Radio Mics
 

On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 09:07:26 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:


"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:53:23 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

What's he using now? Where's the mic? A cheap system on
a boom will sound much better than an expensive one on
the lapel.

Unless you've got a boom operator (way over the top for a church this
size)
the boom tethers the pastor, and that's highly counter-productive.

You deliberately misunderstand "boom" I think :-)

Can you imagine a boom operator with
headphones and a fishpole at a church service:-)))

Radio Mics
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
Can you imagine a boom operator with
headphones and a fishpole at a church service:-)))
Make up your mind. Either boom or pole. The correct terminology in the
UK is 'pole for a hand held device. A boom is a studio device where
the mic is controlled via effectively remote controls at the other
end. A studio boom op can usually be immediately proficient on a
'pole - assuming he has the physical strength. The reverse is not the
case. Learning to operate a studio boom well takes a deal of time.
Just one of the many skills needed for TV sound that you know nothing
about.


Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them to.


Got your grumpy panties on today huh?

--
Bill Coombes

Radio Mics
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:

Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them to.


Got your grumpy panties on today huh?


I think Dave is entitled to point out that Iain is persisting in using terms
incorrectly without you saying daft things like "Whooosh!!!"
or "grumpy panties".

If you have something worth saying, say it, otherwise......

David.

Radio Mics
 

David Looser wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:

Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them to.

Got your grumpy panties on today huh?


I think Dave is entitled to point out that Iain is persisting in using terms
incorrectly without you saying daft things like "Whooosh!!!"
or "grumpy panties".


Non torsii subligarium! This is usenet, I'll say what I like, you say what what
you like, Dave can say what he likes. In the meantime if you haven't got
anything constructive to add STFU.

--
Bill Coombes

Radio Mics
 

"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
David Looser wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:

Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them
to.

Got your grumpy panties on today huh?


I think Dave is entitled to point out that Iain is persisting in using
terms incorrectly without you saying daft things like "Whooosh!!!"
or "grumpy panties".


Non torsii subligarium!



Bill, if I may say so, you are wrong to use that Dog Latin - it will very
quickly degenerate into the liberal use of phrases like:
"Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit
materiari?"


This is usenet, I'll say what I like, you say what what
you like, Dave can say what he likes. In the meantime if you haven't got
anything constructive to add STFU.


But IMO you were quite right to tell that TC 'wannabee moderator' to ****
off....

Radio Mics
 

"Laurence Payne" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 09:07:26 +0200, "Iain Churches"
wrote:

Can you imagine a boom operator with
headphones and a fishpole at a church service:-)))

Only if a technical volunteer developed extreme delusions of grandeur.
Which, of course, could never happen :-)

:-))

A colleague and I have been trying to visualise the
scene. A boom op in jeans, and back-to-front
baseball cap and a t-shirt on which is printed:
"Jesus Saves. Moses Invests"

Radio Mics
 

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:

Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them to.


Got your grumpy panties on today huh?


I think Dave is entitled to point out that Iain is persisting in using
terms incorrectly .....



Dave's term 'pole is an abbreviation for fishpole, the English name
by which it is known both in the US and throughout the EBU.

It is also referred to commonly as a boom:
http://www.studio1productions.com/mic_boom_poles.htm

Strictly speaking a boom is a very large mic stand on tripod
legs. In music we are careful to differentiate between boom
and stand for obvious reasons:-)

Booms are motorised for broadcast but static booms are
used for music recording. They are large enough to reach
over the string section of a symphony orchestra, and have
cranks to raise the height of the main shaft, and to extend
the boom arm. Some have a pulley system to adjust the mic
cradle. Once set. they remain in that position for music
recording, so no operator is required.

Iain

Radio Mics
 

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
"bcoombes" bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote in message
o.uk...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:

Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them
to.


Got your grumpy panties on today huh?


I think Dave is entitled to point out that Iain is persisting in using
terms incorrectly without you saying daft things like "Whooosh!!!" or
"grumpy panties".

If you have something worth saying, say it, otherwise......

David.

I just find it funny that the likes of Iain and Kitty are constantly
criticising others for doing exactly what they've done first. But of
course have their heads so far up their own arses can't see it.

--
*Why do we say something is out of whack? What is a whack?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Radio Mics
 

In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bcoombes bcoombes@orangedotnet wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Iain Churches wrote:
Can you imagine a boom operator with
headphones and a fishpole at a church service:-)))
Make up your mind. Either boom or pole. The correct terminology in the
UK is 'pole for a hand held device. A boom is a studio device where
the mic is controlled via effectively remote controls at the other
end. A studio boom op can usually be immediately proficient on a
'pole - assuming he has the physical strength. The reverse is not the
case. Learning to operate a studio boom well takes a deal of time.
Just one of the many skills needed for TV sound that you know nothing
about.


Whooosh!!!

Another Humpty Dumpty. Who thinks words mean just what he wants them
to.


Got your grumpy panties on today huh?

Nope - never grumpy. Just blunt in a polite sort of way.

--
*Welcome to **** Creek - sorry, we're out of paddles*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Radio Mics
 

Keith G wrote:



Bill, if I may say so, you are wrong to use that Dog Latin - it will
very quickly degenerate into the liberal use of phrases like:

"Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam
possit materiari?"


??...not a phrase or saying I know...something about wood chucks and marble?


This is usenet, I'll say what I like, you say what what

you like, Dave can say what he likes. In the meantime if you haven't
got anything constructive to add STFU.


But IMO you were quite right to tell that TC 'wannabee moderator' to
**** off....


In so many words. :)


--
Bill Coombes