DPA 4017 and 4018 mic review

thank you for the review, ty. i have a quick question. i own a schoeps cmc641. for my film i was planning on using it on a boom and putting dpa 4061 lavs on all the actors. would the dpa 4018c be a better option for the boom? which would closer match the sound of the lavs, the cmc641 or the 4018c?
 
ugafan said:
thank you for the review, ty. i have a quick question. i own a schoeps cmc641. for my film i was planning on using it on a boom and putting dpa 4061 lavs on all the actors. would the dpa 4018c be a better option for the boom? which would closer match the sound of the lavs, the cmc641 or the 4018c?
Click to expand...

The short answer is neither.

The long answer is: All lavs tend to sound like lavs, and lavs and booms don't tend to intercut well. Doesn't matter if they come from the same manufacturer or not. Why? Lavs are essentially boundry mics; the body they are mounted to is the boundry. It blocks sound coming from the other side of the body relatively effectively. This limits your lav to recording sound mostly from just the 180 degrees in front of it.

Boom mics OTOH don't have this problem; they hear a full 360 degree sphere. Neither is bad, but they are different which makes it somewhat difficult to intercut them.

Your Schoeps CMC6-mk41 is one of the most used dialog mics in Hollywood. I recommend using it. I do not recommend replacing it, certainly not in an attempt to make it somehow match a lavalier. Instead, I recommend doing an excellent job of booming, and not using the lavalier recordings unless absolutely necessary. Then work in post to make the lav sound match better with the boom mic. Not the other way around. But when in doubt, discuss it with the audio post person who's going to do the work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top