Interview Microphone for Canon 60d?

V

vision_filmz

Carbonite Member
Trying to film in a birthday party and all I did was pick up background noise and not enough of the actual people I had in front of the camera.

Using Lav mics is out of the question as this is for birthday parties, live events, etc. Would having people hold a field recorded such as an H4n be better even though it looks strange and not something like a typical mic would look like?


Need some help here people :thumbup:
 
vision_filmz said:
Trying to film in a birthday party and all I did was pick up background noise and not enough of the actual people I had in front of the camera.

Using Lav mics is out of the question as this is for birthday parties, live events, etc. Would having people hold a field recorded such as an H4n be better even though it looks strange and not something like a typical mic would look like?


Need some help here people :thumbup:
Click to expand...

You have 2 problems here; the noise floor on the 60d and the pickup pattern on the built in mic. The H4n will help with both of these, although you will need to sync your sound and pictures in post. Also, you can switch to a directional pattern in the H4n, but it can never replace a true shotgun mic. A good solution would be the Rode video mic and a Juicedlink I think. This will give you a very tight pattern and a good gain stage.
 
Having some one hold an H4n as a hand-held mic is going to present some challenges:

- How are you going to monitor audio while you record? This is a must.
- The unit is subject to handling noise.
- The built-in mics are in an XY stereo array, and dialog is not a stereo source for video. You can use only one channel, but because of the placement the interviewee will always be slightly off-axis from both mics.
- The built-in mics both have wide response patterns, so eliminating background noise isn't going to happen unless the person holds the H4n very, very close. That's going to look weird, and create potential for issues with plosives (wind pops from "p" and "b" sounds).

Your best bet is a separate recorder, like the H4n, with a hard-wired mic and a good pair of headphones. A hard-wired lav is easy to clip onto folks as they are interviewed, but if that's still out of the question there's always the hand-held ENG interview mic. These are generally omnidirectional, which would seem like a problem except that they are dynamic and do not have a large pickup radius. This is how reporters have conducted standups and interviews in noisy environments for years.

The camera's built-in mic is useless, and an on-camera mic like the RøDE VideoMic (or VideoMic Pro) isn't going to do much more for isolating background noise.
 
C2V said:
Having some one hold an H4n as a hand-held mic is going to present some challenges:

- How are you going to monitor audio while you record? This is a must.
- The unit is subject to handling noise.
- The built-in mics are in an XY stereo array, and dialog is not a stereo source for video. You can use only one channel, but because of the placement the interviewee will always be slightly off-axis from both mics.
- The built-in mics both have wide response patterns, so eliminating background noise isn't going to happen unless the person holds the H4n very, very close. That's going to look weird, and create potential for issues with plosives (wind pops from "p" and "b" sounds).

Your best bet is a separate recorder, like the H4n, with a hard-wired mic and a good pair of headphones. A hard-wired lav is easy to clip onto folks as they are interviewed, but if that's still out of the question there's always the hand-held ENG interview mic. These are generally omnidirectional, which would seem like a problem except that they are dynamic and do not have a large pickup radius. This is how reporters have conducted standups and interviews in noisy environments for years.

The camera's built-in mic is useless, and an on-camera mic like the RøDE VideoMic (or VideoMic Pro) isn't going to do much more for isolating background noise.
Click to expand...

Excellent Post! Any ideas or suggestions regarding some hand held eng mics and how to use it? This does not need to be broadcast standard as it's only for live events, such as parties and clubs.
 
Rule #1 of sound: good audio isn't cheap, and cheap audio is going to cost you. "Broadcast standard" doesn't necessarily mean exorbitant cost, but there's a reason they have become the standards for use in noisy locations like parties and live events (and football stadiums, and NASCAR races, and...).

The go-to hand-held mics are the ElectroVoice 635a and RE50. They're the same mic, but the RE50 is in a beefier chassis that minimizes handling noise. The 635a has been nicknamed "The Hammer" because you can use it to hammer a nail through a block of wood, and then continue about your daily audio business.

There are other viable alternatives. Some have fuller frequency responses than the 635a but aren't as "indestructible" in construction:

- Shure SM63L
- Shure VP64AL
- AT8004L (I don't have experience with this one, though it has some decent reviews... seems to be AT's take on the 635a)

As for how to use one of these? Well, hand it to the person, ask him/her to hold it within about 8" of the mouth (sternum level) while speaking.
 
C2V said:
Rule #1 of sound: good audio isn't cheap, and cheap audio is going to cost you. "Broadcast standard" doesn't necessarily mean exorbitant cost, but there's a reason they have become the standards for use in noisy locations like parties and live events (and football stadiums, and NASCAR races, and...).

The go-to hand-held mics are the ElectroVoice 635a and RE50. They're the same mic, but the RE50 is in a beefier chassis that minimizes handling noise. The 635a has been nicknamed "The Hammer" because you can use it to hammer a nail through a block of wood, and then continue about your daily audio business.

There are other viable alternatives. Some have fuller frequency responses than the 635a but aren't as "indestructible" in construction:

- Shure SM63L
- Shure VP64AL
- AT8004L (I don't have experience with this one, though it has some decent reviews... seems to be AT's take on the 635a)

As for how to use one of these? Well, hand it to the person, ask him/her to hold it within about 8" of the mouth (sternum level) while speaking.
Click to expand...

Excuse my lack of knowledge on this subject when I meant how do you use it, I was referring to how would the actual sound be recorded? Would these mics have to be plugged into some kind of recorder or is there something wireless that connects to the camera ( dslr ) ?

Thank you for the help
 
vision_filmz said:
I was referring to how would the actual sound be recorded?
Click to expand...

Ah... sorry I misunderstood.

Yes, it will have to be plugged into something. A separate recorder (such as the aforementioned H4n) is a place to start. Getting that sound into the camera would require an adapter of some sort, such as a JuicedLink, but for that kind of investment you might was well go ahead and look at a recorder as it will give you something that's a little more multi-purpose. Recording straight into the camera is just a bad idea, as the camera's audio circuits are of poor quality and it leaves you no means for monitoring the recorded signal. Listening as the sound is recorded is crucial, and can save you from some unpleasant surprises when it's too late to do anything about it.

Wireless is going to cost extra (about $600 extra), as it requires both a transmitter and a receiver. There are systems with plug-on transmitters made for hand-held mics, and there are also systems that include a hand-held mic with built-in transmitter. A wireless receiver can be plugged straight into the camera with a 1/8" connection, but again the quality of DSLR in-camera audio is not great.

And before you ask about buying a cheap wireless system, please read THIS.
 
C2V said:
Ah... sorry I misunderstood.

Yes, it will have to be plugged into something. A separate recorder (such as the aforementioned H4n) is a place to start. Getting that sound into the camera would require an adapter of some sort, such as a JuicedLink, but for that kind of investment you might was well go ahead and look at a recorder as it will give you something that's a little more multi-purpose. Recording straight into the camera is just a bad idea, as the camera's audio circuits are of poor quality and it leaves you no means for monitoring the recorded signal. Listening as the sound is recorded is crucial, and can save you from some unpleasant surprises when it's too late to do anything about it.

Wireless is going to cost extra (about $600 extra), as it requires both a transmitter and a receiver. There are systems with plug-on transmitters made for hand-held mics, and there are also systems that include a hand-held mic with built-in transmitter. A wireless receiver can be plugged straight into the camera with a 1/8" connection, but again the quality of DSLR in-camera audio is not great.

And before you ask about buying a cheap wireless system, please read THIS.
Click to expand...
I need something portable and fast, we are not making movies here so boom poles, micing people up and etc. is totally out of the question. I need to be able to move small and fast and at least have better audio than the on camera mic and finding a way to isolate background noise.
 
Boom poles weren't mentioned. Where did that come from? We're talking about hand-held mics for run-and-gun ENG style, right?

A hand-held ENG mic, connected by hard line (mic cable) to a portable recorder, is both fast and portable. Keep the recorder in a hip pack, and keep headphones plugged in. Or, if you don't mind the noise floor and other problems of in-camera DSLR audio, get a hand-held wireless system and plug it straight in to the camera (which leaves you no way to monitor with headphones, and thus up to chance for what you'll get when you go to edit).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top