translating film audio with musical audio

[Azmyth]

Yeah, I'm not saying you hear the difference in 16 vs 24, just that it has more impact than the difference between 44.1/48 as it gives you that headroom to work with.

So here is a complete list of everything I own...

bear with me...

http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.co...rge-Diaphragm-Stereo-Condenser-Mic?sku=271094

http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.co...-Large-Diaphragm-Cardioid-Cond-Mic?sku=276789

http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.co...Small-Diaphragm-Condenser-Mic-Pair?sku=582094

http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.co...B2.0-Audio-Midi-Computer-Interface?sku=242192

and as already mentioned. I have the MR8 recorder, and I have a Shure sm57, sm58, several generic dynamic microphones, shock mounts for my condensors, and a pop filter.

 

[Gohanto]

The main benefit of 24 bit is headroom. You can record at a lower level with less noise. It gives you more options in post. This has been discussed ad nausium on the Recording Review forums.

Which, in an unpredictable production sound environment, that headroom is extremely valuable and a huge reason why it's standard to record 24bit.

Also, I agree completely that there's minimal difference between 44.1 and 48k recordings. If you want to finish at 48k, or the SFX libraries you use are 48k (many are), then you'll need to convert from 44.1k -> 48k, and that's where you can get some issues. Not always, but I generally try to avoid it.

And on a low budget film, I think getting a mixer and going straight into the camera is the best option. I tend to run a mix into my Zoom as well just as a backup (non-timecode, but using sticks it can still work), but if you have a 1/8" return cable from the camera to verify the camera is recording the audio, then you should be okay.

And I used to own the Fostex you have. Works okay. Preamps aren't the greatest. You'd have to sit down to mix. Personally, I don't think the pros of separate recording outweigh the cons until you get to pro-quality, timecode enabled recorders. Except for use as a backup and/or no line-level in on the camera.

 

[DrDave]

The MR8 is not that noisy, but it is 16 bit. If you are on a budget, you can get a Zoom H2 and mod it to record four channel audio, or as unclebob suggests, get an inexpensive firewire interface for your laptop as you are familiar with laptop recording or the Flash recorders he recommends. 2 good mics sound better than a lot of cheap mics, but two good and two cheap gives you a lot of flexibility. Four good mics is a nice rig, and so it goes....

 

[Azmyth]

so for a low budget film such as mine.. the best choice is going to be to run the mic into a small mixer, and then into the DVX.

I don't have the money for a field recorder right now, and the firewire interfaces can be expensive as well. I don't know of any inexpensive ones. I already have a 10 channel yamaha mixer with 4 preamps.

so my next question would be.. how does the mixer connect to the camera.

 

[unclebob6958]

Kind of off topic but...

Several mixers, etc. have been mentioned and are said to be "not that noisy." That's true; until you get it into an acoustically isolated and treated studio with a couple a of grand worth of speakers, then you start hearing the the faults.

All mics, mixers and pre-amps have self noise. As a rule of thumb, higher cost = lower self noise. That's the main reason why a 4 (four) channel Sound Devices mixer costs $2,500; and all it does is mix and buss!

The biggest challenge with film/video audio is to find the gear that does the job you want with the lowest amount of self noise that fits into your budget. And that brings us back to how this thread started - going from music audio to film audio.

Prosumer music gear tends to be fairly noisy, it is usually recording relatively loud sound sources; the self noise of these units is "covered up" by the loudness of the source material - electric guitars, drums, singing.

Film is a much different mind-set; your are recording relatively quiet sound sources (dialog). The self noise of music oriented gear becomes much more apparent in these situations.

 

[Azmyth]

Kind of off topic but...

Several mixers, etc. have been mentioned and are said to be "not that noisy." That's true; until you get it into an acoustically isolated and treated studio with a couple a of grand worth of speakers, then you start hearing the the faults.

All mics, mixers and pre-amps have self noise. As a rule of thumb, higher cost = lower self noise. That's the main reason why a 4 (four) channel Sound Devices mixer costs $2,500; and all it does is mix and buss!

The biggest challenge with film/video audio is to find the gear that does the job you want with the lowest amount of self noise that fits into your budget. And that brings us back to how this thread started - going from music audio to film audio.

Prosumer music gear tends to be fairly noisy, it is usually recording relatively loud sound sources; the self noise of these units is "covered up" by the loudness of the source material - electric guitars, drums, singing.

Film is a much different mind-set; your are recording relatively quiet sound sources (dialog). The self noise of music oriented gear becomes much more apparent in these situations.

so with that in mind.. the only low/no budget thing to do is run the mics into the camera.

 

[Chadfish]

so with that in mind.. the only low/no budget thing to do is run the mics into the camera.

That depends on the camera. My EX1 is incredibly quiet. My VX2100 was pretty noisy until I got the Greg Winter mod that bypassed the preamps. But now it requires a line level mixer to utilize the noisless DAT quality recording.

For 665.00 the Sound Devices MixPre is a godsend. But I understand having no budget. The reality is that you have to pay to play. If film is your thing then do whatever it takes to get a good clean signal. If you have high standards then your work will reflect that, and you will get even more work as a result. It's a snowball effect. Set an attainable goal and make that first purchase of actual good gear. To buy something that is a compromise will only cost you more money in the long run.

Research - Identify - Acquire

 

[Azmyth]

That depends on the camera. My EX1 is incredibly quiet. My VX2100 was pretty noisy until I got the Greg Winter mod that bypassed the preamps. But now it requires a line level mixer to utilize the noisless DAT quality recording.

For 665.00 the Sound Devices MixPre is a godsend. But I understand having no budget. The reality is that you have to pay to play. If film is your thing then do whatever it takes to get a good clean signal. If you have high standards then your work will reflect that, and you will get even more work as a result. It's a snowball effect. Set an attainable goal and make that first purchase of actual good gear. To buy something that is a compromise will only cost you more money in the long run.

Research - Identify - Acquire

camera will be a DVX100 A or B..

I'm building this from nothing.. so I can always get better later.. but I'd rather get started with something, rather than blowing loads of money on something that I'm not sure I can even accomplish yet.

 

[Chadfish]

I guess test it out and see if you like how it sounds. With nothing for budget, you need to rely on good micing technique. Get that mic as close to the talent as possible. Within 2 feet is a good place to start, but try for closer. Plan shots so you can have the mic just out of frame. If you don't have a shotgun, or a hyper, then try something with at least a cardioid pattern. Something you can put on a pole and point. Test everything out BEFORE you are at the shoot. Make some short test films (I know it's tape) and process the audio as you would for a finished product. If you come from an audio background - maybe you have some noise removing software? If you have a noisy camera - that will help a lot when used judiciously.

Good luck!

 

[Azmyth]

I guess test it out and see if you like how it sounds. With nothing for budget, you need to rely on good micing technique. Get that mic as close to the talent as possible. Within 2 feet is a good place to start, but try for closer. Plan shots so you can have the mic just out of frame. If you don't have a shotgun, or a hyper, then try something with at least a cardioid pattern. Something you can put on a pole and point. Test everything out BEFORE you are at the shoot. Make some short test films (I know it's tape) and process the audio as you would for a finished product. If you come from an audio background - maybe you have some noise removing software? If you have a noisy camera - that will help a lot when used judiciously.

Good luck!

I'm going to buy a nice shotgun mic, I just don't have money for film quality mixers. I've been looking up some examples of different mics ran straight into the camera, and it sounds fairly good. I think it will work fine for my purposes.. I will make sure the audio sounds good, because at least by having an audio background... I care how it sounds.

 

[unclebob6958]

The biggest problem is the quality vs. budget issue. Start with solid mics and work up from there. Get a shotgun (NTG-2?) and a cardioid condenser (Oktava MK-012?) plus the boom pole, headphones and other accessories (between $500 and $1). Then add the mixer (to feed to the camera), then the recorder. Then you can upgrade the mics and start adding the cool stuff like wireless lavs, etc. When you start building after the initial mics don't go cheap, get quality.


You may want to check out the following:

www.filmsound.org

http://filmmakeriq.com/production/audio/guide-to-alternative-microphones-for-use-on-a-boompole.html

http://filmmakeriq.com/production/audio/as-i-hear-it-choosing-the-right-microphone.html

http://filmmakeriq.com/production/audio/choosing-a-shotgun-microphone.html

http://filmmakeriq.com/production/audio/10-tips-for-better-audio-in-digital-video-production.html

http://filmmakeriq.com/production/audio/anatomy-of-an-audio-bag.html