Do I need a second computer??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bampei
  • Start date Start date
B

Bampei

New member
I'm a voiceover actor and a broadcaster.

I have recently built a project studio in order to eliminate commutes to the studios where I do voiceovers. I produce two weekly spots (2:00 and :30) for the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service (AFRTS) that run in Japan and Korea.

In addition, I host a weekly one-hour golf talk show that until now was broadcast live from the AFRTS studio in Tokyo.

Due to a move, and the desire of AFRTS to syndicate the golf show throughout the Asia region, I will be taping the show on Tuesdays... dropping it to MP3, and emailing it to the various AFRTS affiliates for broadacast on Friday.

Here's my dilemna....

I am recording to a high-end computer with an M-Audio 2496 on board, through a Mackie 1402 VLZ-Pro mixer. I have the need to access instant jingles, sound bytes, beds, and pre-recorded interviews while recording the show in a single take. I want to use two programs from BSI (Stinger and WaveCart) to bang the instant soundbytes and beds.

I am confused about latency and the ability for my recording computer to play a wav file, mix it with vocals, and record it in real-time all in one system (while monitoring all as well). Can this be done?

Additionally, I don't like the idea of having my primary recording software window in the background while using BSI software during the show taping.

Would the most efficient method of accessing these wav files and beds during the show be to use a second computer? .... or is there an easier and just as functional way of doing the same thing? I am an experienced broadcaster, but a total newbie to engineering my own recordings.

Thanks in advance for any input.
 
It looks like to be able to get the most out of the programs you mentioned it would be best to put them on there own system(it wouldn't have to be top of the line or anything like that). You could use another program that would integrate with whatever your using(CoolEdit, sonar...) but it would probaly be a pain to learn it and transfer things.
 
It's certainly not necessary, you can do everything on your one computer.

BUT..... I would ask myself: If my job depends on reliability would I be happy only having ONE computer around that could crash on me??? Nope. Gotta have a backup, just in case #1 goes down.
 
Not to be a pest, but I have to ask: If you are no longer broadcasting this show live, why do you have to do it all in one take, in real time? You could solve your problem by dropping your sound bites and beds in after the fact.

Just wondering...
 
Brad said:
Not to be a pest, but I have to ask: If you are no longer broadcasting this show live, why do you have to do it all in one take, in real time? You could solve your problem by dropping your sound bites and beds in after the fact.

Just wondering...
Click to expand...

Do you want to give everyone a seizure??

Get rid of the annoying avatar.
 
Thanks for the opinions. They help!

Guess a 2nd computer is the easiest way, and it doesn't have to be a mega-power one.

To Brad:

Recording the show in one-take real-time is necessary for realism and spontanaity. The beds wouldn't be a problem, but the sound bytes have to be coordinated with talk-show formatting, (Can't talk and have the soundbytes playing at the same time) and if we added them after the fact, we would have problems with timing. This is a radio show, and has to be exactly 00:55:57 minutes long for broadcast. If we added everything after the basic talk recording, we would be spending ten hours trying to get the timing right. It's just easier to drop the wav's when appropriate or necessary in real-time.

Radio shows and spots are much more time critical than music production in general.

Thanks again for the feedback guys!
 
Well, I see the point about realism and spontinaity, but you don't do a live radio show totally blind, right? You are gonna follow a bit of an outline or script. If you know roughly how long the sound bytes are going to be, I don't see why it would be so hard to do. I know there are syndicated radio programs here in the states that are pre-recorded, and I would be surprised if everything was done in real time.

I think if you experimented with some brands of software, you might see how it is possible, especially if you can draw out a timeline with different regions and such.

I am not trying to be argumentative or anything, quite the contrary - I am trying to think of another (easier in the long run) way to go about it. I know that if you are used to checking yourself against a clock, it might be hard to get used to something else. I would tend to look at it almost like a movie: when you watch it on the big screen, it all flows together like it was done in real time, and therefore, in sequence, but of course the truth is very much the opposite. Shots done out of sequence, some actors speaking their lines to a chair instead of to another person (which is how it looks to us), day for night, etc.

Good luck in however you remedy your dilemma!
Brad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top