|
|||||||||
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 265
|
SD 702T into Camera
Hi,
Just wondering what the advantages are of running a boom into the 702T and then out to camera, what are the advantages other than dual redundancy. If someone is doing this, are you still replacing the audio going into camera with the recorder's audio files? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Albany, NY 12210
Posts: 2,652
|
I don't know if there's more than the redundancy, but that's a lot. It let's the editor have a visual sync for one thing. Besides, if they can't find the right file, what do you want them to use, the camera mic or the scratch track you gave them?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Espoo Finland
Posts: 380
|
You can record at 24 bits to the SD702 for more safety. Other than that and redundancy there is no benefits. I do slightly similar thing quite often, lavaliers to camera & boom mic(s) to SD722. Usually the SD722 file is not needed, sometimes some of it is mixed for ambience (cooking, makeup videos).
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 185
|
If you weren't using the 702T would you use a mixer of go straight to camera?
The 702T or a mixer will likely have better preamps, better limiter, better roll-off than the camera. I believe the 702T can be slaved to the camera's TC so when the camera hits record, your 702T will also start recording.
__________________
---8<--- |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
IF you have a camera that has timecode output - virtually no consumer cams that I know of and very few prosumer cams do.
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Olney, Maryland
Posts: 197
|
Quote:
Basically, it allows you to zoom in on the timeline and match sine wave to sine wave. Also, if you are in the habit of watching the dailies or watching your takes...you want to make sure the audio is good. The camera should get good reference audio for quality control purposes. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 383
|
Quote:
I would suggest that if you are going to try replacing the mixer with the 7xx series, try it first before you really intend to use it. You may be OK with the way it works as a replacement to the mixer, but my guess is if you were using a mixer previously, then you'll want to continue using the mixer in front of the 7xx recorder. But then again, you may be able to deal with the way the audio adjustments work. Wayne
__________________
Mics: KMR 82 i, NTG-1, MKH418S, MKH8040, SR77, QTC1, QTC40, SR30 Recorder: Zaxcom Deva 5.8 & MIX-12. Wireless: TRX900 stereo, Lectro 411 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 265
|
Quote:
I really got used to the smaller knobs of the 702T and its limiters, preamps, and meters are excellant. I do see that using the camera input audio from the 702 can be a scratch track, but sometimes there's situations where the camera operator can not be tethered to the sound recordist. I find myself just using the on camera mic as a scratch track and it works well. Just wondered if i was missing something as using the 702 just for its preamps and sending it out to camera is a waste. I'm talking about just using the camera's audio as a final not the recorder's files. thanks |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 383
|
Quote:
Wayne
__________________
Mics: KMR 82 i, NTG-1, MKH418S, MKH8040, SR77, QTC1, QTC40, SR30 Recorder: Zaxcom Deva 5.8 & MIX-12. Wireless: TRX900 stereo, Lectro 411 |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| ||||||
|
|