Gh1 audio

[squig]

:shocked: Are you sure about that? PM or email me at angibrowl -at - gmail if you want, it needn't be that expensive. Rode mics are from Australia if I recall correctly, and their NTG series is both good and affordable.

You might do much better to cast around for a decent sound person with good equipment than buy it all yourself and not be able to make the best use of it; and if equipment is a must-buy for whatever reason, there are still lots of options. You don't need Lectrosonics, for example; for about a quarter of the price you can get some Sennheiser wireless mics that'll give you 95% of the same results.

positive

I already have a rode NTG2. Yep they're made here and are cheaper here too. I want to get a sennheiser G2 system with 2 countryman B3 lavs. And I need a zoom H4n and maybe a rode NT3 and boom.

After doing some reading I'll definitely go with the sennheisers. What do you think of the B3s? I've read some other brands may be better but I can get the B3s a lot cheaper. I was a record producer in a past life so sound quality is very important to me but I'm used to getting very good results with cheaper equipment with some effort.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

The H4 will do just as good. The h4n is newer, but doesn't necessarily mean it's the "best" option...

There's a lot that's better about it. Being able to adjust the polar patterns of the onboard mics (for 4 track recording @ 24/48) is huge. I'd still recommend using an external mixer unless the preamps have improved substantially, but you don't necessarily need a Sound Devices. There are a lot of more budget-friendly options available that will still sound very good. Analog mixing is a very mature technology.

 

[squig]

I've looked around a bit but haven't found anything portable like the sound devices. I have a presonus digitube valve pre that I could rig up with a battery.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

positive

I already have a rode NTG2. Yep they're made here and are cheaper here too. I want to get a sennheiser G2 system with 2 countryman B3 lavs. And I need a zoom H4n and maybe a rode NT3 and boom.

After doing some reading I'll definitely go with the sennheisers. What do you think of the B3s? I've read some other brands may be better but I can get the B3s a lot cheaper. I was a record producer in a past life so sound quality is very important to me but I'm used to getting very good results with cheaper equipment with some effort.

Yes, I rate the Sennheisers. The b3s are good...but if I were you, I'd try out with the Senn. capsules first. So much of a lavalier mic depends on where it's placed on the talent and so forth. You might be surprised to discover that the best investment you can make is a roll of breathable surgical tape which will really hold them in place even on an actor's sweaty chest (and gunk up your mic capsule, get used to cleaning them). Simply instructing your wardrobe people to avoid polyester or other synthetic fabrics (which rustle horribly) will also improve your sound by leaps and bounds. When you have the capsule securely taped under someone's sternum, it's going to sound a bit bassier no matter what capsule you use, but you can fix that with a dash of EQ later. Experiment with the transmit/receive settings for gain and you may be pleasantly surprised.

If you have an NTG2 then the NTG3 may be superfluous. As you'll know from past studio experience (me too) it's a game of diminishing returns: you pay a LOT for the final 5% improvement. Having said that I use a Schoeps CMIT-5u, but then sound was my primary trade for several years. Myself, I'd rent a boom, because they're cheap, and spend the money on someone who knew what to do with it - most people thing you just hold it up in the air and that a boom operator's main talent is being tall, which is just so much BS.

Bear in mind you're not recording in a studio, nor are you recording musical frequencies where alising might be a distraction. 24bit on the Zoom is great, 48Khz is more than adequate unless you are shooting a film about bats, violinists or opera singers. Of course 96KHz sounds a little better, but the real plus of 96khz is in post, where you can layer on lots of plugins without worrying about audio mung coming down below the nyquist threshold. For recording in real world locations it's highly unlikely that 48khz is going to hurt you, and the benefit (with the Zoom) is that you get 4 tracks instead of just two.

Get the remote control for the zoom, a mic stand and an extension and an extra sandbag/clamp, and stick that guy up above your shot (keep it in one place for the whole scene) and you'll have an absolutely awesome ambient track that you can then mix your boom/lav feed into later. Getting good ambience is half the battle, which is why in hollywood the trick for a long time was to mount a figure-8 capsule under the boom and use mid-side recording. It never sounds as good to just get room tone with the boom and mix it in afterwards. Use the Zoom's onboard for that and just roll off everything above ~15khz in post with a 6dB slope.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

I've looked around a bit but haven't found anything portable like the sound devices. I have a presonus digitube valve pre that I could rig up with a battery.

Azden, Rolls at the cheap-yet-cheerful end, Wendt and PSC at the pricier-but affordable. Don't use a valve pre, the tonal characteristics will change depending on how long it's been on and how hot your set is (with lighting or exteriors in the balzing sun). I mean if you're going down the Sound Devices route you're talking a fair maount of money, and it's going to be limited by the quality of the /ad converters on the zoom. In that case you'd be better off getting an Edirol R-4 pro which combines the best of both worlds, and just buying a cheap matched pair of studio condensers and an x-y bar for your ambience (again, Rode has options here).

 

[squig]

thx for the advice

I meant the rode NT3 hypercardioid for indoor work. I've read it sounds warmer than the Oktava although it is heavy. I can get it cheaper here than the Oktava. I'm planning on shooting solo most of the time so I'm using 2 lavs and a boom on a stand.

Ahh so you think the sennhesier lavs are decent? Most of the posts I've read have recommended to ditch them. But if we're just talking about a slightly warmer sound with the B3's then ok. I'm thinking of using Lavs for 90% of the film with the NTG2 and NT3 mostly just there as a backup. But if it were a choice between just using better quality lavs like the B3 or the sennheiser lavs and the rodes which way would you go? Keeping in mind I'll have the much bang for buck H4n as a backup too.

 

[squig]

Azden, Rolls at the cheap-yet-cheerful end, Wendt and PSC at the pricier-but affordable. Don't use a valve pre, the tonal characteristics will change depending on how long it's been on and how hot your set is (with lighting or exteriors in the balzing sun). I mean if you're going down the Sound Devices route you're talking a fair maount of money, and it's going to be limited by the quality of the /ad converters on the zoom. In that case you'd be better off getting an Edirol R-4 pro which combines the best of both worlds, and just buying a cheap matched pair of studio condensers and an x-y bar for your ambience (again, Rode has options here).

Well I'm thinking the pre's on the H4n will probably be good enough for the mic's I'm using. And yeah the converters aren't exactly stellar. It's a lo-fi production with a 25k budget so I'm just going to squeeze as much quality as I can from lower end gear.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

I'm planning on shooting solo most of the time so I'm using 2 lavs and a boom on a stand.

OK, well test out your NTG2 - it's not that long of a boom mic, and you might find it quite adequate for indoor work. The Schoeps I use is about the same length, and I use it all the time for everything except really long shots or very bright rooms.

boom on a stand, be careful. That sort of works but if your people move around you'll hear it straight away, just like you'd see it if they move out of the light in a night shot. You're really, really cutting down your options that way. I totally understand the solo impulse (I'm not that much of a people person myself, especially when I'm trying to be creative), but don't spread yourself too thin either. Realistically you're going to have a problem assessing audio quality properly when you're also trying to operate and review the camera. My experience is that if you are heavily focused on the visual or the aural elements it's easy to miss something awful in the other part of your sensorium and not discover it until post.

Ahh so you think the sennhesier lavs are decent? Most of the posts I've read have recommended to ditch them. But if we're just talking about a slightly warmer sound with the B3's then ok.

Sure they are. Look, of course you'd ditch them if you were being paid $600+ a day plus kit fees, but again it's diminishing returns. They don't sound like ass, they're just not as beautiful as something like a countryman or a sanken. If you have a lot of screaming and so on then they'll certainly break up less gracefully at high sound pressure levels, and the other brands have the added advantage of very tiny capsules. We're talking a diameter of 2mm instead of 5mm...but unless you need to fit them into the seam of a swimsuit, nobody's ever gonna see them, are they?

Don't get caught up with the spec obsession. I get it too, but to be honest once you get into paying pro prices everything is pretty damn good. The uber-expensive stuff is better, but it's also there to help you sell and/or assuage anxieties about your equipment and performance. It's a lot easier to feel confident with $50k worth of gear than with $5k, but as you surely know it won't make your production 9 times better or even twice as good. Don't forget that a lot of this gear is targeted at people who are getting hired onto project with big budgets. If the film is spending a million bucks a week or more, then yeah, the producer can legitimately say 'I want the best in the world' and it's easier to just turn up and have the top end stuff. You, on the other hand, are not going to be trying to run 7 wireless microphones on a set that's submerged in RF noise and has a star bitching about the need to wear a body pack and questioning whether you're going to eavesdrop on his phone calls.

I'm thinking of using Lavs for 90% of the film with the NTG2 and NT3 mostly just there as a backup. But if it were a choice between just using better quality lavs like the B3 or the sennheiser lavs and the rodes which way would you go?

No. If all your dialog is on lavaliers then it's going to sound like reality TV. You might as well just pumping the zoom on the lens and making sure the light is as flat and uninteresting as possible, because it'll sound exactly like Big Brother or Little Sister or whatever you have on TV in Strine.

do you know anyone with this kind of gear, or a friendly rental shop? If so borrow some for a day and record something both ways. Then listen to it afterwards, with or without a picture. Lavaliers are mega-useful but they're always, always going to sound like voice over. The longer it goes on, the more the audience will hate it even if they don't know why.

Really, do a sanity check on this. I know you want good audio, but unless you're living out in the Bush I bet there is someone near you that already does sound and who'll give you a deal. Do you know google groups? Try rec.arts.movies.production.sound - which is mostly made up of pro hollywood people - and ask them if they know anyone who'd help a no-budget film in Australia by recommending a good intern or boom op they've worked with. It is possible to do it all as a one-man show, but you'll go grey in the process. If you're not ashamed to be low-budget with a couple of actors, then don't be ashamed to do it with 1 or a few crew. As a matter of fact, having a people helping you out will make it a lot easier for you to boss the actors, which is not a bad thing.

Test the zoom for channel crosstalk before you commit to it. That's the one thing I'd worry about on something that small.

 

[squig]

I haven't done my film sound reading yet so thanks for the tips.

Ok I'll limit the Lav use to moving shots and boom everything else. Do you think the onboard zoom mic's would sound far better than a lav? Because I could probably hide it in some shots. I haven't done my film sound reading yet so thanks for the tips.

I'll have a play with the NTG2 indoors, I can get the NT3 for around $150 US though which won't burn a huge hole in the budget.

I know what you're saying about the pro's and con's of flying solo. Chances are I'll have a lot of offers of help but I like to be ready for anything. People aren't always reliable particularly when you're paying them with beer and pizza.

 

[Cazeaux]

Well, I was in Japan last week and managed to play with the GH1 a couple of times.
Despite that I couldn't swap to other language than Japaneese. I search for mic gain control but I couldn't find any.
On top of that, if the flash is out, the internal mic rotate to the back as it is mounted on the flash. I am not sure that an outside mic doesn't collid with the flash when getting out.

About the zooming, there is no auto zoom in and out as you can find on a video camera.

Beside, nice heavy beast with clear picture even in dark environment

 

[Eddy Robinson]

Here's my advice; get a lav and borrow or rent a boom. wire up Mrs Squig or one of the squigettes for an afternoon and make an ass of yourself following them around recording what they say and do on both microphones. Then dump the results into the computer and edit it a few days later (in the real world there's usually a wait so you might as well get used to it).

Between your existing technical knowledge and the practical experience, you'll learn more from that process than from any book. The onboard zoom mics will give you good background ambience, you should imagine them as your main dialog mics. That's what the boom is for, but there are many reasons you might want to have a lav going as well. I don't always put them on the talent, I often hide them around the set if there's a noise I particularly want to pick up, like somone stirring tsugar into their coffee during an awkward silence.

Yeah, people aren't always reliable when its beer and pizza, but your equipment will never bring beer and pizza to you I'd say you should have enough knowledge to know what you want done and how, but not expect to do it all yourself all the time, or you'll exhaust yourself and that's bad for your creativity. It's also unfair to your actors when you're doing things serially instead of having several people work in parallel. Part of directing is the ability to delegate.

 

[DavidNJ]

From what I've heard/seen, onboard audio is passable but don't expect too much. you'll need a special connector for the input, it's not regular stereo. Personally, I intend on using a Zoom H4n too - good quality, availability of powered external inputs, and so forth.

Syncing is easy. You can use s slate in the traditional manner (which is a little time-consuming to sync up in post, but will give you needed time to assess footage and sicover quality problems early), or alternatively grab a few frames of the Zoom's display to have a time reference. Unsure if you can set both the Zoom and the GH1 to time-of-day recording and have it stamped in the audio & video metadata, which would be a big timesaver.

As an audio guy I would always suggest handing the job of recording to another person if quality really matters.

Fully concur...the advantage of using the on-camera audio is speed in post. Is this really an ENG camera? Since the cameras don't appear to have headphone jacks that would make monitoring impossible.

The Zoom H4n is popular because of its features, size, and price. You could use the on-camera audio to help align the off-camera audio.

 

[androoow]

http://www.tascam.com/products/dr-100;9,12,3717,14.html

another contender for the portable digital recorder is the Tascam DR-100 been eyeing this up since start of year ..compared to the orig H4 , the tascam just seemed a much better machine , but now with the H4n , there isnt such a lead anymore... Build quality on Tascams seem to be better generally and i like the fact that the Tascam can use its rechargable lith-ion battery along with normal AA's .

That said , the Tascam is a bit more expensive (not much ) and dosn't come with the AC adaptor ..its a bit more !! anyone else been checking this model out???..one thing that annoys me on both is no digital in/outs on them

 

[Toenis]

about field recorders

about field recorders

Please, please remember that any field recordist needs to monitor audio levels and those tabletop recorders do not provide. I mean that the LCDs on those are positioned so that you simply can nor read the meters when in bag or on the go. I 've owned and sold all recorders that I can not use from the bag. Specially so if you boom guy is the recordist too.

There is that new Maranz 661 that has level meters on top and Fostex FR2 LE and then there is that Edirol R44 (my personal favorite BTW).

Please think about wearable/bag/field level monitoring of any recorder before considering to get one and specially so if your boom operator will be the recordist too and specially so if you plan to monitor your levels when operating a camera (that's a bad idea but I have done this for far too many times).

I couldn't even live with that Sony PCM D1 because no one couldn't monitor the levels when moving around.

Cheers,
T

 

[androoow]

Please, please remember that any field recordist needs to monitor audio levels and those tabletop recorders do not provide. I mean that the LCDs on those are positioned so that you simply can nor read the meters when in bag or on the go. .
T

a very very good point.. something i think many people who don't usually record sound in the field are over looking, coming from mainly a recording music background, its something i probably hadn't looked too much into.. however as a lower cost option than those side metering ones, its still gonna be better than onboard sound quality and like the camera itself, whilst not perfect.. people WILL be able to get around its limitations but i totally dig your point.

***goes away to replan sound capture budget

 

[DavidNJ]

An interesting post. It brings up the issues of skills and workflow. How many people are in the sound team? Is there a sound team?

The Zoom H4n and Tascam DR-100 are much smaller and less expensive than the R44 which is nearly 3x the cost of the H4n.

Most people looking at the GH1 are probably coming from a HVX, HPX, HMC< XH-A1, DVX class of prosumer camera or maybe a HV20, SR11, HF200 consumer camera. In those instances onboard audio was the norm. I would imagine the R44 is often used with a breakaway cable recording on both the recorder and camera.

The hybrid video SLR problem is that the audio is on par with a $6-800 consumer camera. The Tascam DR-1 and Zoom H4n are the lost cost alternatives to record in a similar manner to the prosumer cameras. The Fostex FR2 LE and Marantz 661 would be a step in size and cost. The R44, Tascam HD-P2, Marantz 671, Korg MR-1000 would be in calls of recorders with the features a field recordist would expect (such as top controls and displays when in a bag) and are all in the $900-1000 range.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

The onboard zoom mics will give you good background ambience, you should imagine them as your main dialog mics.

Er...you should NOT imagine them as your main dialog mics. Ever. This is what I get for posting at 1am with a big bottle of beer, sorry.

 

[Eddy Robinson]

The Zoom H4n is popular because of its features, size, and price. You could use the on-camera audio to help align the off-camera audio.

Quite. It has limitations (particularly as a mixing device), so the thing to do is treat it as an awesome budget recorder. Think of the camera's onboard sound capability as a handy bonus rather than an end in itself.

Unless you're trying to be uber-stealthy, a $50 slate with the clapper on top is still a great, great investment. It worked for years on end with film cameras and analog tape recorders, long before we had powerful computer systems. It still works - if anything, better than before. If you get one with a color-striped clapper rather than a black-and-white, you can even use it as a reference card for your color correction on every shot, like the old Macbeth color cards shot at the beginning of a roll of film.

If you are being uber-stealthy, you can either record audio and sync up using the waveform from the camera and the recorder in your editing software (for some reason, every NLE I've ever used has waveform display turned off by default...which is idiotic) but it's much easier and faster if you have a click or a peak to align to. don't use a handclap or finger snap, because it's not consistent and if you're trying to match up image-only with the audio, it's not always obvious which frame the sound is on if the hands aren't at the right angle.

A good quality retractable pen has a decent click and won't attract any attention from passers-by, and you can easily see on which frame the button is all the way down. Alternatively, hold a cellphone up in front of the lens and press a button - it'll beep and a number will appear on the display, and you're set. there is actually a virtual slate for the iPhone if you are an apple afficionado.

 

[AdrianF]

Another advantage of the pocket recorders like the Zoom/Microtrack etc. is that they can sometimes be used in place of a radio mic system, if you can't or don't want to use radio mics. Placing the recorder in a pocket with a wired lav and away you go.

Adrian

 

[Peter J. DeCrescenzo]

... Does the GH1 output live line-level _audio_ (for example, the sound being picked-up by its built-in mics) via its special USB-to-RCA cable when the cam is in record mode? Or does the GH1's audio-out go mute (as does the video-out) when recording?

(This a moot point if the GH1 goes into "playback" mode when you plug the USB-to-RCA cable into the cam.)

Kholi, Hunter, Philip, etc.: Would you be able to do a quick check on this?

Bump. Can anyone verify this either way? My apologies if this has already been covered. Thanks!