Mixer or recorder?

ddixon

ddixon

Well-known member
I've been reading here for some time and have learned an incredible amount. I don't do professional work, but in retirement am doing volunteer videos for community groups. I have a Canon XF100 and AT 4053b. I'm getting good sound running the AT directly into the XLR input on the Canon (which is 16 bit only), but am always interested in improving.


My question:
If you could only add ONE piece of gear, which would give the most improvement?


1. good mixer or preamp between the 4053b and the Canon: 4053b -> XLR cable -> Mixer -> XLR cable -> Canon XLR input
2. no preamp/mixer but a 24 bit separate recorder: 4053b -> XLR cable -> recorder XLR input (and sync in post)


In other words, if budget prevents having both, what would you rather have - better preamp(s) but 16 bit recording, or 24 bit recording but no preamp?


And by better preamps, I'd love to have the MixPreD, but if I can't budget for that, I assume that the MP-1 provides the exact same quality, limiters, etc. but just drops the second channel, the levels readout, and the usb interface. And, I already have a JuicedLink CX231 2 channel XLR mixer and I plan to do some testing with that, but it only has miniplug output, and I get the sense that the SD units have better pres. Or would using the JL plus a decent 24 bit recorder be a good option? Or, if I can live with one channel, maybe the MP-1 plus a recorder for a price similar to the MixPreD... OK, I'll just stop now :-)


Looking forward to your thoughts…
 
With a camera like the Canon XF100, you have good sound recording and XLR inputs. You aren't going to improve your sound quality with a low-cost recorder's pre-amps.

I'd say putting a small mixer in the chain would be your best investment. The MM-1 from Sound Devices is a great, little device. Above that, the MixPre-D is an awesome piece of gear. You can, however, find a really good deal right now on a used MixPre (predecessor to the MixPre-D). There are a couple listed in the Marketplace right now.
 
Yeah sorry, skimmed through, saw Canon and figured DSLR.

Any Sound Devices mixer will do a great job, Mix Pre D has more options, but if you are doing it all yourself the MM1 might be a better option. Sound Quality they are the same.
 
For dialog I'm not sure 16- 24 is going to give you a big boost. A good preamp has in my experience made OK recorders sound much better, so if I had to buy one that is what it would be.

However... Do you do other recording? A separate recorder can be a significant item IF you do sound recording also. It sounds like your mostly doing doc kinds of things so that may not be very important to you.

And when I say good preamp I'm talking MixPre at a minimum. MixPre-D would be better but~~~ A preamp with out meters and a really good limiter IMHO is not worth considering. The MP-1 is below what I would want but providing you have some meters you can see in the camera AND you have a way to monitor then maybe it squeaks in. I have not been impressed with Juice Link anything so... That may just be me but there are a lot of not great mic pre's you can get for cheap and I would go with one of them before spending on a JL. JL seems very focused on the consumer/ semiprosumer market and they seem (to me) to be overpriced for the quality. Your paying for the fact that they are generally easy to connect to consumer gear for folks who know nothing about sound.

Don't mean to trash them, but that would seem to me to be a sideways move at best. Close to same quality but more complicated to operate. If your going to complicate your life I would want some serious advantage come back my way. The SD limiters are one of those pluses, especially for run and gun doc work, that you will really appreciate.
 
Last edited:
ddixon said:
...if budget prevents having both, what would you rather have - better preamp(s) but 16 bit recording, or 24 bit recording but no preamp?
Click to expand...

Better preamps, hands down. For upgrades, always start at the signal source and work downstream from there. Why? GIGO.
 
Like I have said many times people underestimate the quality of audio sections in good video cameras. Getting a separate recorder, even a real good 24 bit (max 20 actually in real life) one is not going to improve the quality of audio much, just makes things more complicated and more difficult to run. On the other hand, getting a good mixer (SD 302...) is going to make things easier. The biggest reason: better ergonomics, better meters, better limiters, better connectivity. This makes you capture better audio in the first place, and that is what really counts. If the preamplifiers are also better does not really play a big role, those other things matter more.
 
Last edited:
Wow, great responses, and an amazingly high level of agreement on this! I don't really do recording separate from my video stuff, so am going to focus on the mixer/preamp. Thanks for all the posts, and special thanks to Alex H. (dude, I'm in Knoxville also!!) for his suggestion to check the Marketplace. I'm getting a MixPre from another forum member so am upgrading to two-channel-Sound-Devices-goodness at a price I can afford. Thanks all around!

David
 
OK, I'm back with followup questions.

I now have a SD MixPre that I've added to my setup. Using my AT4053b direct into the xlr on my Canon XF100 I usually need to set the xlr volume to about 5 (1-10 scale) to get interview dialog that bounces between -20 and -12 or so. With the MixPre I turned on the reference tone and adjusted the xlr to have it read at
-20. After using the reference tone, with the xlr input set to line, I still have to set the xlr volume to 5 or even 5.5 to get the same levels as before on the meters on the Canon. So, is this normal and have I done this correctly? I have the gain on the MixPre set to about the 1:30 position or so, and only rarely see one red light. If I turn it any higher I get solid red lights and an odd pulsing that I assume is the limiters trying to compensate.

And the SD allows adjusting the level of the limiters. I have not touched those. How do you know whether to adjust those (and if so, to what settings)?

So far, I'm a little surprised at how little difference adding the SD has made. Either I don't have it set up optimally, or I had better sound from my Canon than i realized. I'm a musician, so have at least decent ears, but at best I only hear about a 5% improvement in the sound. My voice just sounds a slight bit smoother and less brittle.

So, does it sound like I'm setting this up correctly?

Thanks!
 
This can be normal... Your reference is -20dB on the mixpre, so when with the mic connected directly it bounced between -20 and -12 on the Canon, it can be "normal" the knobs are in the same position.

Actualy, if it sounds good and it looks "logical" (the knobs not turned 100% left or 100% right), it's all normal.

But also search for VU and Peak differences... They also give a difference in reading.... I don't know if Canon shows peak or VU (I think peak)
 
I'd appreciate opinions on this little test I've done. Using an AT 4053b, it compares several recording options, two for in-camera use and two for voiceovers, etc.:


1. into my Canon XF100 directly - mic level xlr
2. into the Canon via a MixPre - line level xlr
3. into GarageBand via the MixPre - tape out line level miniplug
4. into GarageBand via a Mackie Onyx Blackjack usb interface ($149 on sale)


The Canon records 16-bit linear PCM and GarageBand is recording 24-bit and saved as .aif. The 4053b was about 12 inches above, and pointed directly at, my mouth. The low end rolloff was NOT engaged, either on the 4053b or on the MixPre. All I've done to the recordings is try to even out the levels as best I could.


In short, I'm pretty underwhelmed by what the MixPre adds.


Recording something other than dialog might be a little different, but that's 90 percent of what I do. And Vimeo does flatten everything out, but it's slight enough that this is still useful, I think.


Comments?


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