Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: 4 channel recorders question...  (Read 11847 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lordbelial

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 533
  • Gender: Male
  • Barcelona got tapers!
4 channel recorders question...
« on: August 28, 2008, 03:22:46 AM »
Hi,

I'm thinking about jumping on 4-channel recording in the near future.

I've always been doin' 2 recordings (Aud+SDB) so I can matrix in post, but never used my UA-5 to matrix both sources because I was afraid of possible delay problems (I use to place mics 10-12 meters far from the stage, usually near the soundboard area 70% of the times I do open)

Actually I'm pointing my next recorder to be an Edirol R-44, so I can do 4 channels (2 for audience and 2 for SDB, or even 4 audience), I think this will prevent me for losing time doin' matrix in post, but I think that the main problem (delay between sources because of mic distance from PA) will still remain the same....

I've tried to found information on the Edirol R-44 but my main answer cannot be answered: Does the Edirol R-44 records 4 channel independently? I mean, is it possible to have those four mono tracks separated? Or are they recorded as one file, mixed and sync'ed?

Thanks for the space!
Víctor.
Actual Gear:

stealth  - AT943 (c,o,sc,h) > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Ultrastealth  - DPA 4061 > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Open - BSC1-K1/K2/K3/K4 > Segue Dogstars > Marantz PMD671 busman t-mod

Playback: PC > M-Audio Fast Track Pro > KRK RP6 actives

My shows on the archive: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/tapemaniac
Member of  Busman Audio team

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #1 on: August 28, 2008, 05:38:04 AM »
This is an interesting question.  I'm an engineer so I'm intrigued by the question.

I recently was mixing a recording and had to match the right and left channels.  What I discovered is that in the final mixdown, if I had the right and left matched to within .01 second, then I couldn't hear any noticeable delay effect.  If they were .02 seconds or more mismatched, you could hear the difference between the two as reverb.  So, let's use .01 sec as our acceptance criteria.

OK, according to wikipedia, sound travels at 343m/s at 20C, dry air.  You say that your mics are 10 to 12 meters away from the stage.  That means that there is a sound delay from the stage to your mics of 12m / 343m/s...or roughly 0.03 sec (or three times the length of Michael Phelps' fingernails  ;D)

I'd say based on this, that you'd probably have some issues with delay. 

However, even if you do have to make a 0.03 second adjustment in post, you only have to do one minor adjustment, since the overall clock of the two sources (SBD and mics) would be the same if you were recording with an R-44.  IOW, just shift your mic source 0.03 seconds back on the timeline and your two sources will be perfectly synched for the whole show. 

This would still be far easier than synching sources from two separate recorders...and I think worth having a 4 channel recorder for, especially since you only have to babysit one recorder in one location.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2008, 05:43:38 AM by tonedeaf »

Offline lordbelial

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 533
  • Gender: Male
  • Barcelona got tapers!
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2008, 05:51:40 AM »
(or three times the length of Michael Phelps' fingernails  ;D)

Hahahaha, that's what I will define as: Owned olimpics.

By the other hand, quite right, main problem sync'n sources is time clock, delay problems will always happen (physics are that funny) but having 4 channels with the same time clock will help for sure.

So now I only need to know if the R-44 records each channel in a single track (or each stereo pair in a single track), because if it does not, no delay issues would be ever fixed in post...

Thanks tonedeaf.
Actual Gear:

stealth  - AT943 (c,o,sc,h) > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Ultrastealth  - DPA 4061 > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Open - BSC1-K1/K2/K3/K4 > Segue Dogstars > Marantz PMD671 busman t-mod

Playback: PC > M-Audio Fast Track Pro > KRK RP6 actives

My shows on the archive: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/tapemaniac
Member of  Busman Audio team

Offline John Willett

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1550
  • Gender: Male
  • Bio:
    • Sound-Link ProAudio
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #3 on: August 28, 2008, 06:58:45 AM »
So now I only need to know if the R-44 records each channel in a single track (or each stereo pair in a single track), because if it does not, no delay issues would be ever fixed in post...

Is this important?

All tracks *have* to be on the same clock time to record at all.

But if it worries you, just give the manufacturers (or their agent) a ring and they'll have the answer.

On my Nagra VI you can choose to record mono files or poly files, it makes no real difernce to the result as they are all clocked together.

Offline lordbelial

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 533
  • Gender: Male
  • Barcelona got tapers!
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2008, 07:11:45 AM »
So now I only need to know if the R-44 records each channel in a single track (or each stereo pair in a single track), because if it does not, no delay issues would be ever fixed in post...

Is this important?

All tracks *have* to be on the same clock time to record at all.

But if it worries you, just give the manufacturers (or their agent) a ring and they'll have the answer.

On my Nagra VI you can choose to record mono files or poly files, it makes no real difernce to the result as they are all clocked together.


Well, it may seem a silly question, no doubt about it... but that's what I'd like to know, if there's the possibility of choosing on the recorder to make mono files or poly files and having all 4 tracks clocked together.

Since I'll use it mainly as a field recorder it does not matter at all, but I've planning to use it as a 4-track mixer for personal music or even 4-track recorder for video/studio purposes...
Actual Gear:

stealth  - AT943 (c,o,sc,h) > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Ultrastealth  - DPA 4061 > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Open - BSC1-K1/K2/K3/K4 > Segue Dogstars > Marantz PMD671 busman t-mod

Playback: PC > M-Audio Fast Track Pro > KRK RP6 actives

My shows on the archive: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/tapemaniac
Member of  Busman Audio team

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2008, 08:23:10 AM »
I'm in a hurry right now so I can't double check with the manual, but if I recall correctly the R-44 lets you choose the format. I think it can be two two-channel files, a single four-channel file, or four separate single-channel files at the user's option.

There's been some discussion of this on the forums because for uninterrupted recording, the 2 GB maximum size for a WAV file (a limit which can only sometimes be exceeded) is naturally reached sooner if you record all your tracks in one file.

--best regards
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #6 on: August 28, 2008, 08:26:55 AM »
I never understand this "delay" issue when it comes to 4 tracking?

We are simply juxtaposing two stereo track sets in time...delay becomes irrelevant.

You're making a "synthetic" recording - you only heard the AUD...part. The SBD is "fake"

I understand delay as far as making the sources sound as one...but it really seems like a non-issue.

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #7 on: August 28, 2008, 09:17:26 AM »
I never understand this "delay" issue when it comes to 4 tracking?

We are simply juxtaposing two stereo track sets in time...delay becomes irrelevant.

You're making a "synthetic" recording - you only heard the AUD...part. The SBD is "fake"

I understand delay as far as making the sources sound as one...but it really seems like a non-issue.

Not sure your point and what you mean by 'fake', but if you record them both at the same clock time, they're out of phase by the time it takes sound to reach the mics that are farther away.  Sound travels through air at a slow rate compared to electricity traveling through wires.  In one case, the sound reaches the stage mics (and thus the SBD) 0.03 seconds sooner than the mics that are 10-12 meters into the audience.  Since you're recording 4 tracks simultaneously on the same clock, in Michael Phelps style, the sounds on the SBD tracks beat the sounds on the mic tracks onto the recording, in this case by 0.03 secs.  Obviously, if you listen to all 4 tracks at the same time with no adjustment, you may hear the delay as a reverby sound.  So, in post, you either move the SBD track forward by 0.03 seconds or move the mic tracks back by 0.03 seconds to make them line up right and to eliminate the delay effect.

Offline lordbelial

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 533
  • Gender: Male
  • Barcelona got tapers!
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #8 on: August 28, 2008, 09:22:10 AM »
I never understand this "delay" issue when it comes to 4 tracking?

We are simply juxtaposing two stereo track sets in time...delay becomes irrelevant.

You're making a "synthetic" recording - you only heard the AUD...part. The SBD is "fake"

I understand delay as far as making the sources sound as one...but it really seems like a non-issue.

Not sure your point and what you mean by 'fake', but if you record them both at the same clock time, they're out of phase by the time it takes sound to reach the mics that are farther away.  Sound travels through air at a slow rate compared to electricity traveling through wires.  In one case, the sound reaches the stage mics (and thus the SBD) 0.03 seconds sooner than the mics that are 10-12 meters into the audience.  Since you're recording 4 tracks simultaneously on the same clock, in Michael Phelps style, the sounds on the SBD tracks beat the sounds on the mic tracks onto the recording, in this case by 0.03 secs.  Obviously, if you listen to all 4 tracks at the same time with no adjustment, you may hear the delay as a reverby sound.  So, in post, you either move the SBD track forward by 0.03 seconds or move the mic tracks back by 0.03 seconds to make them line up right and to eliminate the delay effect.

Great explanation. We should start talk about delay between SDB and AUD as "Michael Phelps" effect.
Actual Gear:

stealth  - AT943 (c,o,sc,h) > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Ultrastealth  - DPA 4061 > ST-9100 > Edirol R09HR/I-River IHP-116(CFMod)
Open - BSC1-K1/K2/K3/K4 > Segue Dogstars > Marantz PMD671 busman t-mod

Playback: PC > M-Audio Fast Track Pro > KRK RP6 actives

My shows on the archive: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/tapemaniac
Member of  Busman Audio team

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15736
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #9 on: August 28, 2008, 09:25:00 AM »
I'm in a hurry right now so I can't double check with the manual, but if I recall correctly the R-44 lets you choose the format. I think it can be two two-channel files, a single four-channel file, or four separate single-channel files at the user's option.

There's been some discussion of this on the forums because for uninterrupted recording, the 2 GB maximum size for a WAV file (a limit which can only sometimes be exceeded) is naturally reached sooner if you record all your tracks in one file.

--best regards
^^^^
This is correct. I don't own one yet, but I've been following the device & the threads.

.. planning to use it as a 4-track mixer for personal music or even 4-track recorder for video/studio purposes...

General consensus seems to be that it's a great little 4 track recorder, but has limited mixer and track monitoring functions.  Check the R44 threads for details.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline ghellquist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2008, 03:04:14 PM »
If you use the right software at home in your PC or Mac it does not matter how the recorder delivers the material. If worst comes to worst you could always convert from the quad format to 4x mono, but you do what fits your setup.

But yes, according to the manual, the R44 can deliver 4x mono, 2x stereo or 1x quad. It is on page 67.
http://www.edirol.com/images/stories/products/r44/R-44_e1.pdf

Gunnar

Offline OFOTD

  • Amorican
  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2008, 03:15:53 PM »
To answer the original question.....

Yes you can record four individual tracks OR two stereo pairs.   Use your favorite audio editor with either format and you're good to go.  I very much prefer recording four individual tracks.

One of the greatest benefits I have found in four channel recording with one device is the ease in which I can line things up in post.  Having both stereo pairs recorded on the same clock makes lining things up to account for any delay super easy.


Lots of threads on delay and all forms of it.  Just search.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15736
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2008, 03:30:44 PM »
I very much prefer recording four individual tracks.

OFOTD, do you prefer that because you get longer recording times per file (2GB splits) or some other reason?
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline OFOTD

  • Amorican
  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2008, 03:40:12 PM »
I very much prefer recording four individual tracks.

OFOTD, do you prefer that because you get longer recording times per file (2GB splits) or some other reason?

That is certainly one of the main advantages for sure.  Most software packages will allow you to open a larger combination of files together so that helps.   It also allows me to cut out several steps along the editing process where its easier to make changes on a track by track basis instead of a stereo pair basis.. 

If I was strictly doing two channel recording i'd probably be using 2xSTEREO instead of 4x1 though.

I think the biggest decision to run 4x1 or 2xSTEREO is based upon which software package you're using and how it functions with multiple pairs and/or individual channels.   Currently i'm using SoundForge 9 and the 4x1 is now just what i'm used to.

Offline rowjimmytour

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3776
  • Gender: Male
    • My LMA bookmarks
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2008, 03:46:19 PM »
To answer the original question.....

Yes you can record four individual tracks OR two stereo pairs.   Use your favorite audio editor with either format and you're good to go.  I very much prefer recording four individual tracks.

One of the greatest benefits I have found in four channel recording with one device is the ease in which I can line things up in post.  Having both stereo pairs recorded on the same clock makes lining things up to account for any delay super easy.


Lots of threads on delay and all forms of it.  Just search.
Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb. I like the fact that I can tweak all the mono files in post edit so I can fine tune into some thing if I have to. Not sure about the R44 but the R4 the highest sample rate at 4 x mono is 48khz at 24 bit. I forgot to mention that easyjim was my mentor for recording 4 x mono and helped anwer millions ?'s I had and showed me the pluses on 4x.
Peace
http://www.archive.org/bookmarNo
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw

Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2008, 04:18:07 PM »
To answer the original question.....

Yes you can record four individual tracks OR two stereo pairs.   Use your favorite audio editor with either format and you're good to go.  I very much prefer recording four individual tracks.

One of the greatest benefits I have found in four channel recording with one device is the ease in which I can line things up in post.  Having both stereo pairs recorded on the same clock makes lining things up to account for any delay super easy.


Lots of threads on delay and all forms of it.  Just search.
Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb. I like the fact that I can tweak all the mono files in post edit so I can fine tune into some thing if I have to. Not sure about the R44 but the R4 the highest sample rate at 4 x mono is 48khz at 24 bit. I forgot to mention that easyjim was my mentor for recording 4 x mono and helped anwer millions ?'s I had and showed me the pluses on 4x.
Peace

Now - that makes NO sense to me...you have clock sync - what does "shrinking" accomplish...???

Its all about the relative position of the files...

Offline rowjimmytour

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3776
  • Gender: Male
    • My LMA bookmarks
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2008, 04:22:20 PM »
To answer the original question.....

Yes you can record four individual tracks OR two stereo pairs.   Use your favorite audio editor with either format and you're good to go.  I very much prefer recording four individual tracks.

One of the greatest benefits I have found in four channel recording with one device is the ease in which I can line things up in post.  Having both stereo pairs recorded on the same clock makes lining things up to account for any delay super easy.


Lots of threads on delay and all forms of it.  Just search.
Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb. I like the fact that I can tweak all the mono files in post edit so I can fine tune into some thing if I have to. Not sure about the R44 but the R4 the highest sample rate at 4 x mono is 48khz at 24 bit. I forgot to mention that easyjim was my mentor for recording 4 x mono and helped anwer millions ?'s I had and showed me the pluses on 4x.
Peace

Now - that makes NO sense to me...you have clock sync - what does "shrinking" accomplish...???

Its all about the relative position of the files...
Shrinking might not be the right word really but using Vegas 7 I think you right click at the end of the file and you go left or right w/ cursor +/- ms for delay and it kinda shrinks the time clock so both sources match.
PEace
http://www.archive.org/bookmarNo
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw

Offline gtalife

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2008, 04:22:45 PM »
I do a lot of SBD/AUD Matrix recordings and own a R-4, i like to run 2x Stereo, compared 4x mono, and trim the audience source 1 tenth of a sec per foot.


Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2008, 04:30:17 PM »
I do a lot of SBD/AUD Matrix recordings and own a R-4, i like to run 2x Stereo, compared 4x mono, and trim the audience source 1 tenth of a sec per foot.

Do you actually sit there and compute this stuff? - or just line them up until they sound good?

Offline gtalife

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #19 on: August 28, 2008, 04:45:25 PM »
I do a lot of SBD/AUD Matrix recordings and own a R-4, i like to run 2x Stereo, compared 4x mono, and trim the audience source 1 tenth of a sec per foot.

Do you actually sit there and compute this stuff? - or just line them up until they sound good?

I multitrack both sources using Adobe Audition, after doing countless Matrix's i still pin point a matching up points. on both sources (snare drum hit, etc) and it ends up .10 sec per foot. Pretty much the whole process is easy after you get used to doing it, the tricky part is making the mix of the 2 sources sound the way you like it, i.e...is there need for some EQ on each source, does it sound better with more SBD than audience etc..etc.
Have fun!

Offline Todd R

  • Over/Under on next gear purchase: 2 months
  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4901
  • Gender: Male
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #20 on: August 28, 2008, 04:52:20 PM »
Something seems way wrong with this -- the speed of sound is roughly 1ms/foot, not 100ms/ft (0.1 sec per foot).   ???
Mics: Microtech Gefell m20/m21 (nbob/pfa actives), Line Audio CM3, Church CA-11 cards
Preamp:  none <sniff>
Recorders:  Sound Devices MixPre-6, Sony PCM-M10, Zoom H4nPro

Offline gtalife

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 63
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2008, 05:05:24 PM »
Something seems way wrong with this -- the speed of sound is roughly 1ms/foot, not 100ms/ft (0.1 sec per foot).   ???

sorry, you are right....thanks for the correction.

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #22 on: August 28, 2008, 05:21:38 PM »
Something seems way wrong with this -- the speed of sound is roughly 1ms/foot, not 100ms/ft (0.1 sec per foot).   ???

sorry, you are right....thanks for the correction.

Yup, that figures right about with my calculation that I did earlier today where I got .03 second delay where the original poster was saying he sets mics up 10-12 meters back.  That's 30 to 35 feet or so...times .001 sec/foot is around 0.03 secs.

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #23 on: August 28, 2008, 05:37:24 PM »
Now - that makes NO sense to me...you have clock sync - what does "shrinking" accomplish...???

Its all about the relative position of the files...

I think there may be some confusion here about the difference between two different things - delay and drift.  Jim is referring to drift and you are referring to delay.

Delay refers to the the difference in the amount of time a distinct audio event/snapshot (for instance a snare hit) is captured by two distinct sources.  A direct feed/SBD source will be 'immediate' realtively-speaking by comparison to a source captured by ambient mics, whether on stage or out in the room.  It is the difference in time between the sound waves reaching the direct mics feeding the mixing console and the sound waves reaching your ambient pair - a difference that should approximate ~ 1 milisecond per foot of distance that is between the ambient mics and the sound source.  When distinct sources like a SBD and an AUD feed are clock-sync'ed in a 4 track recorder or multitrack set-up, you will still have to correct for delay but will have no drift.

Drift, in contrast to delay, refers to the difference between two distinct recorders' internal clocks' rendering of time.  Unless two distinct recorders are pro units with the ability to link by wordclock or by locking/syncing to the time information provided by a digital feed from some other 'master clock' device like an outboard A>D converter, etc., you will over the course of a recording have a slight difference between one recorder's rendering of, for instance, 1:25:36.97 and the other recorder's rendering of 1:25:36.97  

Drift between the clocks of two separate digital recorders - even of the exact model/type - will be constant if they are not clock-synced in some way, and drift thus increases in a direct relationship with an increase in the length of recording time.  So, when you find and line the source up at a sync point (like a snare hit) at the beginning of two distinct sources that were not clock-synced, and then you find a sync point at the end of the recording, you will find that one source is off from the other by some small amount that will make a mix of two disparate recordings lined up at the beginning fall out of sync by the end.  You have to fix this drift by time-scaling (essentially a time-shrink or expand process) one of the two sources to match it to the other.  It may also be done, as some do in Wavelab, by chopping up one source and continually re-aligning it at multiple time intervals through the length of the recording, but that is both much more cumbersome AND much less accurate because there will still be some drift apparent (and possibly audible) at the end of each time interval before the following new sync point.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2008, 05:44:23 PM by easyjim »

Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #24 on: August 28, 2008, 06:09:37 PM »
Now - that makes NO sense to me...you have clock sync - what does "shrinking" accomplish...???

Its all about the relative position of the files...

I think there may be some confusion here about the difference between two different things - delay and drift.  Jim is referring to drift and you are referring to delay.

Delay refers to the the difference in the amount of time a distinct audio event/snapshot (for instance a snare hit) is captured by two distinct sources.  A direct feed/SBD source will be 'immediate' realtively-speaking by comparison to a source captured by ambient mics, whether on stage or out in the room.  It is the difference in time between the sound waves reaching the direct mics feeding the mixing console and the sound waves reaching your ambient pair - a difference that should approximate ~ 1 milisecond per foot of distance that is between the ambient mics and the sound source.  When distinct sources like a SBD and an AUD feed are clock-sync'ed in a 4 track recorder or multitrack set-up, you will still have to correct for delay but will have no drift.

Drift, in contrast to delay, refers to the difference between two distinct recorders' internal clocks' rendering of time.  Unless two distinct recorders are pro units with the ability to link by wordclock or by locking/syncing to the time information provided by a digital feed from some other 'master clock' device like an outboard A>D converter, etc., you will over the course of a recording have a slight difference between one recorder's rendering of, for instance, 1:25:36.97 and the other recorder's rendering of 1:25:36.97 

Drift between the clocks of two separate digital recorders - even of the exact model/type - will be constant if they are not clock-synced in some way, and drift thus increases in a direct relationship with an increase in the length of recording time.  So, when you find and line the source up at a sync point (like a snare hit) at the beginning of two distinct sources that were not clock-synced, and then you find a sync point at the end of the recording, you will find that one source is off from the other by some small amount that will make a mix of two disparate recordings lined up at the beginning fall out of sync by the end.  You have to fix this drift by time-scaling (essentially a time-shrink or expand process) one of the two sources to match it to the other.  It may also be done, as some do in Wavelab, by chopping up one source and continually re-aligning it at multiple time intervals through the length of the recording, but that is both much more cumbersome AND much less accurate because there will still be some drift apparent (and possibly audible) at the end of each time interval before the following new sync point.

Got that - pretty sure he referenced an R4 - so they are inherently clock synced tracks - so why the need to "shrink"?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2008, 06:13:31 PM by Roving Sign »

easy jim

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #25 on: August 28, 2008, 09:23:17 PM »
Got that - pretty sure he referenced an R4 - so they are inherently clock synced tracks - so why the need to "shrink"?

Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb.

^ OK, I see what you mean now Roving Sign.  Doh...

So, Jim, were you using your R-4 or two separate recorders that night where you were ~ 45' away and uphill, and you ended shrinking the AUD source to mix it w/ the SBD? 

I think Roving Sign is pointing out that, theoretically, if it was the R-4 and not 2 separate recorders, the tracks were already sycned and there should not have been a need to correct drift by shrinking a track.

Offline Teen Wolf Blitzer

  • It's all ballbearings these days.
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5310
  • Gender: Male
  • I am Rattus Norvegicus.
    • Support Festival Radio
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #26 on: August 28, 2008, 10:23:42 PM »
If you run the mics onstage there is no delay.   >:D

OFOTD.  You can't run 2 x stereo with the 744.   :(  But you can on a R4/R44.  But I'm sure you knew that.   ;D  You'd think SD could implement that in a firmware upgrade.   ???   It's always bugged me.

But all I do when I have a far mic source and a board is pan the mics to the left in my earphones and the board in the right.  Even out the gain so they roughly match and then listen.  It becomes real easy to slide the board foward till it tits on.  When the band talks or an intro lick is the best place to tell.  I don't bother with the math. 

Offline rowjimmytour

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3776
  • Gender: Male
    • My LMA bookmarks
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #27 on: August 28, 2008, 10:58:28 PM »
Got that - pretty sure he referenced an R4 - so they are inherently clock synced tracks - so why the need to "shrink"?

Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb.

^ OK, I see what you mean now Roving Sign.  Doh...

So, Jim, were you using your R-4 or two separate recorders that night where you were ~ 45' away and uphill, and you ended shrinking the AUD source to mix it w/ the SBD? 

I think Roving Sign is pointing out that, theoretically, if it was the R-4 and not 2 separate recorders, the tracks were already sycned and there should not have been a need to correct drift by shrinking a track.

I was using only my r4 and yes I was talking about drift and not delay. I followed these instructions below to correct the show w/ Vegas.
Now, go to the end of your new audio track and compare it visually to your original track.  Hopefully you should see some similar points in each and be able to tell how far off they are.  If your original audio track is distorted too bad or AGC was used it may be almost square.  Use your ears in that case.  Play the tracks together and you should be able to tell if your new track is ahead or behind your original.  You may have to adjust the track volume of one or the other to help out.  Just make sure you set the new audio track back to 0 before you render.  Go to the end of the new audio track and hold your mouse cursor right over the end.  Hold down the CTRL key and you'll see the "~" symbol appear.  Keep that CTRL key held down and move your mouse to the left or right.  You are now stretching or shrinking your audio track in real time.  Move it in small increments and listen and compare your two tracks visually each time.  You might have to zoom in and move in extremely small increments to get it right.  Once you're done both tracks should sound like one when played together. 
http://www.archive.org/details/bts2008-05-03.bts2008-05-03matrix.flac16
http://www.archive.org/bookmarNo
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe and saw

Offline OFOTD

  • Amorican
  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6307
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #28 on: August 28, 2008, 10:59:17 PM »
OFOTD.  You can't run 2 x stereo with the 744.   :(  But you can on a R4/R44.  But I'm sure you knew that.   ;D  You'd think SD could implement that in a firmware upgrade.   ???   It's always bugged me.

Yup I knew that.  I was speaking from my R4 / R4 Pro experience.  

I agree with a SD firmware solution.  One of a couple things I wish SD would address.  


Roving Sign

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #29 on: August 28, 2008, 11:07:32 PM »
Got that - pretty sure he referenced an R4 - so they are inherently clock synced tracks - so why the need to "shrink"?

Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb.

^ OK, I see what you mean now Roving Sign.  Doh...

So, Jim, were you using your R-4 or two separate recorders that night where you were ~ 45' away and uphill, and you ended shrinking the AUD source to mix it w/ the SBD? 

I think Roving Sign is pointing out that, theoretically, if it was the R-4 and not 2 separate recorders, the tracks were already sycned and there should not have been a need to correct drift by shrinking a track.

I was using only my r4 and yes I was talking about drift and not delay. I followed these instructions below to correct the show w/ Vegas.
Now, go to the end of your new audio track and compare it visually to your original track.  Hopefully you should see some similar points in each and be able to tell how far off they are.  If your original audio track is distorted too bad or AGC was used it may be almost square.  Use your ears in that case.  Play the tracks together and you should be able to tell if your new track is ahead or behind your original.  You may have to adjust the track volume of one or the other to help out.  Just make sure you set the new audio track back to 0 before you render.  Go to the end of the new audio track and hold your mouse cursor right over the end.  Hold down the CTRL key and you'll see the "~" symbol appear.  Keep that CTRL key held down and move your mouse to the left or right.  You are now stretching or shrinking your audio track in real time.  Move it in small increments and listen and compare your two tracks visually each time.  You might have to zoom in and move in extremely small increments to get it right.  Once you're done both tracks should sound like one when played together. 
http://www.archive.org/details/bts2008-05-03.bts2008-05-03matrix.flac16

But how can there be any drift?

you have an R4 - thats the whole point of that device...4 clock synced tracks...

Offline BayTaynt3d

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1816
  • Gender: Male
  • Live from San Francisco
    • BayTaper.com
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #30 on: September 21, 2008, 08:41:08 PM »
Got that - pretty sure he referenced an R4 - so they are inherently clock synced tracks - so why the need to "shrink"?

Dito for me and recording four track w/ my R4. And for the record I have only had delay issues one time running matrix out side where I was about 45' away from the stage uphill. As long as you are around 20'-25' you should be alright w/o any delay. I use Vegas to render my files together and to take care of delay all you have to do is shrink or expand the two audience tracks. I found it easier to shrink the aud tracks to fit the SDB but when you get it right you will know by the reverb.

^ OK, I see what you mean now Roving Sign.  Doh...

So, Jim, were you using your R-4 or two separate recorders that night where you were ~ 45' away and uphill, and you ended shrinking the AUD source to mix it w/ the SBD? 

I think Roving Sign is pointing out that, theoretically, if it was the R-4 and not 2 separate recorders, the tracks were already sycned and there should not have been a need to correct drift by shrinking a track.

I was using only my r4 and yes I was talking about drift and not delay. I followed these instructions below to correct the show w/ Vegas.
Now, go to the end of your new audio track and compare it visually to your original track.  Hopefully you should see some similar points in each and be able to tell how far off they are.  If your original audio track is distorted too bad or AGC was used it may be almost square.  Use your ears in that case.  Play the tracks together and you should be able to tell if your new track is ahead or behind your original.  You may have to adjust the track volume of one or the other to help out.  Just make sure you set the new audio track back to 0 before you render.  Go to the end of the new audio track and hold your mouse cursor right over the end.  Hold down the CTRL key and you'll see the "~" symbol appear.  Keep that CTRL key held down and move your mouse to the left or right.  You are now stretching or shrinking your audio track in real time.  Move it in small increments and listen and compare your two tracks visually each time.  You might have to zoom in and move in extremely small increments to get it right.  Once you're done both tracks should sound like one when played together. 
http://www.archive.org/details/bts2008-05-03.bts2008-05-03matrix.flac16

But how can there be any drift?

you have an R4 - thats the whole point of that device...4 clock synced tracks...


I'm with Roving Sign. As a multi-year R4 and R44 owner, and as a power user of Vegas for even more years, I can say without question that this is not the right approach. There is also some other info in this thread that is confusing, most of which has been corrected by sporatic other posts, but here's a quick rundown as I see it...

1. If you are using an R4 or R44, there will NEVER be drift, which means there will never be a need to shrink or lengthen any track that was recorded at the same time with one of these units. If you are doing that, you are literally introducing drift yourself by doing so. The exception of course would only be if you had another source you were syncing in that was not recorded with the R44/4 -- say when you are syncing up some video to your audio source. So, for an R4/R44, all you have to do is get any point between the tracks synced, and then the entire tracks will be synced. If you're syncing in a separate source, then the technique above is a great one and represents one of Vegas's amazing features (real time on-the-fly editing WHILE it plays).

So say you are syncing a matrixed source with some video. First, get the matrix synced by delaying the SBD channel (you can either add a delay, or slide the track later, but no stretching/shrinking). Once the matrix is good, then sync it with the audio from the video. Get an early piece in sync, and once that sounds good, go all the way out to the end and listen. It might be OK, but chances are, there's drift. If so, that's where I would shrink or stretch the matrix (I prefer not shrinking/stretching the video piece because that will affect picture quality in a visible way sometimes, and the shrink/stretch of the matrix will be inaudible). Done.

2. If you are recording more than one channel with mics or sources that are significantly distant from one another (e.g., SBD into 2 channels and AUD into other 2 channels way back FOB), then you may need to delay the closer mics (the SBD). The rule of thumb is 1ms per foot, but is much better done by visibly lining things up and listening to them. You need to be careful doing this because once you are close to sync, it is easy to get weird phasing. I prefer getting the SBD just a tiny hair in front of the AUD in these situation (again only if mics far from stage in matrix situation) because that prevents weird phasing and it sounds better with the dry SBD leading my millisecs, and the natural ambient coming millisecs later (I'm talking tiny amounts here, you need good monitors and an even mix cause the tiny difference I'm talking about here really basically all sounds in sync once you're that close).

3. The R4 and R44 can record 4xMono, 2xStereo, and combinations in one or multiple individual files. You have to be careful because some editors can't handle the bundled multi-track files, whereas all editors can usually handle a mono or stereo file. Also, file size isn't too much of an issue because the R4/R44 does seemless splits. That said, I almost always run 2xStereo, whether a few of those channels are really mono or not. It makes for two files that are easily read by any editor, and for me, in Vegas, I can right-click and choose the channel I want on any stereo file in a matter of one second. For matrixes, it's easy this way because I just end up with two stereo tracks in vegas, just slip the AUD back in time, and you're done.

Also, if you're new to matrixing and haven't done so yet, you should read the TaperSection Matrix Guide PDF. Very helpful piece.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2008, 10:54:06 PM by BayTaynt3d »
BayTaper.com | One Man’s Multimedia Journey Through the San Francisco Jazz & Creative Music Scene

Offline stantheman1976

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1093
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #31 on: September 21, 2008, 10:21:21 PM »
Dude, that was from a different thread.  If you're using the same recorder then no, there shouldn't be any drift.  My post was about syncing up different recordings from different sources.  My post was not brought into this thread by me and doesn't relate to 4 channel recorders with an internal clock.  Please check the entire thread and see where something comes from before you go calling me out in public.  I don't own and R4 or R44 and probably will never be able to afford either.

I often record video and either a mic or board feed and mix them.  I don't ever stretch the video track when I do that.  I match the new audio to the original and if I have more than one new audio track (i.e. matrix) I match each new track to the one above it and mix to taste.

Offline BayTaynt3d

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1816
  • Gender: Male
  • Live from San Francisco
    • BayTaper.com
Re: 4 channel recorders question...
« Reply #32 on: September 21, 2008, 10:53:04 PM »
Dude, that was from a different thread.  If you're using the same recorder then no, there shouldn't be any drift.  My post was about syncing up different recordings from different sources.  My post was not brought into this thread by me and doesn't relate to 4 channel recorders with an internal clock.  Please check the entire thread and see where something comes from before you go calling me out in public.  I don't own and R4 or R44 and probably will never be able to afford either.

I often record video and either a mic or board feed and mix them.  I don't ever stretch the video track when I do that.  I match the new audio to the original and if I have more than one new audio track (i.e. matrix) I match each new track to the one above it and mix to taste.

That wasn't directed at you, it was directed at the person who quoted it in this thread in this context. I should have left the entire quoted section intact to make that clear. I modified it as such now.
BayTaper.com | One Man’s Multimedia Journey Through the San Francisco Jazz & Creative Music Scene

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.115 seconds with 57 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF