Mid-budget portable and home audio recorder

[Mark S]

Hello all!

I'm hoping to get started in video production, so I've been researching all the items I'd need. The video aspect was easy to decide (Canon T2i and a new lens or two to get started with training videos, then upgrading later). Audio has been a headache though. For many of my searches, I found myself coming here, so I thought I'd ask the sound gurus.

The hardest decision has been the recorder. My main concern, other than quality of the recording, is that I have enough channels to record multiple mics on different channels. I don't want to mix and record on only two or four in the field, so the Tascam DR-680 seems like a good choice. It gives me plenty of room to "grow into," which is nice, but I'd like opinions if it will be good enough for things like training videos, and web-only documentaries and shorts. I plan to start with a Rode NTG-2, but with something like the Sennheiser 416 and high quality lavs, could the DR-680 be good enough for a DVD release or cable documentary?

I've read the $300 portable recorder thread, other threads here, reviews, etc so I think the DR-680 is the best choice, but are there any sub-$1000 devices or setups I may have missed? Or is many channels going in the wrong direction, instead preferring two or four channels, a mixer and *hoping* the [semi-pro] sound person I could afford will get it right?

Thanks for any input!

 

[Noiz2]

It is actually, or was, the exception to be recording more than one channel in production. Two is about the max a run and gun setup can handle with out having a "real" sound person. I mostly do post and a bit of production and my recommendation is to NOT buy sound gear and put that toward getting a sound person with equipment.

You will hear the same from a bunch of sound folks but also from experienced low budget directors. Go look at "the angry filmmaker".

The reason is simple. No amount of gear means anything if you don't have a decent person to operate it. The more you can pay that person the more likely you are to get a decent person. All decent sound people have equipment OR are willing to figure out how to get it to do your show.

If they don't have the gear to do production then you have to seriously question IF you want them around your sound. There are a lot of ways to fake a visual (I do some VFX also) but there is damn little you can do if your production is trash (I do a LOT of post).

SO get a sound person with gear and really don't try to record lots of tracks. It's really hard to get a lot of GOOD tracks and a lot of BAD tracks don't help you at all.

 

[Jema]

Regarding multichannel recorders in the sub 1000 category, there's pretty much only DR680 and the R-44. If you've read the reviews and forums you should know what to expect as they've been discussed a lot.

Or is many channels going in the wrong direction, instead preferring two or four channels, a mixer and *hoping* the [semi-pro] sound person I could afford will get it right?

Even if it may seem safer to have many channels and record everything, one good channel beats a dozen mediocre ones every day. More channels also means more time to set up, more to monitor, and more potential problems (the dangerous; "oh well, one of them is probably fine"), all of which could be spent to get the fewer channels better. I think this is especially true for someone who may not have much experience - give them less to think about, and they will probably be able to do a better job with what they've got.

My .02

 

[gpforet]

A dslr would not be my first choice for shooting training videos. we shoot quite a few and commonly run into takes going far longer than the 12 minute limit of dslrs.

Hello all!

I'm hoping to get started in video production, so I've been researching all the items I'd need. The video aspect was easy to decide (Canon T2i and a new lens or two to get started with training videos, then upgrading later). Audio has been a headache though. For many of my searches, I found myself coming here, so I thought I'd ask the sound gurus.

The hardest decision has been the recorder. My main concern, other than quality of the recording, is that I have enough channels to record multiple mics on different channels. I don't want to mix and record on only two or four in the field, so the Tascam DR-680 seems like a good choice. It gives me plenty of room to "grow into," which is nice, but I'd like opinions if it will be good enough for things like training videos, and web-only documentaries and shorts. I plan to start with a Rode NTG-2, but with something like the Sennheiser 416 and high quality lavs, could the DR-680 be good enough for a DVD release or cable documentary?

I've read the $300 portable recorder thread, other threads here, reviews, etc so I think the DR-680 is the best choice, but are there any sub-$1000 devices or setups I may have missed? Or is many channels going in the wrong direction, instead preferring two or four channels, a mixer and *hoping* the [semi-pro] sound person I could afford will get it right?

Thanks for any input!

 

[Mark S]

Thank you everyone for the input so far!

Thank you everyone for the input so far!

... my recommendation is to NOT buy sound gear and put that toward getting a sound person with equipment.
...
SO get a sound person with gear and really don't try to record lots of tracks. It's really hard to get a lot of GOOD tracks and a lot of BAD tracks don't help you at all.

Once I get some experience and start doing bigger projects, I will definitely hire a sound person. For the kind of stuff I plan to start with though, I think I could handle the sound myself and it would be beneficial to learn. Also I figure voice-overs (myself or otherwise) will be necessary for training videos, so buying seems more cost effective than repeatedly renting or hiring a sound person with his own gear.

Even if it may seem safer to have many channels and record everything, one good channel beats a dozen mediocre ones every day. More channels also means more time to set up, more to monitor, and more potential problems (the dangerous; "oh well, one of them is probably fine"), all of which could be spent to get the fewer channels better. I think this is especially true for someone who may not have much experience - give them less to think about, and they will probably be able to do a better job with what they've got.
My .02

Primarily, I was thinking of more channels so that I can capture ambient stereo sound separately from the dialogue without mixing and potentially making the dialogue unusable. While recording separately, I thought with the DR-680 it is possible to monitor all inputs to avoid the "oh well, one of them is probably fine" mentality. Is that incorrect?

 

[Zander Burstein]

Once I get some experience and start doing bigger projects, I will definitely hire a sound person. For the kind of stuff I plan to start with though, I think I could handle the sound myself and it would be beneficial to learn. Also I figure voice-overs (myself or otherwise) will be necessary for training videos, so buying seems more cost effective than repeatedly renting or hiring a sound person with his own gear.

What kind of training videos are they? A two track recorder works great for me on all my projects, big or small. I can't see you having too many people on camera at once speaking, so one track dedicated to the boom and one track for the lavalier's (if you need them) should suffice. Unless you're wiring up more than two people at a time, in which case a sound person should probably be hired

Primarily, I was thinking of more channels so that I can capture ambient stereo sound separately from the dialogue without mixing and potentially making the dialogue unusable. While recording separately, I thought with the DR-680 it is possible to monitor all inputs to avoid the "oh well, one of them is probably fine" mentality. Is that incorrect?

You say you're trying to record ambience while you're recording the rest of the shoot? If I'm not mistaken that's called Room Tone and you can get that separately recorded after your shots are finished in a scene. Unfortunately I don't know anything about the DR-680 and it's monitoring system.

 

[Steve House]

...

Primarily, I was thinking of more channels so that I can capture ambient stereo sound separately from the dialogue without mixing and potentially making the dialogue unusable. While recording separately, I thought with the DR-680 it is possible to monitor all inputs to avoid the "oh well, one of them is probably fine" mentality. Is that incorrect?

You don't want to record ambiance at the same time you record dialog, even when you do have separate tracks available to record it on. The prime objective in dialog recording is to capture it as cleanly as possible and that means your set is as quiet as possible, everything in the environment silenced as much it can be. Ambiance is, of course, environmental sound and when you're rolling you want it to go away so it doesn't get into the dialog tracks. Record the environment later and mix it with the dialog to taste in post.

 

[Steve House]

...
You say you're trying to record ambience while you're recording the rest of the shoot? If I'm not mistaken that's called Room Tone and you can get that separately recorded after your shots are finished in a scene. ...

You are indeed mistaken. Ambiance and Room Tone are two different things. Ambiance is the sound of the environment - wind in the bushes, crickets chirping in the night, water burbling in a creek, traffic on a freeway seen in the distance. It establishes the location. Room tone is the sound of silence establishing the "presence" of a sound in the environment. A silent sound stage has room tone even though there is no identifiable ambiance. Consider recording someone in a sound booth saying "My dog has fleas." If you record them saying it as "My (pause) dog (pause) has (pause) fleas." and compare it with a version made by cutting up a normal speed delivery and inserting spaces, "My (cut and slip the remainder to delay a beat) dog (cut and slip) has (cut and slip) fleas," you'll find the cuts in the edited version are obvious, sounding 'dead' compared to the sound in the silences where the person simply pauses his speech between words, even though both recordings were made in quiet spaces. There is a sound to the room between the words even if it's a silent space. That's room tone. You record it on the set after the take, preferably with the same mic used to capture the dialog, with all the cast, crew, and equipment in same place they were when the scene was shot, but with everyone standing absolutely still and silent. Post uses that to underlay the dialog as it cuts from character to character and especially to bridge gaps of silence caused by cutting the track during editing.

 

[Noiz2]

Once I get some experience and start doing bigger projects, I will definitely hire a sound person. For the kind of stuff I plan to start with though, I think I could handle the sound myself and it would be beneficial to learn. Also I figure voice-overs (myself or otherwise) will be necessary for training videos, so buying seems more cost effective than repeatedly renting or hiring a sound person with his own gear.

You are talking apples and oranges here. And it sounds like you are planning on doing multi track recording and shooting, on your own? That is a quick trip to disasterville.

So first you NEED somebody who knows something about sound or you are going to get into trouble. The bar on some of these things might be on the low side IF these are really small projects but I wouldn't count on it. They are going to want clear dialog and something that doesn't sound like a home movie. For VO you certainly don't need multi tracks but you generally do want different equipment. A nice dynamic maybe or large diaphragm condenser. Your going to need a stand and probably a pop filter. Are you planning on getting paid for these projects? If so it is not cost effective to not have a sound person. It's a little like saying it's cost effective to put used bald tires on your car. It's cheaper up front but the odds are great that it is going to cost you a lot more in the end.

Primarily, I was thinking of more channels so that I can capture ambient stereo sound separately from the dialogue without mixing and potentially making the dialogue unusable. While recording separately, I thought with the DR-680 it is possible to monitor all inputs to avoid the "oh well, one of them is probably fine" mentality. Is that incorrect?

You only have two ears and even a good sound person would not try to monitor more than two channels at a time. You can keep switching to check the "hero" track at any given time but that takes a dedicated person who is not booming. Also you not only don't want to record "ambience" during shooting you effectively cant, unless you want to use the sounds of a set as your "ambience". You need to go out and record ambience and you need to do that off set. Or at the very least not when the set is being used.

You are going to do what you are going to do but it worries me that you are making decisions based on what the public generally thinks is the way films are made rather than the way they are. You might benefit a lot from volunteering with some local company who does these kinds of shoots and get some practical experience.

The reason why things are done the way they are is not based on some academic thinking but by folks doing it for decades and figuring out what works and what doesn't. Some things have changed, mostly the cost of gear, but by and large the work flow is what it is because it's the way to do it with the least disaster potential. You can thin down the crew (over a big budget film) because you are lean and mean and don't have union regulations to deal with. But if you go look at an indi filmmaker doing good work you will see a small version of a big budget crew. And they will be doing almost exactly the same workflow. It's not because they are lazy or stupid, it's because it's the way that works best.

Visualize the phone call with your client after you shot your training video for ??? days where you have to explain you need to do some of it over because the sound is unusable. Are they going to pay extra to fix your mistake? Are they going to give you a recommendation? ow much business is that going to cost you?

Now as a lower cost? alternative to hiring a sound person with a lot of gear you may be able to pick up someone who wants to be a sound person and has some experience and their pay is you are buying some of the equipment that they get to keep after the shoot(s). Or partner with someone who's job on shoots is sound. Maybe they can do post also? Then the company keeps the equipment but you have a partner. It's not as good as having an experienced sound person with good equipment but it's miles ahead of you trying to do it or having some inexperienced person working with your gear.

 

[Mark S]

A dslr would not be my first choice for shooting training videos. we shoot quite a few and commonly run into takes going far longer than the 12 minute limit of dslrs.

I already own the T2i, so I figured using it would keep initial costs down. Plus, keeping takes below 12 minutes should help to prevent the viewers from falling asleep

What kind of training videos are they? A two track recorder works great for me on all my projects, big or small. I can't see you having too many people on camera at once speaking, so one track dedicated to the boom and one track for the lavalier's (if you need them) should suffice. Unless you're wiring up more than two people at a time, in which case a sound person should probably be hired

To start off, I plan on workplace training videos like company policy and specific job training.

I apologize, I should have mentioned that for my immediate needs like the training videos, a 2-4 track recorder would be sufficient. But after eliminating <$300 recorders like the H4n (lower audio quality, or so the anecdotal stories claim), most of the remaining ones were clustered around 450-600. Rather than spend $470 on something like the PCM-D50, it seems better to spend a little more on something that would meet my future needs, should video production work out for me.

You don't want to record ambiance at the same time you record dialog, even when you do have separate tracks available to record it on. The prime objective in dialog recording is to capture it as cleanly as possible and that means your set is as quiet as possible, everything in the environment silenced as much it can be. Ambiance is, of course, environmental sound and when you're rolling you want it to go away so it doesn't get into the dialog tracks. Record the environment later and mix it with the dialog to taste in post.

Recording ambiance was a thought I had for the future, sort of in between the indoor-only-controlled-one-man-crew shoots and the hire-a-sound-person-higher-budget type. Wouldn't it work out to point 2 cardioids at roughly 110 and 250 degrees with the dialogue being at 0 degrees? I thought the dialogue shouldn't be picked up but things like passing cars and environmental noise are. That seemed like a good way to avoid extra work making sound effects to match the environment.

 

[Chadfish]

I have the DR-680, and love it. When you need up to 6 analog inputs the 680 is great. It's a clean recorder. I've used it to record both dialog and music. I spent the extra 300.00 and got the Busman mod on mine that improves the already great pres to be even quieter. I got it for quiet stuff like nature or symphonies where you have very soft recordings you will turn up in post. I had the R-44 and that was fine, but the 680 sounds better, has more channels, and is cheaper, so why bother with the R-44? For cooperate stuff like you are doing, a regular video camera with proper audio jacks would be better.

 

[Zander Burstein]

Recording ambiance was a thought I had for the future, sort of in between the indoor-only-controlled-one-man-crew shoots and the hire-a-sound-person-higher-budget type. Wouldn't it work out to point 2 cardioids at roughly 110 and 250 degrees with the dialogue being at 0 degrees? I thought the dialogue shouldn't be picked up but things like passing cars and environmental noise are. That seemed like a good way to avoid extra work making sound effects to match the environment.

Now that Steve House corrected me I might be able to answer this with a better understanding. Firstly, if you were to try this method of having multiple microphones picking up ambient noises you would be creating a much more difficult situation. The fact that you're a small crew means that you'll be doing more than one task most likely, as someone pointed out earlier. You do not want to be spending 5-10 minutes setting up a microphone to pick up ambiance that you foresee wanting to add later. Plus it's a microphone, leaving it alone somewhere while you're doing something else is how things get broken. Secondly and even more importantly you're not monitoring that ambiance that you're recording. You may not even like what you're recording, and because you do not have an individual paying attention to the ambiance (because you're probably focusing on the dialogue, as you should) you realize at the end of the day the ambiance is just bleh. It's better to take the time and record ambiance separately when you can take the time to monitor it. The setting up mics and walking away to pick up ambiance is going to be sloppy and I'd bet a recorder that you wouldn't be excited with the results.

 

[Steve House]

...
Recording ambiance was a thought I had for the future, sort of in between the indoor-only-controlled-one-man-crew shoots and the hire-a-sound-person-higher-budget type. Wouldn't it work out to point 2 cardioids at roughly 110 and 250 degrees with the dialogue being at 0 degrees? I thought the dialogue shouldn't be picked up but things like passing cars and environmental noise are. That seemed like a good way to avoid extra work making sound effects to match the environment.

Well, it's true that they would record environmental sounds placed in that array. But a lot of that environment would also be on the dialog track, while dialog would still show up on the enviro tracks as well. A sound positioned 110 degrees off the axis in the pattern of a cardioid mic is 10dB below the level it would be if on-axis (0 degrees) - that's not the same as not recorded at all. Going to give you fits maintaining continuity when you combine different shots (MS, CU, Cut-aways, etc) from multiple takes into a final edited sequence.

 

[steve4505]

I just love these type of discussions. It shows how easy it is when researching an issue, one may forget something critical.

 

[Mark S]

...And it sounds like you are planning on doing multi track recording and shooting, on your own? ...

So first you NEED somebody who knows something about sound or you are going to get into trouble. The bar on some of these things might be on the low side IF these are really small projects but I wouldn't count on it.

My first attempts at video production (after practicing on my own) would be speculative, rather than commissioned, and probably one track VO. So the likelihood of problems is low and there is no concern of getting a bad referral because of late deliveries of the final product. But in the future, after getting more experience, I do plan to do multi track recording myself.

I have some experience in audio setup (in a non-film environment), and have been present while shooting was taking place on a large-scale production (albeit not as part of the crew). Especially after learning more and getting to know whatever equipment I may purchase, you could say that I'll be the person on my set who knows something about sound. When it comes to hiring a low budget crew, I'd sooner hire a camera operator and do sound myself than hire a sound person. Of course with a bigger budget, I'd get an experienced camera operator and experienced sound person.

For VO you certainly don't need multi tracks but you generally do want different equipment. A nice dynamic maybe or large diaphragm condenser. Your going to need a stand and probably a pop filter.

I'd like to keep my equipment to one recorder, but I do agree about different mics + the stand/filter. The nice thing about the DR-680 is that with stereo recording, it allows 24-bit/192kHz. All other models I've seen in that price range or lower are 16 bit or 24/96.

I have the DR-680, and love it. When you need up to 6 analog inputs the 680 is great. It's a clean recorder. I've used it to record both dialog and music. I spent the extra 300.00 and got the Busman mod on mine that improves the already great pres to be even quieter. I got it for quiet stuff like nature or symphonies where you have very soft recordings you will turn up in post.

Thank you for the opinion on the recorder. I've seen/heard the Busman mod before. For future use, that is one of the perks I considered when tentatively selecting the DR-680. As for now though, the stock model seems sufficient.

 

[Mark S]

I have the DR-680, and love it. When you need up to 6 analog inputs the 680 is great. It's a clean recorder. I've used it to record both dialog and music. I spent the extra 300.00 and got the Busman mod on mine that improves the already great pres to be even quieter. I got it for quiet stuff like nature or symphonies where you have very soft recordings you will turn up in post. I had the R-44 and that was fine, but the 680 sounds better, has more channels, and is cheaper, so why bother with the R-44? For cooperate stuff like you are doing, a regular video camera with proper audio jacks would be better.

Thank you for the opinion on the recorder. I've seen/heard the Busman mod before. For future use, that is one of the perks I considered when tentatively selecting the DR-680. As for now though, the stock model seems sufficient.

As it turns out, it was *your* video (playing the guitar) that I was referring to. I only realized that after going to your main Vimeo page and seeing the very same picture as your avatar here. It's very cool to get input from someone who's video I had seen previously!
Thanks again for sharing your opinion. I'm still waffling between the DR-680 and a cheaper unit but the DR-680 is now a little higher on my list.

... You do not want to be spending 5-10 minutes setting up a microphone to pick up ambiance that you foresee wanting to add later. Plus it's a microphone, leaving it alone somewhere while you're doing something else is how things get broken. Secondly and even more importantly you're not monitoring that ambiance that you're recording. You may not even like what you're recording, and because you do not have an individual paying attention to the ambiance (because you're probably focusing on the dialogue, as you should) you realize at the end of the day the ambiance is just bleh. It's better to take the time and record ambiance separately when you can take the time to monitor it. The setting up mics and walking away to pick up ambiance is going to be sloppy and I'd bet a recorder that you wouldn't be excited with the results.

My thought was to have the mics in some kind of DIY mount joined with the camera and the cables going to the recorder and being checked occasionally for quality. If a good sound was captured, great, I just saved some time. If it isn't great there is no need to use it.

Well, it's true that they would record environmental sounds placed in that array. But a lot of that environment would also be on the dialog track, while dialog would still show up on the enviro tracks as well. A sound positioned 110 degrees off the axis in the pattern of a cardioid mic is 10dB below the level it would be if on-axis (0 degrees) - that's not the same as not recorded at all. Going to give you fits maintaining continuity when you combine different shots (MS, CU, Cut-aways, etc) from multiple takes into a final edited sequence.

Hmmm, maybe some kind of sound absorber between the mics and dialogue could be a part of the mount to cut out the dialogue. But given your comment and others I'm starting to reconsider if the set-up is worth the effort and equipment. The only real purpose was to try to avoid the extra work of separately creating or capturing sounds to match things in the scene, but I suppose doing that extra work will yield excellent rather than simply acceptable results.

I just love these type of discussions. It shows how easy it is when researching an issue, one may forget something critical.

Please, elaborate.

 

[Chadfish]

As it turns out, it was *your* video (playing the guitar) that I was referring to.

Yeah, I was trying to decide if it's worth the effort to drag out my MixPre to do location recordings with the 680. I don't bother. I find I get a nice clean signal that I can EQ/process to taste in post with nice results. If you or anyone is interested, I have all my gear demos/reviews organized in one YouTube Playlist. All those videos are also on my Vimeo, but not organized into one group. I have a lot of stuff on mics.

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL856439E1B9E1A669

 

[Noiz2]

My first attempts at video production (after practicing on my own) would be speculative, rather than commissioned, and probably one track VO. So the likelihood of problems is low and there is no concern of getting a bad referral because of late deliveries of the final product. But in the future, after getting more experience, I do plan to do multi track recording myself.

That could work IF you are not also directing. If your going to direct and do another task (not recommended) it should be shooting. The director needs to SEE the shot and you can't watch and listen at the same time. Your mind will focus on one and usually that will be a visual if you have one. If you are watching the take you will miss things in the sound. Multi track will take all of your attention so that goes doubly.

I have some experience in audio setup (in a non-film environment), and have been present while shooting was taking place on a large-scale production (albeit not as part of the crew). Especially after learning more and getting to know whatever equipment I may purchase, you could say that I'll be the person on my set who knows something about sound. When it comes to hiring a low budget crew, I'd sooner hire a camera operator and do sound myself than hire a sound person. Of course with a bigger budget, I'd get an experienced camera operator and experienced sound person.

The above plus your experience is a mixed blessing. Film sound is not really like most other sound. This is evidenced by your plan to try and "save time" by recording ambiance while shooting. This might work if you were recording music, though I still have my doubts, but it is not a realistic plan for film.

Again I will emphasize directing is a full time plus job. You can't successfully direct and do just about anything else. You might be able to squeeze in camera work since it keeps you in the scene but you certainly can't do something that requires you to be out of the moment analyzing what is being recorded. For visualls that backs off a bit doing industrials and docs.

I'd like to keep my equipment to one recorder, but I do agree about different mics + the stand/filter. The nice thing about the DR-680 is that with stereo recording, it allows 24-bit/192kHz. All other models I've seen in that price range or lower are 16 bit or 24/96.

This again points to a music orientation that is not nec. going to help you in film. 24 bit is a good thing. I don't know of any current recorder that records WAV files and doesn't do 48/24. Maybe some dictation recorder? Even a $150 zoom does 48/24. Your shooting production so there is no reason to go beyond 48/24. For some FX it's arguable but not for production.

If I wanted to do a film and be my sound person I would restrict myself to pre production and post for non sound related jobs.

Some of this depends on the quality level your trying to hit and the field your in. Some are more forgiving and if your aiming a youtube all bets are off.

But even if you are aiming pretty low there should be one person who's sole focus visual, one for sound, and one for performance. If you are shooting with less than that I don't think you can do high quality work in a reasonable amount of time.

 

[drewski310]

A dslr would not be my first choice for shooting training videos. we shoot quite a few and commonly run into takes going far longer than the 12 minute limit of dslrs.

Just to clarify, not all DSLR-style cameras have this limit. I've shot entire theater shows and extended interviews on GH2s, which will record until your card is full (US version). Once the 4Gb file size limit is reached, the camera will span, creating another file.

 

[recordingwhiz]

Mark, it sounds like you have already sold yourself on what equipment you are going to purchase, and now youre looking for validation on your theory.
is the Tascam well worth the cost? of course it is if you truly will use it and its benefits, will a DR40 do the job you are talking about (industrial education films) just as well? YES
what mics you choose differ greatly based on situational requirements, like indoor? outdoor? in a gym? in a factory? on a runway? on a race track? in an office?
All these scenarios call for a different approach to getting the best sound.

in most training videos the most important sound recorded is the people speaking with very little regard to 'ambient'. focusing on 'ambient' during a production is for the most part an experiment that has been done thousands of times and not hardly ever used at the end of the day, so its prety much considered 'useless' for most people to use this as a consideration for acquiring gear. its the equivalent of purchasing a car based on how many cup holders it has.

you are arguing your theory with several people here who do the kind of work you want done for a living and know the pitfalls of a one man band scenario, please head their advice it will save you tons of time, money and aggravation. that is what most experienced guys are on here to help you save time and wasted money.

tell us specifically what scenarios you plan on doing in your training videos? then we can guide you better. I have sat thru hundreds of hours of 'Training videos' this year alone and they do NOT have a built up stereo ambient tracks, most use coincidental pick up from the actor's mics, and a lot of voice over.

being on set as a production is happening only exposes you to only a portion of the signal chain for audio in the over-all scheme of things.

and my last rant.. "NO piece or pieces of equipment will EVER replace a person operating it in the proper manner" EVER