|
|
Posted by Specs on 09/18/05 21:18
<mmaker@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1127074408.693114.252790@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Richard Crowley wrote:
> > Thats nice, but not the primary concern.
> > Since the audio is recorded with compression,
> > the question is whether the de-compressed sound
> > track will withstand post-production processing.
>
> I don't see why it wouldn't, given how good it sounds off the tape.
> Certainly I've mixed HDV-recorded dialog with music, backround sound,
> effects, etc and then AC3-compressed the soundtrack to DVD and it
> sounds fine to me.
>
> Obviously I'm not a sound expert, but I wouldn't be worried about the
> quality if you're just recording dialog on the camera, unless you're
> going to be watching the finished movie in a cinema.
>
> Mark
>
The fact of the matter is Crowley likes to come to this group and casts
aspertions on the quality of the audio from the two Sony HDV cams without
having any experience with either.
He has been challenged to put hit bits where his mouth is and has not
delivered.
The audio I have heard coming off these cams is extremely noise free
particularly when compared to my Sony PD150 with its hissy PCM uncompressed
audio. So, what's more important lossy compressed noise free audio or
uncompressed noisy audio?
The question should be whther the audio from these cams is below the level
Joe Public would accept after post-roduction. The simple answer is no. Joe
Public does not generally have studio grade equipment in his front room.
Remember highly compressed audio has not stopped MP3 players being a runaway
success.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|