Need 2 mics for indoor/outdoor interviews

Kindredmachine

Kindredmachine

Well-known member
I'm looking to pick up a field mixer and a couple of mics for indoor and outdoor interviews. I'm sure the topic of "what mic should I get" has been discussed to death but there's SOOO much information to go through I was hoping to get some quick and dirty opinions on the topic and I’ve already been reading about it for over 2 hours.

Here's the deal. Both my indoor and outdoor booms will be operated by novices so I need forgiving mics. For example, I would jump on something like an MKH-416 for outdoor use but I’ve heard you should only put it in the hands of an experienced boom operator (which I won’t have). Also, my understanding is that Supercardioid or “shotgun” mics are to be used outdoor and Hypercardioid mics are to be used indoor. So what are just plain “Cardioid” mics used for? Online, I see people saying they use them for indoor and outdoor… it’s confusing. Also, I’ve been told from a self-proclaimed “pro” to use a Schoeps cmc641 for my indoor interviews, but isn’t that a Supercardioid mic? I thought those were for outdoor use?

1. So the bottom line is this. I have novice boom operators. Which mic do you suggest for indoor interviews; and which for outdoor interviews? I want “forgiving” but I also don’t want to sacrifice quality on a cheap mic. I’m willing to spend $500-$1000 per mic if required.

2. Also, I happen to have a spare AG-MC200G lying around (never used it) and it’s a Supercardioid mic which I’m assuming is great for outdoor use. Anyone try one of these out? How’s the quality?
 
Shotguns can come accross as very echoey, and tinty indoors. They have a very narrow pickup pattern which work great outdoors for isolating dialogue without picking up everything else going on. They can work indoors if used in a room with decent acustics, and right up close, like most mics proximity is everything.

For indoor use most budget minded people go with the octava mk's , their cheap and work great.
 
Supercardioid or “shotgun” for outdoor. Hypercardioid for indoor... but what do people use just plain “Cardioid” mics for? I've heard conflicting things.
 
Super cardioid is not a Shotgun necessarily, first of all. and YES this subject is covered to death and well covered.

even the best mic in the world can suck in the hands of an amateur that doesnt know what they are doing or cannot monitor the signal. no mic in the world can make up for lack of know-how. so there is no such thing as a forgiving mic.

if you get a mic that has a wider pick up pattern so the aiming isnt as critical then you're dealing with more unwanted sounds being picked up as well.

rule of thumb, is generally shotguns outside and hypercardiods indoors, since youre not willing to do the homework then just follow these guidelines.

good shotgun in your range 'Rode NTG 3' under 1k , hypercardioid in your range : 'Audio Technica AT4053b' also within your budget, and get wind protection and good shock mounts for both.

good luck
 
Thanks for the info regarding the "cardioid" explination but there's no reaosn to be rude. I had spent hours reading up on these mics and the one's you mentioned already had made my short list for indoor and outdoor mics. In regards to a more "forgiving" mic, this is where I believe you're wrong. A Supercardioid with a more narrow area of pickup might result in fluxuating audio levels if the boom operator isn't following the subject close enough whereas a more "forgiving" mic such as the NTG-3 (in comparison to a MKH-416) might pick up more noise to the sides BUT would allow that slack in keeping consistant levels on your subject. Like I stated in my original post, I have many of the main concepts down and already have an idea of which mics to get; however, wanted to get some opinions regarding what people like to use.

It's also the result of hours of doing my "homework" that lead to some of the confusion; such as the suggestion to use a Schoeps cmc641 for my indoor interviews even though it's a Supercardioid mic (that didn;t make sense to me). Also, as far as everything I have read, it appeared that a Supercardioid mic WAS a shotgun mic as "shotgun mics" are not used for indoor interviews.
 
I would get the rode ntg3 for your shotgun outdoors mic
then grab a oktava mk12 hyper-cardioid, the mc12 is the same if I recall, just a different packaging name for different parts of the world. but double check, my memory isn't always the greatest.
 
I now standardise on the short shotgun AT875R and find that it is very useful in most situations inside and out, it is also very forgiving for novice boom operators as it can get a good focussed sound, it also has a built in roll off filter at around 80hz so helps with handling noise. I mount them in rode PG/2 pistol grips with WS/6 softies.

Here are a couple of examples of the AT875R on a boom straight into the camera:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH8mVouKkhg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbvCcjrAueI

and the final indie short is here: http://vimeo.com/44760907

And all the location sound for this film school short was done on a single 875R into a G2 radio system, the last shot also had a G2 lav and all straight into the camera a panasonic HPX371, you can also see the mic in shot used as a practical mic on the lecturn and in the hand of the newsreader, all the young people featured also operated the boom.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C5zy1l4c_U

I also have some Takstar CM60/61 cardioid and omni capacitor mics that cost less than $50 and they are very useable inside as boom or interview mics on doco's and indie drama.
 
Last edited:
Kindredmachine said:
T...
It's also the result of hours of doing my "homework" that lead to some of the confusion; such as the suggestion to use a Schoeps cmc641 for my indoor interviews even though it's a Supercardioid mic (that didn't make sense to me). Also, as far as everything I have read, it appeared that a Supercardioid mic WAS a shotgun mic as "shotgun mics" are not used for indoor interviews.
Click to expand...
Where you haven't done enough homework is that you are confusing the pattern itself with the means by which the pattern is achieved. It is not the shape of the pickup pattern of the typical supercardioid that makes it problematic indoors, it is that most shotguns use the line-gradient interference tube design to achieve their supercardioid pattern. It's the interference tube that doesn't work well in the presence of near reflections such as in typical in most location interiors, not the fact the mic is supercardioid per se. The CMC641 is an example of a mic with a supercardioid pattern that does NOT use the line-gradient interference principle to achieve it, hence is better behaved indoors than regular shotguns.

As for cardioid's used as boom mics, it's not just pattern that counts. There's also working distance. The typical cardioid needs to be closer by about half the distance as a super- or hyper- could be used - most have an optimal working distance of about 10-12 inches from the speakers mouth, in contrast to the 20 inches or so for the typical super- or short 'gun.

Why use a boom op that doesn't know what they're doing and try to compensate with hardware? You wouldn't do that with picture, would you, choosing a camera with autofocus and autoexposure because you intend to hand it over to an untrained person acting as the camera operator? You know that will produce sub-optimal images unless you're extremely lucky, so what makes you think sound is any different? Train your boom operator to do the job right - they're not just a human mic-stand.
 
Last edited:
Why use a boom op that doesn't know what they're doing and try to compensate with hardware?
Click to expand...

I could be going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing he has no one else. It never ceases to amaze me that people forget that their are amatuer filmmakers, isolated filmmakers, and some that just dont plain no anyone else. So for the sake of the project and to get it made they sometimes have to out source someone that isn't a filmmaker by trade, but is willing to help. I cant imagine if this guy had access to a seasoned pro, he would be using a novice by choice. Plus audio is incredibly complex, he may be doing the majority of his "homework" in other areas, isn't that why were here? to help one another, and without being a rude and jerky about it. Cut him some slack for christ sakes, if it's to much of a hassle, then dont bother answereing his question, move on\!
 
When I was a teacher in college - with a mixed group of 17-25 year olds, we had a nice pole, a 416 and Rycote with a hairy cover. Cost a lot of money and we used it with a portable recorder, with decent headphones. I used it a few times on projects and was more than happy with it. Students - however just failed to understand it was a proper skill. Their results would often be dire when out on location, on their own, without me - but with me, even in the studio - results were quite usable. The group were mixed in ability - so no matter who was booming - it seemed strange. Their comments on hearing me curse their results as varying shades of useless/rubbish/hopeless (after the initial more educational "not quite precise enough/too much random sound not enough subject/unbalanced in quality" ran out) were that we should have better equipment!

However - on a shoot WITH me it became clear what they were doing differently. Holding a boom pole with both arms above your head is tiring, so they tucked the end into their hip and angled the pole up at 45 degree, like a fishing rod. The mic was no longer pointing at the subject. Sometimes the cameraman would yell that the boo was in shot - which just meant they steep end the angle till it wasn't! Headphones would be either off one ear so they could talk to their friends, or if they were on, then they must have simply ignored what the headphones were actually hearing. In short - if they heard a voice in the headphones, and got level on the meters, that was job done. All the stuff we'd spent time on like inverse square law, polar responses and boom technique was just too hard or not considered important. Many younger people seem to equate sound quality with being loud enough. They cannot hear the difference between low res mp3 and 98K wav files. They can't identify the bass is missing - as in actually unplugged! Some can of course, but not all. I suspect that as some people are colour blind, so some others are sound blind. Things like compression just cannot be heard - even when you switch it in and out. I can hear the differences, but many students simply can't.

If you want quality sound, they need training properly - out of 16 media types, only 2 were interested in sound - and just 1 took it further. The others had no aptitude for sound, and if I was honest, I'd suggest that the only reason they were doing sound was because they'd shown as little skill with their eyes as their ears, and had been 'given' sound. I've always been luck - equally happy with sound, vision or lighting - but for me, lighting came first - then the others. For somebody starting out, learning to really use their ears is not that easy!
 
+1 for the Rode NTG-3 for your outdoor mic and for the Audio-Technica 4053b for indoor work.

Also, cardioid mics can be used indoors if the room is quiet and you want a wider pick-up spread. ( I switch between an AT-4053a and an AT-4031 depending on how much coverage I want and how noisy the room is )

I also highly recommend a good field-mixer and headphones for your boom op to properly hear what the mic they are running is doing. ( Sound Devices MixPre or better )
 
As an owner of both the Oktava and AT4053b, I would favor the AT4053b. The Oktava is certainly good, especially for the money. The 4053b is a notch better, for a price. In this case you get what you pay for. Also, even when shooting indoors, you will want something like a Rycote Baby Ball Gag (mini blimp) to reduce the whoosh when moving either mic.

Grant
 
I'm actually in the same predicament at this moment. This is the original seller of Oktava on ebay. You get 3 different capsules (cardio, hypercardio and omni) for 200€ + VAT. It's a really cheap mic. For me the question is if the reported handling noise of the MK012 is acceptable. AT4053b cost 410€. Is the price difference worth it?
 
recordingwhiz said:
Super cardioid is not a Shotgun necessarily, first of all. and YES this subject is covered to death and well covered.

even the best mic in the world can suck in the hands of an amateur that doesnt know what they are doing or cannot monitor the signal. no mic in the world can make up for lack of know-how. so there is no such thing as a forgiving mic.

if you get a mic that has a wider pick up pattern so the aiming isnt as critical then you're dealing with more unwanted sounds being picked up as well.

rule of thumb, is generally shotguns outside and hypercardiods indoors, since youre not willing to do the homework then just follow these guidelines.

good shotgun in your range 'Rode NTG 3' under 1k , hypercardioid in your range : 'Audio Technica AT4053b' also within your budget, and get wind protection and good shock mounts for both.

good luck
Click to expand...

+1

Ty Ford
 
Just so someone doesn't come along and misinterpret the Schoeps comment.

The Schoeps cmc641 (I own two) is a great mic which can be used indoors or out, thank you very much.

Regards,

Ty Ford
 
paulears said:
When I was a teacher in college - with a mixed group of 17-25 year olds, we had a nice pole, a 416 and Rycote with a hairy cover. Cost a lot of money and we used it with a portable recorder, with decent headphones. I used it a few times on projects and was more than happy with it. Students - however just failed to understand it was a proper skill. Their results would often be dire when out on location, on their own, without me - but with me, even in the studio - results were quite usable. The group were mixed in ability - so no matter who was booming - it seemed strange. Their comments on hearing me curse their results as varying shades of useless/rubbish/hopeless (after the initial more educational "not quite precise enough/too much random sound not enough subject/unbalanced in quality" ran out) were that we should have better equipment!

However - on a shoot WITH me it became clear what they were doing differently. Holding a boom pole with both arms above your head is tiring, so they tucked the end into their hip and angled the pole up at 45 degree, like a fishing rod. The mic was no longer pointing at the subject. Sometimes the cameraman would yell that the boo was in shot - which just meant they steep end the angle till it wasn't! Headphones would be either off one ear so they could talk to their friends, or if they were on, then they must have simply ignored what the headphones were actually hearing. In short - if they heard a voice in the headphones, and got level on the meters, that was job done. All the stuff we'd spent time on like inverse square law, polar responses and boom technique was just too hard or not considered important. Many younger people seem to equate sound quality with being loud enough. They cannot hear the difference between low res mp3 and 98K wav files. They can't identify the bass is missing - as in actually unplugged! Some can of course, but not all. I suspect that as some people are colour blind, so some others are sound blind. Things like compression just cannot be heard - even when you switch it in and out. I can hear the differences, but many students simply can't.

If you want quality sound, they need training properly - out of 16 media types, only 2 were interested in sound - and just 1 took it further. The others had no aptitude for sound, and if I was honest, I'd suggest that the only reason they were doing sound was because they'd shown as little skill with their eyes as their ears, and had been 'given' sound. I've always been luck - equally happy with sound, vision or lighting - but for me, lighting came first - then the others. For somebody starting out, learning to really use their ears is not that easy!
Click to expand...

That made me chuckle; sounds like a nightmare but maybe I should calrify when I say "novice" since my perception and others' seem to be different. We are an actually film company (a small one), as in, this is what we do 50 hours+ a week. For the last 8 years we've conducted mostly lav interviews and filmed audio-free B-roll in the Middle East for TV and product documentary work and trianing courses. Now, we're being forced into boomed audio in which we have far less experience even though our operators are amazing audio techs. I'm sure our 2 operators will do a darn good job but I expect them to make mistakes; thus the request for a "forgiving" mic. I think I've decided on 2 "Audio Technica 4053b" mics for indoor interviews and 2 "NTG-3" for outdoor interviews.

I truly appreciate everyone's input and suggestions! Audio is definately our weekest area (or at least mine) so I'm looking this as much as before beforehand.
 
tyreeford said:
Just so someone doesn't come along and misinterpret the Schoeps comment.

The Schoeps cmc641 (I own two) is a great mic which can be used indoors or out, thank you very much.

Regards,

Ty Ford
Click to expand...

So should I pick up a couple Schoeps cmc641 mics instead of using seperate mics for indoor and outdoor? Or would an NTG-3 perform better indoor over a cmc641? Last I heard there was no such thing as a mic that could do both so your statement is confusing.
 
Maran,

who peed in your wheaties this July 4th?

No rudeness that I can see, just straight ahead good info.

If your skin really is that thin, stay on the porch and don't venture out in the yard with the big dogs.

And keep Christ's name out of it while you're at it.

Ty Ford
 
maranfilms said:
I could be going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing he has no one else. It never ceases to amaze me that people forget that their are amatuer filmmakers, isolated filmmakers, and some that just dont plain no anyone else. So for the sake of the project and to get it made they sometimes have to out source someone that isn't a filmmaker by trade, but is willing to help. I cant imagine if this guy had access to a seasoned pro, he would be using a novice by choice. Plus audio is incredibly complex, he may be doing the majority of his "homework" in other areas, isn't that why were here? to help one another, and without being a rude and jerky about it. Cut him some slack for christ sakes, if it's to much of a hassle, then dont bother answereing his question, move on\!
Click to expand...
I haven't forgotten that he might be an amateur, I don't recall one way or the other. But it doesn't matter ... if he does not have any pro's or even knowledgeable amateurs available then his crew of volunteers needs some pre-shoot training on what their various roles will be and how to fulfill them properly. You don't wait until you're on the set ready to shoot for real to assign people to roles, you have some meetings and rehearsals before hand - teaching his volunteers what to do and how they are to do it becomes the job of the filmmaker
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top