Home Free Library Store
Free Catalog



Save with a Two Year Membership

To post in the forums see the Forum Guidelines.
Join or Renew Today.
New Benefits for all VU Members
Forum Guidelines and FAQ
Main Index Search Posts
Who's Online Log In



Home: Video University Forums: Audio For Video:
An Audio Option

 
 


Mark Foley
Veteran


Mar 25, 2009, 4:06 AM

Post #1 of 3 (827 views)
Shortcut
An Audio Option Can't Post
I didn't want to derail the tall mic thread....

I've been mulling over ways to streamline my processes/charge accordingly for my work. One area I know I may "give away the farm" is my audio work. I go to great strides to capture audio in a recording studio-type of process....probably far beyond even the most high end videographers. This maybe fine and dandy for bragging rights for myself...but is it really worth it if I'm only charging a certain price (way below those high end videographers)

As I discussed in the Tall mic thread, I'm leaning towards more passive/easier capture for all of my audio. However, offering as a add-on, a more robust audio capturing process...providing the client pays for it. Granted, many won't...so I simply won't do the extensive capture either.

I have at times however, have clients who want everything and are willing to pay for anything I offer. I swear, my last client I signed would have paid me to do shoe shines if it was offered as an add-on to the package.


Just thinking out loud here and wanting to see what others may think....
_________________________
Mark






MLiebergot
Veteran


Mar 25, 2009, 8:08 AM

Post #2 of 3 (816 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] An Audio Option [In reply to] Can't Post
I just had a DJ tell me that he never worked with anyone who worked as hard to capture the audio at a wedding.
I only used a small setup and took a feed from his board (which was flawless), and also mounted a Rode M3 with Sennheiser plug on transmitter and H2 on a mic stand recording the PA stacks.

I mentioned to him that I sometimes use a larger setup (when paid for) to record 4 channels via my Edirol R44.

But I must say, after hearing the recorded orchestra sample from a fellow vidoegrapher that I helped with his audio, I am seriously leaning towards the Zoom H4n for quick robust audio recording using the onbaord mics and XLR feeds, all mounted on a single mic stand.

But I have to agree with you on charging for top of the line audio capture (more cooperate). But in most cases what we might consider a simpler smaller setup produces sound quality that many love.

Michael

Cameras: (3) Sony FX1, Canon HV20
Audio: Marantz PMD620, Edirol R44, ZoomH4N, ZoomH2, Sennhesier G2
Mics: Rode NT5, Rode NT3, Rode M3, Rode NTG2, Shure SM57, AT822
Software: Sony Vegas, Final Cut Studio
Computer: MAC BABY! MacPro, MacBook Pro


Kenneth
Veteran


Mar 25, 2009, 11:21 AM

Post #3 of 3 (809 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mark Foley] An Audio Option [In reply to] Can't Post
As I said in my tall mic thread I will use a voice recorder on a boom stand to capture the sound from the speakers. This works great MOST of the time. There are times when the sound system is too high to reach, which is why I am look for a really tall mic stand.

Now that I got the Edirol 44 I'm going to be moving towards 4 wireless mics and the voice recorder as a safety net only. So I'll have mics on the groom, priest, podium, and musicians.

I had one situation last summer where my audio is all screwed up. The officiant refused to wear a mic. I put a mic in the chuppah, but the officiant spoke so softly that it barely got anything. The on camera mics barely have her as well. She was given a mic by the DJ and didn't use it do my voice recorder has nothing. The best audio I have is from the groom's mic but I have 2 sections with 40 seconds of total interference. I suspect the groom or the officiant received two phone calls during the ceremony.



Philadelphia Wedding Video
The Kenneth Stillman Blog