My studio as of Jan 14th... there's a LOT of drywall mud to sand yet.

also probably the most effective low-cost solution for my roof space, as it pretty much fills all the gaps between the drywall ceiling and the underside of the roof deck (with a layer of QuietBrace screwed on for better isolation).

Old Busted or New Hotness? Depends on who you ask, but probably a little bit of both... my Soundcraft 800

And just as I was getting completely overwhelmed by the magnitude of remaining jobs I have to do, I gave myself a morale boost by taking delivery of the centerpiece of the studio, a Soundcraft 800 26-channel mixer. While it looks impressive (to me, at least… but some say I’m easily amused), it has some issues with the master section that will need to be addressed. The age of this mixer means that it will pretty much need a full rebuild.

I’ve already corresponded with the good folks at Creation Audio Labs in Nashville, they specialize in mixer rebuilds. (There was a great article by Rob Tavaglione about rebuilding a Soundcraft Ghost in a recent issue of Pro Audio Review.) I’ll be doing some of the upgrades myself, and I’m going to let them do some of the work. Part of the reason I wanted an older Soundcraft was the individual channel strips… this makes regular maintenance and repairs much easier than a newer mixer like the Ghost.

While this mixer isn't quite as nice as the Soundcraft TS12 that I formerly used, it didn't take four guys and a truck to move, either. While it's certainly a "midsize" mixer, these are a more practical choice for a smaller studio like mine... and they are a lot easier to resell when the time comes.

Fortunately, this mixer came complete with the original owners manual with schematics, a newly recapped power supply, and a bag of extra parts. The extra parts are a bit concerning… it means somebody has been poking around under the hood with a soldering iron, which can be a bad thing if the maintenance maverick isn’t particularly skilled. Since the electronics bench is a part of the studio, I won’t be able to start work on the mixer until the studio is complete. Fortunately, I’m not facing a particular deadline, so I can take the time to do things properly… but I’m sure anxious to get this sucker up and running.

The nameplate on the mixer gives a clue to its age. This one was built, believe, around 1981

http://www.dependentfilms.net/files.html

It’s a website filled with downloadable forms and tools for independent filmmakers. It includes contracts, location release forms, excel spreadsheets, word files PDFs… even color bars and a timecode calculator. Hope you find this useful!

My soon-to-be studio space

This is going to become my all-purpose space… my office, certainly, as well as equipment storage and a bench for electronics fabrication and repairs. But primarily, this space will be my studio, though it won’t have a separate control room. Instead, tracking and mixing will be done in the same area to capitalize on the relatively small footprint (about 300 square feet). We did a lot of work this way at my old studio.

It’s been awhile, but this isn’t the first studio I’ve built. Robert and I built the first OnLine Audio location in Charleston, SC, rebuilding two front rooms of his house into a studio and control room. We started with a 1/2″ 8-track, and then quickly went up to a 1″ 16 track recorder. When we bought the 24 track, we moved to a large space on East Bay St in an old cigar factory that had been converted into a small business development center. The other tenants hated it when we fired up a big stack of Marshalls, but that usually occurred after regular business hours. Robert and I designed and built the control room, iso booth, and large studio room, and we put the 16 track and mixer into a “B” room.

The interior of the studio looked like this when I started.

Construction has been going on for about six weeks now. The old “ceiling” has been removed, exposing the heart pine beams. The underside of the roof was layered with Quiet Brace (tarboard), and drywall has been applied to about 75% of the roof joists. I’m exposing the old beams and installing a vaulted ceiling. It’s a pain in the ass, but it will add a lot of cubic footage to the space… and it should look really classy besides.

Electrical work was finally completed last week… I went through five different electricians before somebody finally showed up to do the work. But I’ve now got a separate 50-amp service line for the audio and lighting, with a dedicated ground. I’ve installed new outlets along all of the walls, and now the insulation and drywall are going up. Garage doors were removed and replaced with an insulated double door and insulated stud wall to reduce sound transmission in both directions. I still have a lot of acoustical leaks to plug, but since it’s a cinderblock building, the space is already relatively quiet.

The studio as of January 4th, 2012... it's a construction site minus the workers. Things are progressing, despite the mess.

I’ll be posting more photos as work progresses. Right now, everything’s a big mess. Work remaining to do… install blown insulation in the ceiling and seal up the sheetrock, install sheetrock and insulation on 2 more walls, insulate and sheetrock the gable ends. Tape, mud, and sand all the joints. Seal up & insulate the doors, install another window, add trim. Paint, Install the floor, build the workbench and gear storage racks. Then I can start looking at studio furniture and consider the purchase of a larger mixer… ideally, something like a Soundcraft 600… but not as big as the TS12 we had at OnLine Audio. I figure it’ll be a month longer at a bare minimum, but probably 2 more month’s work before I can start moving equipment in.

My studio will have digital capability, but the plan is to use an analog signal path for mixdown as much as possible. Plus I’ve got a design in my head for an old-school plate reverb that I’m dying to try.

Building a studio in today’s economy doesn’t seem like a good idea, but it’s about the only way that one can do studio work anymore. There are very, very few “studio jobs” left as more places close down. Several other studios exist here in Chattanooga, ( one less than a block away) plus Nashville is less than two hour’s drive from here. So I won’t be taking out any loans or installing a Neve. But I feel quite certain that I can bring some rather unique skills to the party, and that I can develop some markets for my little studio. More info will be posted as it develops.

The Ambient Lockit Buddy in the hotshoe mount

I did a shoot recently where the production house supplied an Ambient Lockit Buddy along with an Ambient Clockit Box (we used an ACL 203) timecode generator. Ambient timecode generators have been around for a long time, and are proven pieces of kit… though they are expensive little morsels. What’s new is the Lockit Buddy. This is  a small passive device designed to drop linear timecode down to mic level, allowing it to be recorded on the DSLR’s right channel. You can also feed a reference audio track to go on the left channel, if you have an extra wireless or line level out. The Lockit Buddy doesn’t generate its own timecode, and requires some sort of timecode signal for it to work… either generated as it was on this shoot, or a feed from a timecode out from a timecode-capable audio recorder (My Edirol R4 Prohas a BNC timecode out that would be perfect for this application, but the DP didn’t want to be tethered to my recorder) or a video camera.

A typical Lockit Buddy setup. Note that there's no provision to mount either the wireless receiver or the timecode generator... not ideal for handheld shooting or tight production schedules

In use, the Lockit Buddy worked pretty well. We would jam sync the recorder at the beginning of the day and then disconnect the two (with both the recorder and the master generator running in “free run,” of course). The generator and lockit buddy combination was a bit cumbersome on the camera. The Lockit Buddy comes with a hotshoe mount, but not the lockbox, so we had to tape everything on top of the camera. The assembly was cumbersome and constantly slipping out of the hotshoe mount. Because of the mounting difficulty, we didn’t use the wireless receiver on the camera. But it did work. I’ve even got my own Lockit Buddy on order, as they’re not too expensive (around $140).

setting the sound recording level manually is required for the timecode signal to work, though the constant level of LTC would likely override the audio gain setting of the camera. Sudden loud bursts of noise may cause the level to fluctuate in auto mode, however, causing potential sync problems.

Unfortunately, the post work is being done in the UK, so I can’t report how seamless the system is on the backside. I understand they “had some trouble syncing up the takes,” but they didn’t elaborate. Still, if a scratch audio track is fed to one side, one could still use PluralEyes if the LTC signal somehow failed to lock up. Using a slate is, needless to say, mandatory. And there is more info about the post process on the Ambient website.

While I like the Lockit Buddy, there are some improvements that I’d like to see… maybe in version 2.0. A full-sized XLR connector with a mic/line selector switch would be a big improvement, and wouldn’t require any active circuitry.  This way a DP could plug in a basic mic for an audio scratch track, without requiring a tether to the soundperson. The TA3 connector means that special cables must be built to get audio into the camera, and an additional 3.5mm female jack would be highly convenient. I may do that modification myself, once mine arrives.

A commercially available turtle clip for a Tram lav

If you’re flush with cash and short on time, you can buy these from B&H for $20 apiece. Or you could make them yourself. All you need are some bits of copper wire, something round (like a dowel or broom handle) to use as a former, a pair of needlenose pliers, and a pair of cutters. Optionally, you can use a soldering iron if you want to get fancy, but it isn’t required. The clips that I made require a bit of Topstik or Moleskin to secure the mic, but they work as well as the ones from B&H.

Any round object will do as a former. The size determines the diameter of the finished mic clip… about a half-inch or three-quarter-inch rod will do. Wrap the wire around the former as if you were winding a spring one and a half turns. It’s easiest to wind a little extra and then clip off the excess wire later.

Starting a turtle clip. Copper wire is wound around a round former, 1 1/2 turns

Now, using the needlenose pliers, bend a half turn of the wire up 90 degrees. Clip off any excess wire and you’re done, unless you want to solder the ends. Soldering only takes a second and does make the finished clips a tad stronger and smoother, but it isn’t required. If you haven’t done much soldering before, this step could be

Bend one of the loops 90 degrees. I used a vise, but pliers can work fine for this.

a little tricky, but it’s very easy with a little practice. (HINT: Heat the wires first, then apply the solder to the wires. Don’t apply solder to the soldering iron, except maybe to help transfer the heat to the wires.)

Once you’ve made a few of these, other variations and improvements will surely come to you…

Snipping off the excess wire. Having a little extra wire makes handling these a touch easier while you make them.

making clips with two bails, for example, or rectangular shapes rather than round. They will get rather bent out of shape with regular use, but they’re easily replaced and cost only a little time. And if you’re too busy to take the ten minutes it takes to make these, I’ll be happy to sell you some that I’ve made… only twenty dollars each!

My collection of homemade turtle clips. They didn't take long to make, and they get easier with a little practice.

The client is Record Collection Productions from California, and the subject is a band called Jeff The Brotherhood for Red Bull’s Sound And Vision.

It started out simply enough… they requested two lav mics, a boom, and a 4-channel mixer. A straightforward, normal production setup that I’ve done many times before. But yesterday I was told that the post house HAD to have iso tracks, and they HAD to be timecoded. No problem, I’ve got an Edirol R4Pro timecode-capable 4-track. I’ll just bring my cart, and… no, you’ve gotta be very portable and run everything from a bag.

Naturally I thought I could rent my way out of this problem with help from my pals at Trew Audio. But no, their 788 was already out, and their Zaxcom Deva was parked in Glen’s rack for a movie he’s working on. So it’s back to the drawing board. And by the way, they need a wireless timecode slate, too.

The R4 is a great recorder, but it doesn’t handle mixing duties well at all. In fact, about all you can do to monitor is listen to tracks 1 and 3 in the left side of your headphones, and tracks 2 and 4 on the right… no mix outs, no solo monitoring… it’s a recorder, not a mixer.

The solution that I came up with was rather simple. Since the primary deliverables are the iso tracks, I’m running two Lectro receivers into tracks 3 and 4. The boom mic is hardwired to a splitter, with one output going to track 1 of the recorder, and the other output going to a Lectro transmitter. The receiver goes to the camera, so they’ll have a wireless link with the shotgun on one track.

The 4-track capture setup. Sennheiser ME66 shotgun, wireless timecode slate, R4Pro in a Portabrace with a second bag attached to the top containing 2 transmitters and 2 receivers, a Lectro 195 receiver for the camera, and a run bag with batteries, grip tape, extra cables, etc

In a perfect world, I wouldn’t use a setup like this, since a mono mix to camera goes against my grain a little, but this is about the best solution that can be had with the equipment that is available. We’ll see how it actually shakes out.

Some wired lavs- from left to right, unmarked EV lav, evCO90, Sony ECM44b, Sony ECM55b

The problem with comparing different lav mic models is that many wireless transmitters use their own wiring conventions. Lectrosonics uses a five-pin connector (a TA5), while Sony and Sennheiser use a 3.5mm jack… and the two aren’t interchangeable. So while I have a fairly diverse collection of lavs, they aren’t all wired to use the same transmitter. One of these days, I’ll get rid of my other transmitters and go “all Lectro,” but that’s a somewhat expensive proposition.

Two Sennheiser lavs

My lav mic locker includes the following:

• Countryman EMW (wired for Lectrosonics)
• Countryman B6 (Lectro)
• Audio Technica 899 (Lectro)
• Lectrosonics 119
• Lectrosonics 152
• Sennheiser ME102
• Sennheiser ME104
• Sony ECM44B (hardwire)
• Sony ECM55B (hardwire)
• Sony UWP lav
• EV CO90 (hardwire)
• EV MysteryLav- looks suspiciously like a Sanken COS11

These two mics are the ones I use most often... a Countryman EMW and my current favorite, the Audio Technica 899

There is a really good article about comparing several different models of lav mics at Ken Stone’s website- click here. I haven’t done extensive side-by-side comparisons of all the mics that I have, but I’ve got some favorites. I found a good deal on some Countryman EMWs. These are small, rectangular, side-address lavs, similar to Trams, which are kind of an industry standard. But Trams were too expensive and only available new. The EMWs small size and resistance to handling noise are big advantages and I used these for several years. But then I happened to try an Audio Technica 899 during a 3-person shoot… two people wore EMWs, and one wore an 899. While all sounded good, I was surprised at the reduction in room noise when I soloed the 899… there was a significant improvement in the amount of background noise. Since then I’ve managed to purchase a set of three 899s, and these are my favorite mics in most situations.

Any mic with a larger head is generally not my first choice on the set, since most clients would rather hide the mic in the talent’s clothing, even though this means a reduction is sound quality. My Sony 55b almost never gets used for this reason, even though it’s an excellent-sounding mic. My Lectrosonics mics have some rather questionable-looking cables, so I keep them to use as backup mics.

I worked with two Nashville freelancers, producer Laura Douglas and DP Chris Conder. Both have been working in and around Nashville for a number of years, and Laura had worked in news, so we all had similar experiences to share. The show is produced by High Noon Entertainment in Colorado. I’ve worked with them before, but this particular shoot was done with an all-local crew… no one flew in for the show.

One of two Ambient EMP 5s transformers that I recently bought. I've been needing these for a long time, and they work like a charm.

I tried out a new piece of gear on this trip… an Ambient EMP 5s eumel. (a eumal–pronounced “oymal–” is German for widget.) It isn’t a very sexy bit of kit, and it’s pretty pricey (about $118 each from Trew Audio) but it’s extremely handy to have. All they are is a transformer built into a nicely machined Neutrik connector. What they do is convert a wireless lav microphone– in this particular case, my Audio Technica 899- into a hard-wired version. Since these were going to be seated interviews, I figured this would be the perfect application. I’m happy to report they work like a charm. I have several mics that are wired for Lectrosonics transmitters, and now I can use these all as hardwires if the job calls for it. In the past, I have used a Sony ECM55b for my hardwire jobs, and while it works great, I have often wished to use a mic with a smaller head– like my Countryman EMWs or my ATs, since the Sony is a little harder to hide. My Ambient EMPs give me more options, and options are always nice to have on the set!

The guys that were buying their first place had a budget of $140K, and wanted a minimum of 1,000 square feet. Nashville is a nice town, but the real estate prices are pretty steep for most people. (In contrast, we’re looking at a 2,800 square foot house here in Chattanooga, and the selling price is $192K. That’s nearly 3x the house for about $50k more dollars. There’s just no music industry here, unfortunately.)

Producer Laura Douglas interviews first-time homebuyers Bret Marchbanks and Daniel Sircy for HGTV's My First Place. Chris Conder on camera.

The only bad part about the shoot was the drive home. I work as a local in Nashville for one-day shoots, so  had to drive home that night. We finished the interviews at 10PM local time, and since Nashville is in a different time zone than Chattanooga, I pulled into my driveway at 2AM. But I’m looking forward to working with them again soon.

My DBX900 rack, almost identical to the one we had at my studio 30 years ago. It's taken several years to put this together.

In contrast, a DBX 900 rack can be found used as low as $150 on eBay (though I’ve seen some crazy prices lately) and individual modules go for around $100-200 each. One other company besides DBX made modules for the 900 series, and that’s Aphex. These folks make some GREAT compressors, but as far as I know, only the  9721 Dominator and 9651 Expressor is available for the 900 rack, though there may have been others. Because of size constraints, the Dominator doesn’t have all the controls of the 19″ rackmount version, but it’s a very sweet compressor.

The DBX 904 noise gate module for the 900 series rack

Don’t overlook modules that need repairs, either. I was lucky enough to find some 900 units on eBay that were being sold as non-working, parts-or-repair-only. I took a gamble and got these for about $30 each. One was a 905 parametric EQ. This one turned out to be an easy fix… a disc capacitor had blown itself in two.  Thanks to DBX’s unselfish policy of publishing their schematics, I was able to figure out the value and replace it, and it works! Sometimes a blown part is a symptom of other problems, but so far, nothing else has smoked.

Next up was a DBX 903 compressor limiter. This one exhibited some general wierdness in terms of the signal, and the LED meter on the front was out. The 900 series all use the same meter driver board, which helps. I traced the signal at the meter board’s input, and confirmed that it was getting a signal, so I pulled the board and swapped it with another from a working unit… problem fixed. Now we know the problem is somewhere on the meter board. Examining with a microscope showed a resistor with a tiny burn mark around the middle. Replaced the resistor, and presto! The meter board works.

The business end of the 904. The board on top is the meter driver.

The last problem piece is a 904 noise gate, the donor for the working meter board used to correct the compressor. This one was a bit tougher to fix. Reinstalling the now-repaired meter board shows that the unit is detecting properly and gating a signal according to the settings, but there’s no output.  I poked around with a meter, and got about a .4v signal at the input. I started working my way back from the output, and found a non-polarized electrolytic capacitor that wasn’t passing any AC. So to test my theory, I removed C3– a 4.7uF non-polarized electrolytic cap– and replaced it with a pair of 10uF capacitors wired back-to-back, i.e., negative tied together, positive side out… and it works, passing a clean, gated signal!

After a proper 4.7uF NPO cap arrived from Digi-Key, it was soldered in and tested… that fixed it. While I was at it, I ordered enough Nichicon capacitors to re-cap the entire board… fortunately, DBX designed their circuit boards to accommodate either radial or axial-leaded caps, so either type will fit.

The problem cap. Replacing this fixed the unit. Fortunately, the problem wasn't under the big square metal case... that's a DBX discrete voltage-controlled amp (VCA), which is mostly transistors packed very tightly onto another circuit board. Repairing one of these would be really difficult, and replacement would be impossible.

That’s the other big advantage of this old stuff… it’s possible to fix it when it breaks. When parts fail on new gear… likely built overseas, by robots, using surface-mounted components… you’re pretty much done and replacing the entire board is the only option. Sometimes sourcing parts for vintage gear is difficult or sometimes impossible… germanium transistors and diodes come to mind. But vintage gear can almost always be rebuilt, and if the quality is there to begin with, it’s worth the effort.

The 904 fully recapped. The job wasn't that difficult or expensive, but you do need to be careful and take your time.

Zoom H4n portable flash recorder

as my bag recorder for awhile now. But I recently acquired a Sony PCM-m10. This post will compare the two for use as a location audio-for-video recorder. My recorder of choice is an Edirol R4Pro, but it’s too large to use in a bag along with a mixer. What we’re after here are small, palm-sized 2-track recorders, and there are several to choose from.

My Sony PCM-m10. The front panel layout is fairly straightforward.

The Zoom is a good recorder, and has a number of useful features that aren’t available on many other recorders. These are easily discovered through any web search, but the major points are 4-track recording ability, and XLR inputs. But like everything in life, there are drawbacks… at least in my application. These are:

Lousy battery life- There’s no getting around it, the H4n is a power hog. Used as a straight recorder, I get about four hours from a pair of AA alkaline batteries. I’ve been on shoots where I’ve drained two sets in a single day, and the stress of starting a take with a low battery  indicator has to be experienced to be fully appreciated. Or worse still, putting in your last pair when you’re a mile and a half in the woods… and your extras are back in the car. My workaround has been to use very expensive lithium batteries, which will last nearly three shooting days. The folks at Zoom realized their design was a bit thirsty, and they put in a “stamina mode” switch on the back.

Beldar Conehead... never a big fan of reduced sample rates...

This will extend the battery life by disabling some features, but it limits your sample rate to 44.1/16 bit. As Beldar Conehead would say, ”Mips!!! Unacceptable!!!” If you’re too young to understand the reference, I’m sorry, but your cultural education needs some work. Do the research.

The Zoom H4n is bigger overall, and the larger input connectors makes a slightly cumbersome package in a bag.

Picky Line Inputs- the 1/4″ inputs on this unit are high impedance ins. These are great if you want to plug an electric guitar directly into the unit, but for a mixer tape out… not so much. I know, you can buy a cable with a built-in pad, but it’s still a pain in the butt.

Fragile Form Factor- the adjustable mics on the top of the unit are nice for grabbing a quick stereo soundfile, but when used in the bag they tend to be somewhat vulnerable. The big 1/4″ connectors means it usually lives in the bag mics-down, and I worry that these may someday break.

4-Track Limitations- While the zoom H4n is widely advertised as a 4-track recorder, the implementation isn’t as great as it could be. Yes, it can record four tracks at once, but two of those tracks are intended to come from the unit’s onboard mics. There is a 3.5mm jack that can bypass those mics, but this is still a bias-powered mic level input. It can be made to work with yet another padded cable, but doing so involves such a web of special cables and workarounds that I’ve never tried to do a 4-track recording in the field.

The Sony is thinner than the Zoom, but this is a limitation of the XLR connectors.

These drawbacks led me to search for a better solution for recording in the bag, so I’ve gotten a Sony PCM-m10. For my application, the Sony is a better choice, because:

Line Inputs- At first glance, the 3.5mm stereo line in jack would seem to be a downgrade of the balanced ins on the Zoom, but since these are true line-level ins, this isn’t the case. Levels match fine from my mixer tape out using a plain 3.5mm stereo cable. Plus the Sony has a rotary input level control, so adjusting levels is a bit faster that setting a level using an up/down button, as it is on the Zoom. It is slightly more likely to accidental adjustment through careless handling, though.

Battery Life- Power management is vastly improved over the Zoom. The manual says to expect around 4o hours from a set of batteries… less if you use higher data rates. I record at 48k/24bit, and I can get more than three full days of work from a single set of alkaline AAs. The stress relief alone is a big value for me, as I’m not having to constantly check my battery level.

Compact Case- While I’d think these are about the same in terms of their fragility- both are basically built with plastic cases and could be damaged from extreme handling- the Sony is smaller and rectangular. The Zoom is slightly larger, but the bigger 1/4″ jacks can place more leverage on the connector itself, plus the irregular shape makes me think that of the two, the Zoom is going to be more likely to break over time. (I do plan to make a mic guard for the Zoom that screws into its tripod mount, but haven’t managed to find time for that experiment yet.)

The Zoom usses buttons to set the record level, while the Sony uses a thumbwheel. This isn't a digital encoder, either, but an analog level control.

Better Filenames- Though this seems a little nitpicky, I do like the filenaming convention on the Sony better than the Zoom. The Zoom gives each recording’s filename in a given folder a sequential number, starting at 001. The Sony does the same thing, but it adds the date at the head of each filename. This way it’s a little easier for me to tell what’s in each file without having to open it up and listen to it… handy if I’ve been shooting for four days and neglected to download. It just adds a little confidence.

There was one situation where I was glad I had the Zoom. I needed a lav mic on a motorcycle, and  expected the talent to drive out of wireless range. Using the Zoom, I plugged in a hardwire mic directly to the H4n’s input, started the recorder, and put the whole package in the bike’s saddlebags. You couldn’t do this with the Sony… at least not with a hardwire mic. I did some experiments by plugging in various mics with 3.5mm jacks into the Sony’s input, and  it turns out that mics wired for Sony’s UWP transmitters will work fine plugged directly into the input jack… a neat trick in a smaller package. Not so with mics wired for the Sennheiser G3 series, though.

While both are fine recorders, I think overall I prefer the Sony. In fact, I’ve ordered a second one. The idea is to use a pair to record iso tracks from my wireless units, then sync them after the fact using Plural Eyes software. I’m still running tests to figure out the best way to pull this off… the results will be in another post.

To be fair, I haven’t tried some of the other palm recorders available from Edirol, Fostex, Tascam, Marantz, Roland, and others. These two recorders are the ones that I own. (I’ve no connection with either company, nor have gotten any freebees or discounts from anybody. I’d be happy to take some, though.)

The iPowerUS Lithium-polymer 9v batteries and charger

Unfortunately, most rechargables do not have enough energy density to be very useful on the set. I’ve tried some 9v NiMH, and they would only last 2 hours in the same application.

There is another option that is available from Trew and other dealers. A company called iPowerUS makes a 520 mAh 9v Lithium-Polymer battery. I had heard about these before, but a DP I worked with recently (Roger Herr, shooting Infested for Animal Planet/Darlow Smithson UK) actually had a set and recommended them, so I finally broke down and invested in a set.

I’m pleased to report that these are working great for me. I can get nearly an entire day in my wireless units from a single charge… even a little more by switching the power off between takes, so I’m not constantly changing batteries. iPower says their batteries will get over 200 charge cycles from each battery, and Trew reports this to be accurate… and in some cases, 200 cycles is a conservative estimate.

The downside is the initial cost… these batteries are initially quite expensive at $23 each in sets of four. (About $30 each with a charger.) But if we do a little math, they are really dirt cheap:

iPower- appx $30 each/200 charges = 30/200 = .15 per use
Procells- appx $20/12 (case)= 1.66 per use

These batteries break even after you’ve used six cases of 9-volts. (Or if you prefer, after being recharged about eleven times.) For me, that’s around 9 or 10 shooting days. These make sense if all you consider is dollars and cents. But more than that, it saves me time and grief not having to order a couple of cases of batteries every time I turn around. They charge in about 45 minutes, and the iPower charger comes with a 12-volt option for car charging… really handy. About the only downside I can think of is they don’t have a AA-sized solution for my Sound Devices gear.

So while it was a momentary pain in the wallet at purchase time, I’m really glad I bit the bullet and bought these batteries. So far, they’re quick, dependable, work great, and save quite a bit of cash and hassle over time.

The Petrol small Eargonizer bag

There are a number of things that I like about this bag, one of them is space. It’s a bit roomier than my old bag, which means it’s naturally a bit bulkier than before, but not by much. It’s “stiffer” as well, meaning that it’s made with semi-rigid sides. This means more protection for my mixer (though I never felt my gear was vulnerable with my old case). It also allows more flexibility with the configuration. Petrol includes little risers to lift gear up, which works because of the rigid sides.

Actually, Petrol includes a lot of little options and extras. Some will be indispensable for some folks, some will be unneeded for others… but it means I can configure the bag the way I want it, which is a big plus. One item that everyone will like is their wireless pouch… my bag came with a pair, and there are anchor points for two more, which I’ll be ordering directly.

Petrol bags come with a number of risers, dividers, and pockets for custom tailoring the bag to suit various ways of working

Other details that are really handy:

• Multiple anchor points for the strap, so the bag can be balanced
• the clear vinyl window flap attaches with velcro on both sides, so it can be removed and stowed out of the way in clear weather.
• Places to put sharpies and pens (though it doesn’t have a dedicated business card pocket, and I always like to have cards ready to hand out).
• Cutouts on the inner divider for easier & neater cable routing.

Just to be fair, there are a few small details that I’d personally like to improve. I’d like some more padding on the strap, since I usually run a fairly heavy bag. And some method of attaching transmitters for Comteks or camera hops on the strap, up high and away from the mic receivers, would be cool. But my biggest irritation are connector covers. For some reason most bag manufacturers don’t make them removable, and they are always getting in my way when I need to make fast connection changes in the mixer. I never take my personal gear out in bad weather, since I can’t afford to replace it if it gets damaged, so the connector covers aren’t quite as big an issue as it is with, say, a news crew. At least Petrol makes their covers out of a lighter, more flexible material, but I’d like something that could either be removed or rolled completely out of the way.

The bag from the front. Its center divider can be removed if need be.

This isn’t to say that I don’t still like my Portabrace bag… for me, the Portabrace is better for my Shure FP33, since its smaller & lighter. That’s my rig of choice when I need to be very mobile. (I was shocked to earn that Portabrace doesn’t list the FP33 anymore on their website, but there should be plenty of them around.)

Overall, though, I think the Petrol is a great bag and I expect to get many years of work out of it. By listing my old bag (that wasn’t really that old at all) with Trew’s consignment program, the net cost of my upgrade was pretty small… a successful trip, I think.

I was skeptical that it would happen at all, but thanks to a number of fortunate events, the shoot was scheduled for Chattanooga (originally was going to be in Knoxville) and I was contracted to be the location mixer for not just a single show, but an entire series. I can’t disclose much… we’re shooting under a working title, which may yet change. But there will be eight initial episodes.

For our little production community here in Chattanooga, this is HUGE. We’ve never had this kind of opportunity here before, so for much of the crew, it’s a large block of work. Just speaking for myself, in three weeks I’ve already surpassed the number of shooting days for all of last year. I’m a little pooped, but any day that I can go to work is a good day.

My work area on the set. I've brought out nearly all of my gear for this shoot, and having the resources available has been handy.

And thanks to some less-than-satisfactory work by freelancers in other towns, I’ve been cleared to work on out-of-town shoots with the crew as well… their policy is to use local talent whenever possible to save money, but I’ve been given an opportunity for more work. It reinforces the idea that, as a soundperson, it’s important to be on your toes and make the extra effort whenever you can. The concept of “added value” applies well here. I do all I can to make myself as invaluable as possible on (and off) the set. Getting good, clean sound is, of course critical, but there’s always more that can be done on the set. Dressing cables, keeping detailed sound reports, making sure the talent has water, helping load, carrying cameras, helping change lenses… even sending emails suggesting good spots to eat around town… it’s all important and has helped me secure  some additional dates.

And there’s more to come. While most of the studio crew takes a break tomorrow, I’m heading out of town in the morning to shoot at Cirq in Atlanta, then the next day in Collegedale, then back in Chatt, then a date in Knoxville next week, with two more possible dates in between.

My cart rolled onto the set for taping. I'm using my Sound Devices 442 mixer paired with my Edirol R4Pro, which is serving as the master timecode source for two Sony F900 cameras. Here I'm set up for a wireless camera link, but we went to hardwires after the first day. The wireless worked fine, but since the cameras are connected via coax to the monitor cart, there wasn't any advantage

They’re made from 3/8″ welded steel… very heavy duty. Designed to be clamped in a standard C-stand head. They are slightly longer than the usual holder… appx 9″… this allows your pole to be inserted and removed with less motion, and the longer length puts slightly less stress on your expensive pole. They are cushioned with 1/2″ vinyl tubing. Made in USA from locally-sourced materials. All proceeds will help support my audio gear habit.

Email me if you are ordering from outside the US… the shipping will be extra. I’ll gladly accept euros mailed directly to me… those will help support my EU Tourisim Programme. Or you can pay via PayPal… my PayPal/email address is bgilbertsound at gmail dot com. Email me if you have questions.

Harrison's Mixbus on OSX

But one of Mixbus’ downsides is that since it comes from the relatively small (though famous) console maker Harrison, there isn’t a huge marketing staff that can create a comprehensive print manual. There is an online manual for Ardour, the open-source engine on which Mixbus is based. It’s helpful, but it’s a PDF… which means to use it, you’ve got to have it up on a computer, and switching windows between Mixbus and Acrobat is a bit of a pain. I prefer a real book, open on my lap, with the computer running the program I’m trying to figure out.

After printing out the first few pages of the PDF, I learned this wouldn’t do at all… the document is loaded with full-page screenshots, and the on-screen formatting wastes reams of paper and gallons of ink. So, just for my own use, I re-formatted the document to be more printer-friendly by reducing the type size, adjusting the layout, and cropping and/or shrinking the screenshots down.

Then, just for grins, I added some Mixbus-specific sections and comments for those of us who are using the commercial version of Ardour (Mixbus) rather than the free open-source program (Ardour). The mix windows are very different between the two. Most of this information isn’t new… I rewrote it using the Mixbus quickstart document. And there are still plenty of things I’d like to do with the program that aren’t explained. (#1 on my list is how to print a track with only the output of a plugin… there’s gotta be a way, and it’s probably simple… but it isn’t obvious, at least not to my sucking-in-the-seventies brain.

I figured this might be helpful to other Mixbus users as well, so I’m making this document available free to Mixbus owners. Just send me an email to BGilbertSound at gmail dot com. Include your mixbus serial number. I’ll email you a copy of the PDF. Let me know if you have comments that need to be added, and hopefully the document will grow into a real manual.

It won’t be the first time I’ve taught a class… I was Instructor Of Record while attending graduate school at the University of South Carolina. That was a long time ago, but the basic concepts remain the same. This course will be different since it concentrates on location sound for film and video, and it’ll be the first that I’ll do all the instructional design. We’ll see how it goes.

But in our brave new economic world, creative jobs with access to nice hardware have seriously dwindled, and the handful of folks who have those jobs generally stay put. So, like most of us, I’ve got to bankroll my own hardware addiction, which means that there are some pieces of gear that are just plain off limits… no matter how nice they sound.

The EMT 140 plate reverb frame. The control electronics were in a separate rack unit in the studio. The plate was often located in a quiet location away from the studio.

For example, let’s consider the EMT 140 plate reverb. One can be bought for about $1500, which isn’t too bad, really. But plate ‘verbs are large, heavy pieces of gear that require a quiet, vibration-free location.  Usually found only in large studios, they were generally installed and left alone. So what’s a starving self-funded engineer/producer to do?

Enter Universal Audio. These folks make plugins that model classic gear, and they are very well done. I’ve had a UAD2 Solo/Laptop co-processor for quite a while now, but haven’t had the chance to use it much. But while mixing a recent location recording for Claire Lynch, her lovely vocals were begging for a second reverb. (The Solo comes with RealVerb Pro, and I was using this for the instruments.) I tried some free/shareware plugins, and although they sounded pretty good, I didn’t like the interfaces… I felt like I was writing Fortran code back in college rather than mixing, and never could get a very musical result. (like I said, I’m “of a certain age.”) I still had a credit with UAD from when I bought the Solo, so I sprung for a software version of the EMT 140 plate reverb.

Universal Audio's EMT 140 plate reverb plugin interface looks similar to the original, it's intuitive and easy to use.

I’m happy to report it works like a charm. They are the perfect complement to Claire’s vocals. UAD’s graphic interface mimics the original very closely, and the original control panel is easy to figure out. I can make adjustments simply and get great results without having to “hunt around” for a particular parameter. (if you’d rather enter adjustments numerically, though, that option is available through keyboard shortcuts).

I don’t buy many plugins, since they’re only going to last as long as your current computer. When I can afford it, I prefer to buy the hardware version of the gear that I need. But in this case, I’ve gotta admit that the plugin has some significant advantages over the real thing. It’s far cheaper, infinitely more portable, fun to use, and most importantly, makes Claire’s voice sound like a million bucks.

The “mid-side” mic technique is a method of recording stereo using a cardioid mic facing forward (the “mid” mic) and a bidirectional, or “figure-8″ mic facing left and right (the”side” mic). These mics require a little processing at the mixer, though, before we get a stereo signal.

Schoeps has several hardware options to support a double mid-side setup

The mid mic is panned to the center, but the side mic is split into two equal signals. You can do this analog using a transformer-balanced splitter, or digitally by copying the input to duplicate channel. Pan one of these mid signals hard left, and pan the other hard right, but… and this is the key… invert the phase on the right channel.

The beauty of the mid-side technique is that if the left and right channels get summed together for a mono signal, you get no phase cancellation between the two signals. We used this technique in the early days of television, when some of the sets were mono and some were stereo. Using mid-side stereo, both stereo and mono televisions sounded fine. (More details about the mid-side technique are here.)

The double mid-side technique is an expansion of the mid-side technique. By simply adding a rear-facing mic we now have a system that can generate five channels of audio using only three tracks. Use a shotgun for the main mid mic, add a bidirectional mic for the side signal, and a cardioid rear-facing mic. The side signal is shared between the front and the rear mics. Each mic is recorded on its own track.

Decoding the three signals into a 5.1 mix is straightforward. The shotgun becomes our center channel, shotgun plus the mid (split, panned left and right, and phase-reversed for the right side)  becomes our left and right front signal,  rear cardioid plus the mid (split, panned left and right, and phase-reversed for the right side)  becomes our left and right rear signal… pretty neat, eh? And like the standard M-S stereo technique, the signals can be summed to mono without phase error.

The Schoeps double mid-side recording solution has the advantage of the entire rig being able to fit inside a zeppelin.

Shoeps has a good bit of information about double mid-side technique on their website, including some elegant hardware solutions for implementing this system in the field. Hang on to your wallet, though, cause this ain’t a Chinese knockoff… it’s some serious hardware that is priced accordingly.

Schoeps even has a free double mid-side plugin that decodes the three signals for a double mid-side system. Order it here.

A screenshot from the free Schoeps double mid-side plugin

Tim is the production manager at a SC ETV network station in Spartanburg, SC, and had just finished up a documentary for them. Until recently, PBS National had a requirement that all programs submitted to them must be mixed in 5.1 surround sound (they’ve backed off that requirement as of late).

What tim was asking me about was a simple way to capture 5.1 audio in the field. I know of lots of approaches to 5.1, but none of them could be called simple… other than mixing in plain old stereo and letting a 5.1 synthesizer do all the heavy lifting for you. I understand the newer ones do a pretty good job, too. But Tim was looking for another way, and even after 25 years, when Tim gives me a direction, that’s where I’m going.

I started ruminating on his idea of a simple, inexpensive method of capturing surround sound. I’ve come up with almost a solution. It’s far from perfect, but I figure it’s better than pocket lint.

At the core is the Zoom H4n. I’ve got one & use it a lot. I don’t love it, as it’s consumer-grade gear, and is loaded with compromises. But they’re small (it’s a handheld) battery powered (though it eats batteries like candy), and relatively cheap, about $300 street price. So far so good.

The Zoom H4n- it's ability to act as a pseudo-4-track makes it the key to this workflow

This little piggy has a pair of XLR inputs in addition to two onboard mics, and it has a 4-ch mode that allows you to record from both mics AND the XLRs. (Almost none of the commonly-available digital recorders can record more than two tracks at a time.) So you have a fairly cheap pseudo 4-track to work with. Six channels would be better, but let’s start with this.

Let’s imagine a single-person interview in a space with lots of background action… a deli, let’s say. You set your talent down and point the Zoom AWAY from your talent. The XLRs can be used to record a lav on one channel and a shotgun on the second channel.

The two tracks from the onboard mics are sent to the L/R rear channels. You’ll want to do some field testing to figure out which is the best way to orient the H4n… the soundfield might sound too extreme with the mics pointing away, and it may sound better if the mics face the talent, only placed some distance back.

The shotgun will likely pick up more “room” than the lav. Run the shotgun through a stereo generator and send that signal to the front left and right speakers and put the lav on the center channel. You’ll want to play around with this… the center channel might need a little shotgun, and the L/R fronts might need a little lav. But keep checking for phasing errors by summing everything to stereo and mono once and awhile to make sure you don’t get any really whacko-sounding phase cancellations. Some phasing will be unavoidable, but keep monitoring it just the same.

As you already know, the “.1″ part of the 5.1 mix is the subwoofer. Pull these low frequencies wherever they sound best, perhaps the lav if you want to accentuate the speaker’s voice. Other sources might sound better if you want to accentuate the low frequency component of the environment… if you’re shooting on a battlefield, you’ll want those deep, rumbling explosions.

If you’re shooting two people on camera, then you’ll have to decide between two lavs, or a shotgun and a mixed lav signal, or just a shotgun and a single mic. Perhaps the single mic could get the rear signal, and use the zoom mics for the L/R fronts. You’ll need to experiment, and– here’s a crazy idea– use your ears and judgement.

The H4n is small enough that it can fit on a pole or a C-stand. Sometimes placing near a boundary surface, like a table, can give you a little boost as long as no one uses the table to shuffle scripts while you’re shooting. Camera noise will be an issue if you’re shooting a Red or an F900.

It’d be best if you did a dedicated stereo mix on a separate tape, and a 5.1 mix on another. This way you could avoid the whacko phase cancellations on your stereo mix, But rest assured, somebody somewhere will be listening to your 5.1 mix on only two speaker, so keep checking your mix folded down to stereo frequently.

This is about as close to a simple solution as I can come up with. One big drawback is the H4n records at 44.1/16 bit when it’s in 4ch mode. (I think it does, anyway… don’t have the manual in front of me at the moment.) This isn’t a broadcast standard, which unofficially has been decided should be 48K/24bit.

There are some more expensive and complex solutions that may be better… but I’m not sure if the degree of “better” would be worth the hassle. Zoom makes an R16 which I also have. It’s about the cheapest recorder that can record 8 tracks at the same time. And it can be run on battery power. But it too is limited to 44.1/16 when recording 8 channels at once (though I believe it has better specs when doing 4 channels), and the build quality leaves a lot to be desired. The benefit here is that you can use real mics for all 5 channels, and not depend on the recorder’s mics. (The recorder’s mics are OK… not bad, really, and very convenient… but I like having choices). Drawbacks are size, as the R16 is too big to fit in a bag, a more complex setup with five individual mics, and you may want a mixer for more control of the mics (but you’ll need one with direct outs, which is rare in small mixers… even good ones.  The PSC Alphamix (recently discontinued, unfortunately, and hard to fund used), Sound Devices 442 (also recently discontinued, but widely available on the used market), and the current Sound Devices 552 are about the only small ones that I know for certain have direct outs. Audio Developments might. My Eela 191 doesn’t.)

Direct audio outputs on the Sound Devices 552 mixer... a key feature.

My “real” 4-track would also be a better option for a recorder… an Edirol R4Pro, which has timecode and can record up to 96k, but it cost nearly $2k… not an inexpensive solution. Their R44 is a cheaper option at about a grand and is slightly smaller, but no timecode. They’re both too big for a bag, really.

Tascam has some new recorders out. The DR680 can supposedly record eight channels at once, but it has only 4 XLRs. The specifications are a little cryptic as well, as it has

The Tascam 680

six mic preamps and claims “up to 96kHz” BWAV. Does that mean it can record 96K with all eight channels going at once? Perhaps…but as I’ve discovered with my Zoom, perhaps not. But the price is right, $800 from B&H. Their HSP82 can do a full 8 tracks, but it’s a full $5k. For that much, though, a Sound Devices 788T is $6-7k and would probably be a better investment.

The A-list flagship recorders are Zaxcom’s Fusion at $8K, or their Deva 5.8/ Deva 16. Don’t get me started on the Fostex PD606, Sonosax SX-R4, or my favorite-though-I’ve-never-even-seen-a-real-one Nagra VI. (If any of these manufacturers would like me to

The Nagra VI. The gear junkie part of me wants one, but my rational brain won't let me do it

express a more authoritative opinion, they can send me one and I’ll be glad to handle it for them;-)

So there it is… at least a partial solution to the question of simple & inexpensive 5.1 capture. It’s isn’t perfect, but it is something to try, at least.