NTG-1 or 2...virtually the same price....

[Metrolens]

Thank you kindly for the excellent, dare I say "sound" advice.

What is the meaning of the Edison-to-XLR adapter joke? It's over my head.

So, if using the mixer, would I want to set the A1 to "Line" instead of "Mic?" I've never quite understood this switch. Does "Line" disable the A1 preamps, allowing the use of the ostensibly better preamps from the mixer?

And, is there some kind of external tone generator that I could patch into the mixer somehow?

 

[Alex H.]

What is the meaning of the Edison-to-XLR adapter joke? It's over my head.

Edison is the all-around, household wall outlet for AC.

So, if using the mixer, would I want to set the A1 to "Line" instead of "Mic?" I've never quite understood this switch. Does "Line" disable the A1 preamps, allowing the use of the ostensibly better preamps from the mixer?

Line vs. mic is a difference is measurement of the signal voltage in dB. Mic is around -58dB, and line is anywhere from -10dB (consumer/unbalanced) to +4dB (pro/balanced). Send a line-level signal into a mic-level input and you'll get some really nasty stuff... possibly frying the input circuit in the process. So by switching the camera's inputs to line-level, you are indeed bypassing the pre-amps and telling the camera to expect a stronger signal. (NOTE: all a pre-amp does is bring a mic-level signal up to line-level for proper recording.)

Most mixers (including your Behringer) send line level out, unless labeled as mic level. ENG/EFP mixers typically have a switch for mic- or line-level out.

And, is there some kind of external tone generator that I could patch into the mixer somehow?

Yeah... Fostex used to make a good and affordable slate tone generator. I keep it in my live sound kit and it works really well, though it's only got an RCA out. I don't know if they actually make it anymore (I think not), but you might find one on ebay.

Or here's a cheat:

Go into FCP and create a sequence that has :60 of -12dB tone (open up the bars and tone in the viewer and drop it to the timeline). Export the audio only as a 16-bit, 44kHz AIFF. Pull that into iTunes and burn an audio CD. You can then plug a CD player (line out, not headphone) into the mixer and use it to calibrate, and that also allows you to record tone to the camera.

You could also drop the AIFF to an iPod. Again, use line-level out, not headphone. This might require the AV breakout cable.

Just remember that the 1kHz tone should flow through the mixer at unity (0dB on input and 0dB on output), and should hit -12dB on the camera.

 

[Metrolens]

... Yeah... Fostex used to make a good and affordable slate tone generator. I keep it in my live sound kit and it works really well, though it's only got an RCA out. I don't know if they actually make it anymore (I think not), but you might find one on ebay.

Or here's a cheat:

Go into FCP and create a sequence that has :60 of -12dB tone (open up the bars and tone in the viewer and drop it to the timeline). Export the audio only as a 16-bit, 44kHz AIFF. Pull that into iTunes and burn an audio CD. You can then plug a CD player (line out, not headphone) into the mixer and use it to calibrate, and that also allows you to record tone to the camera.

You could also drop the AIFF to an iPod.

Just remember that the tone should flow through the mixer at unity (0dB on input and 0dB on output), and should hit -12dB on the camera.

Great. The iPod solution would work well. Actually, the A1 is capable of outputting a 1 kHz Reference Audio Signal (either at -12 dB or -20 dB). Could this be used? Somehow, I think not, given the signal flow.

 

[Alex H.]

Only use the camera's internal tone when using the camera's internal audio (i.e. no external mixer). You always want your tone source to be the same as the production audio source... otherwise there's no point to recording tone at the tape head.

But I reiterate: use line out from the iPod, which may require the AV breakout cable. If you use the headphone out, it means that the output level can be controlled by the iPod's volume control. That means that you can't be certain you're getting the true -12dB tone into the mixer.

 

[Metrolens]

Only use the camera's internal tone when using the camera's internal audio (i.e. no external mixer). You always want your tone source to be the same as the production audio source... otherwise there's no point to recording tone at the tape head.

But I reiterate: use line out from the iPod, which may require the AV breakout cable. If you use the headphone out, it means that the output level can be controlled by the iPod's volume control. That means that you can't be certain you're getting the true -12dB tone into the mixer.

You're a prince.

So is the procedure to plug the line level iPod into an input on the mixer, set the levels so the mixer's meter just hits 0 (the meters on this mixer are awful; four LED lights at -20, 0, +6 and Clip)? And then I check to see the A1 meters are reading at -12 dB (probably having turned the A1 pots to max, since I'm feeding it a Line level signal). Finally, I plug my mic(s) into the same mixer input(s) that the iPod had fed the -12 dB reference tone to?

Inputs 1 and 2 on my Behringer are going to be the relevant ins; they are the ones with XLRs. These 2 inputs have both "Level" knobs and "Gain" knobs. How much Gain do you expect I'd have to add, versus Level?

And, is this a good cable for iPod line level?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t..._shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=A22WXURYSYD782&v=glance

 

[Alex H.]

You're a prince.

Awww, shucks...

So is the procedure to plug the line level iPod into an input on the mixer, set the levels so the mixer's meter just hits 0 (the meters on this mixer are awful; four LED lights at -20, 0, +6 and Clip)? And then I check to see the A1 meters are reading at -12 dB (probably having turned the A1 pots to max, since I'm feeding it a Line level signal). Finally, I plug my mic(s) into the same mixer input(s) that the iPod had fed the -12 dB reference tone to?

No need to make sure you use the same inputs for tone and source audio. I'd plug the iPod into Line In 3/4 (may require a dual RCA>1/4" TS adapter). Set that inputs level to 0, then starting with it all the way down, bring the master level up until the meters hit 0. Because the metering is so lousy on this mixer, make sure that you bring the master level up just to the point that the 0dB LEDs hit solid. You can hit +3 without knowing it since the next LED mark is +6dB, so be careful.

And on the camera end... do not, I reapeat, do not start with the input levels maxed out. Careful gain staging starts with the input levels all the way down. Then bring them up to level. This will keep your inputs from overloading to start.

Inputs 1 and 2 on my Behringer are going to be the relevant ins; they are the ones with XLRs. These 2 inputs have both "Level" knobs and "Gain" knobs. How much Gain do you expect I'd have to add, versus Level?

Again, careful since you have such lo-rez metering on the mixer. Plug the mic in, activate phantom power if needed. Start with the GAIN all the way out, and the LEVEL at 0. Then ask your subject to talk at his/her normal interview level and bring the GAIN up until the meters are hitting 0. Do this only after you've calibrated with tone.

And, is this a good cable for iPod line level?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t..._shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=A22WXURYSYD782&v=glance

No, but this is...
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB129LL/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0OQ&mco=MTM1MTU

 

[Metrolens]

Awww, shucks...



No need to make sure you use the same inputs for tone and source audio. I'd plug the iPod into Line In 3/4 (may require a dual RCA>1/4" TS adapter). Set that inputs level to 0, then starting with it all the way down, bring the master level up until the meters hit 0. Because the metering is so lousy on this mixer, make sure that you bring the master level up just to the point that the 0dB LEDs hit solid. You can hit +3 without knowing it since the next LED mark is +6dB, so be careful.

And on the camera end... do not, I reapeat, do not start with the input levels maxed out. Careful gain staging starts with the input levels all the way down. Then bring them up to level. This will keep your inputs from overloading to start.



Again, careful since you have such lo-rez metering on the mixer. Plug the mic in, activate phantom power if needed. Start with the GAIN all the way out, and the LEVEL at 0. Then ask your subject to talk at his/her normal interview level and bring the GAIN up until the meters are hitting 0. Do this only after you've calibrated with tone.



No, but this is...
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MB129LL/A?fnode=MTY1NDA0OQ&mco=MTM1MTU

Thank you so much for the help.

Given the deficiencies of my mixer I am going to run some tests to determine what will indeed give me the best sound. I have little faith that the Behringer pre-amps will be better than the A1's. My scenarios:

1. Straight to cam.
2. Straight to cam, using XLR Y-adapter ("hot" and "safety channels).
3. Mixer procedure above.

I'll use the same mics (NTG-1, and possibly a G2 wireless lav, if I decide to buy one), and the same mic placements for each scenario. Any bets which one will win?

 

[Steve House]

...And, is there some kind of external tone generator that I could patch into the mixer somehow?

GTC Tone Plug works great. Audio test generator built-in to an XLR -M connector and powerd by phantom power. http://www.gtcindustries.com/

 

[Metrolens]

GTC Tone Plug works great. Audio test generator built-in to an XLR -M connector and powerd by phantom power. http://www.gtcindustries.com/

Thanks, pretty cool Steve. But pricey, don't you think? (Compared to C2V's solution which is free since I have an iPod).

Especially since I should really only need the -12 dB tone once to calibrate my mixer. Once I see where the pots and knobs need to be to correctly accept and pass on a clean -12 dB tone, I should be able to memorize those positions and be good to go, right? Or is this a bad idea?

 

[Alex H.]

Thanks, pretty cool Steve. But pricey, don't you think? (Compared to C2V's solution which is free since I have an iPod).

Especially since I should really only need the -12 dB tone once to calibrate my mixer. Once I see where the pots and knobs need to be to correctly accept and pass on a clean -12 dB tone, I should be able to memorize those positions and be good to go, right? Or is this a bad idea?

Always calibrate your system. Every time you set up your gear. It seems like a pain, but it's the standard way of doing things and help you make absolutely sure that your levels are dead on.

Likewise, you should always record bars and tone at the head of every new tape.

 

[Steve House]

Thanks, pretty cool Steve. But pricey, don't you think? (Compared to C2V's solution which is free since I have an iPod).

Especially since I should really only need the -12 dB tone once to calibrate my mixer. Once I see where the pots and knobs need to be to correctly accept and pass on a clean -12 dB tone, I should be able to memorize those positions and be good to go, right? Or is this a bad idea?

As C2V says, you should recalibrate for each setup. The idea is to be able to look at the mixer's meters and know for certain what the camera or recorder's meters are doing. The plug makes it fast and simple - plug the Plug into a mic input, set 0dBu on the output meter, set the camera input control so the camera meter reads -12dBFS and you're done. Replace the Plug with the mic, set the mic levels for 0dBu on the mixer and shoot.

I think the Tone Plug's pretty cheap, all things considered. Got mine for about $50 from Trew Audio. I have found lots of uses for it and, along with one of Behringer's cable testers, I consider it to be an absolutely essential piece of kit.

 

[Alex H.]

The idea is to be able to look at the mixer's meters and know for certain what the camera or recorder's meters are doing. The plug makes it fast and simple - plug the Plug into a mic input, set 0dBu on the output meter, set the camera input control so the camera meter reads -12dBFS and you're done. Replace the Plug with the mic, set the mic levels for 0dBu on the mixer and shoot.

To add to that, routine tone calibration is the quickest way to fax out problems that you might not otherwise notice until it's too late. If there's a level discrepancy as you set up (say both channels are at 0dB on the mixer, but you notice about a 6dB difference in settings on the camera), it can point to a short in a cable or connector. These things don't happen too often, but tone is there to reveal them when they do.

And if you can afford it, I'd go with Steve's suggestion on the tone plug. Not that the iPod wouldn't work for you, but the plug is much more compact and can easily fit into a small pouch in your camera bag... and keeps your iPod safe from the risks of field production. $50 really isn't too much to invest for a good tone source.

 

[Metrolens]

Thanks to both of you.

I'm coming around on the tone plug idea. Another huge factor is that it'd look quite un-pro on set to use an iPod.

I think I'll run my tests with C2V's iPod hack at home, then, if I find the Behringer is in fact up to the task, pick up a tone plug for use in the field. If the Behringer isn't markedly better than straight to cam, I may just want to invest in a better mixer (hopefully even with a tone built in). But, would I be right in assuming that a built in tone mixer will get expensive fast?

 

[Alex H.]

Another huge factor is that it'd look quite un-pro on set to use an iPod.

No more so than using a Behringer mixer...

If the Behringer isn't markedly better than straight to cam, I may just want to invest in a better mixer (hopefully even with a tone built in). But, would I be right in assuming that a built in tone mixer will get expensive fast?

Depends on how you define expensive. Sound Devices MixPre is a great solution if you can't afford a more advanced mixer, and if you don't need more than two inputs. The metering is still lower-resolution than the Sound Devices 302, but is certainly better than the Behringer. The major advantages of the MixPre are rugged portability, low self-noise, battery operation on AA cells, built-in tone and phantom, and XLR ins and outs. You also get a headphone/tape return channel so that you can send the camera's headphones out back to the mixer, and listen either from mixer or from camera without patching... simply flip a switch.

The MixPre is about half the cost of the 302. So figure out how much you're willing to invest at this point in making your sound, sound good.

 

[Metrolens]

No more so than using a Behringer mixer...

You had to go there, didn't you. Well, you've certainly earned it.:beer:

Depends on how you define expensive. Sound Devices MixPre is a great solution if you can't afford a more advanced mixer, and if you don't need more than two inputs. The metering is still lower-resolution than the Sound Devices 302, but is certainly better than the Behringer. The major advantages of the MixPre are rugged portability, low self-noise, battery operation on AA cells, built-in tone and phantom, and XLR ins and outs. You also get a headphone/tape return channel so that you can send the camera's headphones out back to the mixer, and listen either from mixer or from camera without patching... simply flip a switch.

The MixPre is about half the cost of the 302. So figure out how much you're willing to invest at this point in making your sound, sound good.

Hmm, a bit over my current budget. The tone plug is looking sweeter and sweeter...

 

[Alex H.]

Hmm, a bit over my current budget. The tone plug is looking sweeter and sweeter...

You've honestly got enough to get by, if you're happy with what you get from the mixer setup. The tone generator would be a good investment nonetheless. And, hey... two or three more projects and you'll probably be able to justify a new mixer.

 

[Jeff Koenig]

You may also want to look at the Sign Video ENG-44. It's about $150 cheaper then the Mixpre and offers 4 channels instead of two. Like the Mixpre, it offers XLR in/out, battery power, phantom, tone, low noise, and headphone monitoring from the mixer or the camera. It's generally considered the best option with the most features in this price range (@ $500).

The ENG-44 isn't perfect, and it's not $50 like the tone plug, but it will do what you need and give you good sound if you're not in the budget range for a better mixer. If nothing else, you definitely cannot get anything better for cheaper.

You can read two seperate reviews in this thread,http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/all-thin...heard-sign-video-audio-mixers.html#post563241 one by Ty Ford at post #8, and one by Steve Leone at post #14 of the thread.

-Jeff

 

[Metrolens]

Thanks again. Jeff that seems like a good, slightly less expensive alternative.

Seems to me, the question is all about the preamps. First of all, my Behringer preamps will have to be significantly better than the XH-A1's, otherwise no point whatsoever to using it. If they are better, hopefully that'll cover me, despite the shortcomings of the Behringer compared to either of those two mixers.

So as long as the sound quality is good enough, and I can grab a tone plug for calibration, the other features (battery power, XLR output instead of 1/4", headphone monitoring, better metering) seem like I could forego for now. Does this sound sane?

Btw I recently bought a pair of powered studio monitors - KRK Rokit 5's, which are simply amazing for the price (Guitar Center). This is what I'll be using to judge the sound quality in my testing (which, btw, has to wait until my iPod returns from LA!).

 

[Allan Black]

Back on the question of which one....one good reason for a prosumer user to buy the NTG-2 over the NTG-1 is, eventually when you want to sell it, there's MUCH more chance of a sale to another con/prosumer user through having the battery option.

Cheers.