Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- From: Edwardo Santiago <sonanceinscribed@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 21:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
On Sep 7, 9:45 pm, Greg Simmons <simmoso...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 10, 11:51 pm, Edwardo Santiago <sonanceinscri...@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
I was wondering what you think of the Holophone system (likes/
Dislike) because I was planning on buying one for the purpose of
recording atmospheres. I currently have a a Fostex PD-6 that I use on
a cart and in a bag, and I was hoping to buy a single point surround
microphone system to complement it. For detailing the atmos recordings
I'll use Steinberg's Nuendo in a 5.1 configuration
I hope the following is not too late, Edwardo...
Personal thoughts, likes and dislikes regarding the Holophone:
a) I am not sure what you meant by 'single point surround microphone'.
If you meant 'single point' as in 'capturing 100% coherent sound from
a single point in space', then you might want to look at a coincident
devices such as the Soundfield or similar (as mentioned below). But if
you meant from a single physical microphone 'object', the Holophone
fits that bill nicely.
b) The Holophone is an excellent 'point and shoot' solution for 5.1
recording, although there are other products on the market that can be
used as well, such as the Soundfield. The difference is that the
latter is a coincident microphone, which is good for pin-point imaging
and mono-compatiblity, but not good at creating a sense of immersion -
which, in my opinion, is what you want for movies, documentaries and
so on. The pin-point imaging of a coincident microphone technique can
be a negative in an atmos situation...
c) On the pros and cons of the two, the Soundfield only requires four
tracks, but needs decoding in post to create/derive the 5.1 image
(this has a benefit in that the image can be manipulated and 'steered'
in post, of course). The Holophone requires six tracks, although there
is no need to derive or decode anything after the event - it is truly
a 'direct-to-5.1' microphone.
d) The signal created by the Holophone is already in 5.1 format, and,
assuming you record it correctly, can be ported directly into whatever
software you care to work with without requiring any further
processing or decoding. It is hard to appreciate this until you've
done it - instant 5.1! It would be possible to have one of those 5.1
emulating headphones systems like Dolby Headphone on location
(assuming you had some way of connecting it to your recording device)
and monitor in 5.1 directly, on location. That might be cool, but I
haven't tried it.
e) The Holophone is a deceptively large device; in fact, it is hard to
appreciate how much volume it consumes until you have to pack or
unpack it for transporting. The one I've been using came in a Pelican
case the size of a small suitcase - which fits the microphone and the
attached 8-channel cable comfortably and safely but with not too much
room to spare beyond that. The size is no problem if you're on a film
shoot and have support vehicles and/or people to move things around
(it's still a lot smaller and lighter than a camera). But it can be
difficult to trek into remote places because the case is not only
physically large, but quite a bit heavier than the Holophone itself
and adds a lot more weight to the pack. In the past, I have trekked
through the Himalaya with the Holophone and cable carefully wrapped in
a sleeping back and packed inside a porters bag (carried by a porter,
of course). In this situation the Holophone is actually handled very
gently, FWIW. Before wrapping in the sleeping bag, I fit the thick
foam windshield around the Holophone itself, adding an extra layer of
protection to the microphone capsules. Of course, nothing beats the
Pelican case for transporting in vehicles, aircraft, etc.
f) Because it uses DPA's 4060 series microphones, the sound is very
clean and clear and maintains intelligibility at a distance. Those
tiny diaphragms (5.4mm or so) provide a textbook omnidirectional
response, probably just what the doctor ordered for the Holophone's
elliptical baffle-mounting concept to work as well as it does. But due
to their tiny size the self-noise is about 23dBA (this is an
unavoidable physics limitation related to diaphragm size), which might
be a bit too noisy for situations that require capturing very low
level or very distant background sounds. I doubt this would be a
problem for most film-related atmos situations because any background
sounds of such a low level would almost certainly be of an equally low
level in the background of the movie or they wouldn't sound right. But
it might be a problem for someone intending to make serious nature
recordings in 5.1, because those types of recordings usually demand
very low noise microphones.
g) If I had to make any improvements to the Holophone, they would not
be sonic improvements - I have no complaints there that are within the
limits of physics. The first thing I'd do is make the cable
detachable. The cable is permanently mounted to the microphone through
a cable gland and retention sleeve, which makes it very clumsy to set
up and pack up in a hurry. Again, probably not much of a problem on a
large film shoot, but a PITA if you're trying to do something quickly.
All in all, I think the Holophone is a wonderful solution and am happy
to put up with the gripes mentioned above because, at the end of the
day, the system works. And when the recording is finished, it really
*is* finished. There is no further decoding or processing required.
You can pass the file on to anyone (in whatever format your recorder
offers that people downstream will accept) and not have to worry about
them decoding it correctly or anything like that. Once you've agreed
on a file format downstream and have set your recorder up
appropriately, that's all you have to worry about.
As with all tools, you'll get great results with the Holophone if you
capitalise on its strengths and avoid its weaknesses. When it is the
right tool for the job, it is very much the right tool for the job.
- Greg Simmons
Greg,
Thank you for taking so much time to write such a descriptive
response. I'm overwhelmed. The Holophone is also a very affordable
tool, much more affordable than the Soundfield, which is why I'm
hoping to purchase one. It's nice to know that the Holophone uses DPA
4060 series capsules. I recently used the DPA 4060 as a plant mic in a
car scene and was very pleased with the results. I spend so much of my
time working on set dealing with standard dialogue that I've almost
forgotten that there's such a thing as "microphone technique", in
regards to multiple microphone arrays. The world of surround sound
continues to develop and I've been fortunate to have a glimpse of what
can be accomplished through working in my 5.1 Nuendo suite at home. I
really haven't even scratched the surface of the possibilities
surround can add to certain projects. I'd also love to download the
audio files you prepared for YC. All I'd have to do is pop them into
my arrange window and press play. Again, Thank you for taking time out
to write so much.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- From: Florian
- Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- References:
- Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- From: Greg Simmons
- Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- Prev by Date: Re: DPA 4017 or Schoeps CMIT5U
- Next by Date: Re: DPA 4017 or Schoeps CMIT5U
- Previous by thread: Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- Next by thread: Re: Documentary film in Peru with Nagra 6
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
