Single-system VS double-system SOUND at DVinfo.net

March 21st, 2002, 03:57 AM

Hi Everyone

I have bought a Canon XL-1, and am debating whether to shoot single-system (i.e. plug mics directly into camera) OR double-system (record sound on portable DAT recorder, completely separating mics from camera).

I hesitate going the easier route of single-system because I want a highly mobile camera, and cords connecting camera to the mics will affect movement.

What are your suggestions?

Thanks in advance.
Phillip

Don Palomaki · March 21st, 2002, 07:34 PM

If you wan tthe mobility and quality of DAT, then I suggest both. Feed a wireless signal to the camera (which will be of somewhat lower quality thanks to the wireless link), maybe from your DAT feed to the wireless transmitter, and have your DAT for the highest quality. That way the camera sound is a backup if the DAT dies, and in any caspe provides additional queues for lip sync.

March 21st, 2002, 08:52 PM

Thanks for the advice. A related question: any difference between DAT and mini-disc in sound quality? I've read that the mini-disc is not as full a sound as DAT. What do others think?

Thanks.
Phillip

Vic Owen · March 21st, 2002, 10:50 PM

I haven't used a DAT for comparison, but the Sony mini-disk I've used sounds just as good as the classical and opera CDs I've dubbed onto it.

Don Palomaki · March 22nd, 2002, 06:10 PM

DAT is typically 48 KHz sample rate, 16-bit depth. MiniDisc is 44.1 KHz sample rate, 16-bit depth, with 5:1 copmpression. A few 'golden ears' can hear the difference between MiniDisc and CD with certain types of program material, most people cannot. DAT is potentially better, but a medocre mic or other field conditions could cancel out the advantage, and DAT is a lot more expensive. Its your call. Visit a professional sound shop and see if they have systems you can audition.

Bill Markel · March 23rd, 2002, 02:05 AM

Phillip,

Vic & dpalomaki hit it right on. As a user of MD since the mid-90's, I was almost offended by what some of the gurus at "MIX Magazine" had to say about the quality of Mini-Disc. But as a musician, I have been very pleased with the quality I have gotten from MD. Just be careful of your levels. DO NOT clip over 100% VU or you will not be happy with the results. Otherwise, I think it is a viable (and much cheaper) alternative to DAT.

Bill

March 21st, 2002, 03:57 AM	#1
ellett62 Posts: n/a	Single-system VS double-system SOUND Hi Everyone I have bought a Canon XL-1, and am debating whether to shoot single-system (i.e. plug mics directly into camera) OR double-system (record sound on portable DAT recorder, completely separating mics from camera). I hesitate going the easier route of single-system because I want a highly mobile camera, and cords connecting camera to the mics will affect movement. What are your suggestions? Thanks in advance. Phillip

March 21st, 2002, 10:50 PM	#4
Vic Owen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 540	I haven't used a DAT for comparison, but the Sony mini-disk I've used sounds just as good as the classical and opera CDs I've dubbed onto it. __________________ -- Vic Owen --

March 23rd, 2002, 02:05 AM	#6
Bill Markel Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sicklerville, NJ Posts: 59	MD vs. DAT Phillip, Vic & dpalomaki hit it right on. As a user of MD since the mid-90's, I was almost offended by what some of the gurus at "MIX Magazine" had to say about the quality of Mini-Disc. But as a musician, I have been very pleased with the quality I have gotten from MD. Just be careful of your levels. DO NOT clip over 100% VU or you will not be happy with the results. Otherwise, I think it is a viable (and much cheaper) alternative to DAT. Bill

March 21st, 2002, 07:34 PM	#2
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	If you wan tthe mobility and quality of DAT, then I suggest both. Feed a wireless signal to the camera (which will be of somewhat lower quality thanks to the wireless link), maybe from your DAT feed to the wireless transmitter, and have your DAT for the highest quality. That way the camera sound is a backup if the DAT dies, and in any caspe provides additional queues for lip sync.

March 21st, 2002, 08:52 PM	#3
ellett62 Posts: n/a	Thanks for the advice. A related question: any difference between DAT and mini-disc in sound quality? I've read that the mini-disc is not as full a sound as DAT. What do others think? Thanks. Phillip

March 22nd, 2002, 06:10 PM	#5
Don Palomaki Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Northern VA Posts: 4,489	DAT is typically 48 KHz sample rate, 16-bit depth. MiniDisc is 44.1 KHz sample rate, 16-bit depth, with 5:1 copmpression. A few 'golden ears' can hear the difference between MiniDisc and CD with certain types of program material, most people cannot. DAT is potentially better, but a medocre mic or other field conditions could cancel out the advantage, and DAT is a lot more expensive. Its your call. Visit a professional sound shop and see if they have systems you can audition.