Edirol R-4 Pro or SD 552

Steve House · February 16th, 2010, 11:04 AM

Marco said it before I had time to reply. I might add that the 552 does not generate timecode for its internal recorder so its file's timestamps are only approximately that of the camera (though it will read TC and sync if the camera outputs it). I didn't mean to imply the recorded files would be flawed or inferior, it's just not going to be as flexible.

Murray Fredericks · February 16th, 2010, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marco Leavitt

Ramji,

If I were a sound guy on a documentary, I'd rather have the SD552 and send a wireless hop to the camera. .

Marco,

This kind of a setup would be perfect for my needs - freedom to move the camera round 'un-tethered', but recording to the camera and to the 552.

What would you use to make the 'wireless hop" to the camera? Would there be a quality loss in that?

Cheers

Murray

Dean Sensui · February 16th, 2010, 10:17 PM

Oade Brothers (don't ask me how to prounounce "oade") has an upgrade for the Edirol R-44 which gives it very quiet preamps. That said, I hadn't had any problems with my stock R-44. If you're recording a concert or classical guitarist it might make a difference. But the stock version should be more than clean enough for interviews and field production.

THAT said, the modified R-44 isn't all that much more than a stock R-44. If I'd known about it prior to getting one, I'd have gotten the Oade Brothers version.

The R-44 time stamps the beginning of the audio file, and the edit software then calculates timecode from that point forward. As far as the user is concerned it sure looks and feels like real time code. Good enough for me to quickly correlate hundreds of video clips with a particular audio file.

Single system sound is always easiest. But the Sony EX1 I have only has two tracks, and I'm often covering more than two people. And I want to have each individual on a discrete track. Thus the need for a four-track recorder.

So Ramji... if you find yourself in a similar situation, you're also going to have to determine how many tracks you'll need, then tailor an appropriate solution.

When I decided to use a double-system workflow I initially looked at the Tascam. Then the R-44 came out. There are a lot of instances in which I can make good use of all four tracks, plus the on-camera mic. For what I do, it makes a big difference in the final product.

Ramji Meena · February 17th, 2010, 05:22 AM

Hi Dean thank you so much for such an eloborated reply.Often I am alone in the field recording tribal songs but I want to record the quality sound.Previously I have recorded live songs on sd302 and it was hell of a task to sync the various takes.That means the time code and video sync is important for me. R-44 doesnt have that.Tascam P2 has this facility.I always felt that I need a very small handy but quality sound recorder.Most of the people here in this forum have the mind set of Hollywood movie production .But in thirdworld country like India the documentary budget doesent allow to have a sound recordist always.Still i want to record quality sound and a good mixer and decent recorder needed within the limited budget.That is why I have started this discussion.I think the zoom h4n and PMD661 type of recoders can not be called low quility just because they are cheap.we have to look into the results.Some experienced professional recordist has to use these and give the feedback.

Marco Leavitt · February 17th, 2010, 08:29 AM

Hey Murray,
I rarely go wireless to camera, but do on occasion use my ATW-1821 wireless system. There is most definitely a quality loss, so that's why I stay tethered. Still, it sounds pretty good, but I wouldn't say it's feature quality or anything. Higher end systems, like Lectrosonic, sound nearly as good as wired, and supposedly Zaxcom, which I haven't used, sounds just as good as wired. Zaxcom's really high-end stuff.

For Ramji's situation, I can see why you would want to record double system for tribal music, but I would think the choice of mics and placement would be a lot more important. Can you give us an example of what mics you are using and where you are placing them?

Ramji Meena · February 17th, 2010, 08:40 AM

Hi Marco I use sony ECM-678 and mostly I place it above the frame on a boom

Marco Leavitt · February 17th, 2010, 08:45 AM

How many performers are involved, and what instruments are they playing?

Dean Sensui · February 18th, 2010, 12:12 AM

Ramji...

When you said "time code and video sync" I'm guessing you mean "locking" the camera and recorder via timecode? I believe the Tascam can do that. The Edirol R-44 can't.

Combining the Tascam and the camera would give you four tracks of audio. But you'll still need to sync them in post. I do this with something called SequenceLiner.

sequenceLiner for Final Cut Pro - an easy way to get sync dailies, cameras or sound

It creates a sequence with the video clips nicely lined up with the long audio track. The sync I get isn't perfect due to the difference in time-of-day between the camera and the recorder. But I can easily grab a group of clips and shift them as needed to attain perfect sync. If it's used with the Tascam the sync will be much more accurate. But it does mean tethering your camera to the recorder.

I've posted an example of run-and-gun multitrack audio. It allows me to be selective about what tracks to bring forward and which to suppress.

Ramji Meena · February 18th, 2010, 05:37 AM

Hi Marco! I normally record a single player and the instrument is like single wire guitar we call it ektara.Sometime it is multiplewire called sarangi .Always the player is singing.In some cases the singer is dancing and then the sound of steps become impotant.At present I put wireless for singing and the shotgun sony ECM-678 on boom.

Hi Dean you are right !Tascam P2 is more suited to my budget.If anyone have used it please give the feedback about the quality of the sound.But I still need a mixer.Folks! please advise the proper mixer in above mentioned environment.

Marco Leavitt · February 18th, 2010, 06:00 AM

Hey Ramji,
Honestly, I don't think having a recorder is going to make much difference in the quality of your sound. I'd concentrate on getting better mics, and maybe better placement, and use the extra money to buy a decent mixer, like the SD302. What kind of wireless are you using?

Ramji Meena · February 21st, 2010, 12:06 AM

Thank so much for the advice.Now I leave the Idea of buying a recorder and spend my budget on good mic and a mixer. I think I will buy SD302 or if budget permits SD552.But recently DV has review a shotgun mic AT’s BP 4029.Has anyone used it or if someone can suggest a better mic then ECM 678 which I am currently using.

Marco Leavitt · February 22nd, 2010, 10:17 AM

Ramji,
Perhaps it's best to lay aside the question of what mic to get. I certainly don't think this is as simple as just going out and buying a stereo shotgun.

Also, I didn't intend to knock the ECM 678. I haven't used that mic, and wouldn't presume to tell you that it's bad. It's just that shotguns in general aren't always the best for recording music, especially when it's mounted immovable on a boom out of the frameline. It would seem to me that what you are missing the most is a good recording of the instrument. You are already micing the vocals. I'm going to guess that the shotgun, being set above the frameline is probably redundantly picking up the vocals again, more prominently than the instrument. Is that correct?

Is it essential that mics have to be out of the shot? If they can be in frame it will help immensely. Can any mics on the talent and instrument be wired? I can see that if there is a lot of movement with the dancing that would be problem, but it seems that there are instances where the talent is just standing or sitting with their instrument?

I'm thinking some kind of instrument mic actually mounted on the guitar-type instrument would make a huge difference here. Or even a really nice cardiod or hyper cardiod in close on the instrument, but angled to also get the vocals might be a good one mic solution.

This is actually getting away from my own area of expertise, as I have limited experience recording live music. I would suggest starting a new thread about the best way to mic your subject, specifying that you only have two tracks available, and not get bogged down on brand names just yet. Sometimes a specialty mic costing only a few hundred dollars will be a better match than a fancier mic that doesn't quite match your application.

Perhaps Douglas Spotted Eagle can be persuaded to offer some insight on this, as he has great experience recording this type of thing.

Also, again, what type of wireless are you using and with what lav?

February 16th, 2010, 11:04 AM	#16
Steve House Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Posts: 5,742	Marco said it before I had time to reply. I might add that the 552 does not generate timecode for its internal recorder so its file's timestamps are only approximately that of the camera (though it will read TC and sync if the camera outputs it). I didn't mean to imply the recorded files would be flawed or inferior, it's just not going to be as flexible. __________________ Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams!

February 16th, 2010, 10:17 PM	#18
Dean Sensui Inner Circle Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 2,054	Oade Brothers (don't ask me how to prounounce "oade") has an upgrade for the Edirol R-44 which gives it very quiet preamps. That said, I hadn't had any problems with my stock R-44. If you're recording a concert or classical guitarist it might make a difference. But the stock version should be more than clean enough for interviews and field production. THAT said, the modified R-44 isn't all that much more than a stock R-44. If I'd known about it prior to getting one, I'd have gotten the Oade Brothers version. The R-44 time stamps the beginning of the audio file, and the edit software then calculates timecode from that point forward. As far as the user is concerned it sure looks and feels like real time code. Good enough for me to quickly correlate hundreds of video clips with a particular audio file. Single system sound is always easiest. But the Sony EX1 I have only has two tracks, and I'm often covering more than two people. And I want to have each individual on a discrete track. Thus the need for a four-track recorder. So Ramji... if you find yourself in a similar situation, you're also going to have to determine how many tracks you'll need, then tailor an appropriate solution. When I decided to use a double-system workflow I initially looked at the Tascam. Then the R-44 came out. There are a lot of instances in which I can make good use of all four tracks, plus the on-camera mic. For what I do, it makes a big difference in the final product. __________________ Dean Sensui Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing

February 18th, 2010, 12:12 AM	#23
Dean Sensui Inner Circle Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 2,054	Ramji... When you said "time code and video sync" I'm guessing you mean "locking" the camera and recorder via timecode? I believe the Tascam can do that. The Edirol R-44 can't. Combining the Tascam and the camera would give you four tracks of audio. But you'll still need to sync them in post. I do this with something called SequenceLiner. sequenceLiner for Final Cut Pro - an easy way to get sync dailies, cameras or sound It creates a sequence with the video clips nicely lined up with the long audio track. The sync I get isn't perfect due to the difference in time-of-day between the camera and the recorder. But I can easily grab a group of clips and shift them as needed to attain perfect sync. If it's used with the Tascam the sync will be much more accurate. But it does mean tethering your camera to the recorder. I've posted an example of run-and-gun multitrack audio. It allows me to be selective about what tracks to bring forward and which to suppress. __________________ Dean Sensui Exec Producer, Hawaii Goes Fishing

February 21st, 2010, 12:06 AM	#26
Ramji Meena Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: MUMBAI INDIA Posts: 109	Bp4029 Thank so much for the advice.Now I leave the Idea of buying a recorder and spend my budget on good mic and a mixer. I think I will buy SD302 or if budget permits SD552.But recently DV has review a shotgun mic AT’s BP 4029.Has anyone used it or if someone can suggest a better mic then ECM 678 which I am currently using.

February 17th, 2010, 05:22 AM	#19
Ramji Meena Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: MUMBAI INDIA Posts: 109	Hi Dean thank you so much for such an eloborated reply.Often I am alone in the field recording tribal songs but I want to record the quality sound.Previously I have recorded live songs on sd302 and it was hell of a task to sync the various takes.That means the time code and video sync is important for me. R-44 doesnt have that.Tascam P2 has this facility.I always felt that I need a very small handy but quality sound recorder.Most of the people here in this forum have the mind set of Hollywood movie production .But in thirdworld country like India the documentary budget doesent allow to have a sound recordist always.Still i want to record quality sound and a good mixer and decent recorder needed within the limited budget.That is why I have started this discussion.I think the zoom h4n and PMD661 type of recoders can not be called low quility just because they are cheap.we have to look into the results.Some experienced professional recordist has to use these and give the feedback.

February 17th, 2010, 08:29 AM	#20
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Hey Murray, I rarely go wireless to camera, but do on occasion use my ATW-1821 wireless system. There is most definitely a quality loss, so that's why I stay tethered. Still, it sounds pretty good, but I wouldn't say it's feature quality or anything. Higher end systems, like Lectrosonic, sound nearly as good as wired, and supposedly Zaxcom, which I haven't used, sounds just as good as wired. Zaxcom's really high-end stuff. For Ramji's situation, I can see why you would want to record double system for tribal music, but I would think the choice of mics and placement would be a lot more important. Can you give us an example of what mics you are using and where you are placing them?

February 17th, 2010, 08:40 AM	#21
Ramji Meena Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: MUMBAI INDIA Posts: 109	Hi Marco I use sony ECM-678 and mostly I place it above the frame on a boom

February 17th, 2010, 08:45 AM	#22
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	How many performers are involved, and what instruments are they playing?

February 18th, 2010, 05:37 AM	#24
Ramji Meena Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: MUMBAI INDIA Posts: 109	Hi Marco! I normally record a single player and the instrument is like single wire guitar we call it ektara.Sometime it is multiplewire called sarangi .Always the player is singing.In some cases the singer is dancing and then the sound of steps become impotant.At present I put wireless for singing and the shotgun sony ECM-678 on boom. Hi Dean you are right !Tascam P2 is more suited to my budget.If anyone have used it please give the feedback about the quality of the sound.But I still need a mixer.Folks! please advise the proper mixer in above mentioned environment.

February 18th, 2010, 06:00 AM	#25
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Hey Ramji, Honestly, I don't think having a recorder is going to make much difference in the quality of your sound. I'd concentrate on getting better mics, and maybe better placement, and use the extra money to buy a decent mixer, like the SD302. What kind of wireless are you using?

February 22nd, 2010, 10:17 AM	#27
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Ramji, Perhaps it's best to lay aside the question of what mic to get. I certainly don't think this is as simple as just going out and buying a stereo shotgun. Also, I didn't intend to knock the ECM 678. I haven't used that mic, and wouldn't presume to tell you that it's bad. It's just that shotguns in general aren't always the best for recording music, especially when it's mounted immovable on a boom out of the frameline. It would seem to me that what you are missing the most is a good recording of the instrument. You are already micing the vocals. I'm going to guess that the shotgun, being set above the frameline is probably redundantly picking up the vocals again, more prominently than the instrument. Is that correct? Is it essential that mics have to be out of the shot? If they can be in frame it will help immensely. Can any mics on the talent and instrument be wired? I can see that if there is a lot of movement with the dancing that would be problem, but it seems that there are instances where the talent is just standing or sitting with their instrument? I'm thinking some kind of instrument mic actually mounted on the guitar-type instrument would make a huge difference here. Or even a really nice cardiod or hyper cardiod in close on the instrument, but angled to also get the vocals might be a good one mic solution. This is actually getting away from my own area of expertise, as I have limited experience recording live music. I would suggest starting a new thread about the best way to mic your subject, specifying that you only have two tracks available, and not get bogged down on brand names just yet. Sometimes a specialty mic costing only a few hundred dollars will be a better match than a fancier mic that doesn't quite match your application. Perhaps Douglas Spotted Eagle can be persuaded to offer some insight on this, as he has great experience recording this type of thing. Also, again, what type of wireless are you using and with what lav?