Video recordings - quality for $$$

[AndrewMeronek]

For those of us who have experimented with making videos for (for example) auditions or other promotional material, is there a preferred device that does a pretty good job for what you spend on it?

I'm thinking that it's probably a good idea to ignore the sound quality in a video recorder and use a separate higher quality mic, but the audio and video do need to be synced. I don't know what's involved in that; I'm a noob. I just know it'll be important, and I don't know what else might be.

[mbtrombone]

It depends on what you need it for really. I use zoom video recorders for much of my audition material, but the video quality isn't very good. It is good enough for classical auditions for summer festivals, and the audio is great, but for promotional I would get something nicer. Can't remember the price of the zoom Q3 I have, it was about a decade ago when I bought it but is was under $200.

For recording my own recitals I have been using a Nikon D500 with a Rode Video MicPro. This is only because I already have the camera and lenses because I work as a photographer as well, so not really cost effective as a musician in my opinion for a beginner, but you get great quality quickly. The only draw back to this system is that you can only record for 29:59 minutes because all DSLRs are like this. The D500 was around $1800 and the lens I use I bought used for about $300. The Mic was about $75.

I would recommend getting a video camera that you like the video quality you get from it, and then getting a good audio recorder and syncing the two together later in a post program like Adobe Premier. The drawback is that you then have to pay the monthly subscription for the Adobe products.

If you want to get really great promotional material you are most likely going to have to just hire someone to do it because you would need to make a second career to support the equipment you need there. The zoom is worth its price everytime, just don't expect great video from it.

Sorry this isn't an easier subject to get into.

[MAliesch]

+1 to hiring someone that knows what they're doing if you're looking for professional promotional material. It can get very expensive very quickly if you're looking into video cameras/equipment.

There is plenty of free video editing software that can be used to sync the audio from an external recorder. Avidemux is a simple one available for all platforms. https://itstillworks.com/12571765/how-t ... n-avidemux

Anymore these days, I think it's quite acceptable to use video off a recent flagship mobile phone with a tripod. Nothing beats familiarity and accessibility when you should be worrying about your performance not setting up camera gear. Lighting, your appearance, and the appearance of the space you're in go a long way towards "video quality". It's relatively simple to get multiple camera angles of the same performance if you know friends or family that also have mobile phones, or if you have something just lying around that you're not using. In terms of bang for the buck, it makes more sense to put your money and time into your audio solution and of course your playing skills, rather than the video equipment.

There exist a myriad of microphone/audio solutions that can connect to your phone, skip all of those. An external recorder with the ability to choose and place your mic, and set your gain appropriately will be a vast improvement in quality.

One of the Zoom recorders like the H4N is a start, as it can be a very versatile tool down the line for many different situations. TASCAM make alternatives that are just as good. The built-in microphone solutions are perfectly acceptable for auditions and even more, as long as you can find a good placement/direction for the space you're recording in. For even better quality down the line, you may want to add an external microphone. If you'll just be recording yourself solo or even with piano accompaniment, a single mic input is good enough. Use relative distance to control the balance of the Piano and Soloist. Which mic/s you end up with is a whole 'nother can of worms. I'd recommend a ribbon mic(be careful with these), anything from the MXL R144 up to the AT4081 should be usable with the R-121 being a good professional standard for this sort of thing.

To anyone that's hiring based on recordings, a great player recorded with a handheld presentation style voice recorder will be preferable to a sloppy player recorded with $10,000 equipment.

[Burgerbob]

Location is highly important, but you can find that one.

I use a phone on a tripod, with a Zoom or similar recorder for audio. Usually I'll just use the built-in mics on the H4, located a distance away.

I sync and edit everything with Vegas software. This is not something you can do easily with free software, AFAIK. This is the hard part.

[harrisonreed]

Synching audio to video is easy, even on crappy software like windows movie maker. Any program that allows you to import additional audio tracks will work. Ever wonder what that clapper board is for that they snap and the director of a movie shouts "action!"? If you think about that, and realize also that you can just clap your hands together when you step in front of the camera, then you'll know.

[Burgerbob]

Synching audio to video is easy, even on crappy software like windows movie maker. Any program that allows you to import additional audio tracks will work. Ever wonder what that clapper board is for that they snap and the director of a movie shouts "action!"? If you think about that, and realize also that you can just clap your hands together when you step in front of the camera, then you'll know.

The problem is twofold- most entry-level programs don't give you the granularity you need to get two tracks REALLY in sync, and they also won't let you export in high quality (or high resolution) audio or video.

[harrisonreed]

Synching audio to video is easy, even on crappy software like windows movie maker. Any program that allows you to import additional audio tracks will work. Ever wonder what that clapper board is for that they snap and the director of a movie shouts "action!"? If you think about that, and realize also that you can just clap your hands together when you step in front of the camera, then you'll know.

The problem is twofold- most entry-level programs don't give you the granularity you need to get two tracks REALLY in sync, and they also won't let you export in high quality (or high resolution) audio or video.

Aiden, I totally see what you're saying, and I agree that video editors make really bad audio editors, but here is why I also disagree, at least in practice:

Even the free versions of windows movie maker allowed for 9000 kbps 90hz (cd quality is half that) audio. Humans can't really discern the difference of audio beyond CD quality. For video, it allows for the super inefficient .avi package, which I believe can contain any resolution or quality of video. So, in that sense, I believe that even free software allows for the resolutions you're talking about -- audio or video.

Where that 90hz audio resolution comes in handy is not the end product discernible audio, but in covering up crossfade edits, pitch correction and other cheats (especially tempo edits, but those won't work on a video). You can record at twice the needed resolution, cheat like crazy, and as long as you didn't edit to the point where you stretched the resolution below CD quality, you can export it out at CD quality and it will be as good as humans are capable of hearing. This is NOT what you're supposed to do for an audition (but from what I've been hearing, many do this to get to live rounds these days), but this is what EVERYONE does in commercial music production.

That aside, even if a video editor only allows for 44hz (CD), you do all your audio edits in a real audio program at 90hz (even audacity, which is free) and export at cd quality. Even on free video programs you can synch the audio using typed time controls (not the GUI slider) to 1ms or less -- again, beyond what human brains can discern.