NTG-2 --> DT454 --> H4N, which cables?

MOKHAN said:
Dang, so the biggest mistake I made was going with the H4N. I'll look into something like the DR-100.
Click to expand...

If you already own it, you should try the H4n with the JuicedLink pre-amp, as you might be happy with the results.

I have quite a collection of different recorders now, and my most recent is an Olympus LS-12 ( $150 ) which runs for 50 hours on two AA batteries and has a LINE level noise-floor of -75 dB RMS. Combined with a JuicedLink unit ( or a good mixer ) it does a great job. ( I normally use a Sony PCM-M10 tucked into my Sound Devices mixer bag, which also has a -75 dB RMS LINE level noise-floor, and runs for 30 hours on two AA batteries )
 
TheDingo said:
If you already own it, you should try the H4n with the JuicedLink pre-amp, as you might be happy with the results.

I have quite a collection of different recorders now, and my most recent is an Olympus LS-12 ( $150 ) which runs for 50 hours on two AA batteries and has a LINE level noise-floor of -75 dB RMS. Combined with a JuicedLink unit ( or a good mixer ) it does a great job. ( I normally use a Sony PCM-M10 tucked into my Sound Devices mixer bag, which also has a -75 dB RMS LINE level noise-floor, and runs for 30 hours on two AA batteries )
Click to expand...

Hmm. Why do you use line level connection? Is the difference in sound quality between a balanced XLR connection and a line level connection not discernable (at least for Vimeo/Youtube)?
While a JuicedLink unit will give me the gain I need, I suppose the trade off is having no other choice but to use a line level connection.

EDIT: Not sure if I have my "line-level" definition down correctly. Line level is pretty much using an unbalanced, 3.5mm connection (rather than the balanced connection of an XLR)?
 
Last edited:
MOKHAN said:
Hmm. Why do you use line level connection? Is the difference in sound quality between an unbalanced XLR connection and a line level connection not discernable (at least for Vimeo/Youtube)?
While a JuicedLink unit will give me the gain I need, I suppose the trade off is having no other choice but to use a line level connection.

EDIT: Not sure if I have my "line-level" definition down correctly. Line level is pretty much using an unbalanced, 3.5mm connection (rather than the balanced connection of an XLR)?
Click to expand...
Not true - line levels can be found either balanced or unbalanced and on a variety of connectors. In professional gear it is very common to find balanced line level on either XLR connectors or 1/4" TRS phone jacks. The output of the Juicedlink is mic level, unbalanced, stereo or dual mono, on a 3.5mm TRS connector.

The terms mic or line level refers to the nominal operating level of the signal and all of the various levels can be found either balanced or unbalanced, depending on the equipment designer's decisions. From lowest to highest, common levels are: mic level, -60dBv to -35dBv or so; 'instrument level', ~-25dBv; consumer line level, -10dBv; professional line level, +4dBu.
 
"Not sure if I have my "line-level" definition down correctly. Line level is pretty much using an unbalanced, 3.5mm connection (rather than the balanced connection of an XLR)?"
-- Generally, 'line level' can be balanced or unbalanced. Typically, unbalanced is (nominally) -10dB, via an 1/4"-TS, RCA and 1/8" connection; Balanced is typically +4dB, via a 1/4"-TRS and XLR. We have all seen variations however. Many 1/8" connections on portable recorders and cameras is stereo mic level.
In the H4n case, that is -10dB via the 1/4" input and is unbalanced... however.. like many budget recorders, it just pads the input down to mic level, and goes the though the POS preamp anyway. A good external preamp can help reduce noise some by boosting low level signals so the cheap preamp can be operated with lower make-up gain.
 
MOKHAN said:
Why do you use line level connection?
Click to expand...

Pretty much all of the low cost audio recorders have weak pre-amps that get very noisy as you increase the amount of gain to your audio signal.

By using a clean LINE level input signal you can effectively bypass the weak pre-amp problem of low cost audio recorders and make a low noise recording.

NOTE: I am referring to low self noise of the recorder itself, not the ambient noise of the environment you are recording in. ( low noise recorder in a noisy room = noisy recording )

For example, here are the results of a self-noise test I ran on my Tascam DR-40 recorder ( firmware 1.20 ).

When the MIC LEVEL is set to it's highest setting ( level 90 ) the self-noise of the Tascam DR-40 recorder is -50 dB RMS.

To my ears this is noisy. I always aim for a noise-floor of -60 dB RMS or better, which is pretty much silent under normal listening conditions.

With the Tascam DR-40 recorder this translates to keeping the MIC input level to 65 or lower if I want a noise-free recording.

Using LINE LEVEL and the highest setting ( level 24 ) the self-noise of the Tascam DR-40 recorder is -75 dB RMS.

By recording a LINE level signal with the DR-40, I can always expect a noise-floor of -75 dB RMS or better.

So by combining a good mixer with the Tascam DR-40 recorder, I can make pretty much noise-free recordings.

Tascam DR-40

MIC GAIN SETTINGS
RMS MIC NOISE FLOOR

MIC LEVEL 0 : -80 dB
MIC LEVEL 10 : -79 dB
MIC LEVEL 20 : -77 dB
MIC LEVEL 30 : -72 dB
MIC LEVEL 40 : -70 dB
MIC LEVEL 50 : -68 dB
MIC LEVEL 60 : -63 dB
MIC LEVEL 70 : -58 dB
MIC LEVEL 80 : -54 dB
MIC LEVEL 90 : -50 dB

* * * * * * * * * * *

LINE GAIN SETTINGS
RMS LINE NOISE FLOOR

LINE LEVEL 0 : -79 dB
LINE LEVEL 6 : -78 dB
LINE LEVEL 12 : -78 dB
LINE LEVEL 18 : -77 dB
LINE LEVEL 24 : -75 dB
 
Problem is, Dingo, that he doesn't have a line level signal available to send to the recorder. He's using a Juicedlink DT454 as his preamp and it only outputs mic level signals. It could be a stronger mic level than the mic by itself but it won't reach line level. That's why I suggested he upgrade to a MixPre way back in post #6
 
Last edited:
TheDingo said:
When the MIC LEVEL is set to it's highest setting ( level 90 ) the self-noise of the Tascam DR-40 recorder is -50 dB RMS.

To my ears this is noisy. I always aim for a noise-floor of -60 dB RMS or better, which is pretty much silent under normal listening conditions.

With the Tascam DR-40 recorder this translates to keeping the MIC input level to 65 or lower if I want a noise-free recording.

Using LINE LEVEL and the highest setting ( level 24 ) the self-noise of the Tascam DR-40 recorder is -75 dB RMS.

By recording a LINE level signal with the DR-40, I can always expect a noise-floor of -75 dB RMS or better.

So by combining a good mixer with the Tascam DR-40 recorder, I can make pretty much noise-free recordings.
Click to expand...

Oh! Got it!

So if you wanted to, you could leave your Tascam's MIC LEVEL at, say 20, and have a noise floor of -77dB. Though the problem here would be that the recording would be too quiet.

In order to solve this, you set your Tascam to LINE LEVEL (from MIC LEVEL) in the settings menu, hook up at Mix Pre (which supports LINE LEVEL output) and bump up the gain on the preamp to compensate.

So, I can do something similar with my DT454, outputting MIC LEVEL into my H4N. Difference is, I'm losing a bit of quality due to the naturally higher noise-floor of a MIC LEVEL input.

Have I got the gist of it?

This article (third paragraph) seems to say the DT454 has a line-level switch at the bottom. I haven't actually received the unit to comment.
http://www.hdvideopro.com/technique/audio/audio-assist-juicedlink-dt454.html?start=1
 
Thank you for your help Dingo and everyone else! I sincerely appreciate it.

I'm looking into a Sound Devices MP-1. It has a line level output and can supply phantom power, and it's more around my budget than a MixPre. I wonder why more people don't go with this over a JuicedLink!
 
Probably the reason people dont use them that often is it is only single channel... A proper mixer does so much more.
 
I use a Sound Devices MM-1 (the MP-1 with headphone monitoring added) sometimes with an NTG1 (same as NTG2 but with no internal battery option). Initially this went into a Zoom H4, but neither this nor the Zoom H4N have professional +4db line level input, so there is a danger of over driving the Zoom inputs and, more to the point, this doesn't make good use of the Sound Devices excellent limiters. So I now run the MM-1 into a Sony M10 (has proper line level input, albeit via an unbalanced 3.5mm socket), with excellent results. Obviously a Mix-Pre[D] option can do the same, with identical quality preamps, but with much more flexibility (you might want to run more than one channel!), but, admittedly, with more cost and, perhaps not insignificantly, more complexity. If you can't afford/don't want a Mix-Pre[D] and do go down the single-channel preamp route, note that the MM-1 is more flexible than an MP-1 for negligible additional cost: with its in-built headphone monitoring, it does, for example, lend itself to boom use providing the boom operator with headphone output and with the line-level then going on to the mixer. The belt clip on it is handy for this use too! Cheers, Roland
 
Last edited:
Throwback said:
I use a Sound Devices MM-1 (the MP-1 with headphone monitoring added) sometimes with an NTG1 (same as NTG2 but with no internal battery option). Initially this went into a Zoom H4, but neither this nor the Zoom H4N have professional +4db line level input, so there is a danger of over driving the Zoom inputs and, more to the point, this doesn't make good use of the Sound Devices excellent limiters.
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. Is this a situation where a device called an "in-line attenuator" would come in handy?
And couldn't you always use your external recorder to monitor using headphones if your preamp doesn't support it?

Lastly, what is your opinion on this, rather than using, for example, an MP-1 and an external recorder (with the NTG-2):
The Roland R-26 field recorder (with the NTG-2). People say it has pretty good preamps. I can't seem to find the link now, but someone claimed it has a noise floor of -125 dB. If that is true, combined with a true balanced line level input, it would surely be a winner!
 
The NTG2 and for that matter NTG1 should be regarded as base level mics, the NTG3 , Senni 416 and others are a better option. Why worry about a better recorder only then to record the background noise floor of the microphone.
 
OzGizmo said:
The NTG2 and for that matter NTG1 should be regarded as base level mics, the NTG3 , Senni 416 and others are a better option. Why worry about a better recorder only then to record the background noise floor of the microphone.
Click to expand...

Pardon? I'm trying to record dialogue.

EDIT: Ah, never mind, I see. To answer your question: mainly cost, I would end up spending a minimum on the microphone alone if I were to jump up to a better option. The NTG-2 seemed to be a pretty good option in terms of value. Now I'm learning (gratefully, from the help of you forum members) how I can squeeze out a decent quality recording, also on a modest budget.
 
Last edited:
MOKHAN said:
re: Roland R-26 recorder : Someone claimed it has a noise floor of -125 dB
Click to expand...

Most likely this is self-noise measured using an "A contour filter" that is supposed to mimic how humans hear, but I am not a fan of measuring noise this way, as I've performed noise tests where the A-weighted results looked great, but this did not match what I was hearing with my own ears. Audio Contour Filters

My crappy old Olympus LS-10 recorder had an A-weighted noise-floor value of -116dBu ( mic sensitivity low ) or -123Bu ( mic sensitivity high ), but in my own tests I could easily hear noise in a recording any time I boosted the audio by +10 dB.

Performing my own RMS noise-floor tests ( using the RMS audio meters in both Sony Vegas Pro and Sony Sound Forge ), the Olympus LS-10 recorder had a RMS noise-floor of about -62 dB, which explained why I was hearing noise when I boosted any recording by +10 dB.

Reading first-hand reviews from people who own the Roland R-26, some people found the mic pre-amps to be quiet and other people didn't.

I haven't had access to a R-26 unit to try myself, so I am not sure what it's like.
 
After searching and reading around these forums forever, I came to the solution of using an MM-1 w/ a DR100 MK2 which has line level inputs. This has been amazing for my Oktava MK012 which outputs low as well. Before, I was forced to use high gain to get usable levels and it sounded pretty bad. Now w/ the MM-1 it's crystal clear. You can find both used and in mint / excellent condition for $500 total (this is what I paid). I think a preamp is a fantastic solution and I think I'll use one no matter what, unless I upgrade to a SD 702 haha, which will never happen.
 
MOKHAN said:
Ah, I see. Is this a situation where a device called an "in-line attenuator" would come in handy?
And couldn't you always use your external recorder to monitor using headphones if your preamp doesn't support it?
Click to expand...
Yes, you could attenuate the input, but doing this just to then amplify further with the less than ideal Zoom H4n preamps is far from ideal. Regarding monitoring: yes you can monitor from the recorder, as long as it is near you - as I said, the MM-1 monitoring is useful when booming, as the mixer and recorder are further away. And, in the UK at least, there is almost no difference in the price between MM-1 and MP1. No experience of the R-26, I'm afraid. Interesting to see that L1N3ARX has gone down the MM-1 route too. Cheers, Roland
 
TheDingo said:
Most likely this is self-noise measured using an "A contour filter" that is supposed to mimic how humans hear, but I am not a fan of measuring noise this way, as I've performed noise tests where the A-weighted results looked great, but this did not match what I was hearing with my own ears. Audio Contour Filters
Click to expand...

Ahh, you're right. They were "A-weighted" results, I wasn't aware that they were any different. Anyways, I took your advice and purchased an MP-1!

L1N3ARX said:
After searching and reading around these forums forever, I came to the solution of using an MM-1 w/ a DR100 MK2 which has line level inputs.
Click to expand...

Do you have to use any attenuators/etc. to connect the MM-1 and DR100 MK2? Or is it just a simple female to male XLR connection? If your DR100 MK2 has true professional (+4dB) line level inputs, then I think I'll go for one of those also!

Throwback said:
Yes, you could attenuate the input, but doing this just to then amplify further with the less than ideal Zoom H4n preamps is far from ideal. Regarding monitoring: yes you can monitor from the recorder, as long as it is near you - as I said, the MM-1 monitoring is useful when booming, as the mixer and recorder are further away. And, in the UK at least, there is almost no difference in the price between MM-1 and MP1. No experience of the R-26, I'm afraid. Interesting to see that L1N3ARX has gone down the MM-1 route too. Cheers, Roland
Click to expand...

My budget could only satisfy a used preamp. I wasn't able to find a used MM-1, though I did find an MP-1 for $200, which is pretty decent! You're right though. L1N3ARX said he's had good experiences with his DR100 MK2, and it even has line level input, so that's probably the least expensive option. I just found out the H4N's line level input isn't even true consumer level, rather, it's somewhere between mic level and consumer line level.

EDIT: Hmm. The DR-40 also seems to have nominal line level inputs. What do you guys think: DR-40 or DR-100 MKII for simply recording dialogue on a boom (along with an NTG-2 and MP-1)?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top