HPX170 Mic/Line inputs are clean - Listen to this

[Guy_Cochran]

A few people have asked if you get better sound with an $500-$1000 external mixer versus feeding directly into the camera. I wanted to know the answer too so we jumped into the studio and shot this HD Video (http://bit.ly/JTp96)

Result? Dang those internal pre-amps in the HPX170 are CLEAN!

[puredrifting]

Yep, I agree, the audio on the 170 is improved over the HVX200 and is pretty decent for a camera. But my $349.00 Zoom H4N sounds better though. I wonder when a camera manufacturer will team up with a company like Sound Devices to design the audio circuitry and pre-amps in a camera.

Dan

[earmarkcreative]

Just to clarify, Guy, is the mixer in your test then feeding the XLR inputs of the 170 or are you recording on an external recorder as well?

I think the best way to evaluate the preamp quality is to record to an external high quality recorder then compare the results to either the mics directly into the camera or mic-mixer-camera setup.

Maybe you can explain your test in more detail.

[Guy_Cochran]

Dan, that's great to know. Are you still going to do a write up of field mixers that in the $1k range? That would really be awesome.

Ryan,

Thanks for asking. Here is the chain:

RODE NT1A on the Left is fed directly into HPX170
RODE NT1A on the right is fed into the SignVideo ENG44 (http://bit.ly/bcAH7) field mixer then into HPX170 Line level.

Both mics use the exact same Audio Technica Premium 30' XLR cabling.

It might help to watch the Vimeo version (http://bit.ly/RdPAF) as it appears YouTube has a low frequency cut. You can also download the full 1920x1080 source file there.

Thanks for watching and for any feedback.

[puredrifting]

Someday, eventually. Just finished up the HPX300 production diary, I am working on an article on the AG-HPG20 P2 device currently. Too much gear to review and write about!

Dan