GH2 Juicedlink RM333 vs. Beachtek DXA-SLR PRO for Direct Audio to GH2

J

jwd@6foot6.com

Member
I'm in the market for an XLR adapter for my GH2. I have a Sennheiser ME66/K6 shotgun and a Sennheiser G2 wireless lav setup. I've done lots of research regarding using a Xoom external recorder versus recording direct to the Panny GH2. I'm a doc filmmaker, and don't want to have to sync in post. I'm taking the leap and going direct for simplicity's sake.

I need to monitor audio through headphones while shooting, so that is one hard constraint. As you know, I don't need AGC suppress with the GH2, and I can also use the onboard sound levels of the camera. The latest versions of the adapters from Juicedlink and Beachtek with audio monitoring narrow down to 2 products, which are sadly pretty expensive. However it's most likely worth it in the end. Here are the units:

Juicedlink RM333 - $469
http://bhpho.to/L36qqr
Promo video with Juicedlink: Oliviatech

Beachtek DXA-SLR PRO - $449
http://bhpho.to/JBlcBC
Promo video from BHphoto: HDSLR Audio Solution

Major Differences I can see are these:
Max Gain - Beachtek=15db Juicedlink=30db
XLR inputs - 3 for Juicedlink, 2 for Beachtek
Meters - LCD on Beachtek, LEDs on Juiced.
Build - Beachtek is nicely designed with easy to use Pots. Juicedlink looks like a DIY box and has smaller pot dials, maybe too small.
Size - the Juicedlink box, though uglier and more complex is smaller and a full pound lighter

I'm not an audio expert. I have read that DSLRs audio intake benefits from a stronger signal. If that's true, then the Juicedlink 30db max signal would be a dealmaker. Am I correct with that?
 
Got a nice response this morning from Robert at Juicedlink. Nice of him to take the time to sort things out for me:

Hi! I'm Robert from juicedLink. I have my google reader search everyday for postings around the web related to juicedLink, to see what's up. I saw your post, and I hope you don't mind that I'm contacting you here. I wanted to make sure you're looking at the right product for your needs. Unless, the GH2 firmware hack provides headphones out the AVout like MagicLantern does for the Canon's (I'm not sure), then you'll need a headphone amp in the preamp. So, if you need headphone monitoring, you will need the Riggy-Assist RA333, not the Riggy-Micro RM333.

While I'm sending this, I'll just comment/add to your list of differences ...

The way to get better SNR from the camera is to throttle back the noisy camera amps, and replace the noisy gain with clean gain from a low-noise preamp. So, in general, more gain in the preamp is a big advantage because you can throttle back the camera amps further. But, in your case with the ME66 and G2, those are very sensitive mics, so the advantage is not as pronounced. The ME66 us unusually sensitive (and the wireless receiver is basically like a preamp). But, if you add more mics to your kit in the future (handheld, wired lav, hypercardioid for indoors), the additional gain again becomes a big advantage.

More XLR inputs ... more flexibility.

The meter on the Riggy can be calibrated to your camera. The Beachtek meter can't be calibrated to your camera. This is important because every camera (and every camera gain setting) will have a different signal level at which it will be happy.

But, with the GH2, you really don't need the meter. On the Riggy, you can power down the meter to extend battery life.

Battery life is another big difference that people often neglect (nice to pack fewer spares or chargers than necessary for travel to events). The Riggy-Assist battery standard battery life with 3 XLR inputs is 2x as long. Power down the meter, and it's even longer. When you're only using 1 mic, power down the 2 unused XLR inputs and its 4x as long.

Will you be powering the ME66 from phantom, or battery? Us manufacturers always provide battery life estimates without phantom (because every mic draws different current, so it's hard to estimate battery life with phantom). If you're using phantom, as a guesstimate, you can cut the battery life estimates without phantom in half. So, the beachtek may only get ~1.5hrs. When you're only using 1 mic, the Riggy-Assist may get you ~6hrs.

Regarding pots. Most cameras don't have pots and level adjustment is done through the firmware. The high end cameras that do have pots (like, the C300) have knobs similar to the Riggy, not the giant knobs found on a Sound Devices ENG Mixer. A person operating an ENG mixer is sitting there 'riding the gain' and wants those big knobs. A one-man-band camera operator is, for the most part, operating the camera, but just wants a quicker way to occasionally adjust the audio levels compared to going through the firmware (hence the type of knobs on cameras like the C300 or juicedLink). Also, compared to the old DT454, we've changed the enclosure so there are lips that protrude out beyond the length of the knobs, to protect the knobs from getting banged around (if your rig falls over, or whatever).

Camera overload protection on the Beachtek is done with limiters. Again, you can't calibrate the threshold point for the limiter to the camera (or camera gain setting). Change something, and you're limiting too early, or not at all. The juicedLink accomplishes this through audio bracketing, which works for any camera, any camera setting, and consumes no battery power. With audio bracketing, you will have all your mics mixed together, however.

Plus, the Riggy is 'Riggy' ... add the RB200 so you can mount your wireless receiver and mic to your camera/preamp, without taking up your hot shoe ... we've thought of everything ...


You can feel free to share this if you wish.

If you would like to discuss further, please contact me directly at jl_info@juicedLink.com


JMHO ...

Best regards,

Robert​



President of juicedLink
​
 
That's too much money for a product that is not Class A. Clean gain is a euphemism for cheap gain, BTW.
You can try one of these; it's super light and small, has zero latency plus digital conversion, real phantom power and can be used as a digital front end.
Runs on a 9v battery. Kind of an audiophile item.
http://www.core-sound.com/Mic2496/1.php

The Zoom will always come in handy, you can use it to feed the GH2 and not bother with the onboard recording, or you can also record the audio.
Does seperate audio always sound better? Yup.

I mainly use a Tascam DR 680. The reason I recommend it is that it can do so many things. It's not perfect, but you can solve almost any recording problem with it. Mixi, monitor, multi, output, backup, and so on.
A lot of people use SD. There's lots of choices out there.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Dr Dave about the gain statement. Better doesn't mean best. From an audio background perspective, film makers seem to settle for less than best or less than "quality" results at times. As an analogy, it is like a bad ND filter on the lens. Most shooters don't realize the loss of quality but those who are well trained and experienced see it immediately. If the differences are pointed out or demonstrated, anyone will agree. Most just don't have that internal frame of reference due to lack of experience.


Bottom line: I'd use a Zoom or Tascam unit and would never bank on camera hosted sound, no matter the camera. I had two Panasonic HMC40's with adaptor blocks. They provided dual XLR inputs and one would think that would solve the sound issue. Even then, I always opted for an external solution.


Mr Dave, how would you incorporate that Core Sound unit into a rig? Having conversion, I don't see the path to the GH2.
 
Last edited:
DrDave said:
You can try one of these; it's super light and small, has zero latency plus digital conversion, real phantom power and can be used as a digital front end.
Click to expand...

Hey DrDave,

I am guessing that the Core Sound unit has one 1/4 inch stereo input socket, as I don't see any other way to input sound on the pictures of the unit.

Also, this unit does not appear to have any type of mounting holes, so you would have to adapt this yourself.

Looks like a very cool unit, though I wish they designed the casing more for video production field work.
 
Its amazing when someone posts an inquiry about on board sound mic only, specifically states external sound like a Zoom not an option , the thread is hijacked to insist its not advisable. I just shot back to back solo camera with an on camera mic (Sennheiser MKE) with the Beachtek unit (XLR adapted) a doc feature and a doc short. Its entirely the application. Stay in range, 1-3 yards of your subjects, monitor with headphones and your sound will be great. Shooting run and gun with an external as backup became a hassle and only use it specific events. Live music being one. Shooting subjects 1- 3yards in front of me with the Zoom I get a 90% axis, to much when Im trying to isolate the subject. There were times when my Sennheiser went down ( battery, pinched adapter) and had to rely on the GH2 mic. You know what, when mixed could not tell the difference.
 
TheDingo said:
Hey DrDave,

I am guessing that the Core Sound unit has one 1/4 inch stereo input socket, as I don't see any other way to input sound on the pictures of the unit.

Also, this unit does not appear to have any type of mounting holes, so you would have to adapt this yourself.

Looks like a very cool unit, though I wish they designed the casing more for video production field work.
Click to expand...
My mistake--I have used this as a front end, but I thought it had an analog out in addition to the HP jack. You can split off the HP jack into the GH2, of course with a Y cable.
You hook up your two XLRs right to the breakout cable, the unit is so small you need a breakout for the XLRs.
 
Last edited:
biginvegas said:
Its amazing when someone posts an inquiry about on board sound mic only, specifically states external sound like a Zoom not an option , the thread is hijacked to insist its not advisable. I just shot back to back solo camera with an on camera mic (Sennheiser MKE) with the Beachtek unit (XLR adapted) a doc feature and a doc short. Its entirely the application. Stay in range, 1-3 yards of your subjects, monitor with headphones and your sound will be great. Shooting run and gun with an external as backup became a hassle and only use it specific events. Live music being one. Shooting subjects 1- 3yards in front of me with the Zoom I get a 90% axis, to much when Im trying to isolate the subject. There were times when my Sennheiser went down ( battery, pinched adapter) and had to rely on the GH2 mic. You know what, when mixed could not tell the difference.
Click to expand...

Glad it works for you and that you ilke it. Kuddos.
 
Ok. I understand the emphasis upon doing audio right as framed above. I also really get the right tools for the job. I can also understand that lots of professionals are likely pissed, frustrated, what-have-you that in the past few years lots of un- and under-experienced amateurs have access to tech and are getting work and getting paid much, much less than pros for frankly "good enough" work that dumbs down the clientele, etc. That's got to be frustrating.

I am doing in-the-street and in-the-homes interviews as a part of an advocacy project on behalf of homeowners facing foreclosure.

I have been figuring out a kit that is small and flexible that can sound great and look good so that people's stories come across in a compelling, meaningful way - to touch others, help others out of their imposed isolation, assist in their own organizing. I am not in a studio or on a set. I am not a "filmmaker" (seems like every third white, hipster, male I meet is). I sure as **** don't get paid for this. It isn't about me and my project. If you have different answers, are a professional, etc., then by all means you should make different choices than I have.

I have a GH2, Sanity 5 and PerLichtman audio hacked, and want great sounding audio with little set-up. Having been using an AT875R, a DR-100mkII, and syncing in post for great results, I decided to try the Juicedlink RA333 since it is so small and power efficient to cut out the need to sync, which can be a lot when I'm dealing with 40+ shots in a long day of interviewing.

I went with the Juicedlink RA333 instead of the RM for lighter weight. Yes, I sacrificed the audio monitoring but got around that by splitting the output: one to the GH2, one to a tiny Sony IC recorder thru which I can monitor and get a WAV audio back-up. Is this the ultimate? A bit complex/redundant? Pro-grade?

What I have is audio that sounds as good as my prior set-up - again limited by mic placement - synced in the camera, a smaller, flexible package with less work time. I haven't worked with any Beachtek products, but a pound heavier with everything else that make up a kit?.... Communication with Robert has been great.
 
Super catchy model name: the Sony ICD-SX712. Very small, very high quality for its intent. Mounting options are a pain and I hacked apart the little stand with the 1/4-20 thread so that I could mount it securely in a hot-shoe. GREAT battery life. I also like using it with a lav connected and putting it in a subjects pocket, shooting them as they walk around, etc and syncing that in post. Very flexible.
 
We are just trying to save ppl money because pro spec gear is often the same price or cheaper than stuff which is built around surface mount ICs with little or no gain structure to the front end. Bottom line is if you like the way it sounds, it does not matter what is inside the box. As a practical matter, a properly designed front end has a number of advantages which range from a smooth unclored, noise free sound, through compatibility with a range of impedances for mics, to rejection of RF without dampening the top end. Now your box may have all of those qualities and more, and if so, kudos. I personally have way too much work and I really could care less if the market is flush with enterprising people wanting to do cool projects. I believe a bigger market benefits everyone.
As a general rule, I tell everyone never to buy anything that a salesperson of any kind recommends. After all, if they were experts on gear they would be working as a sound engineer or videographer, presumably. I have found that this works well most of the time. There are, however, cheap pieces of kit that have stood the test of time, like some of the zoom products. Your box may prove to be one of those items. I had a preamp once that was midpriced but sounded amazing. One time on a live shoot I started picking up the local radio station and everything ground to a halt because I simply could not get rid of the RF. Just one of many considerations, and so I use this forum, and other forums, to see what ppl think about a piece of gear, just as you have done. It is totally copacetic to have a different view than gearheads.
 
Cool, DrDave. Definitely appreciate all of that and I agree that these forums - a "home" to a lot of people like yourself willing to share knowledge - is where I've learned the most. Thanks to you and in general to these digital spaces.
 
Walter Hergt said:
Ok. I understand the emphasis upon doing audio right as framed above. I also really get the right tools for the job. I can also understand that lots of professionals are likely pissed, frustrated, what-have-you that in the past few years lots of un- and under-experienced amateurs have access to tech and are getting work and getting paid much, much less than pros for frankly "good enough" work that dumbs down the clientele, etc. That's got to be frustrating.

I am doing in-the-street and in-the-homes interviews as a part of an advocacy project on behalf of homeowners facing foreclosure.

I have been figuring out a kit that is small and flexible that can sound great and look good so that people's stories come across in a compelling, meaningful way - to touch others, help others out of their imposed isolation, assist in their own organizing. I am not in a studio or on a set. I am not a "filmmaker" (seems like every third white, hipster, male I meet is). I sure as s*%t don't get paid for this. It isn't about me and my project. If you have different answers, are a professional, etc., then by all means you should make different choices than I have.

I have a GH2, Sanity 5 and PerLichtman audio hacked, and want great sounding audio with little set-up. Having been using an AT875R, a DR-100mkII, and syncing in post for great results, I decided to try the Juicedlink RA333 since it is so small and power efficient to cut out the need to sync, which can be a lot when I'm dealing with 40+ shots in a long day of interviewing.

I went with the Juicedlink RA333 instead of the RM for lighter weight. Yes, I sacrificed the audio monitoring but got around that by splitting the output: one to the GH2, one to a tiny Sony IC recorder thru which I can monitor and get a WAV audio back-up. Is this the ultimate? A bit complex/redundant? Pro-grade?

What I have is audio that sounds as good as my prior set-up - again limited by mic placement - synced in the camera, a smaller, flexible package with less work time. I haven't worked with any Beachtek products, but a pound heavier with everything else that make up a kit?.... Communication with Robert has been great.
Click to expand...


I was recently impressed with Robert's a/b comparisons. I thought they highlighted the differences very well. I am considering a riggy and will likely give one a go. I was hoping to get some feedback regarding usage with a GH2 but haven't received a reply to an email. I may reach out again.
 
After deciding I couldn't afford a Juicedlink RA333, I bought a used Juicedlink DT454 (now discontinued) to record direct into my GH2. I paid $225. The 454 has a headphone jack and dual meters. Mostly I rely on the GH2 meters. Though I'm not a sound engineer, I've found the device to work quite well. The twin XLR inputs plus a minijack allow me to use my existing Sennheiser microphones. The ability to change the audio levels on the fly with the dials on the box, even in the middle of a shot, is very useful for the type of solo run and gun documentary work I do. The box is kind of bulky, and I attach it to a cage, though it does mount to the bottom of the camera for a more compact rig.

I've also tried using a Zoom h4n system. I can't stand the hassle of syncing the audio in post, even when using Plural Eyes. I'm probably just lazy, but the H4n is very bulky compared to a Juicedlink adapter. Then again, you do have a separate audio source should the camera sound suck.

Getting good sound into the GH2 is still dependent on the foundation of audio, getting the mic as close to the sound source as possible without seeing the mic in the shot. I'm shooting a documentary in bowling alleys at the moment, and you can imagine the ambient sound is tough to overcome when trying to get interviews. This week I made the mistake of having the wireless lav too far down the shirt of a subject, and the resulting spoken word audio was crap due to the background noise.

Last week Juicedlink released a number of new devices that are more compact, and have a variety of features depending on the model. I would expect they work equally as well. And maybe, just maybe, the audio on the GH3 will allow a simpler setup without a separate preamp mixer to hassle with. I haven't seen any chatter on the audio portions of the GH3 yet, but when they start shipping we're bound to hear some.
 
Sennheiser ME66/K6 shotgun is a decent mic. You did well with it indoors with echo-y room
Echo is not the problem in that take, base noise ( raspy hiss ) is! It's easy to filter that out in post, however...
1) I found that dialing the camera's levels down to zero and using your mixer's preamp to control levels, allows the Mixer's preamp filters to do the heavy lifting, bypassing what are invariably anemic camera pre-amps.
2) You didn't mention which mic you used with the G2 wireless. Looks like the stock Me2, but where is the capsule? hopefully not at the collar of the sweatshirt!
3) I use the double record method a lot and yes, feed the Zoom H4N signals from my mixers ( either Azden FMX32 or today....FX-DSLR). I always control levels in my mixer, NOT in my master recorder.
* The ME2 is a decent mic but there are better and more discrete lavs from Countryman or clones thereof.
 
jwd@6foot6.com said:
And maybe, just maybe, the audio on the GH3 will allow a simpler setup without a separate preamp mixer to hassle with. I haven't seen any chatter on the audio portions of the GH3 yet, but when they start shipping we're bound to hear some.
Click to expand...

'twould be nice
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top