Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

R

rdbot

Member
Hello. I've been using a Sony PD100a and am thinking of upgrading to the Pannie. Because of horrible audio quality I've been sending my Sennheiser mic through a Wendt field mixer and also a xlr converter to get to that little mini plug--a bulky combersome setup. Are the mic pre's and audio in general good enough on the Pannie to be able to get rid of the field mixer. I'm guessing that the audio would be better going through a field mixer, but is it good enough with out it--ie. will it sound clean and professional?

Thanks!

R
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

No camera has good enough mic pres. I would get a sound devices mix pre.

-Dave
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

I think this point is debatable. The DVX100 has an excellent audio subsystem with pretty good mic pre's. Would a line level input from a Sound Devices mixer be better than routing through the DVX100 pre's? Yes, but the margin of difference is not going to be huge-especially if you have a good hot mic. Sony is known for their poor audio on their miniDV cams and the DVX100 is a big step up. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by plugging the mic directly into the DVX.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

The DVX has the best audio system of any of the prosumer cameras. Try it for yourself to see if you think it's good enough, but it's definitely much superior to other cameras.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

This thread has been double Barryd.
I had a sony cam (trv950) the sound was awful. I agree on this one.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

Plugging directly into the camera should only be a last resort. You either have to use the automix feature (which really isn't a feature, it's a pain), or use the manual controls, which are virtually impossible to do quickly and accurately while shooting. I think the mic pres are the best of any of the prosumer dv cams, but they still don't sound good. Believe me, I've cut sound on a lot of shorts shot on this camera, some plug right in, and some use an external mixer, and on the one's that they plug directly in, we end up looping most of the dialogue because they didn't like the sound, or it peaked out too easily, or the automix made the bg's sound funky. It's nice that you can plug right in if you have to, but I would avoid doing it at all costs.

-Dave
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

that's good to know, so how would you set up the levels on the cam and deck for optimum signal? I'm not familiar w/ the settings on the Pannie, but also in general, how do you get the best results such that I can control the input from the mixer.

R
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

I'm in agreement with Dave that you can definitely do better with a quality external system. While the DVX has the best audio of prosumer cameras, it's still got to meet a certain price target, whereas dedicated hardware will almost always perform better. That's why I say "try it, see if you like it", because it's certainly not bad. But yes, obviously with dedicated professional equipment you can do better, so it's nice to have the option.

Not sure what you mean by "automix" though -- there's no automatic level control or auto audio gain control of any type on the Panasonic, so there won't be any background noise action happening... do you have any more info on what it was you were experiencing?
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

The real issue is why? Don't you want a device the soundperson can operate? Good audio requires monitoring and adjusting on the fly. Much easier to adjust levels at the mixer than on the half hidden pots on the camera. Same on every professional grade video camera out there.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

what settings should be on the camera if I want to control levels w/ the mixer...is there a unity type setting...or for instance advice like don't use auto functions, etc. How do you set metering as to optimize signal/noise?

R
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

Well, using the Sound Devices Mix Pre, I send tone to the camera, and set the camera levels to about two notches into the red. Then you should be good.

I was pretty sure the DVX100 had an automix function, where it "mixes" for you, but I could have that confused with the XL-1 or PD-150. I deal with all of these cameras day in and day out, and I could have something confused.

-Dave
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

Yeah, there's no auto level control of any type on the DVX. You have to set all levels manually. There is a limiter to avoid clipping, but it doesn't do any boosting of the signal, in fact it appears to not affect the signal at all except in a small window from -6db to -4.5db, where it clamps down to a max of -4.5.

The other cameras do have an auto level control, IIRC, which would behave as you said.

2 notches into the red on a DVX would represent -8db... is that the level you want to set your tone at? The white line that marks the division between white and red is -12db, and every dot represents 2db...
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

I love my MixPre, I used it more when I had an XL-1 and XL1s, I use it less with the DVX100a because I find the audio far superior than the Canon's. When I do use the Mixpre, I send a 1k tone from the mixer and set the audio levels on the DVX100a smack dead center at -12db. I just shot a dance recital with a couple of PZM's and my AT-4073a shotgun and the audio was excellent.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

I tend to run my levels a little hotter than most people. It comes from my music background.

-Dave
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

You guys have got to be kidding me with this "Are the DVX mic pres decent enough" crap. I mean really... gimme' a break.

There's NO comparison between the DVX mic pres and ANY other prosumer cam at this price point.

Rather then pontificate... I like proof. So here it is.

Click HERE for to hear 2 mics plugged directly into the DVX.

Still not satisfied?

Click HERE for another one... very entertaining.

Does anybody have ears? Run your 7506 headphones directly out of your (hopefully decent) computer and close your eyes. This is CD quality sound. Period.

I used to go to CES every year. I've heard $250,000 stereo systems... YES... two hundred and fifty THOUSAND dollar stereo systems... I've met the people who write for The Absolute Sound and Stereophile... I've talked to countless "golden ears" and I'd even define myself as having them... Reality set in for me when I met one very respected guy in the industry... he tried to tell me how the sound of his amp was improved by LOOSENING THE SCREWS ON THE TOP PLATE. That's when I realized how "subjective" sound... as well as insanity is.

I'm just not the kind of guy who can sit around loosening the screws on my gear while I ignore my ears.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

Sure sounds like insanity ("loosening the screws")... but I spent enough time programming computers to know that sometimes things work a certain way even when we don't have an obvious explanation. For example: maybe there was some sort of grounding error going on, and loosening the screw made just enough difference to overcome it? Or, it could just be the "placebo" effect!

That's why there's no substitute for the ol' blind test: listen, compare, and then find out which was which, so it removes all preconceived notions and the "placebo" effect!
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

The pres in the DVX sound OK. Good enough to get the job done, but they don't sound nearly as good as the Sound Devices Mix Pre. Hardly any portable pre amp does, in all honesty. I'm not arguing that it sounds terrible, what I'm saying is that you need a reliable way to adjust levels on the fly. You can't quickly and easily change audio levels on the fly while shooting on the DVX100. You just can't. THAT's why I recomend a mixer in front of it. If someone starts shouting, you can jump on a fader knob and turn it down quickly on a mixer. Those little knobs on the camera are difficult to get to.

Again, coming from a post production perspective....Every single project that I have ever done, where the people plugged the mic directly into the camera, they ended having distorted audio, or the levels were too low, and we end up having to loop at least half of the dialogue. When people use an external mixer, the only times I've had to loop dialogue were if there was a plane going overhead in a period piece, or the shot was too wide, and they couldn't get in with the boom, and didn't have wireless.

I agree, that the DVX-100 has the best audio end on ANY pro sumer camera out there so far that I have personally dealt with. If you do have to plug a mic directly in, then this is the camera to do it on. The first project I cut FX on that was shot on this camera had the sound recorded on it, through a Mix Pre, and it was superb. Also, I have found the DVX-100 is the easiest of the pro-sumer cameras to use.

-Dave
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

Hey Dave, let me repeat the question I made in the other topic:

When you ride your knobs, isn't the bacround noise going to change in intensity? Isn't it easier to pull the mic back from the source to adjust the volume?

I am really confused, because I had an audio class someday and I toought that I heard my teacher saying something about this. Before any offenses to my teacher, I might have misunderstood. So I wanted to clear it up. Thanks!
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

Matt, so you think that though it might be a bit better to go with a field mixer that the audio on the Pannie w/o one is more than fine. I'm trying to avoid carrying the extra equipment, but will definitely do it if it makes a very noticable difference.
 
Re: Field mixer vs. on board Pre's

yeah ****..i thought that i could get away with the pannie for audio.. These damn posts.. they make me spend money.. I think that sound devices 3 xlr one is the one i got my eye on. Any one use one of these? Anyone use a good mixer they can recommend?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top