AF101 bad audio hiss

Thank you one and all who took the time to consider my problem and offer their thoughts. It's really appreciated. I love this website!
 
Im not an audio expert.

The level of hiss your getting is a little bit more than I typically get, but not by a huge margin - could be explained simply by the mic used, since youre using an me-66. BUT, the difference is my dialogue volume is much much higher than yours which suggests that your mic is just simply too far from the person talking. It sounds like the mic is on your camera and whoever that is talking is just somewhere in front of the camera - at a guess about 5-8 feet from the mic.
 
Rick Burnett said:
Hmmm, I don't get that level of hiss with a Rode NG-2 on my AF100. (I listened to the audio clip). When I get my AF100 back in about a week I will test it again. I recorded an interview recently with the AF100 and I was really happy with the audio results.
Click to expand...

Hey Rick, do you use the battery phantom on the NTG-2 ?
 
For this usage of it I believe I used phantom power out of the AF100. But, I'll have to check when my AF100 gets back as the settings should still be the same.
 
My experience is that the ME66 is way too sensitive for the AF100 and the output is far, far above what is needed and much too loud. I've quit using mine on the AF100 and also switched to a Rode NTG-2. It's not the camera - it's the mic at fault.
 
Haven't had a chance to do your 0db test. But can say that I notice little or no difference between audio recorded on my AF102 and my Sony Z1. It's actually slightly cleaner than on my JVC HM700.
Get to a dealer with your mics and try to replicate on another camera.
Hope you work it out soon.
 
spyke said:
My experience is that the ME66 is way too sensitive for the AF100 and the output is far, far above what is needed and much too loud. I've quit using mine on the AF100 and also switched to a Rode NTG-2. It's not the camera - it's the mic at fault.
Click to expand...
An inline pad should do the trick. ME66 is a
great mic.
 
I do not own an AF100/101 so I cannot talk specifically about its audio quality. However I used to own throughout the years a few Panasonic "professional" camcorders, including an XLR mic input adapter which was claimed to be "absolutely professional audio quality". The self noise level was so high I thought it was defective too, and sent it back to Panasonic for warranty repair. It was promptly returned withut anything done to it, and a technician called me saying there was nothing wrong or anything they could do to lower the self noise. I have gradually learned that none of Panny's audio products is quiet enough to be called pro, i.e. their EIN is always around -80 dBv or worse, vs. true "pro" quality of below -110 dBv.

I LOVE and own Panasonic products, almost to the point of exclusively, from TV sets, rice cookers, electrical thermos bottles etc. to camcorders and cameras, but deeply regret thier audio products' self noise levels. In fact essentially all of Panasonic's "pro" audio products self noise levels are worse than Sony or Canon's consumer products. Oh well, nothing is perfect in this world. Overall, other aspects of Panny products outweigh the self noise flaw, and I still LOVE Panny products.
 
I have not experienced any of the hiss I've read about here. I'm a stickler for pristine audio and I get it with the AF-100 unless I have other issues like a bad cable or impedance mismatch. My question is, in very general terms, can we get a cleaner audio signal by going through a good mixer like a Sound Devices and feeding a line level to the cam? Is this a better standard operating procedure?
 
OKCPicker said:
I have not experienced any of the hiss I've read about here. I'm a stickler for pristine audio and I get it with the AF-100 unless I have other issues like a bad cable or impedance mismatch. My question is, in very general terms, can we get a cleaner audio signal by going through a good mixer like a Sound Devices and feeding a line level to the cam? Is this a better standard operating procedure?
Click to expand...

Without a doubt, yes. I always use line input from my Letrosonic wireless when operating solo and when the budget allows for a sound tech, we always use line input. It's definitely the cleanest audio match.

The only time I use the mic input level is when I have the ME64 mounted for ambient sound and then I am careful to keep the input levels low (the ME64-ME66 are high output mics). It is also possible to use a mic attenuator pad to manage mic input levels.

Line level should be used whenever possible for the cleanest sound.
 
this is sound advice snp (no pun intended).... i don't trust the mic pre's on any video camera ... it's not an area of
emphasis for the manufacturers. hire a recordist and/or let them feed you a line-level signal. if you don't have
a recordist, get good quality mic-pres .. like the Sound Devices MixPre.

To demand pristine mic-pres from the AF100 ignores it's price-point and the amazing sensor
that's in this unit. There are trade-offs.

jeff
 
OKCPicker said:
I have not experienced any of the hiss I've read about here. I'm a stickler for pristine audio and I get it with the AF-100 unless I have other issues like a bad cable or impedance mismatch. My question is, in very general terms, can we get a cleaner audio signal by going through a good mixer like a Sound Devices and feeding a line level to the cam? Is this a better standard operating procedure?
Click to expand...
The short answer is "yes" .. absolutely. If you care about audio quality, then you should use a quality out-board mic-pre (like the Sound Device MixPre). Going in line-level makes a
huge difference.
jeff
ps: i have no association with Sound Devices .. i'm just a fan of their products.
 
Last edited:
I am wondering if the new Sound Devices Recorder would, could , can ... "double" as a field mixer.

Now that would be handy.
 
he likes the color the AF100 pre's add :-)

seriously dude ... if you're coming from a mixer or pre, go line-level in .. it drops
the noise floor significantly.
 
Shooter said:
You sent mic level audio from a mixer to the camera instead of line level. Why?
Click to expand...

I dunno that's the way I had it setup for my Betacam. Theoretically I've heard line level is better, but my 62 year old ears (veterans of many rock concerts) can't tell the difference :-) Not trying to start a flame war but after 40 years in this business I'm blown away by this camera at this price point. Is it perfect? No camera I've ever used has been, but I've always figured out how to work with the gear at hand. Sure it's a little noisy in the blacks and maybe the audio has a tad of hiss but remember we're talking about an instrument that only costs $4,700. In my book that's pretty amazing considering my first video camera (Ikegami HL-77) cost $47,000 (for camera head only, lens and VTR extra). It's been my experience that getting that last 10% in quality usually costs much more. At $4,700 after a couple years you can afford to go and buy the latest, greatest (super low black noise level) camera and donate your AF-100 to charity. One man's opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top