they'll be ADR'ing, I'm not sure. Basically, getting good sound when using a Steadicam requires alot of work for so-so results and sync sound with DV is a nightmare without timecode in the cameras and the editors.
Hope this helps,
brian wells
It's Stereo Digital Wireless and cost around 4000. Wireless is subject to dropouts and heavily
reduced sound quality that I would consider unaccaptable anymore. The Lectrosonics Digital Hybrid
systems may be another option, but only come in single channel versions, and are 2500 per
channel. Certainly you could get away with a less expensive system, and I have done that, but
the range is terribly reduced, I've had dropouts and fuzzy reception, and reliablility issues even with 1200 systems before.... So wireless isn't the best option for optimal sound quality without
spending big bucks.... Sound guys only use wireless as a last resort.
What you mention about sending timecode to a camera and then to DAT is a relevant point. Absolutely that is a good idea. Unfortunately, the DA-P1 is a not a timecode recorder (unless you're using channel two for timecode, otherwise there is no Jam sync to a Timecode slate for visual reference) and the problem with this approach is FinalCutPro does not have a software function to tell it one of your audio channels is actually timecode and has no way of interpreting this information. One of the Avid systems does let you do it, but I think it's the Symphony, and it's definitely not in any of the DV-targeted products.
I would seriously consider using a CoreSound PDaudio system now. It's a PDA with onboard preamps that captures incredibly high fidelity audio and costs under a grand for a package as my DAT-replacement. I sold both my DAT's about a month ago. I never want to own another DAT machine, ever! Way too much hassle when you've got things like PDAudio for the same price.
The thing to really consider when doing Steadicam shots are footsteps and shadows. It requires a high level of shot blocking to get rid of shadows and the sound of footsteps is terribly distracting. I used a couple of Sanken lavs with Lectrosonics wireless systems on a recent independent film during the Steadicam segments, which definitely helped swift things along, but it certainly wasn't up to par with the quality level I would have liked... and you could still hear the Steadicam operators feet tapping the floor/ground as they moved... So probably they'll be ADR'ing, I'm not sure. Basically, getting good sound when using a Steadicam requires alot of work for so-so results and sync sound with DV is a nightmare without timecode in the cameras and the editors.
Hope this helps,
brian wells
wabbit
Evil has Ears
I don't know what price range you consider out of bounds but their are some relatively cheap non-linear audio options out there. The Sound Device 744t is a dream. I pick one up earlier this year, sold my DAT almost immediately. If $4000 is not in your price range, the 722 (~$2000) is just as good audio quality (24bit/192kHz) but only 2 channels and no TC. The preamps and A/D on this thing are the things of wet-dreams.
Lastly, the Fostex FR-2 (~$1200) is ok if you are on a budget. I finally got to play with one recently and compared to the SD it is JV league but still better then on-camera audio. Fostex keeps saying it is going to have a TC plug-in card but I still don't think it has been released yet.
As thisiswell said, DAT is not just dying, it's dead. You can't get them serviced anymore, and finding people that want to deal it in the professional realm is getting harder. A couple of extra bucks to invest in a non-linear solution is going to much happier down the road (better quality, future proofed, and quick load times instead of real-time input you get with DAT).
Good luck
Lastly, the Fostex FR-2 (~$1200) is ok if you are on a budget. I finally got to play with one recently and compared to the SD it is JV league but still better then on-camera audio. Fostex keeps saying it is going to have a TC plug-in card but I still don't think it has been released yet.
As thisiswell said, DAT is not just dying, it's dead. You can't get them serviced anymore, and finding people that want to deal it in the professional realm is getting harder. A couple of extra bucks to invest in a non-linear solution is going to much happier down the road (better quality, future proofed, and quick load times instead of real-time input you get with DAT).
Good luck
thisiswells
Retired
wabbit said:
The deal with the FR-2 timecode board is they made it. It worked great. Ready for production.
But, it was based on a short lived consumer chipset that nobody makes anymore.
They went back to the drawing board and began on another version....
It has been two years since then....... I would not count on it ever being available.
wabbit
Evil has Ears
Well, that explains that whole..."it will be out next quarter" for the last year or so.
Didn't see a solid market for the TC card for the Fostex anyways.
Here is a link to the Coresound product.
http://www.core-sound.com/HighResRecorderNews.html#INTRODUCTION
I witnessed someone using the Coresound Mic24296 with seemingly impressive results (think it was attached to an iRiver device). The controls were a hassle to deal with if you shooting regularly or ENG style but a good low-budget film solution.
Didn't see a solid market for the TC card for the Fostex anyways.
Here is a link to the Coresound product.
http://www.core-sound.com/HighResRecorderNews.html#INTRODUCTION
I witnessed someone using the Coresound Mic24296 with seemingly impressive results (think it was attached to an iRiver device). The controls were a hassle to deal with if you shooting regularly or ENG style but a good low-budget film solution.
thisiswells
Retired
"Long Live Dave_Fisk."