Do I need a mixer?

roxics

roxics

Veteran
On my last feature we shot with a Canon XL1. We didn't really have money for a good audio setup unfortunately. So we ended up recording the audio to the XL1. We did this by using a cheap behringer mixer between the AT835b mic and the XL1's RCA input jacks. Yes (cringe) we ran something like 10-20 feet of RCA cable between the mixer and the camera. Surprisingly though the audio actually turned out alright most of the time. Not quality quality but at least you can hear it and work with it. The mixer helped add some umph to the signal and we would have been lost without it. I know this because the mixer wasn't battery powered and a couple of times on location we had to just run the mic directly into the camera.... well lets just say that audio wasn't usable. Live and learn.

My question is, I plan to shoot my second feature this fall with the DVX100 possibly the DVX100A. And I keep hearing it has some of the best onboard audio of all the cameras in it's class. Will I need to put a mixer between the mic and camera this time to get that same umph to the signal?

I don't have a dedicated audio guy. In fact I'll probably be the one on audio and cinematography while directing. We run a small crew of two or three people.
 
You shouldn't have to have a mixer no. The mic level signal should be fine. I think the problem on the XL1 (I don't have one) is that the RCA's are line level in, so if you were just feeding a mic level signal into it, well your about 40-50dB too soft.

With a mixer, you can have a line level output (Switch the DVX to line level) and have a stronger signal which would be less susceptible to other electronic noise that's floating around. Also I'd imaging any decent mixer would have a phones out so that the boom op can actually monitor the sound from there, and then the director could monitor from a camera feed or something.

Aaron
 
The purpose of a mixer with location audio is two fold: Phantom Power and Volume.
DVX has phantom, of course, and the volume feature is really only useful if you have a soundman.

A limiter might be a good idea to prevent distortion from an overdriven signal.

I would personally buy a different, higher quality microphone instead of a field mixer if I
didn't need the mixer, but still wanted to put some spend towards audio.

Hope this helps.
 
Are there any limiters or compressors I can put between the camera and the mic that are a decent price and portable/battery powered? What I mean by decent is a few hundred dollars?
I know some of those limiter/compressors can get to be thousands of bucks. But from experience shooting without someone on the levels a take can be perfect, except it clipped and then we have to reshoot. Not fun for anyone.

Good to know I won't really need a mixer though. As for a better mic, I can't afford everything at once unfortunately. I'm saving my pennies for new lights (briteks) and a used DVX as well. And I'll be lucky just to have enough for those by the end of summer.
 
Option DVRACK

Option DVRACK

I used DVRACK the other day recording a rock band at Key Club. And with all the lights and extremely loud music I was able to turn down the volume on the camera to respectable levels and still be able to look for clipping in the sound when I recorded. This may be an option to use not to mention all the other goodies the program offers.
 
No we've tried using a laptop and we don't like it. That's what we used on our last short film. My buddies laptop really isn't built for being put on the grass and in the dirt, plus it's his only computer. It's a pain to use.
 
Laptop recording can be very risky as your primary audio recording. I have heard of many failures when people try this. In particular things like the HDD getting fragmented and can't keep up with the data, general software failure, etc all can destroy several hours work in a second. As a backup, fine, but wouldn't bet my production day on a laptop system.

As far as needing a mixer...you can get away without one just like you might do fine without a sound person but there is a good reason why all professional productions use them. Weight your choices, take your chances :)
 
A mixer and a person mixing is necessary. THe idea is that he concentrates on levels and making sure the sound is good. Standing behind a camera and concentrating on the picture does not always allow that.
 
can someone please explain to me the best way to control the master level coming into the camera?

i mean it might seem simple but other than adjusting the levels coming from the mic, how do you knwo what the master level should be?

and if you just have one mic do you set the master level in the middle and then only work the individual volume for that mic?

what about the camera? do you just set it in the center and only work the mixer level?

i've had very good luck just using the camera as i've almost never had anyone to do sound.

i played with a shure fp-31 mixer and it worked o.k. but i found it harder than just using the volume control on the camera...

been thinking of a wendt x2 mixer, a friend has one and it is a lot nicer than the shure.

matthew
 
Your best investment might be to bring on a mixer/recorder that has better equipment and can provide dedicated monitoring of your audio...as someone else said, it is very hard to focus on the picture and the performances and still make sure you get good audio. And, if you play your cards right, your mixer can also help to position the boom correctly in each shot and eliminate another burden from you.
 
Here's a real helpful series of articles on the issue of sound recording for videographers and, in addition to education and tips they also recommend various pieces of equipment. Limiters and compressors, I think, were mentioned.

http://www.equipmentemporium.com/audiohi8.htm

Which brings us to the next topic in our Audio for DV discussion: line level feeds.
Audio coming from a mixing board is usually at 600 ohm line level, which is a much hotter and stronger signal than mic level. However, most camcorders only accept mic level external input when used as a live camcorder; when the camcorder is used as a VTR it will accept external line level video and external line level audio via the RCA jacks in the back. When the camcorder is functioning as a camcorder, the RCA inputs are disabled.
Therefore, to feed line level audio into a camcorder (which is mic level), we need to reduce the signal by 30 to 50 dB.
Some mixing boards, such as the Shure FP33, the PSC DVpromix3, and some Mackies, have a switch to reduce their outputs from line to mic level. You can't ask for more convenience than that!
Otherwise, one needs to insert a pad or attenuator between the output of the mixing board and the input of the camcorder. Shure makes a 50 dB line to mic Attenuator. Audio Technica offers a switchable -10, -20, -30dB pad. Either of these devices will work, since the camcorder input does have some range with its gain or volume.
Sometimes when you feed from a mixing board, the DC interference at the mic input jack may be a problem. Sometimes it may not. It all depends on the design of the mix board.
Click to expand...
 
I was thinking about getting an older iBook with a 10 Gb HDD and OSX then loading it with Wire Tap Pro then using it as a combo field recorder (at the same price or maybe even less than an R-1) and using the other computer functions when it wasn't recording audio. But Wabbitt has a point. Maybe that's really not the best idea.
 
i have one of those little inline audio technica pad's that has a switch to take out -30, -40 or -50

the problem is knowing when to use it...

when the feed is a little too hot it isn't as obvious as you'd think.

matthew
 
The only time I would ever use dual system sound (laptop, dat, etc.) with DV is for Steadicam.
The camera records as well as anything else, practically speaking, of course there are differences.
 
admiral3 said:
Wabbit, you wouldn't be wubbing someone's nose in the fact that they had to settle for a less desireable camera, would you? ;) lol
Click to expand...

Actually, no :) You can spend the same amount of money on a PD170 (respectable camera on many levels) and your in-camera sound will be terrible. The DVX is better then some older DAT (Tascam in particular).

Panasonic really got their "stuff" together concerning the audio on the DVX. I was really hoping Sony would get their stuff together with the 170's audio, but they didn't.
 
Whether anyone needs an external "pump", be it a mixer or preamp, will depend on many factors, particularly dealing with crew size.

A mixer/preamp won't be much use if you can't use it properly. By that I mean adjusting the levels on the mics accordingly.

This necessary "on the fly" level setting is to compensate the greatest weakness ALL video cameras have: on-camera volume adjustment. Even worst when it's a menu type.

Proper LED meters are also necessary, as needle types are hard to see and need focusing attention. LEDs provide that.

When you are close to "one-man team", certain things you need to know just by a glimpse. If you have an external 7" or so monitor you can use the on-screen level meters, and then external volume pots might be well used.

One rule though: each location or sequence needs just one volume setting. If you do no respect that and adjust levels for every shot, you will end up with a hellish mix of background levels. If you are going to adjust something during the shot, up or down, because it's too low or too high, do it slowly and stay there.

Another thing which I found a must for every low budget shooting on my last doc was a mic stand. You can put there your shotgun mic and place it close to your subject and away from your camera.


Carlos
 
panasonic audio is good for the price of the camera , if you dont consider the price , its just another very low quality audio device ,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top