Terry Mikkelsen
Forum Replies Created
-
I know that Time Warner Cable only does SD inserts. No HD yet. (At least here in Ohio. Any luck else where?)
Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
Tom you are all good. You don’t need separate tweeters. Most cabinets do not have split frequency drivers (separate woofers and tweeters). The speakers made for the amp are much stiffer and can handle higher frequencies better than a regular speaker. So your speakers that you got from the other amp are just perfect.
Now the fun part. You should match your speaker impedance to the recommended impedance of the amp. This will determine if you should wire your speakers in series or parallel. If you are unable to find the specs for the amp, I would wire in series. This will double your impedance of an individual speaker and will be less “strain” on the amp, making it less likely that you’ll blow the amp.Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
You shouldn’t use regular speakers for an amp cab. I learned this through experimentation while still in high school. We went the other direction though, and took an amp and tried to make car speakers. It will produce sound, so it works in that essence, but not the results you really want. The amp speakers are MUCH stiffer and not as much throw. Guitar tones are more simple than reproducing the entire audio spectrum at once (like a piece of music). So with a “tighter” speaker you get more control over the tones produced.
If you really wanted to experiment, you could use regular speakers, but you would need a woofer and tweeter as you originally guessed. A regular 12″ woofer will fry over time if you try to push too much high frequency material to it. Because it has a large amount of travel and mass, it is difficult to make it move really fast (5000 times or more per second). Thats why a tweeter is better suited to that job (less mass, easier to move quickly). Consequently, the opposite is true as well, it takes a lot of air movement to hear the lower notes, and the small mass of the tweeter is unable to push enough air and will fry in trying to do so. So you’ll need some kind of cross-over network, whether active or passive, to divide the audio into spectrum that is appropriate for each speaker.Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
I’m having trouble with the 2/3 A4.
Can you give dimensions for the finished size and the unfolded size?Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
-
Setup some 30 second shots and see what floats your boat. Plus you can extrapolate your time invested to your entire piece and see if its worth the image you are getting.
Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
My gut was right. I cannot find settings or workflow that is worth the increased compression time. By going to another format/timeline you can get different looks, but nothing that really pops out. There are slight differences, which could be perceived by some as better, but to others maybe it is worse. And the differences are definitly slight! Even at 200%, you need to examine frame by frame for the differences, nothing that is worth noting at 100% in real time.
With all of this in mind, along with the almost 2X time it takes to render/compress, I can’t justify it at all.p.s. I didn’t like any of the results when I applied gaussian blur, ranging in values from .1 to 1.
Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
“Terry, do frame controls matter when going from my EX1 timeline to m2v?”
Yes, because I believe your EX1 timeline is 1440 x 1080 or 1920 x 1080 and your m2v is 720 x 540. Also, if you don’t have your interlacing set to same as source, frame controls are going to kick in. I’m not bashing frame controls though. They are VERY good when used correctly. Usually, I find it best to use the “fastest” settings first and see if it produces acceptable quality. Then you can push it further if needed, with the penalty of increased render times. Of course, do this with small samples, not your entire video. You don’t want to have to wait 3 days to find out it looks like crap.
Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -
I’ve done some comparison shots on my own in regards to HDV (not EX1), but I think that it still may apply. My shots are mostly sports related, so this is high action footage. When going from an HDV timeline to DV and then to Compressor for DVD, I dislike the overall effect (softness). This is a personal point of view and other may find it more pleasing. However, the other big reason I stick with HDV only is TIME. If I change timelines, I need to render/compress to DV and then I need to compress to DVD. I don’t have time to do two compressions, especially for such a small difference in the two methods. I also need to output for web (2 different versions).
So, if you stay in the native timeline when you export out a “reference movie”, cuts only portions of the timeline will not need rendered. Any part with composites and effects will require rendering, even for a reference movie.
If your QT to DVD is taking a long time it is the frame controls which are usually the culprit. Setting them to best is a sure fire way to get long, long compression times. If you have a DV timeline, your frame controls should be off. You are already at size and frame rate that is needed.
Tech-T Productions
http://www.technical-t.com -