Rode wireless lav mic on DVX200! Awsome!

M

MichaelA

Well-known member
Just sharing...
Been using a Sennheiser G3 and was getting a lot of interference and getting frustrated at rigging it up between cameras :furious3:.

Just got a Rode Filmmakers Kit digital wireless lav setup. It rocks. Super simple and easy to use. Takes about 10 seconds to rig up between cameras, no interference in the same conditions that would mess with the G3. No detectable latency. Audio is coming through as well if not a bit better than the G3.

Street prices less than $400.

This thing kicks ass! :thumbsup:
 
Yes it does. Been using mine since it was released and it works great, even at windy beach weddings up to about 200 feet then it starts to get wanky when line-of-sight is lost. But that's an extreme case. The rest of the time it works splendidly. Using with the DVX200 and a mini to XLR cable works a charm.
 
What are you guys using for setting on these things? I'm finding that the mic on +10 and the receiver on 0 seems to work well in most situations on the DVX with the manual dials cranked back to around the 10 o'clock position; may even drop the mic to 0. On the canon's I have to run +10 mic and 0 receiver as well and crank the gain down in the camera - but I think canon's have crap preamps in 'em. Seems like the DVX's preamp is quite a bit better....
 
MichaelA said:
What are you guys using for setting on these things? I'm finding that the mic on +10 and the receiver on 0 seems to work well in most situations on the DVX with the manual dials cranked back to around the 10 o'clock position; may even drop the mic to 0. On the canon's I have to run +10 mic and 0 receiver as well and crank the gain down in the camera - but I think canon's have crap preamps in 'em. Seems like the DVX's preamp is quite a bit better....
Click to expand...

that sounds about right to me. I am no where near my dvx200 to confirm, but I'll be back Monday evening and check.

Do you mean Canon dslr's? Thise things have preamps? Lol
 
Yeah, Canon DSLR's - I think their preamp is kinda like a string and a paper cup! Work around that , though, and you can get some usable interview type audio in a pinch....
 
MichaelA said:
Yeah, Canon DSLR's - I think their preamp is kinda like a string and a paper cup! Work around that , though, and you can get some usable interview type audio in a pinch....
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The next workaround is buy an external field audio recorder like a Zoom or Tascam, etc. The following workaround, for me, was to buy a proper unibody video camera or camcorder: DVX200. lol
 
It's been really nice using the dvx for audio. Coming from someone who was hauling around two dslrs and an audio recorder. Still using the g3 but considering the rodes as well. Great thread.
 
Yeah, I got a zoom. But sometimes synching the audio in post is a pain. Zoom makes some good stuff though, but almost always needs a deadcat if outdoors.
 
Michael,

Just curious, were you scanning a new list at each location with the g3? Usually the only times I had interference were when I forgot to do so.
 
Normally the g3 works ok. But I was shooting in a hospital that had a ton of emf noise. The rode was able to punch through it while I couldn't find a quiet channel on the g3. Likely the benefit of digital vs analog....
 
Used my Rode kit for the first time today, with the suggested specs mentioned earlier in this thread. Setup was shockingly easy, really glad I went with this kit. I did, however, find that while outdoors the mic was extremely sensitive to noise outside of the subject's voice, just typical stuff- cars passing down the block, trees rustling, etc. Do you guys have any tips for optimizing output for this kit? Or even other lavs that I could use with the Rode Kit that might suit better for shooting outdoors in city environments?

Needless to say this is my first wireless setup and I haven't needed to do very much on camera interview stuff until recently. Any direction is appreciated, thanks guys!
 
Hmmm.. I suppose you could try dropping the mic gain one setting, but then overall it may be too "soft" and still pick up the background. Rode does say it's an omnidirectional lav so that may just be the nature of the beast. I don't know if there is such a thing as a directional lav mic which could help. Depending on the situations I find myself switching between the lav and a directional shotgun and usually find something that works OK, but I am usually fighting wind noise more than background. I don't think you are limited to just the Rode mic with the kit and am pretty sure others could work but am at a loss to suggest any. May be worth pinging Rode for their recommendation and posting back up what they say. Would be good for future reference!
 
dtocco said:
Used my Rode kit for the first time today, with the suggested specs mentioned earlier in this thread. Setup was shockingly easy, really glad I went with this kit. I did, however, find that while outdoors the mic was extremely sensitive to noise outside of the subject's voice, just typical stuff- cars passing down the block, trees rustling, etc. Do you guys have any tips for optimizing output for this kit? Or even other lavs that I could use with the Rode Kit that might suit better for shooting outdoors in city environments?

Needless to say this is my first wireless setup and I haven't needed to do very much on camera interview stuff until recently. Any direction is appreciated, thanks guys!
Click to expand...

A key way to avoid background noise when working with a lav is to be sure the lav is as close to the speaker's mouth as possible.
 
Appreciate that guys, after reading your replies this might have a lot to do with how I mic'd the subject. Just thought there might be better options for those noisier environments. Thanks for your input!
 
dtocco said:
Used my Rode kit for the first time today, with the suggested specs mentioned earlier in this thread. Setup was shockingly easy, really glad I went with this kit. I did, however, find that while outdoors the mic was extremely sensitive to noise outside of the subject's voice, just typical stuff- cars passing down the block, trees rustling, etc. Do you guys have any tips for optimizing output for this kit? Or even other lavs that I could use with the Rode Kit that might suit better for shooting outdoors in city environments?

Needless to say this is my first wireless setup and I haven't needed to do very much on camera interview stuff until recently. Any direction is appreciated, thanks guys!
Click to expand...

The lav mic is an omni. That means it records everything. If you can hear it, it can pick it up. The only thing to do is get the mic closest to the source you do want to hear. But, that's why it's a lav.

To not pick up background noise you need to look into a decent cardioid lav or directional mic like a long shotgun. In fact, what you're supposed to do is have a cardioid lav a hand's length from the lips of your subject, aimed at the subject with a muff to avoid plosives (which you get much less of with an omni), you then can get an omni and hide them in the clothes, or under hair, etc, then have a long shotgun (the longer the barrel, the more directional, the less surrounding noise it hears) on a fishpole between the subject and interviewer pointed at the subject's lips, out of camera view. So then you have two close lav sources (the cardioid for the best sound, the omni for when the subject turns their head away or move around and rustles clothes the cardioid will pick up) and a shotgun that won't get any clothes rustles but is only effective when the subject is pointed straight at it.

Also, cardioids are expensive. So are long shotguns. There will soon be a Rode XLR buttplug TX that will pair with the RX unit so you can conceivably use it with any mic. I plan to use it with a long shotgun when booming or on a dynamic uni Shure SM57 mic for podium speakers.

Best thing to do is find a quieter location lol

What I like to do is show the noisy thing in the background. Kids playing, tractors mowing, etc. Then, since you can see it, it doesn't seem as noisy. You don't need to spend brain power imagining the noisy thing. You see the tractor and go, oh okay, and ignore it. Now you "hear" the interviewee better. Just depends on the shoot.
 
Last edited:
JRJphoto said:
The lav mic is an omni. That means it records everything. If you can hear it, it can pick it up. The only thing to do is get the mic closest to the source you do want to hear. But, that's why it's a lav.

To not pick up background noise you need to look into a decent cardioid lav or directional mic like a long shotgun. In fact, what you're supposed to do is have a cardioid lav a hand's length from the lips of your subject, aimed at the subject with a muff to avoid plosives (which you get much less of with an omni), you then can get an omni and hide them in the clothes, or under hair, etc, then have a long shotgun (the longer the barrel, the more directional, the less surrounding noise it hears) on a fishpole between the subject and interviewer pointed at the subject's lips, out of camera view. So then you have two close lav sources (the cardioid for the best sound, the omni for when the subject turns their head away or move around and rustles clothes the cardioid will pick up) and a shotgun that won't get any clothes rustles but is only effective when the subject is pointed straight at it.

Also, cardioids are expensive. So are long shotguns. There will soon be a Rode XLR buttplug TX that will pair with the RX unit so you can conceivably use it with any mic. I plan to use it with a long shotgun when booming or on a dynamic uni Shure SM57 mic for podium speakers.

Best thing to do is find a quieter location lol

What I like to do is show the noisy thing in the background. Kids playing, tractors mowing, etc. Then, since you can see it, it doesn't seem as noisy. You don't need to spend brain power imagining the noisy thing. You see the tractor and go, oh okay, and ignore it. Now you "hear" the interviewee better. Just depends on the shoot.
Click to expand...

All good points, thanks for your input!
 
Wanting to Learn about audio some more, Which I don't use very often, mostly shooting B-Roll. If you have a shotgun mic on a small boom, and a Lav with both plugged into the DVX200, will you be able to hear if the subject goes off access from the shotgun in the video? would you record in stereo or a combined L & R Mono? My current Shotgun is a Audio-Technica AT-897 and a Rode Lav.
 
Last edited:
7DDude said:
Wanting to Learn about audio some more, Which I don't use very often, mostly shooting B-Roll. If you have a shotgun mic on a small boom, and a Lav with both plugged into the DVX200, will you be able to hear if the subject goes off access from the shotgun in the video? would you record in stereo or a combined L & R Mono? My current Shotgun is a Audio-Technica AT-897 and a Rode Lav.
Click to expand...

Woah, woah, woah....slow down. I don't want to get all scientific in here. 1. I'm no audio engineer, 2. I'm an audio engineer, 3. I'd rather be shooting and not worrying about audio. Anyway, let's take this one step at a time.

"You have to learn WHY things work on a starship." - Captain Kirk

I'm a photographer...I don't need to know the physics of light or the basics of color theory or need to study how different lighting forms can affect the drama of a scene, or any of that...I don't even really need to know how the camera works anymore since I can just shoot with full auto and have the camera do all the thinking. But, I do know all of that stuff, I do know my camera intimately and I mostly shoot in full manual. Why? I don't need to do any of that to take a bloody picture, but as a professional, I get paid to take very good pictures quickly and consistently and it helps that, since I know how the world works, I can walk into a room, judge the lighting conditions and think "ISO 800 f/4 1/250" and go from there. At that point I am merely tweaking what I know to work for the situation, rather than having to bust out a light meter or take a plethora of test images to judge exposure. And composition just comes naturally. Now, the hard part is dealing with the client and the talent. And getting paid on time, dammit! There's far too many things to worry about, you don't need physics getting in the way of something you should already know about before hitting the set. That's why it's important to drive your car until it runs out of gas...test the limits so you know what you're dealing with in an intimate way. But, know that you're going to do that so you already have a fuel can with extra fuel in it so you're not stranded. Work smart, not hard.

So, the only way for you to understand WHY things are happening, you need to go and find out about microphones and probably the physics of sound. Lots of other places to find that stuff out at and Google is your f$%ing friend. I'll touch on some of the basics, but you need to go look up the harder stuff. Ima use words you may or may not have heard before...and probably from me...earlier in this same thread, probably. Note: when I say "directional", unless I say "omnidirectional" I am meaning "unidirectional."

YOU: If you have a shotgun mic on a small boom, and a Lav with both plugged into the DVX200, will you be able to hear if the subject goes off access from the shotgun in the video?

This is like a riddle. For one thing, you're asking about the shotgun. The lav doesn't factor into the equation. So, really, it should read like this:

YOU (REVISED): If you have a shotgun mic on a small boom will you be able to hear if the subject goes off access from the shotgun in the video?

This is misleading because you said "in the video." That doesn't matter if the shotgun is on a boom. The subject can be completely out of the video frame entirely but if the shotgun is still pointed at them on the boom (because the boom can follow the subject) then the video part doesn't matter at all. So, really, it should read like this:

YOU (REVISED 2): If you have a shotgun mic on a small boom will you be able to hear if the subject goes off access from the shotgun?

Short answer: yes, but it depends on the mic and it depends on how far away the subject gets from the sweet spot of the mic.

Long-ish answer: uh, sure, but if you have a very long shotgun (one that is very directional) then it will lose the subject quickly the further from the sweet spot it gets. If you have a shorter shotgun, then it is not as directional and you can get away with the subject not being completely in the sweet spot, but, the sweet spot is also a bit larger. That's why ENG cameras have shorter shotguns than, say, a movie sound guy would have an extremely long shotgun for picking up dialogue clearly even when the mic is 20' feet away from the talent. So, what you need to do is make sure the shotgun on the small boom stays with the talent. You can't run the camera and do that at the same time, so this is when you need at least a boom operator who knows what the flying filth he's doing. I have a Panasonic MC7-somethingsomething shotgun. It's short and it means well, but I can't use it to grab movie dialogue without getting it very close to the subject. Why? Not directional enough. But, it's great for being what it was designed to do: be an awesome on-camera shotgun for ENG purposes. That means it's great for picking up nats (natural sound/room ambience), it's great for picking up an interview subject's audio when you're standing right next to them, but really it's a great secondary mic for that same interview because the primary audio should be coming from that nice little handheld cardioid mic with the flag that's right in the subject's face.

But, even if they do walk away from the boom (or the boom falls over) the talent has a lav, so you're probably good. There's no such thing as over-redundant in this field of work. That's why even with more than one camera, each camera should be backing up the footage to a second card, which DVX200 lets you do. Have an external field monitor/recorder also recording the video output. Have the field audio recorder/mixer outputting itself into one of the camera's audio channels for a backup of the field audio recorder's mixdown. Have a laptop at video village for DIT/backup work when you're done with a card. Have that backup hard drive backed up. Then take the whole backup and back it up in the cloud. You never. Ever. Know.

YOU: would you record in stereo or a combined L & R Mono?

Uh, depends. But, largely I record mono. No real reason to do that as L&R since there'd most likely be phase issues if it's not being done correctly or with equipment that doesn't support that...whatever that's called. For me, recording single-channel mono (speaking of being redundant) for dialogue is perfectly acceptable. You can make a stereo mix of that later if you wanted, but there's no reason to record real live stereo unless it's musical instruments. Even then, I'd only record mono on each instrument or piece of an instrument kit unless they're the badass soloist or something. Then, I might want to have two mics, one each for left and right, slightly out of phase so they don't do phase-y things like a weird dopplar effect or that thing where they keep hearing each other and reverb louder and louder into each other, whatever that's called. It's bad. There's a way record dialogue, for example, with a single mono mic up front (a nice ribbon mic for color) and a second mic (probably a cardioid) literally 90º relative to the subject. So, there's the main mic up front the talent speaks or sings into and a second mic at the talent's left or right side. Then you can use the spatial difference to create a stereo, almost three-dimensional sound. I forget what that's called, but you see it in music recordings all the time. It's the ingredients of creating a stereo mix by not being limited to a mic on the left and a mic on the right. You get the foundation of the single mono hero mic with the added spatial-ness of that second, different mic. Mixed together which might be like 4 or 6 sources together, you get this incredibly spacious sound.

But, generally speaking, video stuff, just a single mic mono in will sound just fine on your interview video, especially after mixing in a little ambience and a stereo music bed. It'll sound just fine.

YOU: My current Shotgun is a Audio-Technica AT-897 and a Rode Lav.

Meh. None of that really matters. They both make good product so you'll probably be fine. The AT-897 is plenty directional for dialogue purposes and the Rode Lav is a decent enough omni mic. One thing to consider, however, is a dedicated field audio recorder/mixer. I use a Tascam DR-701D which is a 6-channel field audio recorder/mixer that was made by an audio recording company for audio recording purposes. It's preamps and other fiddly bits are purpose made for field audio and they sound so much better than the DVX200's built in stuff. That's not to say the camera's audio ability sucks...it's just as good as any other ENG camera I've worked with. But, compared to a proper field audio recorder/mixer, you start to see the limitations of the camera's audio components when it's really a much better camera than a sound recorder. It's no slouch on its own or being compared to other ENG cameras, but it's not a dedicated sound device. So, I use the Tascam and feed the Tascam back into the DVX200. DVX200 is ALSO recording ambience through that Panasonic shotgun I mentioned whose name I don't know (MC700? I've said it on this board before) into line 1, whilst line 2 is recording the mixdown from the Tascam. Because redundancy. The Tascam, btw, is 6 channel because it has a 4 channel input system and it also records a 2 channel mix. So, you already have a mixdown recorded which is great for plugging in straight away to your NLE and getting to work while the sound dept works on creating the proper mix. Plus, the device can read timecode so you can sync up in the field and that makes post-production stupidly simple. The 4 channels come in handy when you have a 4-person interview, naturally. That's why I bought the Tascam in the first place: I was needing to cover at least 2-3 interviewees per video for a client sometimes and I needed the control of mixing 4 mics separately rather than combining them all in a mixer and recording just the mixdown into the camera. What if one guy overmodulates? I can't fix just his audio. It's all baked in. No, separate audio tracks were needed and DVX200 only has 2. Not only does the Tascam do its thing, but it also is capable of higher quality audio recording, plus little things I like such as the tone I can put anywhere to make finding a good take easier. I just like it. Again, if you only need one mic then chances are you don't require more than the DVX200 by itself. It certainly does a good job. Later, you might need more than 2 inputs, a good field audio recorder/mixer would do you well.

TL;DR: yeah, until the subject gets out of range. But you have the lav so you're ok.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top