looking for $300 mic and $200ish recorder to have good audio straight into my dslr?

PegLeg Media

PegLeg Media

Well-known member
I am doing a ton of quick video blogs at work and need an easy/quick setup that still sounds somewhat professional. So i have 2 things i want to add, a new microphone and an audio recorder so i can run two channels at once, but into my sony a7iii, not recorded external with xlr.

1. MICROPHONE
I know Rode is known for the best on camera mics so thought about the new rode videomic Pro Plus. I have used the video mic pro and it isnt near the quality of my friends sennheiser mke-600 which is about the same price. I am curious if i should just go with rode for ease of use or try the sennheiser which i have had a lot of luck with recently (even going straight into the 3.5mm jack in the camera. Another mic suggestion would be helpful.

2. AUDIO RECORDER
I have the zoom h4n but want to be able to plug in 2 or maybe even more microphones that are 3.5mm jacks, not xlr. I had this little saramonic/beachtek adapter that had 2 separately controlled inputs and it went straight into my camera... worked but the build quality is bad and it broke after a few uses. So i would love something like this but higher quality and maybe more channels.
 
I’m curious. If you want to go through the trouble of buying an audio recorder, why are you wanting to avoid recording outside the camera? Also, if you’re using any kind of external interface, why are you wanting to avoid XLR connection from the mics?
 
Alex H. said:
I’m curious. If you want to go through the trouble of buying an audio recorder, why are you wanting to avoid recording outside the camera? Also, if you’re using any kind of external interface, why are you wanting to avoid XLR connection from the mics?
Click to expand...

I wont always record to the camera and avoid xlr. For important projects i will still do that and already have gear for that.

i just have to do 10-20 video blogs a week with a few hour turn around time on top of my normal work load and want this to be quick. I did some BTS video using the senn mk-600 straight into the sony a7iii and it sounded better than my rode ntg-2 into my zoom h4n so figured it would be a good setup to have just left up in my studio. The reason i want the recorder is in case i have 2-3 people on camera and want to mix a boom and/or 2 cheap lavaliers. All my lav mics are 3.5mm as well so just think it would be easier and cheaper than
buying nice lavs and syncing audio in post.
 
A few things:

Compared to your visual equipment budget, your stated desire to get GOOD audio for $500 is pretty anemic. Just sayin....

Rode making the best on camera mics is wrong headed thinking since no on-camera mic will sound great except compared to other on-camera mics, which won't be very good due to the distance from the source.

You may think that avoiding XLR connections and going 1/8 connectors will make your life easier. It might, but the chances of compromised audio will be greatly increased and mixing this together in a recorder and sending it along with 1/8 plugs is a pretty sketchy way of doing it.

Self powered mics with 1/8" connections are usually not very high quality. Audio for dslr is usually a dual system affair with synching as part of the process. If you used a regular video cam with phantom power on two channels, this would get a lot easier for you. Any chance you can rent for this project? I don't like renting, but for a specific purpose-job, it maybe a better workflow. I often use a mixer in front of the camera to further improve both the pre-amps, limiters, controls, metering, and more. $200 recorders are not going to offer you pro level mixing function.

Like many, I often work alone and need to deal with audio without assistance. For interviews, I use stand mounted boom mics or lavs; either wired (better) or wireless. But in either case, I record to a standard video cam or into a mixer-recorder. As a last resort, I use small recorders like the Tascam 10x series or other plant a recorder somewhere. Synching doesn't take long if you have a reference track on your dslr, but I hear you: this will be a PITA if you don't edit and need to hand-off a bunch of files immediately. Like I said, you could fix this real easy with a different cam rather than fighting an unsuitable workflow to get your results.

There are a few other battery powered mics that use XLR connections such as the AT-897 and could be converted to 1/8" connection. I'm not sure this would sound any better than a Mk600. If you have phantom power, the AT875 is terrific for under $175. If this shoot is going to happen indoors, then any shotgun mic may be less than optimal depending on the room.

Regards,
Grant
 
I think you need to rethink some things. First two lavs and a boom is three channels and you are not going to get three on the DSLR.
Someone else asked about multiple 1/8" inputs on a mixer or recorder and well as far as anyone could find such a beast doesn't exist.

The other issue is that most 1/8" mics for DSLR etc. are dual mono, ie they send the same signal to both channels. Better lavs with 1/8" connectors for say the SEnnheiser wireless systems don't.

Part of the reason you don't find 1/8" connectors generally on semi pro gear is that they are weak and are easily accidentally unplugged. On consumer gear they are often soldered directly on the board so any impact on the connection translates to damage on the electronics. When you do see them on better gear it's usually for secondary functions like an alt headphone jack or camera return.

So...

If you did find what you are looking for it would probably be some consumer low end gear. Assuming this Vlog can live with less that "high end" audio then I would get an onboard something like the Rode (I personally haven't noticed a lot of difference from the pricier Rode's to the cheapie Trakstar's but YMMV, and maybe a stereo variable with mic like the "Sony ECM-959A". But an on camera mic is an on camera mic and it's always going to be pretty "R&G crossbred with a home movie" in terms of sound quality.

The big problem that has not been talked about is that with out an external mixer or recorder you have no way of monitoring and even then you are monitoring before the recorder (unless you use an external recorder) which is a bit like shooting with out looking at the monitor.
 
Noiz2 said:
The big problem that has not been talked about is that with out an external mixer or recorder you have no way of monitoring and even then you are monitoring before the recorder (unless you use an external recorder) which is a bit like shooting with out looking at the monitor.
Click to expand...

The A7 III does have a headphone jack. Of course, in-camera audio with DSLR and mirrorless is still a bit lackluster.

PegLeg Media said:
i just have to do 10-20 video blogs a week with a few hour turn around time on top of my normal work load... All my lav mics are 3.5mm as well so just think it would be easier and cheaper than
buying nice lavs and syncing audio in post.
Click to expand...

I agree with Scott: you need to rethink some things. There’s a much simpler solution here that will utilize what you already have, get you the end result you think you want, and minimize how much you need to spend to make it happen.

You have the potential to need more than two inputs at a time, so consider the Tascam DR-70D. That will also provide both ISO track and mix recording as a failsafe, better monitoring, and a mix to the camera via the 1/8” out made just for sending mic-level signal to DSLR/camcorder.

I assume you have a decent shotgun and/or hypercardioid for your regular work? So, that just brings us to the lavs, which you say are all 1/8” (3.5mm). With an inexpensive adapter like THIS, you can turn them all into XLR connections for your F4 (and convert phantom power to plug-in power). They also work with on-cam mics like the RØDE VideoMic Pro.
 
Alex H. said:
You have an F4. You have the potential to need more than two inputs at a time, and the F4 will provide that. The F4 will also provide both ISO track and mix recording as a failsafe, better monitoring, and a mix to the camera via the 1/8” sub out.
Click to expand...

He said he has an H4N, not an F4.
 
iain.bason said:
He said he has an H4N, not an F4.
Click to expand...

Correct you are. I’ll blame that lack of comprehension on all the dust in the house from ripping up carpet to have hard floors laid in...

Post above corrected. Thanks for catching that.
 
Alex H. said:
The A7 III does have a headphone jack.
Click to expand...
Are you sure? when I looked at the specs at B&H they only listed one jack and it was a mic in.

If it has a headphone out that isn't also the mic in then my point is moot on the monitoring.
 
Isn't this like asking which cheap lens you can use on your expensive camera because you do lots of shooting and using a good lens is a faff?

I HATE the sound of the Rode on camera mics. They're not bad, but sound exactly like what they are - a step up from the built in mic. Most mics have the sort of performance that lets you see them used for a huge range of scenarios. Nobody ever uses a Rode successfully for anything other than on camera video. They're cheap, and if they were good, audio recordists would use them on everything - they don't! My experiments with cameras that use 3.5mm sockets is that their audio system is pretty compromised too - nasty sounding autogains and limiters, poor control of gain etc etc. If they fit XLRs, they know they also have to fit decent audio. If it's 3.5mm unbalanced - then sound isn't important.
 
Last edited:
Noiz2 said:
Are you sure? when I looked at the specs at B&H they only listed one jack and it was a mic in.

If it has a headphone out that isn't also the mic in then my point is moot on the monitoring.
Click to expand...

Positive.

B&H specs are occasionally inaccurate (rather, incomplete) and the product photos don’t show the connection covers opened. It took looking up third-party reviews to find it, but there are several out there with detailed pictures.
 
thanks for all the feedback guys, you all are definitely thinking on the more professional side. I currently film this project with a $26 lavaliere going straight into my sony a7iii, the audio is good and i dont even need to improve the quality from here. I just hate MIC'ing people, having hair/clothes rub on it and the little extra time it takes than if i had a boom set up at all times i could just plug in.

So i already have a c-stand and a boom to hold the mic in place, im not actually planning to put the mic on the camera. So what i am thinking is maybe the senn mk600 and the tascam dr70. This will allow me to run the mic to the recorder for interviews and bigger projects. Then when i do my quick unimportant blogs i can just run the sennheiser and a cheap lav with the xlr adapter into the tascam into the camera.
 
I'd suggest a Sound Devices MixPre from eBay. Run from the tape out socket of the MixPre to camera using this https://www.amazon.com/Koss-155954-VC20-Volume-Control/dp/B00001P4XH In the past I ran this exact combination into 3.5mm input on a Canon HF100 camcorder and got great audio recording musical theatre. Use mic recommended by previous posters or your lav with the adapter someone else posted earlier.
Depending on your budget you might consider the newer MixPre-D, with an accessory bracket, which allows you to mount it on tripod under camera. Mixpre-D also has a seperate dedicated output to feed DSLR that Mixpre does not, per Sound Devices "dedicated consumer mic-level on a locking TA3 connector (designed specifically for DSLR-type inputs".
Either mixer can feed XLR output to a recorder e.g. Tascam Dr-60d Mkii at a future stage if needed.
Mixpre-D used prices dropped when Sound Devices released the Mixpre 3 a while back (that device I believe can mix three chanels, record them and output a 2 chanel mix to your camera via a 3.5mm connector per the manual the output gain may be adjustable to suit your camera.) It is however more expensive.
 
This cheap Beachtek should be great for most situations, depending on your needs. I use one running a wireless lav in the left channel and a boom on the right channel (It provides phantom power). Works great if you don't need something super fancy and no syncing in post. Just do some testing with your camera(s) and mic(s) to see how they respond to the signal and note the settings accordingly. I got great results with a Blackmagic Micro and this together for a simple sit down interview.
 
wjauch said:
you might consider the newer MixPre-D, with an accessory bracket, which allows you to mount it on tripod under camera. Mixpre-D also has a seperate dedicated output to feed DSLR that Mixpre does not, per Sound Devices "dedicated consumer mic-level on a locking TA3 connector (designed specifically for DSLR-type inputs".
Click to expand...

Yup. Once you drop the external recorder requirement, a used MixPre-D feeding the camera is usually the cleanest solution to the OP's problem. It allows one to minimize the effects of the audio internals of the camera, and provides three things that are really needed to get good audio -- excellent mic preamps, excellent limiter (don't underestimate the value of good limiters), and excellent metering.

I use a MixPre-D to feed a crappy six+ year old handycam when I need a small and light kit and it does an amazingly good job with the audio.
 
Last edited:
^ Truth from Bruce.

And if you need three channels, a 302 will do the trick. More that anything else, I like the metering on the older SD gear with really bright LED's. When my 302 or 744 hits the red, you know it! The new gear with strictly LCD metering is not nearly as nice IMHO, even if the new stuff has more features or even better audio. The usability is key for me so I don't plan on retiring my vintage gear anytime soon. And the SD stuff is made to last forever; I hope SD continues to support it as that is the only reason I would contemplate a change.

And if you're a buyer, used SD gear like the MixPres and 302's have dropped in price recently, so maybe more within reach on an economy budget.
 
ggrantly said:
A few things:

Compared to your visual equipment budget, your stated desire to get GOOD audio for $500 is pretty anemic. Just sayin....

Rode making the best on camera mics is wrong headed thinking since no on-camera mic will sound great except compared to other on-camera mics, which won't be very good due to the distance from the source.
Click to expand...

1) I agree, there is a massive MASSIVE imbalance in priorities here in visuals vs audio! Hugely out of whack.

2) yup, relying upon an on camera mic is the most common awful audio mistake newbies make.



My ultra ultra ultra frugal almost no budget audio suggestion:

Deity S Mic 2 + Zoom F4 (around US$350ish secondhand, only a small increase over the almost non-existent $200 budget given but is so so much much much better than the best $200 recorder such as a Tascam DR60Dmk2. Or if going secondhand as well, then the Tascam DR70Dmk2 would be the best sub $200ish recorder for secondhand. But why get it? When the F4 is in another league entirely)

Or for a very small bump in budget, you could go for the Zoom F8n (you might appreciate the automix function for extremely quick turn arounds with multiple speakers)
 
I've noticed a few times the MixPre-D got mentioned in this thread.

For many years the MixPre-D (or the earlier original MixPre) was an excellent first class choice.

But when the Tascam DR60D / DR70D / DR701D came out then the MixPreD started to lose its relevance for many people.

Then the final nails hammered into the coffin was when the Zoom F8/F4/F8n and Sound Devices MixPre3/6 came out, then the MixPre-D lost 95% of its relevance for this purpose for most people.

I reckon the same holds true for most other mini mixers people consider mounting under the camera, their time is past and no longer relevant in nearly 2019 when we've got better devices that are work as greater mixer/recorder combos for very very little money in a compact little body.
 
From my experience, I respectfully disagree with IronFilm's perspective.

I have two "vintage" SD mixers - a 302 and 442. I was early in line to purchase a MixPre-6 when it was released last year, thinking it could replace both older mixers for most of my work. I record to the camera about 90% of the time when shooting video, but also do some audio-only radio interviews and music recording projects.

The MixPre-6 succeeds magnificently as a recorder with four mixable inputs, and as a computer interface. But after using it awhile, I decided to continue carrying my SD302 as the primary field mixer in my day to day kit. The bright LED meters are a key reason, as well as the physical switches and other controls that are far easier to set up in a hurry than digging through the MixPre-6's touchscreen and menus. Even the fader knobs fit my hands better. It is simply a quicker and more foolproof device for operating in the field, and I love that I can read the levels from across the room or in the brightest sunlight.

The lack of a true +4 dBm line level output on the MixPre-6 is another deficiency. It doesn't interface seamlessly with my cameras' inputs, and uses a relatively fragile 3.5 mm connector on the mixer end of the cable. And since it's a digital device, there is a slight but noticeable delay from input to output - I estimate it at about 5-10 ms, which amounts to about half a frame at 60 fps. Probably not enough to be a critical issue most of the time, but not something I would choose given that I still have the analog mixers to fall back on. Finally, the MixPre-6's battery life is relatively poor except when using the Sony battery sled, which adds quite a bit of bulk to the unit. My 302 has never failed to get me through a day's work on a set of three AA batteries. (Some of the other mixer/recorders you mentioned might not have these particular issues, which are specific to the MixPre-6.)

Now I love the quality and features of all three of these units, and they each have a place in my workflow. Not a knock on Sound Devices at all. But if I were looking for a rugged, high quality and easy to use device to supplement the front end of a camera's audio system, my choice would be the original MixPre (-D) or 302 - not one of the new generation boxes with all digital controls and a LCD panel.

I bought my 302 used, but in pristine condition, for about $600 several years ago through an ad here on DVXuser. That's still quite a bit less than the MixPre-6 is selling for.

- Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top