Best way to record interviews with available equipment .. plz help

  • Thread starter Thread starter holysphinx1@hotmail.com
  • Start date Start date
H

holysphinx1@hotmail.com

Guest
hello all
i am starting to make a short documentary films for " Non profit organizations "
it is no budget films
so rent is not an option
on all my shooting before narrative or other genres i always had a professional sound operator to record sound with a reasonable equipment
for now i have to record sound by my own for the first time in my long career and i am only limited to what i have ,, so the point here is how to use it to get decent Quality ,, what level should i record the ext Lav mic i had on 5d ?

the EQUIPMENT :
1 - one 5d mark 2
2 - iphone and ipad & laptop ........
3 - 2 wireless Sony WCS999 Wireless Camcorder Microphone
Amazon.com: Sony WCS999 Wireless Camcorder Microphone for DCR-DVD101/201/301 & DCR-HC20/30/40/65/85: Camera & Photo

4- an old radioshack
[TABLE="width: 600"]
[TR]
[TD]Pro Unidirectional Highball Dynamic Microphone 33-3027
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]http://support.radioshack.com/productinfo/DocumentResults.asp?sku_id=33-3027&Name=PA%20Microphones&Reuse=N
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
---
my Sony WCS999 Wireless Camcorder Microphone
have an additional "mix" port on the receiver so i can actually plug the two mics together , with no additional hardware needed.
and it have an headphone port to monitor to sound for any mic problems that could happen like " interference and drop outs " that usually happens with those cheap units
but that is just monitoring the unit but not the out recorded on cam
any ideas on what levels and any tips that i may did not notice ??
any suggestions and help will be very much welcome ??
& thank You for Your time
-------
note : that i will use the h264 canon codec and i can not use Magic Lantern on those Projects since i dont have a Proper cards for raw . so i will be stuck with canon menu only ..
 
You don't have much to work with... The wireless is cheap and likely unreliable. The ball type mics are more for live performance... and must be very close to the sound source (a few inches). Even with the best microphones, DSLRs just don't record sound very good.. same goes for phones.
I would seriously consider getting at least one decent field audio type mic and a portable audio recorder. It is possible to use the camera's built in mic/recorder for ambient sound.. maybe good enough for b-roll and such.
 
thank You Rick R for Your reply
i tested the hand mic based on what You said i found it true!
the hand mic need to be very close so i get it out of my equipment
that said in the mean time i can't buy any thing as i have no budget at all
i tried the The wireless and it was ok not great but ok , and about the camera You are True Too its noisy if i raise the levels but in mid to low levels it is ok not great at all
so according to what i have i will just use The wireless mics recorded to cam and as a backup ill record with my iphone and place it as near as possible
i think ill use The 2 wireless mics together via the mix port to get better sound is this useful ??
and ill try to save some money so in the future i can get zoom h1 to record with its mics
 
As Rick mentioned, you don't have much to work with, if you can't spend anything at all. The only mics you realistically have to work with are the Sony wireless ones. To get the best chance of reliability out of them, get the receivers as close to the transmitters as possible.

I would recommend mounting the transmitter with the best line of sight as possible, so in a front shirt pocket or similar.

You might get usable sound from them that way. it's your best (and only realistic) chance with what you have.
 
Make sure the person who is commissioning the video knows in advance the audio will be poor, because if they don't properly understand, you will get the blame for it. It sounds like you really want to do the job, so first thing is to get some help. You cannot get the best out of the kit unless somebody looks after it, listening on headphones to what it is doing, so you can stop and reshoot. If you don't do this, it's the same as covering the LCD screen and estimating the framing, zoom and focus.
 
thank You all for Your help
yes i noticed that The wireless mics is working ok if the receivers are close to the transmitters as possible.
and they have a headphone to monitor them all time
my Question is will it help to use the 2 mics in the same time mounted to the talking person ??
and should i set the camera to record low level then boost in post to get low noise ??
thank You
 
"will it help to use the 2 mics in the same time mounted to the talking person ??"
Only if they are on separate audio tracks. Alternately, if the frequencies (channels) are selectable, you could use one transmitter and two receivers. (to separate audio tracks or recorders) .. however you CANNOT use TWO transmitters and one receiver.
FYI, just because a wireless system works OK at one location, doesn't mean it will at another.. the same goes for profession wireless systems. Have a plan B and know how to change channels (if that's possible on your systems)
 
thank You again
the camera will record it to the L channel only , so i dont have the option of 2 channel
the option here is that the receiver have 2 inputs one for the mic and the second input is called " mix " so You can input another mic to it and it mix both mics on one channel
so in this case what i am afraid of is that if one have problem or drop outs it will be recorded on same channel
but if no problem happen then i get benefit of stronger sound even if the person turned head left or right both mics will be better than one
but for safety am leaning toward using one mic only since if they are 2 it will be mixed on one channel by the transmitter
and yes it has 3 frequencies to select from for the transmitter and receiver
so what do You think use one or 2mics ?
 
I second paulears comment, make sure they know what they are getting themselves in for. are you volunteering, or being paid? if they are paying you, than that would make expectations a LOT higher

if you can find someone else to also volunteer with more equipment (even if just a shotgun mic and/or zoom recorder), that might be helpful too.


if you can only record one channel, i would probably only bother with one radio.
Using two of these radio microphones at once mixed to one channel only increases the chance of problems - it would double the chance of dropouts, possibly create phasing problems, and increased noise.

You want to record as LOUD as possible without clipping, and have the ability to lower the whole thing in post. this lowers the whole sound, including the noise floor.
recording low and boosting in post will only give you LOTs of hiss.

clipping is bad too, you need to find a comfortable point.
 
@Stiffman
thank You for Your reply
and i am volunteering, not being paid
and sadly i can not find another volunteering, not being paid to bring another equipment !
i agree with You as 2 radio mics will be a mess and specially when they are on one channel , so i will use one mic only and that is one of the benefits i learned from this post by the helpfull People like You who helped me
regarding the levels i was thinking of recording lil bit low then normalize in post in order to keep the cam preamp make lower noise , so is this right thing ?
or should i keep at as high as possible b4 clipping ?
i noticed when i tested that the higher the levels the higher the noise !!
by the way i have learned a good tip to reduce noise in post in Audacity from helpful guy too
thanks all
 
No no no. The advice given was correct. If you record low, then bringing it up raises the noise floor in the edit. You MUST get it right when you record. Not too loud, it distorts, and not too low , it hisses. This is difficult if you are looking at the images because you MUST do both.

is the product you linked to available for use in Cairo? Europe don't use the 900MHz band as it's full of phones, I thought Egypt used a similar system? It's a big city, and before you buy it may be worth checking. If you already have it, then interference could be a problem at some locations?
 
Last edited:
thank You i got it about levels
about the 900mhz mics " i already have them " and i dont know technically what we use in cairo for mobiles
i just hope interference wouldnt happen and ill try to monitor it via transmitter ,, what else i can do ??
actually i start to feel that i was wrong to go volunteering as i have a few equipment , and after all the headache i passed in for my equipment i wish i can quit it :(
 
holysphinx1@hotmail.com said:
thank You i got it about levels
about the 900mhz mics " i already have them " and i dont know technically what we use in cairo for mobiles
i just hope interference wouldnt happen and ill try to monitor it via transmitter ,, what else i can do ??
actually i start to feel that i was wrong to go volunteering as i have a few equipment , and after all the headache i passed in for my equipment i wish i can quit it :(

what else i can do ??
Click to expand...

Advise them that after testing you realize you do not have the proper audio equipment to get decent sound, therefore you cannot in good conscience do the project.

If you cannot do it at least halfway right, you cannot do it.
 
Yes You are true
i have apologized to them , the fact that i have to get an external recorder " not cheap " and shotgun mic from the highest level same as we use in feature films , and a wireless high end senhizer mics , these are high end equipment to me and cost more than all other equipment , and the fact that no DIY solutions no Alternatives for Limited Budget
" Actually it made me hate more and more sound " not easy not even simple as video costs a lot and no independent can handle , actually i was not just lost my intrest in recording audio by myself ,, sound made me hate no budget indi film , oh Picture is must easy to make than sound and another fact i noticed to maximize my hatred to sound is :
in picture if You bought a Jib as an example Your Pic at once get benifits from it and people see how different and richer became Your Picture but for sound it is a monster and do not work like that it asks You all High costy things and just to be ok not bad no one will clap for You in the movie cas Yo used sen me 66 mic which is much expensive than rode mic , not even people who works in media
so again if You have the money You buy these expensive things just to be ok
so if You want to use fancy 3 times cost solution no one actually will notice , no more credit or any thing, the only fact as we see here if You dont do this You cant record sound but nothing more
i Hate sound i will keep myself away and use minimum Equipment , away as i can from this monster
" to get my point take a look at my video gear it is very simple and missing a lot " a lot " but i still can makea whole feature of what i got only and actually the talent can even make You feel i do not need any thing more , so picture is my love it gives You credit and good name with very few requirments and with tons of low budget options and if You can save to buy a small piece of equipment like dolly or steady or or it gives You all thecredit and even audince notice it ,, but with sound no credit even if You buy a 100000$ equipment just ok and no one will notice it at all !!
tell me how many audience congratulate You film maker and told You oh we love the dialogue level and clearity ????
but if You do not give them that level You loose
so that is why i always hated sound and see it as a monster a vampire who suck the blood of indi film makers giving them just debt and no credit at all
thank You people for Your help and i am very sad and feel desperate cas i apologized to the non proft org ..
oh and sorry again for my bad english as it is not my main
thank You all
 
Last edited:
holysphinx1@hotmail.com said:
"Actually it made me hate more and more sound" not easy not even simple as video costs a lot and no independent can handle , actually i was not just lost my intrest in recording audio by myself ,, sound made me hate no budget indi film , oh Picture is must easy to make than sound and another fact i noticed to maximize my hatred to sound is...
Click to expand...

Hate is a pointless waste of effort. When you feel like you really hate something, use that as a signal to start putting in the effort to learn all about the object of your hate. The more you learn, the less you hate. Try it and see.

In cinema, it's expecially pointless to hate sound. Sound is said to be 70% of the experience of a motion picture. People will forgive bad video and all kinds of video artifacts, but bad sound will cause them to get up out of their seats and walk away. Sound is crucial.

So far you've apparently been taking sound for granted -- you just pass the responsibility to someone else without knowning anything about what that responsibility entails. Now it's time for you to learn just how difficult what you've been taking for granted really is. And that's a good thing. It will make you a better cinematographer in the end.
 
Hmmmmm,

You must hate a lot of things since apparently it only takes not knowing how to do it.

BTW you could have a decent audio set up for the cost of the video equipment you listed.

$600 for a wireless is "High Costy" but a $2,500 camera body is not?

Not sure where $100,000 of sound gear only gets you "OK" results? The gist seems to be that you don't like anything that doesn't get people to pat you on the back for some dramatic effect. Doing a quality film that creates a world that sucks your audience in is really of no interest to you it seems. It really comes off as you want to shoot one "wow" effect after another and silly stuff like story and acting, dialog etc just gets in the way of the eye candy you are interested in.

Maybe it's a translation issue but that is really what your rant comes off as.
 
Cheap equipment is not the problem. It is the WRONG cheap equipment. You can get quite good sound on a very limited budget, but it needs the right kit. Sound is not difficult, it just needs you to really understand how it works and what you hear. A good photographer can get superb pictures with a cheap camera. Spending a fortune on body and lenses guarantees nothing, if you don't have the aptitude. I have heard good sound recorded on an iPhone, and awful sound recorded on a $10,000 recorder. A cheap microphone in the right place works well.

The most expensive radio system is nearly as good as a $10 piece of cable.
 
Yes True for most said
and may be my weak english language made it difficult to understand what i meant

to make things clear of why i hate recording audio " not all audio i love sfx and music and those too could make 70% of film i agree "
of course with a good accepted understanable dialogue
a good DoP can still make a wow pic or woow very Pro shot with canon 50 f1.8 wich is less than 100$
" but it will cost him to do a lot of things like knowing where is the sweetest Fstop etc "
so a 10,000$ lens is not a must to produce a Pro Wow Work , and this exactly is the core of what raised all the Indi works You all see these days add to this concept the DiY work and You got what makes indi films go
compare that to sound !!!!!!!!!
ok from my experience in my 1st feature film my sound operator made me buy a senhizer me66 shotgun and roland r44 and we rent 2 sen g2 wirless system , and the only low equipment he used was my sony wireless lav i listed here and he only used one of them in causes of 3 actors talk in same time ......
" that Equipment was the same high or super budget film local here use , the fact at the time i was shooting my film my father who is also a feature film director who worked on Big budget films was shooting a film with one of Egypt top star and guess what he was using the smae sound equipment i use nothing more !!!!!!!!!!!
so my point is while picture from cheap and indi level camera and lenses can make You " if talented " to be compared to high end cameras and lenses
in sound recording this is not the cause to just be accepted in pro level You will Pay mostly same as other non indi
" You can make a film to be screened in theaters and win in festivals with canon 7d or even with 550d but for sound You can not do that with radioshack mics and nothing less than the long live Senhizer Products
" and i know there are much much higher sound equipment than senhizer and the R44 but local no one here use other equipment "

second point :
in case You saved an extra money and want to enhance Your work in Picture Land :)
buy or Diy jib or crane or dolly or steady or wireless follow focus or slider or or or " and if used right then at once people see every $ you spent and even see it as more than You did and at the end it makes Your name better in our field
do the same thing with sound " sell Your me 66 and think of high end fancy shotgun "
for majority of audience and media people You done nothing at all or at the best a very few of sound engineers may be i say may be notice that u used a lil bit better than me66
and that what makes us in Pro world like in features series etc use the minimum accepted Pro sound audio and in case of my country it is the 3 part triangle
" r44 as recorder , me66 as shotgun ,, sen g2 wireless ""
did You notice that i say Pro uses here G2 and i didnt say G3 ? ,, did You get the hidden meaning i want to say ?
---
when a friend or Young aged new directors asks me best advice for making ultra small short film with no budget to introduce themselves to the world i say to them
" i hate sound and You need to get same equipment my father use in those big film so consider "field audio recording not all audio " as Your enemy that will destroy Your effort and just make this film or use a story that makes a silent film with no dialogue just use sfx and music ...
in this post i myself tried to challenge what i already know and find a way arround it cas i wanted to help those non profit organizations who are trying to make our world a better place specially in a country like mine , and my film " that i didnt make " was specially putting spot on one of very helpful people who help poor childs to learn and go to school
but again sound was the killer that murdered my dream
--------
i know my post is long booring one with a lot of english mistakes so forgive me but i want to tell You a last small story
for my feature film i bought ton of equipment more than i can afford as person who is not rich and after film i cant afford to make them stay so i sell most of them but i just kept the very minimum equipmet " which is listed here now " just to make it possible for me to still shot small Projects , and when i tried to use this technique with the killer monster " Sound "
i find rolland r44 alone is nothing and shotgun me66 alone " i mean conected to camera directly " is bad so i couldnt save either , and the only one stayed with me was sony mics
sorry for all my long response and thank You all , our talk here alone could make better filmmaker many thanks really
 
Last edited:
So then the question is why are you using wireless on a low budget film? 95% of all films ever made were done with no wireless. You work around the limitations of your "not expensive" camera but you expect to not think about or work around limitations in sound and then complain.

For some perspective what you were using is not what gets used on a film with a budget in the US and it is definitely not considered pricey high end equipment.

Unfortunately you are not alone in this attitude on sound that in your case seems to extend to dialog also. I find it really disheartening to hear young filmmakers talk about the process as if they were working on a shoot'em up video game.

Nowhere have you mentioned quality of the film. Your sole concern is that the audience will get wowed by some visual gimmick.

Dialog is the backbone of any film. Even silent films had dialog, you just had to read it.
Sound is the world your dialog takes place in.

Ignore that and if you spend enough maybe you get a film like 300. A truly horrible film, awful dialog, but the loudest film ever made. Really not good sound even if you watched it in a place where they took pity on you and lowered the level to bearable. But it was one visual "wow" after another. Made it come off as a video game with less plot.
 
Last edited:
" You can make a film to be screened in theaters and win in festivals with canon 7d or even with 550d but for sound You can not do that with radioshack mics and nothing less than the long live Senhizer Products
" and i know there are much much higher sound equipment than senhizer and the R44 but local no one here use other equipment "
Click to expand...

i find rolland r44 alone is nothing and shotgun me66 alone " i mean conected to camera directly " is bad so i couldnt save either , and the only one stayed with me was sony mics
Click to expand...

A couple of things.

In the first quote you are actually wrong. You could with the right sound person make a film with mics from Radio Shack and get into festivals and will awards etc. Content and quality go a lot farther than "wow" moments. Black Stallion won a special Oscar for sound and some of that award winning sound was recorded with the cheap sony stereo mic that came with the sony walkman cassette recorder that was used to record those sounds.
There is a line of ADR in Fly Away Home that was recorded with a Radio Shack mic and Cassette deck in the actors home. It was not intended but they had an equipment melt down when everything was closed.

So you can and it has been done. But you NEED someone who knows what they are doing.

DSLR's have almost universally bad audio, they were never made to record sound and they don't do it well. If you couldn't get decent sound from the sennheiser connected to the R44, then someone didn't know what they were doing. Neither is something I would recommend but both are capable of decent sound. In the last quote "r44 alone is nothing"? what are you talking about? It sounds like you were expecting a recorder to also be a microphone and maybe it's own boom op? It's like saying the 5D body on it's own is nothing, and I also find that the lense alone doesn't work, so I had to toss both of them... How about.... connecting them!

Personally I would not argue for you to learn how to do sound. Maybe a little more general understanding would be good. But like directing and editing and camera work it's a special skill. If you want to be a director you should spend your time perfecting that. Find someone who wants to do sound and work with them. You also want to find someone who knows post sound.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top