Mic recommendation...

W

weis5on

Member
I have a few quick questions. We're shooting an educational web series with two individuals in front of a workbench, approximately 6ft long. Both looking directly at the camera. Distance between the individuals is going to be roughly 3ft. My equipment options are Juicedlink little darlings on each individual, or SD633 with mic. I prefer to use the SD633. I have a Sanken CS-3e mic; but, I don't think that would be a good option for picking up both individuals. It's pick up is surgical. Location doesn't really allow for hiring a boom op as a long term solution either, so the mic needs to remain static. I do have an AT875r as well, but I'm thinking of purchasing another mic that is better suited for indoors anyway. This location is an aircraft hangar. It's all metal and concrete, and there's nothing in there to prevent reflection. Other locations that I'm frequently in are often smaller rooms. The CS-3e is my go to when outdoors, which is usually at an airport. My questions are as follows:

Is it reasonable to use the Schoeps CMC6 MK41 boomed in front and overhead for both individuals, or would it most likely be necessary to us separate mics on each individual?

Is the CMC6 still considered a great mic for small rooms, like an office?

Would there be any issues pairing the CS-3e and CMC6?

Are there mics, other than the CMC6 Mk41, that I should consider for indoor shots? The CS-3e will likely remain my go to for outdoors.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
The answer is simple..... 2x wireless microphones.

The shot would be to wide and have to much distance between the people to make a boom / pole useful.
TV broadcast has been doing this sort of stuff for years, watch your local morning breakfast shows.
 
OzGizmo said:
The answer is simple..... 2x wireless microphones.
Click to expand...
I concur, two lavaliere mics. You could use hard wired lavs if the talent is not walking around. On separate tracks, mix in post. You can record direct to the cam with decent external preamps to save time in post. Assuming it's a 'real' camera of coarse.
 
I pretty regularly slip my Scheops 514 (CMC5 preamp + MK41 mic capsule) between two people...it works GREAT in the right environment with two people not so far apart from each other. Three feet between mouths could maybe work as long if I don't have to place the mic too far above their heads to accommodate the picture frameline and if there isn't tons of room noise. I'd have to see the situation to know.

But I agree with OZ and Rick here. Go for lav mics, preferably on wireless transmitters. Then if they look to the side to point at something, both lean over to mess with something on the bench, or otherwise move as humans, you have a decent chance of keeping audio fairly even...

I guess the juiced link recorders could work...if you go that route, maybe clap a dumb slate at the beginning of each take, and if long takes maybe every 15min or so, and then at the tail.
 
weis5on said:
... This location is an aircraft hangar. It's all metal and concrete, and there's nothing in there to prevent reflection.
Click to expand...


The lavs will save you in that very live space. They will be the most effective mic for all the echos/reverberations. Some are better than others in this environment. I use Tram TR-50s. Many have said the Oscar Sound Tech lavs are a cost effective clone.
 
OzGizmo said:
The answer is simple..... 2x wireless microphones.
Click to expand...

I actually disagree. That very well might be the solution when arriving on location and figuring things out but I personally absolutely would go with 2 booms on C stands before wiring people up of the shot is tight enough.
Going by exactly what OP said, 2 people direct to camera reads while stationary? The answer is simple (for me).
 
That may be true in many circumstances, but this is an aircraft hangar. The lavs will perform better in that reverberate environment.
 
weis5on said:
I have a few quick questions. We're shooting an educational web series with two individuals in front of a workbench, approximately 6ft long. Both looking directly at the camera. Distance between the individuals is going to be roughly 3ft. My equipment options are Juicedlink little darlings on each individual, or SD633 with mic. I prefer to use the SD633.
Click to expand...

Without a boom op, I'd go with two lavs. If the people aren't moving, I'd certainly go wired. Wireless is a last resort if you can't do it any other way. And you can, so you should go wired. It'll sound better, be way more reliable, and way cheaper.

I've got a pair of the Oscar SoundTech 802s. If you want to hide them under clothing, you'd probably want 801s. I bought mine as a kit which included an XLR power supply (converts phantom power to the plug-in power the mics need). With that you can run them off your SD633 just like you would your CMC6mk41 or your CS-3e. I run mine off my SD MixPre-D, works like a charm.
 
Have you already purchased the Juicedlink little darlings？If not, then I'd seriously consider the Tascam DR10L instead.
 
IronFilm said:
Have you already purchased the Juicedlink little darlings？If not, then I'd seriously consider the Tascam DR10L instead.
Click to expand...

Yes I have. I know there are differences. The Juicedlink might have better preamps and then everything else the Tascam DR10L has. Anything you know that might make the Tascam a bigger favorite?
 
Safety track recording!! An absolutely **essential** feature I reckon under such circumstances (where they can't be monitored).

Plus they're cheaper.
 
Bruce Watson said:
If the people aren't moving, I'd certainly go wired. Wireless is a last resort if you can't do it any other way. And you can, so you should go wired. It'll sound better, be way more reliable, and way cheaper.
Click to expand...

Years ago, I'd agree with this. But with good modern wireless systems and good lavs, I don't really find an important audio-quality difference. And the bit of dynamic control and limiting a good transmitter provides can be seen as a good thing. I mainly use Lectrosonics wireless systems, but this applies to Zaxcom, higher-end Sennheiser systems, etc. I'd say for lots of work it also applies to Sennheiser G3 systems (sorry; I don't have enough experience with Rode's and other company's 2.4GHz systems to say much about them...but other people here, including Pure D, like them plenty).

I'll run wired lavs IF it'll be safe (controlled environment, no talent movement, taped down cables) and/or if I'm getting serious interference hits. Just my take, and this approach does assume good (ie- rather expensive) wireless systems.
 
Jim Feeley said:
Years ago, I'd agree with this. But with good modern wireless systems and good lavs, I don't really find an important audio-quality difference. And the bit of dynamic control and limiting a good transmitter provides can be seen as a good thing. I mainly use Lectrosonics wireless systems, but this applies to Zaxcom, higher-end Sennheiser systems, etc. I'd say for lots of work it also applies to Sennheiser G3 systems (sorry; I don't have enough experience with Rode's and other company's 2.4GHz systems to say much about them...but other people here, including Pure D, like them plenty).
Click to expand...

That's OK with me. We'll just disagree. I can certainly say that the sound quality of one of my $20 cable beats the heck out of one of my $700 Sennheiser G3s, requires no operator input to find an open frequency, and I've never taken an RF hit on using XLR cables.

If you've got the $2500 for a Lectro, go for it. If I had one I'd probably use it more and cables less. But even at that level, a modern digital wireless signal still doesn't sound quite as good as a $20 cable, it's still more trouble to set up, and it's way more expensive than the cable.

As for compression and limiters, I'd much rather do that under my control (as opposed to Lectro's control) using my mixer and my DAW in post. But maybe that's just me.
 
Wireless VS wired aside the reverb issue has a lot to do with proximity. If you can get a boom in close enough you won't have a big reverb issue and a hyper is going to pick up less room than an omni. But if you can get the lave much closer than you can get the boom then proximity probably trumps directionality. It's a hard one either way. I have done run and gun booming it an airshow and some of that was in hangars. In our case it would have taken at least one more crew person to just deal with the wireless and we were catching people on the go so even that may not have worked for some.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top