rafaeldelauz
Well-known member
and expensiveeee
Researching Lavs for Weeks - Still Lost.
- Thread starter trey
- Start date
Yes, I'm familiar with the B6, but I thought they only came wired and not wireless.
Also, is the size really that important if you can just hide the lav under the shirt?
Do you know what I'm saying?
Trey
Wireless has nothing to do with the lav, except for what it's wired to feed. That distinction must be made.
A wireless system is comprised of three parts: mic, transmitter, and receiver. For hand-helds, there are plug-on transmitters that work with any XLR mic, or there are transmitters that have the mic bult-in (or mics with the transmitter built-in, either way). For wireless lav systems, you have to have a beltpack transmitter and a receiver. Then, you choose which lav mic you want and have it wired for that system.
As for compact transmitters, Lectrosonics makes a pretty darn compact one.
Size does matter (pause for middle-school laughter... ). Some capsules like the Sony ECM-44b are, frankly, clumsily large. There's no good way to bury them without leaving very noticeable lumps. But below a certain size, there are quite a few different shapes that are small enough to bury: Tram TR50, Sanken COS11, DPA, Countryman B3 or B6 or even EMW.
The Tram TR50 and the Countryman EMW are both relatively flat, making them fit nicely between layers of fabric. The Sanken COS11 is long and slender (pause for laughter...) and can hide in clothing easily without displacing too much fabric. The Countryman B3 and the DPA are both very small and easy to place under clothing or in hair. The Countryman B6, as you know, is the smallest of the bunch and is the easiest to hide. But it's not a fix-all. There are times with the COS11 is much better than the B6, and times where the DPA might be the best choice for it's isolation/rejection.
Last edited:
TyFord
Well-known member
But not as small as the B6.
See my AES 2008 report for a demo.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=X9JTHFs3VtI
Regards,
Ty Ford
See my AES 2008 report for a demo.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=X9JTHFs3VtI
Regards,
Ty Ford
What does everybody think about this potential set up?
2 wireless lavs transmitted to the receiver mounted on the hot shoe of my HV30 -DIALOGUE.
Record separate audio track with the Canon DM-50 mounted to hot shoe - AMBIENT (no dialogue).
Sync up in post.
Would this have a nice sound?
Trey
2 wireless lavs transmitted to the receiver mounted on the hot shoe of my HV30 -DIALOGUE.
Record separate audio track with the Canon DM-50 mounted to hot shoe - AMBIENT (no dialogue).
Sync up in post.
Would this have a nice sound?
Trey
Two wireless lavs and one receiver? Only if you have a dual-channel receiver, as two transmitters on the same frequency will do nothing but fight with each other.
But you're thinking right as far as recording ambient tracks later as audio-only and laying that in during post. That's pretty much standard. Be sure also, after each set-up with dialog, to record about :30 with everyone standing still, no talking. Use that "room tone" to help in making the dialog edits smoother. Then layer ambient sound beds underneath everything.
But you're thinking right as far as recording ambient tracks later as audio-only and laying that in during post. That's pretty much standard. Be sure also, after each set-up with dialog, to record about :30 with everyone standing still, no talking. Use that "room tone" to help in making the dialog edits smoother. Then layer ambient sound beds underneath everything.
Good point.
If you have a portable SD/CF recorder like a Zoom or Olympis or Sony, I'd use that for wild sound. Unless your DM-50 has some impressive isolation from the camera, and your HV30 is super-quiet, you're likely to get cam noise.
If you absolutely must use the camera to record wilds, set it up, roll in record, and do not touch the camera until you've gotten sufficient material. That'll keep handling noise out of the equation. That also goes for the SD/CF field recorders.
Does the HV30 have a shoe mount? Just looked at it online and it does not appear to have one. Unless I'm looking at the wrong HV30.
Nonetheless... if you already have wireless transmitters, you can't just go out and buy a dual-channel receiver. You'd have to get a whole new system with transmitters and receiver to ensure compatibility. Audio-Technica makes one, but it's been getting pretty lousy reviews. Azden is not even worth investigating.
The best bet would be to get a smaller audio auxiliary case, like the Porta Brace Audio Side Slinger, and keep both your receivers in there. You could even go with their standard Side Slinger (if you don't have a mixer) and have a more compact bag. Either bag, it does mean running cables, which can make hand-held camera work a little more challenging, but once you work out a system for keeping the cables under control, it's a decent solution for one-man-band production.
Well, this is where it gets complex. You'll need an XLR adapter box...Beachtek is a proven piece of gear. You'll take the audio out of the receivers by XLR cable to the box. The adapter box then converts those inputs to the stereo 1/8" TRS that your camera accepts.
Another reason for going this rout: trying to mount one dual-channel system, or two single-channel systems (by way of a shoe bracket), will overload such a small camera. It'll become top-heavy and a bit unwieldy.
Let's look at it this way: for any one source with an output, you need to have an input to get it to the camera. Since the camera has two channels in, you can only run two sources at a time. Field mixers are a must when trying to cram three sources into two inputs.
You can set it up however you need, but know the limitations of outputs to inputs and set up accordingly.
With the Canon DM50, it's designed to run through the hot shoe with no cable. You can run the DM50 through the hot shoe, or you can run external sources in (like the wireless mics) through the 1/8" input. But you can't do both.
Except that this whole thread has to do with seated interviews in the ENG/EFP style of production. VO and ADR simply are not practical in these situations, and lavs are pretty much the rule and not the exception.
Yes, studio VO is always going to have a better frequency response and overall quality (if done right), but there are some things that studio VO cannot do.
Last edited:
Bad noise floor on the 1800s, from everything I've heard. Disappointing since they claim 104dB s/n. Sennheiser's spec for the G2 is 110dB.
*EDIT*
I guess "lousy" and "not stunning" are really qualified by individual perception. I see self-noise that is distracting, noticeable, and not able to be masked in the ambient floor as lousy.
*EDIT*
I guess "lousy" and "not stunning" are really qualified by individual perception. I see self-noise that is distracting, noticeable, and not able to be masked in the ambient floor as lousy.
Last edited: