Interview microphones - what should I get? Shoestring budget.

F

frogbrains

Member
Hi folks,

New to the forum, and here to ask pretty much one question to which I cannot find an answer anywhere else on the internet (although I am sure one should exist).

So basically I produce video content for a fairly popular new YouTube gaming network, and in September I am going up to London to provide coverage of Eurogamer Expo. For this coverage, I plan to do a number of interviews, mostly impromptu, with other attendees as well as those showing there. I have a digital recording device of sorts already.

I am here, as I said before, to ask one question regarding this situation;
What microphone should I get for this purpose?

Please bear in mind before answering;
  • When I said "shoestring budget", I basically mean £0 - I am a volunteer at the moment, have not been provided any money or any kind of budget for this project, and as a result am putting my own pitiful funds into it. As cheap as possible while still being of reasonable quality. Ideal would be £35 - £40 ($55 - $63). Please don't laugh at this, it appears to me that this price range may be a little ridiculous, given the stickies I have studied in a fair amount of depth on this forum regarding similar matters to this, all of which offer solutions in the range of around $200. However, if I have missed a post about cheaper microphones for this purpose, please direct me to it.
  • The microphone will be used in a large, very busy interior with lots of noise. While it would be good to pick some of this noise up to set the scene, I can't risk not being able to hear the interviewee over the noise of the crowd.
  • The microphone must use a 3.5mm connector, and cannot be powered by the device to which it is connected. The use of batteries internal to the microphone is, of course, fine. Along with price, the use of a 3.5mm jack is most important. I understand that the use of an XLR converter can be used to plug an XLR device into a 3.5mm port. If this is done, does the XLR device require some sort of external power (as I believe, given my very limited knowledge in this field, that XLR also provides power to the device)?
Sorry to just barge in on this forum straight away with a question without introducing myself or anything, and I do not doubt that what I am asking for here must seem a little ridiculous, but if anyone has any ideas as to a good mic to choose for this situation, I would be really, really grateful.

Thanks
Adam
 
Last edited:
XLR does not provide power. XLR to mini adaptor should be fine, if you're not doing a lot of rugged jostling and moving of your recorder (interviewing while climbing mountains, for instance). There are inexpensive 1/8" mikes you could use, but I'd look for a used Shure SM58; about $100 US new-- you could find one used right in your price range with persistance. A cardioid dynamic should be fine. You didn't mention your "digital recorder of sorts;" a lot could depend on what that actually is...

GJ
 
Gregg Juke said:
XLR does not provide power. XLR to mini adaptor should be fine, if you're not doing a lot of rugged jostling and moving of your recorder (interviewing while climbing mountains, for instance). There are inexpensive 1/8" mikes you could use, but I'd look for a used Shure SM58; about $100 US new-- you could find one used right in your price range with persistance. A cardioid dynamic should be fine. You didn't mention your "digital recorder of sorts;" a lot could depend on what that actually is...

GJ
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply, GJ.

The ability to use an XLR adapter, while adding additional cost, is a good one - thank you for this information.
I will keep an eye out for a pre-owned Shure SM58 on everyone's favourite auctioning website - there are a few on there right now going for good prices.
The "digital recorder" is in fact a device designed for dictation and note-taking, an Olympus VN-713PC. This was purchased for me by someone else in order to aid in college with dyspraxia and executive function disorder from both of which I suffer, and as a result if its use could be implemented would save a great deal of money. I foresee no issue in the use of this device, as it is equipped with a 3.5mm audio in jack, as well as, I believe, live monitoring (I may be wrong about that, but the product description suggests that this is a feature). If you disagree, and think that another kind of digital recorder would be more suitable, then please do say so; I am open to all suggestions, but while I do strive for quality, cost is, while not a concern I wish existed, a major factor in this production.

Thanks
Adam
 
Last edited:
I think you're going to find that this recorder will not give acceptable results for sync sound recording. First of all, it limits your choice of recording formats to either mp3 or WMA. Both are compressed formats and neither of them is really suited for master recordings. For sync to video you ought to record uncompressed 48kHz WAV files. Secondly, while it has a 3.5mm jack and you can get XLR->3.5 adapters easily enough, the external mic inputs on little recorders like this are typically designed to use consumer electret mics powered by low-voltage so-called "plug-in power" coming from the recorder and it remains to be seen whether the input would be sensitive enough for the lower levels coming from a dynamic mic. I would expect it would not be adequate for one of the dynamics that would be best for the recording environment where you'll be working.

Not a fan of the aforementioned Shure mic for this sort of work - it's a close working stage vocalist's mic, awkward as an interview mic. Would suggest considering something like the Electrovoice EV635a, EV635N/D-B or the Audio Technica AT8004 - all are good performers, are designed for hand-held interview use, incredibly rugged, and very inexpensive (less than US$150 brand new). But as I said, the downside of any dynamic mic is the output levels might be too low to drive the recorder properly anyway.
 
I'm a bit confused - some mics do indeed require power to be supplied by the XLR as in 48V phantom power. No problem if you don't have this, but of course you're limited to dynamics. If the idea is to do the usual waving the mic about between yourself and the person speaking, it's better to have omni directional mics, as you can't be 'off-mic', but more importantly, you can put the mic right onto someones lips without the bass boost you get with a cardioid. However - if you have a low budget, then I'd buy one of the dirt cheap Shure SM57 copies - as I don't like counterfeits, how about this one as a guide - you can buy similar in the states?
http://www.thomann.de/gb/the_tbone_mb75.htm
Then, to stop the interviewer putting it too close to the mouth, add a big foam windshield - maybe one of those with the gaming network screen printed onto it.

Pretty cheap, and surprisingly good - if you can't afford something like a Beyer M58, my own favourite omni.
 
Steve House said:
I think you're going to find that this recorder will not give acceptable results for sync sound recording. First of all, it limits your choice of recording formats to either mp3 or WMA. Both are compressed formats and neither of them is really suited for master recordings. For sync to video you ought to record uncompressed 48kHz WAV files. Secondly, while it has a 3.5mm jack and you can get XLR->3.5 adapters easily enough, the external mic inputs on little recorders like this are typically designed to use consumer electret mics powered by low-voltage so-called "plug-in power" coming from the recorder and it remains to be seen whether the input would be sensitive enough for the lower levels coming from a dynamic mic. I would expect it would not be adequate for one of the dynamics that would be best for the recording environment where you'll be working.

Not a fan of the aforementioned Shure mic for this sort of work - it's a close working stage vocalist's mic, awkward as an interview mic. Would suggest considering something like the Electrovoice EV635a, EV635N/D-B or the Audio Technica AT8004 - all are good performers, are designed for hand-held interview use, incredibly rugged, and very inexpensive (less than US$150 brand new). But as I said, the downside of any dynamic mic is the output levels might be too low to drive the recorder properly anyway.
Click to expand...

I assume by "sync sound recording" you mean a recording that will have to be synced to video in post. Why would this recorder introduce a problem with that?
Data compression is not a huge issue for me - I record most things compressed anyway, due to the many many hours of footage I use if I were to record everything lossless I would soon run out of storage for it all (and I hate deleting things).
Is there any way of solving this power issue? I know a friend of mine has a shotgun microphone (Audio-Technica, I believe) into which one can put batteries, and this uses 3.5mm. Is there not such a solution for other microphones?

paulears said:
I'm a bit confused - some mics do indeed require power to be supplied by the XLR as in 48V phantom power. No problem if you don't have this, but of course you're limited to dynamics. If the idea is to do the usual waving the mic about between yourself and the person speaking, it's better to have omni directional mics, as you can't be 'off-mic', but more importantly, you can put the mic right onto someones lips without the bass boost you get with a cardioid. However - if you have a low budget, then I'd buy one of the dirt cheap Shure SM57 copies - as I don't like counterfeits, how about this one as a guide - you can buy similar in the states?
http://www.thomann.de/gb/the_tbone_mb75.htm
Then, to stop the interviewer putting it too close to the mouth, add a big foam windshield - maybe one of those with the gaming network screen printed onto it.

Pretty cheap, and surprisingly good - if you can't afford something like a Beyer M58, my own favourite omni.
Click to expand...

I did think that XLR sometimes provided power of some sort.
I was slightly concerned with the choice of the Shure SM58, as I had read elsewhere that an omnidirectional is better for this kind of work.
Given the price, these counterfeits may be a viable option. I don't like buying fake merchandise either, but needs must, and if they are of reasonable quality, why not? Are they of reasonable quality? Anyone with experience?
I was indeed planning on getting a windshield, and probably a mic flag as well, with the network's logo on it.
 
I'd NOT use a 58, but as I mentioned a 57 with a much bigger windshield. The mic I linked to isn't a counterfeit because it's not pretending to be a Shure - it just comes from the same factory that also sell it with the Shure badge. It's a subtle distinction I can live with. Most XLR to 3.5mm adaptors don't require power because all they do is connect XLR pins 1 and 3 together, which just unbalances a dynamic mic. A small reduction in output,which is insignificant, and it's done. It is important to check that the device with the female XLR socket does not have phantom power turned on because plenty of XLR mic sockets DO have power for use wit condenser mics. You can never say XLRs do not have power, because some do - and some devices like cheap mixers have no switch to turn phantom off!

Omnis are better because they reduce the need to wave them about, and the potential for missing comments is high with cardioids, but with a presenter who knows how to use them properly, and not reply until the mic is back at their mouth, they're fine. Cardioids just have a feature that means as they get closer in, the bass rises in a non-linear manner, so the tone changes if you don't control mouth to mic distance properly - omnis are much more forgiving in this respect. although the windshield does it's normal job, the other use is simply to keep the mic away from the close mouth danger area.

Dynamic mics, close in have plenty of output level - for interviews the output is fine. The mics mentioned by Steve are fine mics - but out of your price range.

Frogbrains - if you want to try one of the mics I mentioned - I've got one here I'd be quite happy to loan you if you want to try it and see - I've got an XLR to 3.5mm adaptor somewhere too? Let me know if you are interested. Paul
 
frogbrains said:
I assume by "sync sound recording" you mean a recording that will have to be synced to video in post. Why would this recorder introduce a problem with that?
Data compression is not a huge issue for me - I record most things compressed anyway, due to the many many hours of footage I use if I were to record everything lossless I would soon run out of storage for it all (and I hate deleting things).
...
Click to expand...

Data compression schemes affect the timing of the waveform as well as its frequency distribution. This means when you load them into your editing software, convert it to video standard, and try to sync it to the video, you're going to experience drift where parts of the take are in proper sync and other parts are off. Storage space is cheaper than dirt - it makes absolutely no economic sense to compromise the quality of your original recording trying to save a couple of pennies on storage media. It's tricky enough getting proper lip sync recording double system as it is - don't cheap out and make it even harder than it already is.
 
Steve House said:
Data compression schemes affect the timing of the waveform as well as its frequency distribution. This means when you load them into your editing software, convert it to video standard, and try to sync it to the video, you're going to experience drift where parts of the take are in proper sync and other parts are off. Storage space is cheaper than dirt - it makes absolutely no economic sense to compromise the quality of your original recording trying to save a couple of pennies on storage media. It's tricky enough getting proper lip sync recording double system as it is - don't cheap out and make it even harder than it already is.
Click to expand...

Well, as the recorder has already been provided to me for free, I will give it a try before the event (which is in September). If it turns out that you're correct (which is the most likely case, of course, but money is the issue here) then I will have to shell out for a better recorder.
 
frogbrains said:
Well, as the recorder has already been provided to me for free, I will give it a try before the event (which is in September). If it turns out that you're correct (which is the most likely case, of course, but money is the issue here) then I will have to shell out for a better recorder.
Click to expand...
Just remember that high-quality sound is as important, indeed in an interview centred show like you're making even MORE important, than pretty video. If you have an extra coin or two to invest, your production will be better served by investing it in sound rather than picture.

As far as using a compressed recording format in order to save space - you said you don't like to delete things. My practice for memory cards is that the media in the recorder or camera is a temporary storage device, used only for the original capture, and NOT a long-term storage solution. I don't have a drawer full of memory cards serving as my archive. First thing I do when I get back to the office is to redundantly archive the files off of the card onto TWO independent hard drives. Once I have verified that I have two uncorrupted independent copies of the original files, the card is returned to the camera or recorder and re-formatted to clear off the old data and prepare it for re-use for new originals. (Old fashioned tape is another matter. Still archive the originals to HD but also keep the original tapes intact as a redundent archive, never reuse them.) With 1 and 2 terrabyte drives in the $100 range it is foolish to worry about saving space on a memory card in order to minimize the investment in cards for long-term storage - if you need more space for temporary storage than 1 card has available before you're able to transfer the files to their permanent archive home, buy a second card to take with you, swapping them out mid-gig. But you don't need to retire the cards into your archive after a single use like you would with tape. Never, ever, compromise on the quality of your original recordings for any avoidable reason and lossy compression schemes like MP3 or WMA ALWAYS compromise quality. Never forget that whatever you get on the original is as good as it ever will possibly be.
 
Last edited:
Steve House said:
Just remember that high-quality sound is as important, indeed in an interview centred show like you're making even MORE important, than pretty video. If you have an extra coin or two to invest, your production will be better served by investing it in sound rather than picture.

As far as using a compressed recording format in order to save space - you said you don't like to delete things. My practice is that the media in the recorder or camera is a temporary storage device, used only for the original capture, and NOT a long-term storage solution. I don't have a drawer full of memory cards serving as my archive. First thing I do when I get back to the office is to redundantly archive the files off of the card onto TWO independent hard drives. Once I have verified that I have two uncorrupted independent copies of the original files, the card is returned to the camera or recorder and re-formatted to clear off the old data and prepare it for re-use for new originals. With 1 and 2 terrabyte drives in the $100 range it is foolish to worry about saving space on a memory card - if you need more space for temporary storage than 1 card has available before you're able to transfer the files to their permanent archive home, buy a second card to take with you, swapping them out mid-gig. Never, ever, compromise on the quality of your original recordings for any avoidable reason and lossy compression schemes like MP3 or WMA ALWAYS compromise quality. Never forget that whatever you get on the original is as good as it ever will possibly be.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said - I am spending £0 on video, as I already have a number of cameras available to me that will provide all necessary quality. All the budget I have is going into audio, but it really is a pitifully tiny amount. Like I said, if the current solution doesn't work out (I have months to test it before the event, on the 30th of September), then I will spend more money on a better recorder. This is made more possible by the fact that I just found an AT8004 going really damned cheap and with terrible keywords so its unlikely anyone else will find it.
 
frogbrains said:
I agree with everything you said - I am spending £0 on video, as I already have a number of cameras available to me that will provide all necessary quality. All the budget I have is going into audio, but it really is a pitifully tiny amount. Like I said, if the current solution doesn't work out (I have months to test it before the event, on the 30th of September), then I will spend more money on a better recorder. This is made more possible by the fact that I just found an AT8004 going really damned cheap and with terrible keywords so its unlikely anyone else will find it.
Click to expand...
I happen to own an AT804, the 8004's predecessor, and am satisfied with its performance. I think you'll be happy with 8004.
 
I've never found the drift is much of a problem. Occasionally, when it happens, it may be necessary to insert a cut and move the audio a frame or two but this rarely takes more than a minute or two, but probably seconds. I've an old DAT recorder that slips slightly and I have put this down to dropouts and the error correction.

When MP3 was first introduced the codecs were not really 'loss-less' and the difference between .wav and .mp3 was very obvious. Now I'm finding I'm having more and more trouble hearing the differences - and with the higher bitrate mp3s I now use, the difference is now very small indeed. The old roughness and loss of the top end has largely gone.
 
paulears said:
I've never found the drift is much of a problem. Occasionally, when it happens, it may be necessary to insert a cut and move the audio a frame or two but this rarely takes more than a minute or two, but probably seconds. I've an old DAT recorder that slips slightly and I have put this down to dropouts and the error correction.

When MP3 was first introduced the codecs were not really 'loss-less' and the difference between .wav and .mp3 was very obvious. Now I'm finding I'm having more and more trouble hearing the differences - and with the higher bitrate mp3s I now use, the difference is now very small indeed. The old roughness and loss of the top end has largely gone.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. The device I am planning on using can record up to 320kb/s, which cannot be differentiated from lossless without stupidly good playback hardware - and its going to be compressed waaaaaaaayyyyy more than that for YouTube anyway. + I have recorded audio separately from video in the past and had to deal with a little drift. It isn't a big issue.
 
paulears said:
...
When MP3 was first introduced the codecs were not really 'loss-less' and the difference between .wav and .mp3 was very obvious. Now I'm finding I'm having more and more trouble hearing the differences - and with the higher bitrate mp3s I now use, the difference is now very small indeed. The old roughness and loss of the top end has largely gone.
Click to expand...
The point is why accept ANY compromise when the cost difference between the almost there and the right on is literally matter of pocket change, if even that. Let's say you expect the actual recording time of your interviews on a given day to be one hour of audio, total. You have a couple of cards that allow you to record 4 hours MP3 or 2 hours WAV on each. What possible advantage would you have recording MP3?
 
Steve House said:
The point is why accept ANY compromise when the cost difference between the almost there and the right on is literally matter of pocket change, if even that. Let's say you expect the actual recording time of your interviews on a given day to be one hour of audio, total. You have a couple of cards that allow you to record 4 hours MP3 or 2 hours WAV on each. What possible advantage would you have recording MP3?
Click to expand...

That isn't the real issue here. I have no method of recording anything other than MP3. A lossless recorder means spending extra money, which I don't have.
 
Last edited:
If this new gaming network is as popular as you say it is, maybe it's time to get paid for you hard work.

Or do you enjoy working for free and spending your money on gear for their projects?

Have them buy you an RE-50 mic, mic cable, or butt plug & receiver, and a proper camera with XLR mic inputs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top