T2i Noisy expo floor interview audio help

E

elcarlio

New member
Hi, ive got the T2i with magic lantern and im looking fo the best audio solution for my work. Ill be doing 2 people interviews (interviewer and interviewe?) at a noisy expo floor and cant decide on what solution to go for. Woul the Rode videomic Pro be enogh by itself or will it get too much ambient noise? How about the JuicedLink DT454 with a handheld mic? or the Zoom H4n (or is this obsolute with ML)? çWould monitoring audio be enough with Magic Lantern or would the JuicedLink come in handy here? I think those are my 3 options, if anyone has any tips id gladly appreciate it. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Wired or wireless lavs into a Zoom, Rode through a Juicedlink into the camera to get reference audio, then sync it up using DualEyes/Pluraleyes would be your best bet
 
if you dont mind the look of a handheld, that might give you the best isolation. otherwise lavs are your best bet. if you need the sound of the interviewer as clean as possible (sometimes all you want is the subject) then you have to make sure he knows what he is doing with a handheld. there is some technique to it and it is not always done well.
 
TooTallTim said:
Wired or wireless lavs into a Zoom, Rode through a Juicedlink into the camera to get reference audio, then sync it up using DualEyes/Pluraleyes would be your best bet
Click to expand...

^ that's the usual advice given around here, especially for folks who aren't into Magic Lantern (see my rant/demonstration in my sig if you haven't yet). And it WOULD work, but I think you could get away with a much simpler option.

Honestly, a Lav mic might not be appropriate for walking around. A shotgun like the Rode pro has gotten some incredible results in the hands of Phillip Bloom in a noisy bar, however I think he had to get relatively close to his subjects (using a very wide lens) to do so.

I'd go with a Juiced Link and a handheld mic if you want the best possible scenario, and monitor the audio using ML's headphone option (that way you actually get to listen to how it is being recorded). If it is a noisy expo, you might need an amplifier on the headphones coming out of the camera (like a Fiio, which is less than $10) to adjust the volume. The juicedlink will come in handy because you want to leave the camera's gains on ZERO and adjust the mic with some decent amps before it hits the camera.

I'd love to see hear how this goes, I've never tried shooting a noisy event with my setup yet!
 
Excelent advice, and thanks to everyone. I'll just be the cameraman and the interviewer has experience in handling the mic. so I do need both of them with clean audio. Lavalier isnt an option since im going from booth to booth making short interviews. So from what I understand, I cant monitor the audio from the juicedlink? Or is it just safer to get it from ML? Saw a cool cable/adapter to avoid the long canon A/V with the $0.30. adapter. Saw the Philip Bloom interview and he really looks like he got close, but it was a noisy environment, hope mine is quieter. I think the handheld mic will be the best bet and experiment from that point on. I read that for headphones, the less impedence, the better for this kind of setup, although the extra ten bucks for the Fiio wont hurt. What about the hanheld mic, any suggestions or would any do the job? And would skipping the juicedlink put me in a tight spot by just depending on ML and a handheld directly to the camera like your rant with the lav. (very usefull by the way)? Finally, any heat issues with any of these setups? Does Juicelink help by taking of the load from the cam?

Thanks, im going crazy over which is the best setup for my specific need.
 
elcarlio said:
So from what I understand, I cant monitor the audio from the juicedlink? Or is it just safer to get it from ML?
Click to expand...

It depends on the Juiced Link device you plan to use. Some of them, like the XLR + phantom power amp, have a headphone monitoring jack right on the device. The cheaper ones that I've seen from them do not. The problem with this setup, however, is that if there is some sort of problem between the JuicedLink and your camera, you won't know about it until its too late (connection not seated properly, incorrect gain settings on camera, etc). Its always best to monitor directly from the recording source if possible, so that you know exactly how it is coming out.

And would skipping the juicedlink put me in a tight spot by just depending on ML and a handheld directly to the camera like your rant with the lav. (very usefull by the way)?
Click to expand...

Ok- plain and simple, the pre-amps on the camera are pretty weak and introduce a lot of noise when you have to use them. That's why most folks gave up and will tell you to just use an external audio source (like a Zoom H4N or some other recording device) and sync the tracks in post.
Magic Lantern gave us the ability to turn off the gain entirely, which will result in clean unamplified audio. However without being amplified, a standard mic is usually far too quiet to be of much use. THAT's what the Juiced Link or other preamp is for. In my test, I didn't run a mic directly into the camera- I used a Sennheiser wireless receiver, which has its own little preamp built in. It may not have phantom power and be as good as the JuicedLink's amp, but by raising the gain on that, and setting the camera to zero, I managed to get totally usable audio without any extra hardware or recorders, and I continue to use this in sit-down interview situations all the time.

In a noisy environment, I think you'd be best off having something like the Juiced Link, which has gain control dials so you can dial it up or down as needed at the event while listening to how the camera hears it live.

Finally, any heat issues with any of these setups? Does Juicelink help by taking of the load from the cam?
Click to expand...

Magic Lantern can consume more power than stock if you use a lot of features (focus peaking, magic zoom, zebras, etc), however it can also use a lot less if you set it to do things like turn off display while shooting, etc. I think worse case scenario, you'll end up with faster battery drain, but not any quicker overheating. I recently did a 2 camera shoot, one using ML the other not, and neither felt hotter than the other after over an hour of shooting (and neither overheated at all).
elcarlio said:
And options keep popping out... Zoom H4n and -25db Cable to mic input.

http://www.pinknoise-systems.co.uk/zoom-windjammer-25db-cable-bundle-p-659.html

what do you think of this? Does the H4n have the same power to phantom power xlr mics than the juicedlink? Im sure I cant go both ways so does ML also work with the zoom like this?

Thanks!!!
Click to expand...

No, the H4N is NOT an amplifier. Its a recorder. A Recorder does not need phantom power as I see it, so I'd say the answer is most likely NO.
The H4N does have a headphone jack going out, which I've heard people say they use with a line into the camera instead of headphones, for the purpose of a clean track to sync the externally recorded audio with. Once you're using the Zoom as a recorder, I don't see any reason for you to do that, though.
 
dishe said:
No, the H4N is NOT an amplifier. Its a recorder. A Recorder does not need phantom power as I see it, so I'd say the answer is most likely NO.
Click to expand...

The H4n does have pre-amps in it, complete with phantom power supply. So to answer elcarlio's question: yes, it will supply phantom power to external mics just like the JuicedLink does. The -25dB cable is a padded line-to-mic cable for sending the headphone/line out of the H4n to the 1/8" mic-level input of the DSLR. Of course, this does take away headphone monitoring, so your sound recording is left up to chance.
 
Wow, quality answers for me here, thanks!
So it basically comes down to this:

a) JuicedLink DT454 + hand held mic. + monitoring from camera.

b)Zoom H4n + handheld mic. + -25db + monitoring from camera.

Does the juicedLink give me more power or more "pro audio" than the H4n? Battery life, ease of use?
Does the -25db record the audio from the H4n directly on the camera (no sync required) giving me the extra mic of the recorder?

Am I to the point of just having to choose because both options are good enough or is the juicedLink really the most robust option and will find myself having to upgrade later on if I go with the H4n?

Great help guys, anyway I go, ill be posting the outcome of this.
 
Your always going to get the best results on a noisy expo floor from handheld mic like the Shure SM58. It has a high rejection area which would give you the "cleanest" results. Or the Heil PR22 is a fantastic microphone as well. I wouldn't even consider lapels an option in a noisy environment. They have too big of pick up range.

I would recommend using those mics in conjunction with the H4n or the juicedlink. I would personally prefer to use the H4n and have a shotgun mic run on the camera to use as reference audio for syncing.
 
Be aware that traditional "stage" vocal mics do not make the best hand-held interview mics. Personally, I cannot stand the SM58 for something like this (and really don't like the mic that much at all... it has had its day). There are mics made specifically for hand-held interviews. They are dynamic and omnidirectional, though despite the omni pattern they do incredible jobs of isolating interviews above background noise. The Electro Voice 635A and RE50 are the two "broadcast standards" and are tried and true. There are also models from Shure, Beyerdynamic, and AT.

ENG interview mics have lower handling noise, better windscreening, and the omnidirectional response pattern. Why omni? Well, a hand-held mic between two people needs a little forgiveness. By having an omni capsule, should the interviewer be a little slower to move the mic to the interviewee, the first few words of the answer are not lost.
 
just throwing this out there as another possibility, is to lav the interviewer, who can stay wired the whole time, and have him use the handheld on the subjeccts without having to move it back and forth.
 
C2V said:
The H4n does have pre-amps in it, complete with phantom power supply. So to answer elcarlio's question: yes, it will supply phantom power to external mics just like the JuicedLink does. The -25dB cable is a padded line-to-mic cable for sending the headphone/line out of the H4n to the 1/8" mic-level input of the DSLR. Of course, this does take away headphone monitoring, so your sound recording is left up to chance.
Click to expand...

Ah, see, I didn't know the H4N had phantom power. Of course it has some sort of amp, but I didn't realize the fancy phantom power variety was needed. I assumed from my days of attaching recording devices to mixers that the actual recorder doesn't require its own quality amp.
But now that I think about it, it would make sense since it IS a field recorder after all, and when recording in the field its not like you'll have a mixer or other amp before you hit the recorder. You need a quality amp right in there.

The JuicedLink's purpose is ONLY to amplify a mic line for the purpose of sending it out to a recorder, so I assumed it was better suited for the task, but I suppose they both would do the job. Is the line out for headphone monitoring on the H4N as clean as JuicedLink's though? Since it is only meant for headphone monitoring, is it safe to assume the same quality amps would control the volume on that... Again, I don't know as I don't use an H4N personally. All I know is that the JuicedLink was designed for this purpose, and therefore has appropriate amps for the task on the output to camera. You'd be sort of "re-purposing" the H4N to do something different.
Additionally, would a -25db cable going out of the headphone jack really be a good idea? You want the line going into the camera to be hot enough that you can turn the gain all the way down in the camera. If you turned the volume down on the H4N, would the line to camera still be too hot that it required a -25db cable?

As far as losing headphone monitoring and "sound recording left up to chance", it appears he is planning to monitor right off the camera (which Magic Lantern does). So, he won't be losing that either way. Therefore, the way I see it, the only reason to go with the H4N is if you intend to also record a back up track directly on the unit to sync in post.

Given the current price of a good JuicedLink with Phantom Power, you honestly could go either way (they're the same ballpark price it appears). If the H4N's output to camera is identical to the JuicedLink's (I would love to see someone do a comparison here!), than I'd say the H4N is a better buy because of the other things it can do (independent recording, has its own mics for ambient sound, can act as a USB audio device to record onto a computer, etc).
 
Last edited:
dishe said:
Additionally, would a -25db cable going out of the headphone jack really be a good idea? You want the line going into the camera to be hot enough that you can turn the gain all the way down in the camera. If you turned the volume down on the H4N, would the line to camera still be too hot that it required a -25db cable?
Click to expand...

Line level, rated in dBv (voltage), is generally +4dB for professional (balanced) and -10dB for consumer (unbalanced). We're dealing with, roughly, -10dB on the Zoom's output.

Mic level is around -50dB or -60dB. The 1/8" input on a DSLR is a mic-level input, and sending a line-level signal to a mic-level input risks frying the pre-amps. Even if you use the headphone volume adjustment to turn the output down, it still does not leave a great deal of headroom on the input and risks overmodulation and other nastiness.

By padding the signal with that cable, the signal goes from -10dB to -35dB. With the RODE VideoMic Pro's boost enabled, that +20dB takes the mic level from -50dB (or -60dB) to -30dB (or -40dB). So you're in the same neighborhood.
 
C2V said:
Line level, rated in dBv (voltage), is generally +4dB for professional (balanced) and -10dB for consumer (unbalanced). We're dealing with, roughly, -10dB on the Zoom's output.

Mic level is around -50dB or -60dB. The 1/8" input on a DSLR is a mic-level input, and sending a line-level signal to a mic-level input risks frying the pre-amps. Even if you use the headphone volume adjustment to turn the output down, it still does not leave a great deal of headroom on the input and risks overmodulation and other nastiness.

By padding the signal with that cable, the signal goes from -10dB to -35dB. With the RODE VideoMic Pro's boost enabled, that +20dB takes the mic level from -50dB (or -60dB) to -30dB (or -40dB). So you're in the same neighborhood.
Click to expand...

Interesting. The problem with using the camera's internal recorder is that the noise floor is pretty high, so you want to avoid having to raise the volume in post as often as possible.
What I do is generally get as loud as I can without being high enough to peak out the level. I'm not sure how much precise control you have over that with this setup. At least the JuicedLink gives you a dial you can turn to adjust the level appropriately, I think.
I don't have enough experience with either to know how well this would work. I only know what has worked for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top