13
Aug
An Evening with the Deva
by Glen Trew
/ 7 Comments
I assume this event was shot in HD. How did you handle timecode for the Deva and the cameras?
Hi Steve,
The timecode was handled fairly simply by the DIT (Digital Image Technician)...
A single sync box was jammed to the Deva, and then that sync box was used to jam the timecode on each camera.
The timecode frame rate requested was 23.976.
Glen
Glen Trew
Thanks for that. I am curious about microphone selection as I do alot of the same sort of production in the corporate world as well as live to tape for television here in Austin. What did you use for the audience Q and A mics and what lav did you put on Kevin? Did you have any feedback issues with the audience mics? Thanks again for the article. Its always interesting to read how others approach our craft.
Best, Steve Osmon
Kevin's handheld and the Q&A mics were Sennheiser SKM-500s, provided by the sound reinforcement company.
Kevin's lav was a Sanken COS-11 in a Lectrosonics SMVQ transmitter provided by me as it was not sent to the speaker system. I put the mic on Kevin to pick up any off-the-cuff dialog that may not have been picked up by his hand mic. Since it was a bit of an unknown exactly what was going to happen, and since I had the extra input, the reasoning made sense at the time. But as it turned out, with hind-sight I regret using it because it managed to work it's way loose from the hockey jersey and could be seen hanging down. Fortunately Kevin noticed it soon after it fell and put it in his pocket without missing a beat, and, fortunately, it wss not needed anyway.
Regarding feedback: There is often a battle between getting enough volume before feedback when sending microphones to a speaker system, especially when dealing with low-volume conversation levels. This is particularly true when, in addition to feeding the speaker system, the mics are also being recorded for film/video. This is because even low levels of ringing (feedback) are objectionable in a recording when they might be acceptable in a speaker system where the room ambiance is quiet high.
So, there were a few moments at the beginning of the show when the FOH (Front Of House) mixer had to fine tune the EQ of Kevin's mic to minimize the feedback. The same was true when the Q&A section started. But after a very short time, the microphones, EQ, and levels were optimized and sounded great. The sound reinforcement company and FHO mixer, Jim (whose last name escapes me) were very professional and did a great job.
Glen
Great Article Glen.
I love my Fusion, which I bought from you guys out of Vancouver.
Before I bought it I had used Sound Devices recorders and was very happy with them. But I always liked what I had read and heard about the Zaxcom stuff.
I took a risk and bought it with out ever using one. I live in Calgary, I think there is one other sound guy who has a Deva here. Not many sound guys here.
I loved it. It is so much easier to use then a 744 or 788. The touch screen is amazing, so easy to route tracks to whatever you want. The big reason I went with it was cause of the outputting. My fusion has six outputs. Its been so handy.
Now, I don't have an analog mixer. I just used the Fusion to mix and record my first feature. I had no probems or issues using it or its knobs.
I can say enough good things about it. I only have two complaints. NO PAUSE BUTTON! Really Zaxcom? My 300 dollar Zoom recorder has a pause button.
And I can't load a BWF and play it back on it. Where that comes handy for me is when I do playback for music videos. Being able to playback a file that is timecode embedded would be very handy. A 744 or 788 can do it.
Just wanted to add my two cents.
Hey Glen,
Very nice article. I was impressed with the detail and mixing choices (4 knobs controlling audience mics... I didn't even think of that) My question to you is why go with the cubs and the shure sm -81's. I'm not familiar at all with these mics. Could you tell me why?
Thanks for a very informative article.
Brian Hanish
Toronto, Ontario
Hi Brian,
The Sanken CUB is a directional boundary-layer mic. I brought two for audience response. The Shure SM-81's are a general purpose directional condenser mic, popular for stage use. They were available from the sound reinforcement company.
I used all four mics, if for no other reason than to have backup if there was a failure. As it turned out, there were no failures and the combination of the four mics (two left, two right) gave a more full and spacious feel to the auditorium and audience response than a simple mic pair. If a single stereo pair could have been properly place in front of the stage pointing toward the entire audience, that would be my choice. However, we were limited to placing the audience mics on the side walls of the auditorium. Mixing the combination of the four mics worked very well.
Glen Trew