Schoeps CMC641 & Tascam DR-100 mkii

J

JChang

Active member
I am shooting a short film soon with a lot of interior shots. My friend has a CMC641 he is willing to lend me. The problem is all I have is a DR-100mkii to record the audio on.

Would a Schoeps CMC641 + Tascam DR-100mkii combo work? Or would I have to go through something like a Sound Devices 442 and then record into my DR-100?

Is the noise floor on the DR-100 good enough to make use of how silent the Schoeps is?
 
"Would a Schoeps CMC641 + Tascam DR-100mkii combo work? Or would I have to go through something like a Sound Devices 442 and then record into my DR-100?"
-- You do not 'have to' go through an external mixer, the DR-100 has the proper connections and the required Phantom Power. Would a high quality external preamp or mixer be better? For sure, if you know how to hook it up and properly gain-stage it.

"Is the noise floor on the DR-100 good enough to make use of how silent the Schoeps is?"
-- it depends on many factors.. probably more on your skills (and your boom op) then the gear.
BTW, I wouldn't let an inexperienced PA/boom op near that mic.
 
If you can avoid using the HIGH gain setting on your Tascam DR-100mkii recorder, the noise floor is very good. ( -79 dB or better )

At the HIGH gain setting the noise-floor shoots up to a maximum of -53 dB at it's highest setting, which defeats the purpose of using high quality external mics in the first place.

NEVER use the HIGH gain setting.
 
Thanks for the reply. I will make sure not to use the high settings.

Just a few questions, how would an external mixer help out in terms of sound quality?

Also what factors of the mic makes it hard for a lesser experienced boom op to use?
 
JChang said:
how would an external mixer help out in terms of sound quality?
Click to expand...

Adding a Sound Devices mixer ( or equivalent high quality mixer ) helps in a number of areas:

1- Significantly better low-noise mic pre-amps ( dynamic range is 110+ dB )

2- Dual stage adjustable audio limiter ( almost impossible to clip the audio )

3- Will provide 48 volt phantom power to your mics for 4+ hours using only two or three AA batteries

4- Has a very loud headphone amplifier, so your boom op will hear absolutely everything being recorded

5- Detailed and very easy to see audio level meters

6- Enables you to record audio to a portable recorder tucked in to your audio bag, AND it can send the SAME audio to your camera at the same time. If you use a good quality camera, it means you will have a second copy of your audio as you shoot.

JChang said:
Also what factors of the mic makes it hard for a lesser experienced boom op to use?
Click to expand...

Many higher end mics are very directional, so if the boom-op isn't carefully tracking the action, the mic may be pointed at the wrong person while you shoot.
 
Many higher end mics are very directional, so if the boom-op isn't carefully tracking the action, the mic may be pointed at the wrong person while you shoot.
Click to expand...
Also, the mk41 is known to have a very smooth off axis rejection. Inexperienced users may find it slightly harder to immediately hear when they are off axis or not. The only time I've had the privilege to use a mk41 on a shoot, we filmed a man sitting in a hallway and a woman walking up to him, talk, and then leave again. While the woman was walking away I was still booming the man sitting, yet the footsteps were so clear that I thought I was somehow aiming at her feet!
 
An external mixer does sound like something very useful to have.

And in reply to operating, thanks for clearing that up. I was thinking for some reason that it would be very easy to pick up the boom operating operating the boom.
 
"I was thinking for some reason that it would be very easy to pick up operating the boom"
- Operating the boom is a skill a gained through experience. As important, or more than the sound recordist. The boom op is will also be required to wire the talent, so they must be very adept at that as well as other sound issues.
My comments about PA/boom op were also in regard to the safety of the gear, who commonly trash gear, despite their 'good intentions'.
 
@Rick R - I understand.

One last question. If I was to record from lets say the 442 -> DR-100mkii wouldn't that in theory have the same noise floor as recording straight to the DR-100mkii?

I am asking because the 442 has a lower noise floor than the dr-100 but it still comes through the Line inputs of the DR-100mkii which would would just add in extra noise right?
 
One last question. If I was to record from lets say the 442 -> DR-100mkii wouldn't that in theory have the same noise floor as recording straight to the DR-100mkii?

I am asking because the 442 has a lower noise floor than the dr-100 but it still comes through the Line inputs of the DR-100mkii which would would just add in extra noise right?
Click to expand...
Very little noise is added, since it is primarily the preamps which add noise, not so much a line input (if it's a "true" line in, as some recorders have a line inut that just pad the signal and let the it go through the preamps, but even in these cases the preamps work so little that the noise is low). If you use the 442, you use it's preamps which are much quieter than the ones in the DR100, and going line in to the DR100 doesn't add much noticable noise.

Tests have been made where people have compared using a mixpre and going into a lower cost recorder, versus no mixer and just using a high quality recorder such as a SD702 (which have preamps as good as most high quality mixers). The performance of the first was very close to the latter, and the differences more or less negligible when recording at good levels (the difference mostly comes in when recording at lower levels, where the better performance of the line in components and AD card in the high quality recorder wins out).

Price vs performance can make a good mixer and cheaper recorder a very good deal compared to a good (expensive) recorder, but with the disadvantages that you have a bulkier two-piece setup instead of one, and the fact that a lower cost recorder is not really a professional piece of equipment and can break or fail much easier than a good recorder. With the constant improvement of cheaper audio products, The rewards of a more expensive, high quality recorder like the 702 - besides the fact that it's made specifically for these kinds of things and is very adjustable - is mainly it's reliability. You can take it into the desert, a rainstorm, or the arctic, and every time you hit record it will start. You can throw it into a brick wall and it will keep on recording as if nothing happened (try to do any of this with a DR100). Even though the costs of high quality gear can be daunting, if its reliability can prevent even one problem on set, and the ease of use maybe save in a few minutes every day, on a film with a sizable budget that alone could justify the purchase.
 
Last edited:
JChang said:
If I was to record from lets say the 442 -> DR-100mkii wouldn't that in theory have the same noise floor as recording straight to the DR-100mkii?
Click to expand...

You will be limited by the LINE level noise-floor of the DR-100 MK2, which is about -83 dB.

It would be very difficult to find any place in the real world that has an ambient noise level of -83 dB, and many professional microphones have a self-noise that is higher than -83 dB.

So from a practical perspective, you wouldn't be losing much by recording a LINE level signal with the DR-100 MK2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top