Wireless monitoring - Bag audio

V

Vintegreo

Well-known member
I'll typically have a wireless hop from bag audio into the camera's inputs and am wondering about wirelessly sending the headphone output of the camera back to the audio operator so that there's confidence that something is getting recorded on the camera.

What are some typical tools to do this with if that's how you want to do it?

Obviously, the cam op can listen on headphones and the audio op can record backup on a recording device, but I'd like to know how folks do this who are doing it.

Thanks!
 
Same way you'd use your camera hop is how you'd bring the audio back to you.... pretty simple.

However, don't overestimate in thinking how much confidence it will give you in terms of what there is being recorded onto the camera.

Let's say you hear a wireless hit while monitoring the camera return. You're now stuck with this complex puzzle to solve: was the hit between the talent TX and your RX in your bag? Or just maaaybe a bad cable in your bag that is on the edge of breaking? Or is your recording in your bag 100% fine but the hit was on the camera hop? Or is the camera recording it 100% fine but the hit was camera return back to you?

You'll have absolutely no idea! And you might waste a lot of valuable time trying to figure this out, when you should be instead concentrating on more important issues.

This is why if they absolutely insist about using audio recorded to camera, it should be a cabled connection. Otherwise, be prepared to use your recordings from your bag.

So you can do this if you wish and set up a wireless camera return, but make sure you have a good think about if it is really worth the extra efforts and cost (but hey, if production requests and is paying for this feature, then go ahead and grant their wishes!).
 
I have to agree with IronFilm, especially if you are recording on your own in the bag. If you are doing double system, then the audio going to camera is reference audio only. When I've done this I wasn't all that concerned about it. If I could run a hardline back to me I'd do it. Otherwise, I didn't bother because I know my audio recording is just fine. You start throwing wireless on everything and you're just in for a headache you really don't need. I recommend going hardline to camera unless it just isn't physically possible.

Now...if if I'm not recording in the bag and just running a mixer (because client didn't want to pay for a recorder), it's up to them what they want and what they are willing to pay for. I'd still be really reluctant to have to deal with potentially 3 separate wireless chains (talent to mixer. mixer to camera. camera back to mixer), but if I had to I could. I just wouldn't want to. I'd prefer a hard line. Every time you throw a channel of wireless into the audio equation your potential for problems goes up dramatically, and the time it takes to solve the problems also goes up.
 
You should also know that you would almost certainly be listening to what was heading into the camera not what was being recorded. You are one step further down the chain so it is a better place to monitor but you are hearing on the way in so you still want to do some quality checks.
 
Unless it's a sit-down or live shot(something where we aren't moving around), we're always wireless from the bag to camera. If you're wireless from the bag to the camera, I look at it as the camera op's responsibility to monitor at the camera and make sure something is getting there cleanly. I know of a bunch of DB camera guys who refuse to monitor audio at the camera when they are wireless. They say "It's audio's responsibility". That's just stupid, lazy and arrogant.

A wireless return line is just throwing another variable into the mix. If you hear a dropout or other artifact in the wireless return, how do you know if it's a problem with the "send" to the camera or the "return" to the bag? I've even seen cam ops (one man banding it, no less) running bluetooth from the headphone jack to their "headphones". WTF? And they're running wireless receivers straight into the camera. Again, how do you tell where the problem is if you hear it?

And I say all of this as a camera guy.
 
davefisk said:
I have to agree with IronFilm, especially if you are recording on your own in the bag. If you are doing double system, then the audio going to camera is reference audio only. When I've done this I wasn't all that concerned about it. If I could run a hardline back to me I'd do it. Otherwise, I didn't bother because I know my audio recording is just fine. You start throwing wireless on everything and you're just in for a headache you really don't need. I recommend going hardline to camera unless it just isn't physically possible.

Now...if if I'm not recording in the bag and just running a mixer (because client didn't want to pay for a recorder), it's up to them what they want and what they are willing to pay for. I'd still be really reluctant to have to deal with potentially 3 separate wireless chains (talent to mixer. mixer to camera. camera back to mixer), but if I had to I could. I just wouldn't want to. I'd prefer a hard line. Every time you throw a channel of wireless into the audio equation your potential for problems goes up dramatically, and the time it takes to solve the problems also goes up.
Click to expand...

Maybe in "production", but most of the time in my world(network/broadcast), the two channel mix recorded in camera is what's used most of the time, even when we multi-track in the bag.
 
Hummm...?

I kind of thought a snake between the mixer/recorder and the camera with an included return was the usual way of doing things. Guess I am behind the times.
 
My understanding of common practice is what everybody else has stated. Wired breakaway cable for when it really matters what ends up on camera, and otherwise a wireless hop with the hope that the camera op is paying a little bit of attention.
 
cpreston said:
My understanding of common practice is what everybody else has stated. Wired breakaway cable for when it really matters what ends up on camera, and otherwise a wireless hop with the hope that the camera op is paying a little bit of attention.
Click to expand...

Well, it always matters. A cable is the most reliable, but there are times wireless is necessary, because you need ease of moving around quickly and un-encumbered or it's a matter of safety, for you, the gear and others around you. I shoot a lot of sports and when we go on the field for post at an NFL game, I WILL NOT step onto the field hardwired. It's a recipe for disaster.
 
Thanks for all the insights. In this case, I was the producer and not the audio or camera guy. For our shoot, it wasn't all that practical for my shooter to be wearing headphones for a number of reasons I won't go into here. Also, my audio guy (who is fantastic) was tied up with critically listening to what was being recorded in the bag and always does a stellar job for me. That said, a power failure on the hop went out for a couple of minutes and unfortunately wasn't noticed by either the audio guy or the camera guy. So...what I was looking for was something very rudimentary where a quick glance or check by the audio guy could periodically say "yep, it's still getting there" vs catching a dropout, or something super critical beyond the basics of that the signal is still mostly headed to the camera.

After all, as has been stated here by others, the critical thing is that the bag audio recording is as flawless as possible.

In the future, I'll make sure that I can see meters on my client monitor to make sure the hop is working.
 
The camera hop died for a couple of minutes, that shouldn't be a massive end of the world situation. As you'd still have the camera microphone for reference and time code, either of which can be used for syncing.
 
Vintegreo said:
In the future, I'll make sure that I can see meters on my client monitor to make sure the hop is working.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, just seeing meters bounce won't tell you much. Sure, you'll see that something is flowing throgh the audio chain, but bouncing meters also happen with distortion, RF interference, etc.
 
Alex H. said:
For what it's worth, just seeing meters bounce won't tell you much. Sure, you'll see that something is flowing throgh the audio chain, but bouncing meters also happen with distortion, RF interference, etc.
Click to expand...

Yep, I completely agree, but it will protect from a flatline. Quality monitoring can be done of the recording that's being made in the bag.
 
And, as in another thread recently, they even bounce sometimes when there is no signal recorded.
 
Run&Gun said:
Maybe in "production", but most of the time in my world(network/broadcast), the two channel mix recorded in camera is what's used most of the time, even when we multi-track in the bag.
Click to expand...

Yup. It really depends on the style of the gig. I know lots of folks who send audio to camera and camera is the main audio. With a good crew running professional equipment, it's a non-issue.
 
davefisk said:
Yup. It really depends on the style of the gig. I know lots of folks who send audio to camera and camera is the main audio. With a good crew running professional equipment, it's a non-issue.
Click to expand...

Until it is an issue.

Gremlins and Murphy's Law etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top