MLiebergot
Veteran
Apr 2, 2008, 9:23 AM
Post #45 of 54
(1244 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Re: [Sparky] Edirol R44...the answer to our audio needs....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I use them for different setups. I use recorders like the Zoom H2, Marantz PMD620, and Edirol R09 mainly for wedding use, where I like quick and easy setups in various locations. I prefer using the Zoom H2 with its built in 2 mic elements to record string ensembles during the processional and the ceremony, as well as micing a PA stack during the reception and record from both sides of the mic to get music and crowd reaction.
I prefer to use the PMD620 and R09 to record readings and lav micing of people if needed, as well as use the built in mics if needed for solos. I use either of these during the reception to record a line feed from the board. These units have better pre amps and record line feeds much better than the H2 does.
I prefer 4 track recorders for recital and band situations, where I run several different configuration's into it (Line feed in 2 channels adn mic feeds into 2 channels, or maybe run 1 line feed and 3 mics, or even 4 mics into the recorder). The cool thing about the R-44 is that it will allow you to run each channel independent as well as independent padding and phantom power. Also you should be able to use the built in mics in 2 channels and still use the remaining 2 channels for whatever you wish (line feed, more mics etc.).
If I am doing a wedding where I know I will have a live band, I also like to use a track recorder over individual ones, as I can take a line feed (or mic PA stack) and also feed 2 additional channels into the unit. Thus having perfect sync and mix to be synced to in post. I also like to send a wireless mixed feed into my camera (via RCA line out) for monitor/sync/backup audio purposes.
Over time I might find that I will run only a 4 track recorder for a ceremony, which I would love to do. Place mic under podium for speeches and place one mic on podium into channel 1 for readings, another hard wired mic for musicians (or maybe wireless into the channel) and also send a wireless feed from the groom into the recorder. Then send a mixed signal to my camera for backup sync purposes. The recorder itself will have a perfect synced mix for the entire ceremony from multiple locations, with no need to mix different recorders together.
Then simply bring all 4 channels (all teh same length and perfect sync) into post for surround mixing.
I use to be an audio engineer, and love sound. I got away from audio for over 10 years, and it wasn't until I got into video that I rediscovered my love for audio again and how important it is to video. Which is obviously taken for granted ad overlooked by many vidoegraphers.
I think most of us here shoot well enough where we don't have to spend a lot of time trying to clean up or fix our video. But a lot of people seem to spend a lot of time trying to fix their bad audio, and could edit much faster if they didn't have to.
I'm not trying to criticize people here, just stating a general observation that I see a lot on various video boards. Audio is the ugly stepchild of video and taken for granted. The funny thing is that no client will notice how good the audio sounds when it sounds right and great. And as such can make an average to poorly shot video seem good. But take a well shot video and mix inferior audio with it and the piece will seem bad.
Audio is the visual element they don't see but perceive subconsciously.
Michael,
Just out of curiosity ... what is it that you tape so much of that you use all these neat recorders/mixers? Do you do a lot of bands or stage performances?
Michael
Cameras: I do use them.
Audio: Yes, it does come with audio if you like.
Software: I am learning...
Support: I need all that i can get.
Computer: MAC BABY!
|
