Filming gigs

[wateroftyne]

3 minutes ago, Silvia Bluejay said:

Nah, you know what I said last time we talked about this earlier in this thread - I realised we weren't happy with the Zoom because we could compare its output to something else which we liked better. Per se, the Zoom recordings of our gigs would have shown no problems, if it wasn't for the fact that the other recordings were better.

No big deal. We'll try the complicated, expensive solution at the first suitable opportunity, and report back.

Cool - I’ll sure to be great! I’ve got a nice Rode set-up for my DSLR, but I tend coy to use it ‘cos it’s a bit conspicuous. Looks and sounds great when I do use it, though!

[bazzbass]

On ‎2‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 01:49, dmccombe7 said:

interesting thread.

Im very tempted to get the Q2N, it looks ideal, but with 4 GoPros in the house, and 3 DSLR's its a bit overkill.

Looks like there's a new version of mine. I have the Q2 HD and the new version i think is the Q2N HD.

I find the Q2 HD so simple to just put somewhere with half decent view of the band and it has an auto volume control and all just works dead easy.
Does run thru batteries right enough.
Typically 2 hrs out of 2 duracell AA's


Dave

I run my Q2HD on USB power with one of those USB powerbank thingies

you're welcome

[Silvia Bluejay]

An update to this thread: we have tested the Saramonic, but the conditions at those selected gigs were not satisfactory enough for us to give an informed opinion and publish decent clips - we're still working on that. The problem with using the Saramonic is the incredible faff with setting up the tripod, the camera, the Saramonic itself, attaching microphone supports, plugging in cables and microphones, and placing the whole caboodle in the best position to take advantage of its capabilities. We only use it at one gig every 6 or 7.

As a further update, I have now bought a Zoom Q2n to use alongside the Saramonic (or the Canon SX40, which is still going strong), not as a replacement but as an addition, to allow us to film from a different angle and capture, say, the whole of the room including the audience, as opposed to focussing on the band and occasionally turning the camera 180 degrees. So far, I have mixed feelings. My 'interim' review on Amazon, where I bought it, explains:

Quote

Jury still out. I used this to record a pub gig - in relatively low light, with coloured Parc lights flashing - and I'm not convinced it cuts the mustard. Compared to my other recording device, an old Canon camera, the video is much darker and the colours much less bright. It's got better resolution, though. I'm beginning to think that the Concert Lo-light setting is so geared towards avoiding bright spots of light on moving subjects that it makes everything look very dull. Therefore, what I'm going to try this Saturday is first the Auto setting, then the Night setting, in the hope that the actual amount of light allowed to reach the sensor will increase. (I don't mind seeing some bright spots where the lights hit certain surfaces, if that's the price of a better-lit recording.)
No complaints about the sound quality, it's fine, then again, if sound is all you need to record, there are Zoom devices dedicated to that only. This one, for me, has to be tops in both regards, or it goes back.

We'll be testing it again this weekend.

[EBS_freak]

On 12/17/2017 at 12:33, wateroftyne said:

Nice!

Out of interest, do you find the clips I’ve posted in this thread with the Zoom lacking in any way? 

Be tough - I can take it :-)

I think for what they are, the Zoom recordings are actually pretty decent. The weak point in all of these systems are generally the mics - but a lot of these field recorders will allow for external mics - however, most of the mics you would be interested in would be phantom powered and a lot larger than the ones build in... so cause added complications. For a simple set and forget, I think your recordings are pretty good representations of the quality that you can expect.

[EBS_freak]

6 minutes ago, Silvia Bluejay said:

An update to this thread: we have tested the Saramonic, but the conditions at those selected gigs were not satisfactory enough for us to give an informed opinion and publish decent clips - we're still working on that. The problem with using the Saramonic is the incredible faff with setting up the tripod, the camera, the Saramonic itself, attaching microphone supports, plugging in cables and microphones, and placing the whole caboodle in the best position to take advantage of its capabilities. We only use it at one gig every 6 or 7.

As a further update, I have now bought a Zoom Q2n to use alongside the Saramonic (or the Canon SX40, which is still going strong), not as a replacement but as an addition, to allow us to film from a different angle and capture, say, the whole of the room including the audience, as opposed to focussing on the band and occasionally turning the camera 180 degrees. So far, I have mixed feelings. My 'interim' review on Amazon, where I bought it, explains:

We'll be testing it again this weekend.

Are you moving your camera around? The last thing you want is a camera mounted mic if so... especially a highly directional one like the one in the stock picture you posted above. If you are thinking of multiple angles and multiple cameras, its preferable to consider the audio and visuals as two completely different entities. Otherwise, the whole thing becomes a bit amateur as you move the camera around, especially in front of the drums and guitar and the rest of the band seems to drop out!

[Silvia Bluejay]

Not moving the camera around - always on a tripod, usually pointing toward the band, and very occasional zooming. (I'm talking about thre Canon SX40.)

Regarding the Zoom, it was firmly clipped to the same sturdy tripod as the SX40.

Regarding the Saramonic, it was on the sturdy tripod by itself, but on one occasion I was forced to stand too far from the band, on another occasion I was too much on one side, on another occasion one of the mics wasn't plugged in properly or developed an interference noise of some sort, etc... heh.

[wateroftyne]

The Zoom comes loaded with compromises that you'll have to work around, and it's no surprise that less-than-stellar low-light performance is one of them. Bear in mind the whole thing costs around the same as an DSLR kit lens.

If the lighting is murky, I have to do a fair bit in post. If it's especially bad, monochrome works a treat.

[Silvia Bluejay]

Yup, thought so. Learning curve ahead!

[Al Krow]

On 17/12/2017 at 12:52, wateroftyne said:

Cool - I’ll sure to be great! I’ve got a nice Rode set-up for my DSLR, but I tend coy to use it ‘cos it’s a bit conspicuous. Looks and sounds great when I do use it, though!

A topic I'm very much interested in. I've been thinking about getting a better mic than my Rode Video Stereo mic for use with my Panasonic video camera.

However I'm probably focusing on the wrong thing here, in terms of just looking at mic attachments; as the weak link is more likely the preamp in the video camera?

Is there any 'score card' of cameras / videocams in terms of how good their built in pre-amps are? Or are there any camera models that have a great reputation when it comes to recording sound?

[mrtcat]

I totally understand the need to be really easy to set up but I still think a modern digital desk coupled with a camera capable of good image quality is by far the easier option and it gives far far better results than any room mic only process. If you mic everything anyway then recording to a laptop is no more complicated than plugging the laptop into the mixer with a usb cable. If you don't mic everything, then it really isn't that time consuming to put a mic on a guitar cab and a couple of mics on the drums. Ok if you have 3 horns etc it becomes more laborious but even then a pair of condensers will do a great job.

[wateroftyne]

25 minutes ago, Al Krow said:

A topic I'm very much interested in. I've been thinking about getting a better mic than my Rode Video Stereo mic for use with my Panasonic video camera.

However I'm probably focusing on the wrong thing here, in terms of just looking at mic attachments; as the weak link is more likely the preamp in the video camera?

Is there any 'score card' of cameras / videocams in terms of how good their built in pre-amps are? Or are there any camera models that have a great reputation when it comes to recording sound?

FWIW, I've got an Olympus E-M5II which I love, but the preamp is a hopeless, hissy mess.

[Silvia Bluejay]

Incidentally, I forgot to mention that the new Q2n eats batteries, so we've been using it constantly plugged into a power bank as opposed to having to change batteries twice during a gig.

And, as all small devices, including DSLRs, it will record video files (.MOV) in chunks of around 3.5GB, interrupting the recording once it reaches that size and immediately starting recording the following chunk. If the MicroSD card you put in is fast enough (class 10 minimum), when you stitch the files together mid-song the stitching won't be noticeable, unless you look for it really carefully.

[Al Krow]

I've been pointed in the direction of these links, which look useful:

A Cheap Mod To Drastically Improve DSLR Audio

http://dslrvideoshooter.com/7-camera-preamps-ive-owned-best-budget/

Get Better DSLR Audio Quality by Using a Good Preamp: Beachtek vs. juicedLink vs. Zoom H4n

[HengistPod]

I use a SONY Standard Definition camcorder, which you can pick up off eBay for 50 quid or so. Set it on a tripod where it won't get knocked over, frame your shot, and let it film your set. Audio quality can be surprisingly good if you happen to find a sweet spot in the room (by total luck), and it needs serious (louder than pub band) volume to distort.

SONY DCR-SX44, 45, 63, 65, 83 or 85 and DCR-SR68 or 88 are my favoured camcorders (mostly cos I have a load of spare batteries that fit them, and they take SD cards. Most have a hard disk too.)

Picture quality is DVD standard - you don't need HD by any means at all.

Move the camera between sets to get a different perspective on the band.

Then use some proprietary software to edit down the clips it creates.

I've filmed every gig we've done for the last couple of years with some very good results. Certainly good enough to whack on Youtube & FB to direct potential venues to. Also handy for discovering just how out of tune your singer really is.

 

And - if you do film every gig, eventually you'll have a bunch of clips of you playing the same song in different venues and from different angles. Assuming your drummer plays at the same tempo every time you can make up a splendid clip, using the best version for sound. Time consuming, but fun and potentially impressive.

[wateroftyne]

Here's another hack edit I did for the band I was depping with last night. Q4n out front (also providing the audio), Q2HD covering the drummer (poorly placed - lack of a flip-out screen is a problem here). It's canny for a quick job.

 

[Silvia Bluejay]

That's good stuff!

Another quick update: nothing has been recorded on the Saramonic since I posted here last - it's a very high-quality solution but a right PITA so I use it only when nothing else will work.

We have, however, continued using the SX40 and the Zoom Q2n regularly. The former still beats the latter into a cocked hat on pretty much everything, especially the video quality (as in, light and colour handling, not resolution), but the wide-angle function of the Q2n is very useful indeed for band+audience footage. I have found a way to sort-of-remedy the Q2n's dismal handling of low-light gigs, and especially of those using coloured lights, by converting the MOV files into MP4s and turning up the movie's brightness by at least 20% in the process.

The Q2n's performance in daylight is also different from the SX40's, again mostly from the point of view of the quality of the colours, which are less vivid and, in like-for-like comparisons, reveal a brownish hue. Of course we wouldn't notice any of this, or of the above, if we didn't have footage from another camera to compare it with.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Silvia Bluejay

[mrtcat]

On 27/05/2018 at 16:24, wateroftyne said:

Here's another hack edit I did for the band I was depping with last night. Q4n out front (also providing the audio), Q2HD covering the drummer (poorly placed - lack of a flip-out screen is a problem here). It's canny for a quick job.

 

Great 4 part vocals.