Solo shooter audio options

Peter Moretti · December 2nd, 2007, 04:00 AM

Bob,

Please consider the adivce I gave in post #14. Print it out and bring it to the sound shop. See what they think. I really feel it's a potential strategy for you to get high quality sound.

The bottom line is that recording to an SD recorder will give you much better sound than using an SD mixer and recording the the HV-20.

No matter how much the HV-20's internal amplification circutry you can or can't bypass, you're still stuck with both HDV audio, which is by definition compressed 16bit, and the HV-20's digital to analog converters. These can't compare to 24bit uncompressed recording using SD's D/A converters.

Ray Bell · December 2nd, 2007, 08:41 AM

I'm sorta in the same situation....

So far I decided to go with a recorder external to the camera....

Seems there are lots of new recorders hitting the shelves this Xmas and so
my research is coming up with some great machines....

What realy peaked me was the Sony PCM-D1, but its not cheap, one of the complaints from a user was Sony needed to add a remote controller...
it still seems to be the cats meow though as recorders go. Is that thing georgous or what...

anyway, then my research found the Sony PCM-D50... oh wow... it doesn't have the cool VU meters but its still a sexy beast in its own way...

These are just now showing up and the field reports I'm reading about seem the unit is working out fine... and the price is much easier to take than on
the D1....

Sony also added a remote this time and they have a XLR setup if you need to add better mikes.... the XLR setup isn't cheap but my understanding is its due to the balanced transformers ???? but my real guess is its priced this way to set in with the D1's price point..

I have also seen at least one setup using the D50 with a 302...

you might check it out.... I thought it just has a lot of versatality with the built in mikes and the ability to interface with just about any other sound equipment you might have or be adding on in the future...

Ray Bell · December 2nd, 2007, 08:52 AM

I shamelessly snagged this image from a different web site.... I'd give credit due but don't know the name...

here is the Sony PCM-d50 with the SD302....

Bob Kerner · December 2nd, 2007, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti

Bob,

Please consider the adivce I gave in post #14.

The bottom line is that recording to an SD recorder will give you much better sound than using an SD mixer and recording the the HV-20.

I haven't discarded this idea, don't worry. But I think if I'm going to go with a recorder I'd also like to have the use of the mixer to send the signal Both to the recorder and the camera, in case I muck something up I'll still have something on the HV 20 to work with.

All the cables looked rather intimidating but, after the initial shock, it wasn't bad at all. I'm a bit of a gear hound so I did reap some enjoyment from the ability to adjust the levels and monkey with the high pass filter before the signal went to the camera. I'm going to listen to the tapes later today.

Peter,did you say that you too were using an HV20?

Bob

Bob Kerner · December 2nd, 2007, 07:53 PM

I rented an SD 302 to see if I could discern any difference or benefit using it with my HV 20. I'm coming at this as a novice trying to improve the audio for my video work.

I set up in my home and ran through the same routine with a Senn G2 (stock lav) direct to camera and through the 302. Then, just to see the quality difference with my previous wireless, ran my AT Pro 88 into the camera. I did not have the miniplug to XLR converter for this so I did not test it with the mixer. I listened through phones as I set up and then again after I made a final cut movie of the test. No adjustments in FC.

I can definitely appreciate why video folks should have a mixer. If it's possible and not just my untrained ears, the end product sounded just a bit cleaner running the Senn through the mixer. There was some almost imperceptible hiss lurking in the background that seemed to disappear. I had the high pass filter on so maybe that corrected it. It was also a Pleasure to be able to accurately and easily dial up the settings on the mixer, rather than fiddling with the audio menus on the camera. I have a long way to go in understanding what I should be shooting for on the meter and how to get there with all the 302 settings, but it was nice to have fine control. And it's got to be fantastic to use with multiple sources.

At first the cables were a bit intimidating, not setting them up per se but seeing them on the floor. I like to handhold the camera alot and this is going to reinforce the need to have it on the tripod where it belongs.

The Senn is, of course, heads and shoulders better than the AT. Much cleaner and refined, not a single drop out where the AT began having them at about 15 feet. Interestingly the AT picks up a lot of ambient garbage that the Senn seems to ignore. The shop I rented from threw in a Beachtek mixer as a freebie loaner. It's clearly not in the same league as the SD302.

I'm not sure I learned anything about the audio quality of my camera. The stuff coming in from the Senn with the mixer sounds nicer than anything I've achieved so far. However, consensus here and in other forums is that the HDV audio is not the best and folks making films with this camera are recording to another device and using the camera track as a safety net.

If I had to unholster my Visa card tonight, I think I'd go with a 302 with an eye toward a recorder in the near future.

I hope this helps someone trying to answer the same question. And thank you to everyone here. You are amazingly generous with your time.

Cheers,
Bob

Guy McLoughlin · December 3rd, 2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Saxer

No. I can live with HDV 192Kbit. The HV20 (at least mine) has a very noisy mic-in.

Hmmm...

I'm using a SD MixPre and a BeachTek DXA-2s. Setting the manual mic level to -12 dB on my HV20, I am recording a -80 dB noise-floor on DV tape with no mic attached. With a mic attached, the noise-floor is limited to the room noise, which is about -60 dB in very quiet room. Hiss if any is very minimal.

Comparing the audio that the HV20 records to an uncompressed WAV file, the biggest difference for me is noticeable fall-off of the lower frequencies. The audio on DV tape is quite good, but the uncompressed audio is a lot better.

Peter Moretti · December 3rd, 2007, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob Kerner

I haven't discarded this idea, don't worry. But I think if I'm going to go with a recorder I'd also like to have the use of the mixer to send the signal Both to the recorder and the camera, in case I muck something up I'll still have something on the HV 20 to work with.

All the cables looked rather intimidating but, after the initial shock, it wasn't bad at all. I'm a bit of a gear hound so I did reap some enjoyment from the ability to adjust the levels and monkey with the high pass filter before the signal went to the camera. I'm going to listen to the tapes later today.

Peter,did you say that you too were using an HV20?

Bob

Bob,

Yes I am, or should I say will be. I have the camera, 302 and 744T, I just haven't had the time to put it all together and figure out what cables I'll be needing. (Also, most of the equipment is being stored off-site for reasons too convoluted to be worth explaining.)

BTW, I pretty sure you don't need a mixer to send the signal back to the HV-20. I believe SD's 7 series recorders all have audio outputs w/ essentially no time lag. So you could record to both the HV-20 and the recorder simultaneously by just connecting those outputs to the HV-20. I believe you will need an attenuator to bring the signal down to mic level.

The whole timecode part of my thread can be ignored if you want to record audio to both channels on the HV-20 and/or don't use a timecode capable recorder.

HTH and I'll keep you informed.

Bob Kerner · December 5th, 2007, 08:21 AM

Great. I'd be interested to hear how it works out for you, bringing the signal into the recorder. Good luck.

December 2nd, 2007, 08:52 AM	#33
Ray Bell Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,414	I shamelessly snagged this image from a different web site.... I'd give credit due but don't know the name... here is the Sony PCM-d50 with the SD302.... Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Ray Bell; December 2nd, 2007 at 09:37 AM.

December 2nd, 2007, 07:53 PM	#35
Bob Kerner Major Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New York Posts: 388	Results of my weekend experiment I rented an SD 302 to see if I could discern any difference or benefit using it with my HV 20. I'm coming at this as a novice trying to improve the audio for my video work. I set up in my home and ran through the same routine with a Senn G2 (stock lav) direct to camera and through the 302. Then, just to see the quality difference with my previous wireless, ran my AT Pro 88 into the camera. I did not have the miniplug to XLR converter for this so I did not test it with the mixer. I listened through phones as I set up and then again after I made a final cut movie of the test. No adjustments in FC. I can definitely appreciate why video folks should have a mixer. If it's possible and not just my untrained ears, the end product sounded just a bit cleaner running the Senn through the mixer. There was some almost imperceptible hiss lurking in the background that seemed to disappear. I had the high pass filter on so maybe that corrected it. It was also a Pleasure to be able to accurately and easily dial up the settings on the mixer, rather than fiddling with the audio menus on the camera. I have a long way to go in understanding what I should be shooting for on the meter and how to get there with all the 302 settings, but it was nice to have fine control. And it's got to be fantastic to use with multiple sources. At first the cables were a bit intimidating, not setting them up per se but seeing them on the floor. I like to handhold the camera alot and this is going to reinforce the need to have it on the tripod where it belongs. The Senn is, of course, heads and shoulders better than the AT. Much cleaner and refined, not a single drop out where the AT began having them at about 15 feet. Interestingly the AT picks up a lot of ambient garbage that the Senn seems to ignore. The shop I rented from threw in a Beachtek mixer as a freebie loaner. It's clearly not in the same league as the SD302. I'm not sure I learned anything about the audio quality of my camera. The stuff coming in from the Senn with the mixer sounds nicer than anything I've achieved so far. However, consensus here and in other forums is that the HDV audio is not the best and folks making films with this camera are recording to another device and using the camera track as a safety net. If I had to unholster my Visa card tonight, I think I'd go with a 302 with an eye toward a recorder in the near future. I hope this helps someone trying to answer the same question. And thank you to everyone here. You are amazingly generous with your time. Cheers, Bob

December 2nd, 2007, 04:00 AM	#31
Peter Moretti Trustee Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sherman Oaks, CA Posts: 1,259	Bob, Please consider the adivce I gave in post #14. Print it out and bring it to the sound shop. See what they think. I really feel it's a potential strategy for you to get high quality sound. The bottom line is that recording to an SD recorder will give you much better sound than using an SD mixer and recording the the HV-20. No matter how much the HV-20's internal amplification circutry you can or can't bypass, you're still stuck with both HDV audio, which is by definition compressed 16bit, and the HV-20's digital to analog converters. These can't compare to 24bit uncompressed recording using SD's D/A converters.

December 2nd, 2007, 08:41 AM	#32
Ray Bell Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,414	I'm sorta in the same situation.... So far I decided to go with a recorder external to the camera.... Seems there are lots of new recorders hitting the shelves this Xmas and so my research is coming up with some great machines.... What realy peaked me was the Sony PCM-D1, but its not cheap, one of the complaints from a user was Sony needed to add a remote controller... it still seems to be the cats meow though as recorders go. Is that thing georgous or what... anyway, then my research found the Sony PCM-D50... oh wow... it doesn't have the cool VU meters but its still a sexy beast in its own way... These are just now showing up and the field reports I'm reading about seem the unit is working out fine... and the price is much easier to take than on the D1.... Sony also added a remote this time and they have a XLR setup if you need to add better mikes.... the XLR setup isn't cheap but my understanding is its due to the balanced transformers ???? but my real guess is its priced this way to set in with the D1's price point.. I have also seen at least one setup using the D50 with a 302... you might check it out.... I thought it just has a lot of versatality with the built in mikes and the ability to interface with just about any other sound equipment you might have or be adding on in the future...

December 5th, 2007, 08:21 AM	#38
Bob Kerner Major Player Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New York Posts: 388	Great. I'd be interested to hear how it works out for you, bringing the signal into the recorder. Good luck.