wateroftyne

[quote name='bluejay' timestamp='1485721053' post='3226144'] No extra mic on the SX40 - it's got a built-in stereo mic. The DSLR I use for filming has a decent, but mono, mic, and I'm currently plugging into the camera's microphone input a small stereo mic which I might have to replace with a more expensive version in the future. [/quote] All of which will add up to more than £250, I'm guessing?

[quote name='bluejay' timestamp='1485720533' post='3226134'] Comparison files below. They are both .MOV files straight from each device, no conversion or editing whatsoever. One clip is truncated, but there's enough of it for a comparison. [url="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/90710763/Canon%20SX40.MOV"]Canon SX40 version[/url] [url="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/90710763/Zoom%20Q4n.MOV"]Zoom Q4n version[/url] [/quote] Ta. OK.. obviously I don't know how it sounded in the room, but: I agree the Q4n sounds a bit dense. Maybe a little bit of a nudge to give it some air would sort that out? Maybe it was duff? The SX40 has more ambience, but it's clipping so much it's - IMO - unlistenable. Did you have the mics set to XY on the Qn4?

[quote name='bluejay' timestamp='1485719801' post='3226122'] For my live recordings I am now still using the old Canon SX40, which wasn't a DSLR or even a bridge camera, just a slightly bigger version of a compact. I pair it with an entry-level DSLR with an additional stereo microphone; the DSLR gives us better image quality but the sound isn't as good as the SX40. [/quote] It might be 5 years old, but the SX40 was still a £400 camera with a decent bit of glass on it. I don't think you can expect a the Q4n to compete. What mic are you using?

Here's a couple of other clips I've done with the Q4n: (The camera is behind the PA on the first one, and there's no monitors... hence the missing vox) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Xc20kBpeA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6bO52qiX_M http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Y-YggnBz-w&t=41s

I would never expect to the Q4n footage to compete with a DSLR or decent bridge camera, but if the lighting is decent enough (unlike my example above!) it's not bad. (Incidentally, I don't use the low-light option. The blacks lose their depth.) I've got no complaints whatsoever about the mics - a little tweak in post, and I think they sound just fine. I've never had any issues with the audio not playing on my Macbook either. Can you post your clips here? I'm intrigued.

Thread from the dead... Here's my effort at a single-camera edit, recorded on my Zoom Q4n - in a less-than-ideal location - at last night's gig. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3KqoJdzOTA[/media]

Another clip from a dep I did last night... [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3KqoJdzOTA[/media]

I've had a few stabs at doing demo / review vids just for fun - examples [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLyBAFiJRJY"]here[/url] and [url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq64dgNIrD8"]here[/url]. (They're Sunday league compared to what Ed Friedland and Dan do.) I get negative comments, some of which are justified - they could be technically better, and I'm still working on it. But, I also get a people complaining about my lack of AWESOME CHOPS. This doesn't bother me... it's not what the videos are for. Thankfully, quite a few people also seem to have enjoyed them, so IMO it's worthwhile.

[quote name='drTStingray' timestamp='1485618888' post='3225368'] the only people I've come across who don't like slap are bass players (many of whom haven't even bothered to learn to play it) [/quote] ...there's a reason for that.

Duck Dunn done gone, but Murphy Dunne done still alive. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5A1AAWY3y0

[quote name='ROConnell' timestamp='1485516978' post='3224511'] Why? Genuinely curious, do they think something to do with the tone or demonstrating the sounds is better with slap? Can't we just have more of an emphasis on NORMAL playing... [/quote] So the person watching can have an idea of how it will sound when they're slapping in their bedroom...

Yeah - colour is tricky, because it's so contextual. I got lucky with my old LPB - it's exactly what I wanted. Strangely, I see it as blue, but Adrian insists it's green :-)

[quote name='mentalextra' timestamp='1485249261' post='3222375'] I'm probably going to regret asking, but Mr Pratt seems to be a 'marmite' character on this forum, what has he done to deserve that? [/quote] What? You don't know? He played a Jazz on The Delicate Sound of Thunder. He deserves everything he gets.* [size=2]*Just kidding. Great player & raconteur. I've got a lot of time for him.[/size]

Nowt in my PLI either.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1485169562' post='3221654'] I'll just copy and type that out and put that in our gig folder then We've got at least six gigs this year already planned that require proof, one venue is just a bog standard pub £300 gig. [/quote] I can only speak as I find.

[quote name='Graham' timestamp='1485169172' post='3221650'] Oh god yes, complete abomination [/quote] I've just listened to it again to check I wasn't imagining it. It's even worse the second time... 80's big-ballad production? Check. Pointless, cheesy nylon-string noodling? Check. Angsty monochrome video? Check. Are we 100% sure it's not a parody..? EDIT: Oh, and the band are called 'Disturbed' as well. Bless.

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1485168197' post='3221633'] Cool by me, leaves the well paying gigs for those that have paid the £30 to get it done [/quote] I've gigged for 30 years all over the place. I've only been challenged for PAT evidence once: by a health and safety guy at a festival... who, by coincidence, happened to be a full-time PAT test guy. I raised an eyebrow at him, and he never mentioned it again.

I'm entirely with markstuk on this one. The whole scheme is flaky.

[quote name='MrCrane' timestamp='1485164860' post='3221577'] Much as I love Lindisfarne, I could never understand why they did this one [media]http://youtu.be/T1urq4Vb0XM[/media] [/quote] Ha ha. It's horrid.

This. I genuinely thought it was a parody when I first heard it. I proper LOL'd. It's overwrought, over-sincere, and dreadful. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Dg-g7t2l4

[quote name='colleya' timestamp='1485114452' post='3221254'] I know it's all subjective, but it just sounded....... right. Putting it through 2 cabs at 4 ohms made a huge difference in terms of pushing more air and giving the sound more weight. It was fat, round and clear without being muddy or boomy at the bottom end. I don't like much treble or bite at all but I've found that this means that higher notes can disappear, however this wasn't the case and it was even across all strings without treading on the guitarist's toes. Sound on stage and out front was clear and separated. We were using all backline but it wasn't a washout. The only gripe I have is that the butterfly style fastenings for the front plate prevent the amp from standing on it's short edge, which is the natural place you'd put it down given the position of the handle. It took a diving save to prevent a nasty bump! [/quote] Yep - I love the (sonic) weight & the even-ness too. There are no holes in the spectrum. And I share your only gripe re: the fastening, too. I found out the same way you did :-) I keep meaning to feed it back to Leszek... I must remember.

Here's some more RF bits and bobs I posted earlier, in case they're any use:

How much of this stuff is actually a blood relation to the old TE? It looks to me like people are getting excited about a name and a colour. Happy to be proved wrong, mind.

[quote name='Grangur' timestamp='1485089298' post='3220989'] I've got the HandBox Red Fighter. It's bigger than the R400 but I've got it running through a Bareface One10. Can't say I've had it at gig volume, but I like the sound if them together. My usual amp is a Markbass LM3. The Red Fighter is a bit more toppy than the LM3. [/quote] Interested to hear your thoughts on the RF. I wish I'd had a chance gig it at something a bit rockier than I was doing at the time. So well made, though.