Mic or Line Level?

[Alex H.]

My company has already paid for the house sound...the feed to my camera is not a courtesy...it is a paid service just like the many wireless lavs and hand helds. It makes no sense at all for me to show up with a duplicate audio system and a sound engineer just to provide a feed to my C100 in the back of the ballroom. It's hard enough to mic GMs and VPs with one lav...I don't want to think about trying to get two on them.

Unless an AUX feed from the console was in some sort of contractual agreement, a live sound engineer assumes the house sound takes priority above all. Your sound engineer was likely doing exactly what he was hired to do.

Based on your description of the meters barely bumping during sound check, it sounds like Paul is dead-on regarding the house engineer suddenly pulling all AUX masters up when the show went live. You may occasionally find a live house engineer who understands the needs of a videographer and is willing to accommodate (having been on both sides, I tend to keep an eye on my press feed if I have one for a live show), but never assume.

The other part of this, though, is that you had mismatched signals. You were sent a line-level signal, yet had your camera set to mic-level input. That forced the FOH engineer to send a very, very low output during sound check (hence the console's meters barely even lighting the first segment). That's just asking for trouble. Set your camera to accept line-level in and allow the engineer to send you a properly-calibrated signal. That will take a lot of the risk out.

There are other safeguards you can take, especially in a conference/convention setting, and these are fail safes in case the board feed gets hosed. For one, you can plant a wireless lav on the podium. Or, if there's a wireless mic already on the podium and you have the same model of system, tune a second receiver to the same frequency and feed your other camera channel, or a backup recorder, with the signal. Good coverage on a situation like that requires several sources anyway: AUX mix from the console (if available), direct from the podium, plus a couple of room mics to catch crowd reax (laughter, applause, etc.). This also, of course, requires more than two record channels, so having an additional recorder (or a second camera) gives you the ability to record them all now and mix them together later as needed.

 

[Rick R]

A pre-fader aux send would not be subject to the FOH mixer's fader moves.. but would be subject to the gain/trim setting, but that's usually not changed much after a sound check.
Even if I 'was' paying for a main out from FOH, I would NOT expect them to supply cables, adapters, pads, ect. and would only expect a clean +4dB or -10dB feed.

 

[mhood]

I was in on the pre-convention tech calls with the hotel A/V. A mic level, XLR, main feed was specified and paid for just like my riser and A/C drop. But I certainly was remiss in not checking and double checking my audio feed. Also, a lav at the podium doesn't make much sense to me at all. In my company at least, speakers DO NOT stand behind a podium. I wear my fluid head out panning to keep up with them as they pace back and forth across the stage. ;-)

 

[paulears]

The trouble is that while you may well get the contracted feed, like the ac power supply, unless you pay for a person to monitor and run your feed, then it is only going to get casual monitoring, which will be by way of the occasional PFL prod - because live sound people do not wear headphones when they mix, so apart from maybe a bit of minding an led meter, they're really unable to spend much time checking your feed, apart from making sure there is audio present. To expect more shows that the job isn't quite understood. The production team where headsets and chat, but the sound op has to concentrate throughout. If I'm doing video and need sound properly controlled, then it's a different ballgame. We do quite a few dance shows, and usually we'll have a couple - maybe three stereo sound sources. Often the tracks are provided by individuals, some low level, some crushed at the top, others with too much bass, others with loads of hiss because they've been copied from ancient cassettes. Sometimes somebody sings, so the sound op has to attempt to balance the sources and tweak as they go. This also requires a post fade aux send, so the balance is the mix sent to the camera. This is where the video feed often falls down, because the show level will be almost certainly different from rehearsal. In addition, the singers will be different levels too, if they are green - so the post fade mix is what the video needs. It can be complicated further by things like float mics that may well be set and forget - yet may well be needed in the mix - but in the house system they have to be low, because feedback is an issue, yet their input might be critical - as in a tap number. Any preset mix will be a problem.

If anyone asked for a mic level out from me - I'd slap a DI on a iine output - and perhaps not even a separate mix at all - just give them the desk mix output - probably a mono feed, if I'm not using it. For music events, this would probably in smaller venues be no use at all, because not everything will be in the house mix. Amplified music can be difficult. quite often, the people on stage are too loud, so I'm only bringing the quieter ones up to match the sound of huge marshall 2 x 4x12 cabs on the spinal tap setting of 11! So my mix to the camera from the main outs would be guitar light - sometimes guitar absent, while somebody playing a quiet acoustic instrument might be boosted quite a bit - which also sounds odd. For music, you really need a dedicated video sound mixer. My setup actually has a 3 way mic split (bought second hand ex-BBC, quite a few years ago) A passive split where every channel has a male and female XLR connector, and a two multi pin connectors available on the side so I can split the mics to front of house, monitors and recording. The BBC used to use them for festivals. Good sound needs monitoring. I do get the definite opinion than many video people expect good audio but don't ever listen to it until the edit?

Putting in the contract that you need a desk feed is one thing - but unless you specify control, what do you get? No idea!

 

[Richard Crowley]

As someone who works both ends of that cable, these are my observations, experience, and expectations:

1) LEVELS: It is typically unrealistic to expect a MIC-level signal feed. SOME small mixers (Mackie, et. al.) MAY have a switchable mic/line-level output, but that is typically the MAIN output and is already in use feeding other things.
THEREFORE: always be prepared to take whatever level you get. Mic-level, line-level or (more often than you might like) something in-between.
PREPARATION: My favorite solution is the Rolls DB25b http://www.rolls.com/product.php?pid=DB25b It has a transformer isolation, ground-lift switch, and a variable attenuator to handle whatever level they send you.

2) CONNECTOR: It is typically unrealistic to expect that you will have the exact connector style you want. You never know what they will have to go through to get you a feed.
THEREFORE: always be prepared with adapters and cables to AT LEAST accept audio from male (or FEMALE!) XLR, from TS and TRS 1/4-inch, from RCA/"Cinch", and even from 3.5mm (iPod earbud, etc.)
PREPARATION: $10-15 worth of adapters in a little container will be a show-saver down the road. You can find quite servicable and inexpensive adapters if you shop carefully. For example Audiopile is a good source IMHO: http://audiopile.net/products/Adaptors_Connectors/Adaptors/Adaptors.shtml
And, of course, you should ALWAYS have the cables/adapters necessary to get audio INTO your camera(s).

3) MIX: You are putting a great deal of faith in the (frequently overworked or under-experienced) FOH engineer to get you a decent recording feed for most anything beyond a single-micorphone talking-head lecture.
THEREFORE: be prepared to provide your own audio coverage.
PREPARATION: A small audio mixer, some cables, and a couple of microhones, particularly a decent wireless or two would be a reasonable "emergency kit" when you can't get a venue audio feed.
Even a $20 Shure M67 mixer (from eBay) and some SM57/58 microphones would get you a 1000% better audio mix than using the built-in mics on the camcorder.

 

[unclebob6958]

This is more in the way of a summary than new info.....

I've been a stage performer, mixed bands & speakers, done a little production sound as both boom-op and mixer, and my current business is audio post, so I've experienced most of this from all angles.

The audio during a sound check has very little to do with the audio when the event is happening. There is a vast difference in sound between an empty room and a full house. Sound check merely provides a baseline for what will be happening during the event itself. In musical situations, once the performer is in front of the audience, adrenaline takes over; the drummer plays harder, the bass and guitar turn up, the singer pushes just a little harder, etc. If it's just a podium presentation, sound check is usually a desultory "Check, one, two, three" by a member of the crew. Even if the presenter was at sound check s/he becomes just as excited as a performer; the adrenaline pumps and they speak with much, much more authority.

The FOH mixer has to account for all of these changes on the fly, so the mix that sounded half decent during sound check gets thrown out the window. Another issue to consider is that the FOH mixer job is to make everything sound good in the room while the event is happening. This has somewhere between very little and nothing to do with the audio recording of the performance.

This is why, optimally, audio at live events should be mixed/recorded separately from the live FOH mix.