Basic question on recording several channels

B

Bfilms

Active member
Putting together a system (posted about it before), and just wondering about Lavs.

Lets say the scene is 2 actors, and I have a boom and a lav on each actor. I need to run all three through a preamp? Can the mix pre d do this? And then I need to run them from the mix pre d into the recorder (I will be using DR-100).

Sorry for the super basic question, everything about a single channel has been answered, but I was wondering about this.
 
The MixPre-D can be setup to use the return channels as two more inputs for essentially a 4 channel mixer. The wireless lavs dont need phantom power so you can use the return channels to take those inputs and use the main two channels for the boomed mics, then output the whole thing to your Tascam.
 
ben_r_ said:
The MixPre-D can be setup to use the return channels as two more inputs for essentially a 4 channel mixer. The wireless lavs dont need phantom power so you can use the return channels to take those inputs and use the main two channels for the boomed mics, then output the whole thing to your Tascam.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by return channels...is there a diagram?

And by "output the whole thing" to the Tascam, this will be done using one cable (which)?

-Thanks for the help, I have a lot to learn.
 
Best help I can offer since I don't own one is to suggest going to www.sounddevices.com, downloading the manual for the MixPre-D and reading all about what it can do. But I think it would work nicely for you.
 
Bfilms said:
Not sure what you mean by return channels...is there a diagram?
And by "output the whole thing" to the Tascam, this will be done using one cable (which)?
Click to expand...
Yes, for more info peruse the MixPre user manual.
Typically, a camera's headphone output is fed to the mixer's 'return' input for monitoring audio directly off the camera. (or other audio recorder) On some of the SD mixers, that (return) input can be assigned to the main outputs. Giving the mixer two additional (unbalanced) channels. Although with less flexibility than the main input channels.
 
Rick R said:
Yes, for more info peruse the MixPre user manual.
Typically, a camera's headphone output is fed to the mixer's 'return' input for monitoring audio directly off the camera. (or other audio recorder) On some of the SD mixers, that (return) input can be assigned to the main outputs. Giving the mixer two additional (unbalanced) channels. Although with less flexibility than the main input channels.
Click to expand...

That was the info I was looking for, so the output channels (XLR) would be "input"...

Here's what I found in the manual -

"Inputs 3 and 4
Each channel of the Tape Return input can be routed to various locations. When additional inputs are needed (such as when multiple wireless receivers are used) the Tape Return channels can be independently routed to the main output bus of the MixPre-D to act as additional inputs (3 and 4).
MixPre-D User Guide and Technical Information
6
v1.0 Features and specifications are subject to change. Visit www.sounddevices.com for the latest documentation.
To cycle between the available routings of the Tape Return signal, hold down the Input 1 Button (for Channel 3) or the Input 2 Button (for Channel 4) and press the Headphone Controller. An LED in the right meter will illuminate to represent the destination of the routing:
-30: RTN L (Channel 3) or RTN R (Channel 4)•
-18: Left output bus.•
-16: Center (left and right) output bus•
-14: Right output bus•
When any channel of the Tape Return input is routed to the main output bus, the RTN Monitor Source is disabled.
The TAPE RTN (Input 3 and 4) Input is an unbalanced stereo input that is suitable for tape or line level devices only. There are no microphone preamps on Inputs 3 and 4."

Regarding that last part, that would mean that there would be no quality difference in recording? Meaning the Lav (or other channels) could just as well be plugged into the recorder (DR-100)?
 
"Regarding that last part, that would mean that there would be no quality difference in recording? Meaning the Lav (or other channels) could just as well be plugged into the recorder (DR-100)?"

Assuming your (unidentified) wireless receivers have line-level outputs, then you should hear no significant quality difference between running the receivers through the Sound Devices mixer vs. running them directly into the DR100 recorder. The SD mixer is like a Ferrari Testarossa compared to your Kia recorder.
 
"recording" several channels is different from mixing several channels. AFAIK, the DR100 will only record two channels. In many cases the benefit of using both boom and lav on the same actor is to have more options in post… mixing these down will not necessarily get you that.

Just making the distinction clear… all the answers so far have addressed MIXING several channels, not recording several channels.
 
Richard Crowley said:
"Regarding that last part, that would mean that there would be no quality difference in recording? Meaning the Lav (or other channels) could just as well be plugged into the recorder (DR-100)?"

Assuming your (unidentified) wireless receivers have line-level outputs, then you should hear no significant quality difference between running the receivers through the Sound Devices mixer vs. running them directly into the DR100 recorder. The SD mixer is like a Ferrari Testarossa compared to your Kia recorder.
Click to expand...

Rode Lavs...not sure about wireless, why not run them wired if possible?

I decided to go with the Sanken CS-3E shotgun, so obviously that would sound better than the Lav, and Lavs in general won't sound as good as a solid shotgun, so wouldn't it be beneficial to run the Lavs through a good preamp like the Mix Pre d?

I had this answered in another thread, but running any mic through the Mix Pre would sound a lot better than just straight to a DR-100 or even a DR-680...same thing would apply for Lavs as shotguns, right?
 
If the 3rd and 4th inputs don't have mic preamps, then you simply can not use them with wired microphones.
We were assuming you were talking about wireless mics because you can get line-level out of the receivers.
You can not run an ordinary wired mic into a line-level input. On that mixer or any other piece of equipment.
 
Running any given source through the Sound Devices preamp/mixer before going into
a DR100 MIGHT sound better than directly into the DR100. But I wouldn't bet on it.
 
Richard Crowley said:
Running any given source through the Sound Devices preamp/mixer before going into
a DR100 MIGHT sound better than directly into the DR100. But I wouldn't bet on it.
Click to expand...

Actually, I'd say that in general nothing will sound better if passed through an unnecessary device. If the mixpre is not being used for something like increasing signal level or mixing signals, it's better to bypass it.
 
Yes, using the SD as a quieter way of boosting mic-level signals is the reason I used "might".
But I'm not one of those who think that an external mic preamp is the solution to everything.
 
ullanta said:
Actually, I'd say that in general nothing will sound better if passed through an unnecessary device. If the mixpre is not being used for something like increasing signal level or mixing signals, it's better to bypass it.
Click to expand...

The Mix Pre seems to be one of the most recommended pieces of audio equipment of indie shooting...the general consensus seems to be to skimp on the recorder and make sure to get a great preamp. Am I missing something?
 
Any chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This applies to video as well as audio. A gold-plated, diamond-encrusted mic preamp/mixer will NOT give you first-class sound if you are feeding it into a lousy recording device (like a DSLR, etc.) No piece of equipment is magic. Mic preamps seem to be widely over-rated as magic wands that will "improve" you sound. Simply using a better microphone (or moving your present microphone into a better position) will very often make a MUCH bigger improvement to the sound track than adding a $1000 mic preamp. A mic preamp/mixer would NOT be first on my list of economic investments for audio quality. The best mic preamp in the world can't improve the sound from a lousy microphone.
 
Richard Crowley said:
Any chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This applies to video as well as audio. A gold-plated, diamond-encrusted mic preamp/mixer will NOT give you first-class sound if you are feeding it into a lousy recording device (like a DSLR, etc.) No piece of equipment is magic. Mic preamps seem to be widely over-rated as magic wands that will "improve" you sound. Simply using a better microphone (or moving your present microphone into a better position) will very often make a MUCH bigger improvement to the sound track than adding a $1000 mic preamp. A mic preamp/mixer would NOT be first on my list of economic investments for audio quality. The best mic preamp in the world can't improve the sound from a lousy microphone.
Click to expand...

I will be using a sanken cs-3e. Read some great reviews on it. Seems to be far from lousy.

The Rode Lavs are also well reviewed.

The DR-100 seems pretty good too.

What would you recommend? Skipping the Mix Pre? I don't mind shelling out another $750 for it if it will in fact produce noticeably superior sound (which is what everyone seems to be saying it does).
 
Agreed that you have good microphones and a decent recorder. But it sounds like you need at least 3 mic preamp inputs, which the MixPre-D does not have. The SD 302 has three mic inputs, and the SD 552 has five. But those are a lot of money just for mixing. I would consider a less expensive mixer that has enough inputs. Depending, of course, on what your longer-term priorities are.
 
Another point to consider. You say you're going to have two lavs, one on each talent, plus a boom. You really need 3 iso tracks to do this right, NOT a stereo mix. Lacking a third recording channel, you'll need to mix the two lavs and send them to one channel of the stereo track and put the boom on the other channel. Lavs and booms don't mix well together because the time difference between when the voice arrives at a lav on the talent versus when it arrives at the boom can lead to phasing issues. You can sometimes mix the lavs more successfully but the same phenomenon might occur there as well. The best approach is to have three separate recording tracks and put each mic on its own track.
 
Steve House said:
Another point to consider. You say you're going to have two lavs, one on each talent, plus a boom. You really need 3 iso tracks to do this right, NOT a stereo mix. Lacking a third recording channel, you'll need to mix the two lavs and send them to one channel of the stereo track and put the boom on the other channel. Lavs and booms don't mix well together because the time difference between when the voice arrives at a lav on the talent versus when it arrives at the boom can lead to phasing issues. You can sometimes mix the lavs more successfully but the same phenomenon might occur there as well. The best approach is to have three separate recording tracks and put each mic on its own track.
Click to expand...

Would simply running the boom through the Mix Pre D and a DR-100 be the way to go?

Then recording the LAVs on a separate DR-100 with no mixer....

Or would the LAV quality be too terrible?

Or should I just say screw it and buy a SD 442 (future proof extra channel) and 4-track recorder and have fun paying off credit cards for a few years...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top