I've been having a problem lately recording musicals. During loud high pitched parts of the song the audio will start to crackle. I checked the levels in my camera and they aren't in the red getting clipped. I'm using an Audio Technica AT897 shotgun into my camera and as backup Zoom H4N (both react the same).

My friend told me that volume is exceeding the mic or the pre amp of the respective recording device. Anyone else film this type of work and can make a recommendation.


Btw, I'm not setup near the sound system speakers. It's a challenging to handle the quiet dialog alternated with loud singing.

(both react the same).

That's a clue. Assuming you mean that the Zoom is recording off its internal mics and not from a splitter for the AT897, this would point you toward the venue's speakers, or at least their audio chain. Not a lot you can do about that.

It is not clear to us what "and as backup Zoom H4N" means? Unless you can reveal the exact interconnection scheme, we can't really offer much more than generic suggestions.

As Mr. Watson said, if you are saying that the Zoom H4n mics independently pick up this high-frequency distortion, then that would indicate that the distortion is already in the air before it gets to any of your microphones.

But if you have some other connection scheme (please let us know), then it may mean that the first mic preamp (in your unidentified camera? or in the H4n?) is getting overloaded before it even gets to the audio level control. Or it could even mean that the distortion is happening in the microphone itself because it isn't rated for such high sound levels.

You can't expect automatic operation from ANY equipment to adequately deal with such a wide dynamic range as quiet dialog and loud music. Consider recording the microphone to TWO tracks, one of them 15-20dB down from the first. That way you will have adequate gain for quiet dialog, and use the other track for undistorted loud music.

H4N was recording separately using its own built in mics and wasn't fed into the camera.

The distortion wasn't in their sound system. I pulled off my headphones during the performance to check.

I've heard (and seen) much worse. If that's the worst of it, a 'Clipped Peak restoration' plug-in may help somewhat. In the future, moving the mics further away from the sound source, .. or different mics that can handle higher sound pressure levels. (SPL)

I'm filming at the back of the auditorium at least 30 ft away from their speakers.

There are worse sections than the attachment I posted. That was just to give you a sample of what I'm hearing.

I'm surprised that they are having a video made - here in the UK recordings (audio and video) are strictly banned, and it's in the contract they sign.

On the quality front - that quality seems pretty typical of the sound of recording a PA system with mics - always sounds a bit harsh. Direct from the mixer is of course best, but usually tricky to manage.

I'm surprised that they are having a video made - here in the UK recordings (audio and video) are strictly banned, and it's in the contract they sign.

On the quality front - that quality seems pretty typical of the sound of recording a PA system with mics - always sounds a bit harsh. Direct from the mixer is of course best, but usually tricky to manage.
These are amateur high school productions. No one is buying a dvd unless they're related to a cast member. If you go by the letter of the law...

There was an old thread recently bumped about filming these type of events. Audio is always a headache. Often it's difficult to get a board feed and when you do it's usually unusable. Students usually are running the board and don't have a clue.

You never know what you're getting into until it's too late. In hindsight I should have pushed for a board feed.

Most mics that can be both battery powered and phantom powered have different ratings for maximum SPL and dynamic range. The specs on the AT897 show a really wide difference between battery and phantom powering (14db).
Do you remember which way yours was powered? And if by battery, was it a known good one?
Those factors would make a really big difference in this case of very high volumes.

I am VERY surprised that you have the legal permission to record that show. Typically, the contracts for big-name shows like that don't even allow still photographs, much less audio or video recordings. Regardless of distribution. And, of course "copies for cast members" does not preclude proper licensing. In the USA, it is illegal to distribute (EVEN FOR FREE) audio or video recordings of copyright material without release/license from the rights-holder.

From the sound of the clip you have a hearing-challenged, out-of-control, rock-music person running the FOH mix, and the excess SPL is distorting your microphones. Hope you are providing earplugs for the audience.

I think I've figured it out. The culprit seems to be the camera (JVC HM600) pre amp.

When I plugged the mic into my sound device mixer the problem went away. When I plugged the mic into my camera or used the camera's internal mic the crackling returned when I let out a loud sustained note.

I am VERY surprised that you have the legal permission to record that show. Typically, the contracts for big-name shows like that don't even allow still photographs, much less audio or video recordings. Regardless of distribution. And, of course "copies for cast members" does not preclude proper licensing.
The show is generally licensed piecemeal or as a package deal by the org putting on the local production. Rights to the show, $1k. 20 copies of the script, $200. Patterns to make costumes, $500. Rights to make video for cast and crew, $500. All of the above, $2k. I have done shows like this and generally don't worry about the copyright, but for a particular production I asked to see the contract to read what the video rights were, and truly, they had purchased rights for me to be able to shoot and distribute.

Probably not your case (you appear to have isolated it), but overdriven or damaged cones in speakers/head sets can cause problems similar to what you are describing.

Ask the sound guy for a feed. A stereo feed if your can accept 2 channels.That's what most do. Or at the very least, bring an audio recorder and plug it into a feed from the audio console. The signal will usually have a compressor or a limiter on it to keep peaks in check. That way you can blend your mic recording with the dry signal to get a livelier overall sound.

We do it all the time.




Sublime Lighting LLC (http://www.sublime-lighting.com)

These are amateur high school productions. No one is buying a dvd unless they're related to a cast member. If you go by the letter of the law...

There was an old thread recently bumped about filming these type of events. Audio is always a headache. Often it's difficult to get a board feed and when you do it's usually unusable. Students usually are running the board and don't have a clue.

You never know what you're getting into until it's too late. In hindsight I should have pushed for a board feed.

The school sign a contract which has the no recording clause in it - and they just ignore it. I know that so many schools do it, and many HAVE to record it because they use it for grades - which need evidence. However - how do they justify breaking a legal agreement to the kids? What does it say to the kids about the importance of copyright?

Not having a go at you, but much of my work involves professional theatre video and audio recording - most for archive or legal purposes and the hoops I have to jump through take a lot of work, compliance wise - it just gets me when educational people just think they can ignore the rules!

Might be more resonance than a clipping. I've applied the de-clipping in Izotope RX4 which made no difference that I could hear. Nor did I see any in the waveform.

I have also applied the de-reverb filter which cleaned it up a bit.

Tweaked file is attached. See what you think.

Andrew

Might be more resonance than a clipping. I've applied the de-clipping in Izotope RX4 which made no difference that I could hear. Nor did I see any in the waveform.

I have also applied the de-reverb filter which cleaned it up a bit.

Tweaked file is attached. See what you think.

Andrew
Thx Andrew that reverb filter did a nice job. I'm not sure if FCP has that ability.

As for the crackling sound it's not terrible I just wanted to understand the cause so I can avoid it happening again. While I might not understand the particulars I can safely say that neither the camera mic input nor the H4N are up to the task for this type of work and will use plug my mic into the Sound Devices mixer and send the camera a line feed.

...many (schools) HAVE to record (a dance recital) because they use it for grades - which need evidence. However - how do they justify breaking a legal agreement to the kids? What does it say to the kids about the importance of copyright?...

Not having a go at you, but much of my work involves professional theatre video and audio recording - most for archive or legal purposes and the hoops I have to jump through take a lot of work, compliance wise - it just gets me when educational people just think they can ignore the rules!
Do you have educational fair use in the UK?

Around here (the U.S.) there are some specific (narrow) areas of copyright exclusion for classroom use, having to do with criticism and learning. I suppose an argument might be made that playback and recording for grading, for classroom use only, could qualify as educational fair use.

Of course there are casual copyright abusers who think educational fair use can stretch to cover all kinds of school-related uses - it can't, it's a narrow exclusion.

At least in the UK, my understanding is, there's a way to license popular music for non-broadcast video/film. It's such a pain (and no benefit to musicians!) that we don't have that kind of license broadly available in the U.S. Every such use is individually negotiated here, which effectively means that there's no remotely affordable way to license pop music that comes out of the conventional record industry on any but the largest projects.

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on the internet! Anybody who consults with the internet "experts" for copyright advice may well be very poorly advised. Not to mention that we have forum members from numerous countries with varying copyright laws and practices.

Thx Andrew that reverb filter did a nice job. I'm not sure if FCP has that ability.

As for the crackling sound it's not terrible I just wanted to understand the cause so I can avoid it happening again. While I might not understand the particulars I can safely say that neither the camera mic input nor the H4N are up to the task for this type of work and will use plug my mic into the Sound Devices mixer and send the camera a line feed.

Hi Pete,

The de-reverb is a high end audio thing, and only comes with Izotope TX4 Advanced. (FCP won't be able to deal with it.)

If this was the issue that you were hearing (and is thus removed in my above file), then I would feel safe to say that it's probably not any piece of gear that you have been using. It's the acoustic environment of the room you are recording in, and your microphones and recording units are doing their job correctly ... picking up exactly what is there.

Andrew

I was looking at the audio wave form from the camera and could also see that there was clipping. Seems like the crackling sound is from the limiter.

Maybe the mods could split out the copyright stuff because it's derailing the OPs topic, which is my fault sorry, but to Seth,

We do have some copyright spending for education, but weinberger and the other copyright holders specifically prohibit recording, and to make it worse there are now schools versions of the popular shows, but they contain the clause?

We have the limited manufacture licenses which are pretty simple, but they don't cover things like musicials or plays, again a specific limitation. dramatico-music is the term to search.

If I get one of these jobs come in, I always mention the copyright issue in the email to and fro, and the schools always say not to worry, their educational license covers them. I smile, take their word and do the job. I think under UK law I'm still at fault as I'm the one who did it, but I risk it with the email backup.

Not sure if they do it in the US, but at one venue, I witnessed a man arriving with a violin case, and telling the MD he was from the rights holder, and had brought his own music. This show, think French and barricades, has a clause that requires the production to use music in full, with no cuts or arrangements. Luckily they had done it right. I asked the guy what would happen if they had changed keys or cut some of the songs. - he said he would have collected the music at the end of the show, and taken it away!

Lets see:
There are the composers rights
The lyricists rights
The various performers right
The publishers rights
synchronization rights
etc.

Artists want their work performed, enjoyed, and the recognition that goes with it. - that is until corrupted by fame and money.

The middlemen just want their money.

Thus a few average artists make a lot of money, a lot of great artists starve, and the suits at Sony, Disney, etc. pocket their bonuses.

Now that we are sharing some specifics, my takeaway is that copyright law and practice in the UK vs. the US is even more different than I thought. Thanks for the addtional info Paul. Some of it leaves me scratching my head, because you're using apparently common UK terminology that we just don't have here: Weinburger, manufacture (to perform/record for distribution?), dramatico... and I really don't understand what the representative of the rights-holder did with the sheet music, or why.

No matter I suppose. It's hard enough to keep clear on this side of the pond without becoming entangled in someone else's laws and practices. Interesting that they're apparently so different. Frequently on this forum contributors seem to assume that copyright is the same all over...

Don, I agree with you; much of law and practice in the US benefits the business people, when in principle it should be benefitting the creators of works. I think that's more true in the traditional music industry than anywhere else. The house has way too much advantage. And, the house is content to leave no avenue for licensing to small fry, like meetings & events, wedding, corp/industrial video, indie film.

Yes, to be sure there appears to be a significant variation in copyright law and practice between countries, despite the Geneva Universal Copyright Convention (1952). For example, in the UK, there is an additional copyright for the engraver/engraving, the graphical representation of the score, separate from the original music and lyrics, arrangement, and even the "editorial". And in some countries (like Canada, and maybe Australia, AFAIK), it is much easier to acquire "sync" license, more like the "mechanical" license in the USA which is both "compulsory" (must be automatically granted), and "statutory" (minimum rate set by law). Of course, there are always exceptions. For example the "compulsory" phase only kicks in AFTER the original recording is released.

To be fair to the music publishers, the composers lyricists and arrangers didn't get very far without the publishers who would print, distribute, and (most importantly) promote their compositions. But it is easy to forget that here in the Internet Era where technology has made self-publishing and self-promotion so much easier. And many of the publishers were started by (and continue to be operated by) the composers themselves. Most music is "owned" by the publishers because it is more convenient for the artists to just make an outright sale vs. waiting for royalties to dribble in over the years.

The various rights management agencies (ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, PRS, PPL, et.al.) were established to manage the monitoring of publishing, "performance", and distribution, collection of royalties, and distribution of royalties to the rights-holders. And certainly there are ongoing disputes and complaints about the fairness of the royalty calculations and payments,etc.

The last time I dealt with amateur performance of "big-name" Broadway shows, there were very severe restrictions on recording/photography to the extent that even casual snapshots of your kids in costume were prohibited. But maybe they have become more realistic in recent times. Or maybe it is just different in the UK vs in the US

I wonder how they purge the show from the security cameras???????

We do have some copyright spending for education, but weinberger and the other copyright holders specifically prohibit recording, and to make it worse there are now schools versions of the popular shows, but they contain the clause?


It very much depends on the show, Weinberger/Boosey do allow recording of some shows, we have a couple lined up for July, and have just done a couple, they have one price for a single copy, and then an additional for up to 100 copies. The one we just did had the (very famous) writer of the piece in the audience;- we always check and won't film if they cannot get the rights.

D

But maybe they have become more realistic in recent times.

I agree. It comes down to cost vs return. If the legal cost is more than a potential recovery would bring in, they'll let it slide. With cell phones with decent quality cameras and video cams nowadays, it's impossible to police it realistically. It's time for the industry to change. If it doesn't, it'll fall the way of the dinosaur.