Audio Quality : GH2 vs PMD-661

L

Lee Saxon

Well-known member
I decided to record my voice with the AT4053b through the MixPre to both the Panasonic GH2 & Marantz PMD-661 simultaneously.

I can hear differences but I'm not sure I'd be able to if I wasn't hearing them back to back. I know I couldn't say which is which.

But my ear isn't very developed, so I'd like to see how many people can tell which is the PMD-661. Download the source file; I don't know about Vimeo's audio encoder.

http://www.vimeo.com/jleesaxon/gh2

BTW, I'm connecting the GH2 to the MixPre via http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/746644-REG/Sescom_LN2MIC_ZMH4_GH1_LN2MIC_ZMH4_Line_Out_to.html
 
Last edited:
I would say that the first recording was the GH2. It sounded a bit more compressed/limited. Still, both seem quite usable. It's not day and night or anything.
 
With all the threads saying how vital an external recorder is, plus how you guys were talking in my 'padded cable' thread, I was expecting day-and-night. I'm quite surprised by how well the GH2 did. The 661 is obviously better, but I really don't feel like it's $600 better.

Any ideas on a more stressful test that would better reveal the limitations of the GH2?
 
Prosumer camera audio is underrated. They give perfectly usable, even good results, especially if good mics and preferably a good mixer (with good limiter) is used to feed them. I have measured over 90 dB dynamic ranges in both DVX100 and HX-A1, about 25 dB more than the big Nagras real film professionals were using untill the nineties. Using the camera for recording audio is not going to be noticed by the audience.
 
Yeah, the give-away is that in the first one the highs are clipped off. I only wish my voice was that deep.
 
Petrus said:
Prosumer camera audio is underrated. They give perfectly usable, even good results, especially if good mics and preferably a good mixer (with good limiter) is used to feed them. I have measured over 90 dB dynamic ranges in both DVX100 and HX-A1, about 25 dB more than the big Nagras real film professionals were using untill the nineties. Using the camera for recording audio is not going to be noticed by the audience.
Click to expand...

I remember the first project that I did sound editorial for had all the dialogue recorded onto the DVX100, and the person operating the audio equipment actually knew what they were doing, and the audio quality was quite good. If you can get good quality audio recorded right to the camera, it's great because you don't have to worry about sync issues when you import your data into whatever you use for video editing. I still recommend doing two system sound if it can be done because the higher end audio recorders are far and away better than anything a camera has built in, but if the budget doesn't allow for it, you won't be totally sunk.
 
Lee Saxon said:
I guess you're talking far higher-end than the PMD-661 because the GH2 is a pretty low-end camera and as you can see...
Click to expand...

Yeah. I'm talking about something like a Sound Devices machine or a Deva from Zaxcom. But even then, a Deva in the hands of someone that has no idea of how to use it is pointless, and pretty much overkill for many of the projects that aren't big budget union TV shows or feature films.

Your comparison is interesting, but what I'd love to see is some in use/on production A-B comparisons done like this where all the factors of production come into play. I'm not saying what you did isn't good, or isn't worthwhile, because it sets the ground work in a controlled environment. Also, this video shows you that you can record reasonably good quality audio onto a camera if you know what you are doing. What you will run into is audio snobs (of which I am one) that will get into the minutia of the quality of the A/D converts in the camera compared to those in the 661, and how these components do on a real shoot.
 
Yeah I did this super simple test basically to see if the GH2 was a total bust before I even tried to use it on a "real" shoot.

Actually that's basically all I've done with any of my video/audio gear (just finished building my first rig a couple weeks ago). I suppose I'm going to have to actually get around to using this thing one of these days :P

PS - If any of you guys have any ideas on another "controlled test" like this, but more demanding...I really want to hit the "breaking" point of at least the GH2 so I know where it is, and despite what a few girlfriends have said, listening to my voice isn't THAT stressful.
 
I would maybe set up a mock shot real fast. Someone sitting on a couch or a chair, and boom them like you normally would, then run the signal like you did in this first test, and then have them say some different things at different volume levels. I like when Chad does a little rhyme or something in his comparison videos, something like "Sally sells sea shells at the sea shore" or something like that. That way you are pushing both machines at the same time.
 
I was totally thinking as I did this test that I wished I had a guitar so I could make up rhymes for the gear I was testing!

My best friend is a great singer, and she can get MAJOR volume, so that may be what I try next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top