Sound Quality of Oscar Sound Tech 801 paired with Zoom H1

C

cuius

New member
Hi

This is my first post. Thanks for any guidance with this question - I've done quite a bit of searching but haven't found a discussion that is specific to this pairing.

I have a shoot coming up which will include a few casual interviews. I purchased the OST lav after reading many good reviews, and opted to try the Zoom H1 as an alternative to a Sennheiser G3 or Rodelink. My tests with this pairing have delivered disappointing audio results - distant and muffled. I've uploaded a sample here: https://soundcloud.com/daniel-agostino/audio-test-ost-801-and-zoom-h1

What I'm wondering is whether the issue lies with the Zoom H1? If I were to connect to a Sennheiser G3 or Rodelink, would I notice a large shift in audio quality?

Additionally, I would like to purchase another mic that I can use to record audio from a second source. I'll be using a C100 and would like to use a camera mounted microphone. I would use a c-stand, but it might be too intrusive and I'll be doing running/gunning anyways, so I'll need to be capturing b-roll audio on-board. My best option seems to be the Rode NTG-3 because of its great sound quality and versatility for future shoots. My one concern is that I'd be better served by a cardioid mic for an indoor interview. Perhaps a Rode NT5 or an Audix SCX1/C? Can I rest assured that the NTG-3 will get me close enough?

Thank You
 
I hear some traffic noise, maybe a fan or air conditioner, and other distractions at a low level in the background, but the overall quality of the voice sounds like what I would expect from a decent lavalier mic setup. The low cut and switching to manual level control improved it (the 60% level sounded best to me, after adjusting for playback volume). What you have sounds like it would work OK for a "casual" interview.

No on-camera mic will be of much use doing interviews. The NTG-3 is a good microphone and might work fine, although shotguns aren't usually the very best choice for indoor voice recording. A hypercardioid like the Audix or an Audio-Technica AT4053 (in the same price range) may be better, depending on how "live" the room is -- but in either case, that's assuming you mount it on a boom within 18" or so of the speaker's mouth. It's hard to imagine a location much worse than mounted on the camera itself.

- Greg
 
Thanks for your reply, Greg. Would you say that I'd do better than OK for a lav setup if I got the Sennheiser G3 and went directly into the C100 or an external recorder like a DR-70D or a Zoom H5?
 
cuius said:
My tests with this pairing have delivered disappointing audio results - distant and muffled.
Click to expand...

It sounds OK-ish to me. The 60% version (whatever that means) sounded the least over driven. That said, my OSTs sound better than this. So... you can probably improve. To that end...

Some questions: First, where did you mount the microphone? Wherever it is, is it under clothes or on top? Where did you make your test recordings -- what kind of room? Please tell us how big the room was, describe the floor, walls, ceiling, furnishings so we can get an idea of what kind of reflections you were experiencing. Whose voice did you record? Was it your voice? Because recordings of your own voice never sound good to you -- the recordings lack the bone conduction and airway resonance that your ears hear, but the mic does not.

And some suggestions: First, if you want a quality audio capture, you can't use any kind of automatic gain control. All AGC must be defeated. Second, you want the (manual) gain on your recorder (be that a Zoom, Tascam, the camera, whatever) set so that your dialog peaks hit around -12 dBfs. Don't go higher, you'll need the headroom to avoid clipping.

Finally, some advice: That is, wireless is a last resort, not a first. Wireless is expensive, prone to RFI, and even the best wireless doesn't sound as good as a $20 wire. Wireless is your very last resort.
 
It sounds neither "distant" nor "muffled" to me. Perhaps you expectations don't account for your limited experience.

As others have already observed:
1) The quality of the source was not great (although perhaps representative of your "casual interviewees")
2) The recording location was not very good either (although, again, perhaps representative of your expected conditions).
3) We don't have any details of HOW you recorded this. (Location, mic placement, etc.)
4) NEVER use "auto-level" except as a last resort. DO learn how to set recording levels properly to avoid clipping or sinking into the noise "mud".
5) Wireless will NEVER "improve" the performance of the recording chain. It is only an undesirable option where you cannot use a proper wire connection.
6) Make every effort to reduce/eliminate noise AT THE SOURCE. Trying to remove noise after the fact is fiddly, expensive, and rarely satisfying.
 
Appreciate the information. This is a paid pro video project that I'm working on - although I am new to audio recording. My GOAL is to get my interview audio as close to right as I can for this project, with the knowledge that I still have a fair bit of practice and experimentation ahead of me once I have the gear. I will be doing more documentary after this, so owning the right stuff is important to me. The event I'm documenting is at a residential indoor location with background chatter and light construction noise - I expect that I will be doing sit down interviews.

I recorded another test with my OST-801 and Zoom H1. This was recorded with H1 levels of 60. lav clipped sideways on crew neck of my t-shirt. Location is a carpeted bedroom (10x12), plaster walls, a couple chairs, bed, desk, 10 foot ceiling, open windows. This one sounds better to my ears. Would like to know if you all think this is optimal for my OST? I am renting a C100, so I'm unable to test the wired connection at the moment. I am willing to spend money on other recorders, or wireless systems to get the best sound of my lav, however.
https://soundcloud.com/daniel-agostino/test2


The first recording was outdoors on a porch in a relatively quiet residential neighborhood - still some ambient noise from roadways, airplanes, wind, etc The mic was clipped to my t-shirt (on top), about 8 inches from my mouth. The porch is covered, is up against one side of the house, and is open on the other three sides with some columns to hold up the roof. All wood construction.

I am aware of the need to use manual levels - the levels that I was talking about were the H1's levels of 0-100 (I presume this is gain). I will be sure to use manual levels and make sure to keep my signal between -20db and -12db. I also know its best to monitor sound as you are recording, which is a big part of why I was considering swapping the H1 for a wireless solution.

Thanks for the input
 
Repeating: Wireless WILL NOT "improve" anything!
The very best a $3500 wireless system can do is try to be as good as a $35 cable.
Wireless will also do nothing for proper monitoring except perhaps make it more difficult.
It is confusing that you keep mentioning wireless as if it could somehow improve your recordings.

Better recorders will lower the noise floor of the recorded tracks.
But it sounds like you are recording in situations so noisy that you will never reach the recorder's noise-floor.
 
I think you're right that I won't reach the noise floor of the recorders for my interviews, so my H1 or XLR to the C100 should do just fine. I guess my initial focus on the wireless was because I was imagining that the G3s preamps might be superior enough to the H1 to balance out the loss of wireless delivery - but it sounds like thats incorrect. Anyways, its certainly nice to hear that I can spend less and get the best sound through an xlr cable.
 
cuius said:
lav clipped sideways on crew neck of my t-shirt.
...
The mic was clipped to my t-shirt (on top), about 8 inches from my mouth.
Click to expand...

You won't believe this, but this is a bad location for a lavalier. This is the same mistake I made in the beginning, the same one most of us make.

The "ideal" location for a lav. is farther down the body, actually on the "nipple line" and centered. Why? Where you have it is under the chin, which blocks the mic from "seeing" the mouth. Try it and have a listen. Don't be surprised if your "muffled" sound disappears.

For reference, look at your local news broadcast. See where the lavs get clipped. You'll very seldom see them very far from this line, but they are often a little off center (because of the clothes to which they are attached), which works fine with omnidirectional mics like the OSTs.

Next, if you were going to use the mic exposed, you should have bought the 802, which is equalized for use above clothes. What you'll get with the 801 isn't bad but it has a high frequency rise built into it (to compensate for attenuation of high frequencies as sound travels through some level of clothing). This HF hump can render some voices a little bright or somewhat harsh. You can equalize this rise back out of the sound as needed. But you should know that you may have to do that on occasion.

You should also know that you'll likely have to equalize out other things. Because a lav sits below nose level, it can record voices more "nasally" that you'd like. A parametric equalizer can fix that easily.
 
Unfortunately the G2/3's HDX noise reduction system is sensitive to HFs and the OST 801 exasperates the issue, so I usually recommend the 802 or other mics for 'general' usage.
 
The OST-801 has the high frequency peak and is designed to be used under clothing. The OST-802 doesn't have the peak and can be used externally.

Also, you can improve the audio quality of your lav mic recording with a little bit of EQ at the right frequencies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top