RØDE smartLav vs. Audio Technica ATR-3350 on Zoom H1

RØDE smartLav vs. Audio Technica ATR-3350 on Zoom H1

  • Audio Technica ATR-3350

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • RØDE smartLav + SC3 TRRS to TRS adapter

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Total voters
    1
WilliamGuy

WilliamGuy

Member
Need some advice on a cheap 'wireless' lav set-up using a lav and small external recorder.


I am wanting to use a Røde smartLav (with their new TRRS > TRS 3.5mm adapter) mainly because this allows me to use their invisiLav mount to hide the mic (I hate the sight of them and it also provides decent shock protection). I realise that the smartLav+adapter set-up isn't one that many people will have experience with, but stay with me.


Even though I will be running the smartLav into an external recorder and so don't need to worry about the DSLR's shoddy pre-amp, I will be running it into the Zoom H1 that's pre-amp is still far from noise-free.


I have heard that the Audio Technica ATR-3350 has a built in pre-amp (the reason why it needs batteries) and so doesn't need as much gain on the H1, resulting in far less noisy audio than similarly priced microphones.


So my question is:


Will the Røde smartLav be of higher or equal quality to the Audio Technica ATR-3350, even though it would need to have the gain set higher on the Zoom H1, possibly introducing more noise.


Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
The AT 3350 battery module is not a preamp. It just enables the mic to be usable on devices w/o plug-in power.
Don't know of its quality. (or lack thereof) At the $18 USD street price, I wouldn't expect the quality of a top shelf lav.
I don't know anything about the SmartLav, expect it's more expensive than the AT. (around $60 USD street price)
 
Hmmm, I've seen it written (admittedly not by AT) that it has a pre-amp... and other sources note it as louder.

Even if it has no pre-amp and is merely louder, my question still applies.
 
If by "cheap 'wireless' lav setup", you mean that you want to have someone walk around with a lav and the H1 in their pocket, you wouldn't want the ATR-3350 since it has a very long cable.
 
CF01 said:
If by "cheap 'wireless' lav setup", you mean that you want to have someone walk around with a lav and the H1 in their pocket, you wouldn't want the ATR-3350 since it has a very long cable.
Click to expand...

Too long to simply coiled, taped, and tucked where there won't be too much rubbing against clothing?
 
I don't have any experience with the smart lav. but i can tell you that the super long cord is really rather annoying on the ATR3350. Its to the point where i have debated, lately, cutting it down quite a bit.
I have used the ATR-3350 just like you are saying, on talent as they walk around for the day with the zoom h1 in their pocket and a boatload of cable coiled up in their pocket. For ENG work, or documentary when you aren't super worried about seeing the mic then you can make this work. I wouldn't rely on this for dramatic work however.

I have been able to rig it with relatively little clothing noise, with some tape and a lot of luck...
 
i've never used the smartlav, but being able to use the invisiLav is quite appealing. At only, what, 60$ it's not really that bad of an investment to just try out and see if it works. To be honest, if there is a difference, I doubt it will be extreme.

I can attest to the cable length of the AT. It's pretty damn long. I used it just the other day. While not perfect, it was nothing an elastic band couldnt fix.
 
ATR-335 is an 18 dollar mic. That's 3 pints of beer where I live. It is flimsy, fragile, and sounds thin. But hey...its 18 bucks! I used it way back when I just started out as a backup, which I needed for this VERY early shoot:

http://youtu.be/EhnJiWLPIS8?t=1m53s

I did find that its output was reasonable going into the old Sony Z1.

Regards,
Craig
 
" Have you checked out the Giant Squid mics? They sound good paired withe H1 and they are reasonably priced http://www.giantsquidaudiolab.com/gs/gs-mono.html "
> As I.. and others have previously stated, the OST mics or worth considering.. affordable (not in the $18 range), but highly regarded by mega-budget movie sound pros .. you generally get-what-you pay-for.
 
Condenser mics have "kind of" a preamp built in, that is what requires power and what creates confusion. So as much as the AT mic has a "preamp" so do all other condensers. Marketing that as a plus is just marketing.

I haven't used either. There is some truth to you get what you pay for, but the type of capsules used in a lot of lav mics are also used a LOT in other things from phones to toys so even the bottom of the pile is often decent. At $18 you cold get just to see how it works. You can probably find something at that same price range at Radio Shack, and it might actually be the same thing since they just sell rebranded gear from other manufacturers. At around $100 the OST mics will be a BIG step up in quality.
Cheap lavs usually suffer from two problems. One is internal noise. How big a deal that is for you depends on what you are doing with it. I have some I would never use on a person but are fine for sticking in an engine compartment for FX recording.
The other is build quality. If your using it for run and gun shoots it's probably going to get a fair amount of abuse so if you go cheap you should probably get a backup.
 
Noiz2 said:
[...] but the type of capsules used in a lot of lav mics are also used a LOT in other things from phones to toys so even the bottom of the pile is often decent. At $18 you cold get just to see how it works. You can probably find something at that same price range at Radio Shack, and it might actually be the same thing since they just sell rebranded gear from other manufacturers.
Click to expand...
Is this the same capsule as used on those low cost "PC microphones"? Those things are really noisy and barely usable for anything serious... Or can we expect much better quality from the Audio Technica Lav?
 
It's not going to be the "same" probably, though? But even if it were the noise is not likely to be the fault of the capsule. I have heard some surprisingly good mics made from mass produced electret condenser capsules sold for electronics projects.
 
Noiz2 said:
I have heard some surprisingly good mics made from mass produced electret condenser capsules sold for electronics projects.
Click to expand...
That's very interesting. I'm not sure why, but I had convinced myself that electret mic (especially low-cost ones) where inherently noisy. Obviously, I was wrong! Probably the embedded FET/BJT-based amp is really to blame for poor quality?


sleroux said:
Is this the same capsule as used on those low cost "PC microphones"?
Click to expand...
I was talking about microphones like Logitech PC headset or Logitech PC 860
We have a bunch of this kind in our language laboratory. Even some 3× or 4× more expensive versions ... and they all are total piece of crap! Noisy, with poor dynamic and pitiful build quality...

Could you confirm that even at <20$ the ATR-3350 is way better than those kind of junk?
 
Last edited:
Hard to say about the "PC" microphones. I'm guessing AT will be better build quality, but then Altec Lansing used to only do really good high end stuff and now a lot of their products are consumer junk.

Also you can't make any assessment of something being plugged into a computer mic jack. I seriously doubt that any mic will be a lot noisier than the sound in on most computers.

Electret condenser elements are used in a number of high end mics there is nothing particularly bad about them. As a general rule the smaller the diaphragm on a mic the noisier it will be. So to get a tiny diaphragm to be low noise you have to spend some time tuning the electronics and design of the capsule. There are microscopic lavs that have some amazingly good sound that is very low noise, they also cast a lot mostly. But with the larger capsules that you see on a lot of cheap lavs you can get decent results if you find a good mass produced capsule and are careful with electronics.

My advice would be to buy it someplace you can return it or just figure your gambling. At $18 that is not a big gamble.

My better advice is get an OST lav and be done with it.
 
The Audio Technica ATR-3350 is pretty low sensitivity mic, it is rated as -56db so the gain on the H1 needs to be set pretty high (80-90) to capture at -20 to -12db. The Rode SmartLav should allow a lower gain on the H1, probably around 75.
 
adaamquesada said:
The Audio Technica ATR-3350 is pretty low sensitivity mic, it is rated as -56db so the gain on the H1 needs to be set pretty high (80-90) to capture at -20 to -12db. The Rode SmartLav should allow a lower gain on the H1, probably around 75.
Click to expand...
According to the specs, the Zoom H1 has maximum gain of +38dB.

Does that mean that the OP won't be able to record at acceptable level without using an external preamp?
 
sleroux said:
Does that mean that the OP won't be able to record at acceptable level without using an external preamp?
Click to expand...
It depends on how loud (SPL) the source audio is. So yes, that would likely be the case with a low-talker or other quiet source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top