Sub $1000 Boom Mic Options

F

Fidelio

Active member
Hi all,

I know this question has probably already been beaten to death, but I've never really been much of a sound person and I haven't been in on the know, on the technical front, for the past several years (did a bit of soul searching; almost completely abandoned all filmmaking), and so I ask for your collective sagely advice: what are the best $1000 or sub $1000 boom mic options that I can pursue? Best being defined as most well-rounded and versatile for many circumstances, which can produce usable, if not semi-professional on-location sound.

As it has been a number of years (almost seven, in fact) since I've last looked at the technological offerings for the low-budget indie filmmaker, I am a bit lost as to what to look at, especially given the myriad of choices available. For my purposes, I'm planning to develop a skeletal kit that I can work with at a very low cost at each outing, such that I can continually work on small projects over time. For this I am planning to acquire a DVX, on the video front, and now I am scouting options for quality sound. I do not plan to employ ADR or other such extensive post-processing services, partly as a matter of philosophy of aesthetics, Dogme, and partly because of cost and time. As such, it is imperative that I find an option which can produce sound, from the source, that can be sufficient for a final product, on its own. Essentially, I strive to fulfill the basest of requirements in achieving a quality standard, and while I have my faith in the DVX for imagery, I haven't much of a clue when it came to audio.

Thus, any and all help would be greatly appreciated! Much thanks.
 
My question is: are you planning on sticking this on the camera (please don't) or using it with an external recorder. If so, what's the budget like for that?
 
I'm afraid we have to bug you for a bit more information, simply because there are no mic choices that cover it all, or even most things, at any price. It really depends on what kind of things you work on, and who will operate it.

For instance, even the best mics will sound bad when put on a camera compared to a relatively cheap one on a boom above the subjects (which needs an operator, a boom and a shockmount, unless it's for sit-down interviews where you can get away with a mic on a stand). If you work in noisy locations, boom mics can get trouble and you would need a lav, which is also a good choice if you work without a sound person.

Depending on the environment, some mics are to prefer before others. Indoors, you can get in trouble using shotguns as the reflections might make them sound boomy, so if you work both in- and outdoors, one cheaper shotgun and one cheaper hypercardioid could be better than a single good mic. If you work in places with high humidity or cold/heat, an RF-mic like the NTG-3 or MKH-series might be necessary.

Then comes the question of how many people will be talking, which might make it necessary to use an external recorder or a mixer.

An answer to many of these questions and situations, along with recommendations of relevant current equipment, is to be find in the stickies and doing a few searches on the forum. I understand that you want a simple and fast answer, and I wish there was one. The best thing you can do to get good sound is not primarily to get good equipment, but to learn more about how sound recording works and how to adapt the techniques available depending on the situation.
 
Last edited:
I'm somewhat perplexed by your situation Fidelio. Fortunately this is the right place to be for some friendly advice... You're wanting to buy a DVX now(?) I've got an old, pretty much used up, DVX in my closet... and I'm sure you could find a bargain price on a low-hours DVX from somebody here... so that's good, but I'd be more inclined to get into something HD... even if it's a cheap camera... like an entry-level DSLR that does video. A used Canon t2i or something like that(?)

This is just an opinion... and of course the DVX is capable of producing great SD video... but at this point... the DOF and low-light abilities of a DSLR (again, my opinion)... PLUS HD images... are too much to make a choice from the more distant past. The great thing about the DVX is that it's a really capable all-in-one with video and audio... but the video end of things is simply too long in the tooth now. I wouldn't be too quick to go that route, unless you're REALLY sure that's what you want to do.

The others are right... that more then the mic, you'll have to make an honest commitment to go to the trouble to get any mic closer to your talent then you'll likely get on-cam. If the cam is close, then that's still good enough... but do you plan to have all your shots as close-ups?

You can get some kind of stand... a cheap shockmount... a 50' (or a couple 25' XLR cables)... a Zoom or Tascam recorder (for cheap I got a DR100MKii... wait for a sale)... and a cheap boom pole... plus an NTG2... for well under a grand.

If all that sounds like a pain in the butt... you may be better off with lavs. Again, for a cheap route, buy used... or else you may want to try the OST (oscar sound tech) lavs... I like the Tram style... 801 I believe... and get comfortable with making an "air pocket" on your talent when you lav 'em. So that nothing rubs the mic... and you'll learn that there are fabrics that are noisy, etc. (cotton is about the best)... Then you can run each lav into an even cheaper recorder... and treat the recorders like wireless mic packs.

There's a very common misconception... amazingly this misconception NEVER goes away... that if you buy the right mic, that getting good sound becomes as easy as just pointing it at what you want to hear. I've always said that getting good sound isn't rocket science... but it does take a willingness to accept a few laws of nature.

When people shoot video... they think nothing of moving somebody into better light... out of a shadow... or setting up a specific lighting setup to make the talent look good... meanwhile sound, since it's invisible and typically an after-thought on many low budget productions... gets none of the same attention to detail. All it takes is to move a person out of an echoey spot... unplug a refrigerator... turn off the AC/heat for the take... shoot away from unwanted sounds... get the mic close enough... you know... just generic "common sense" stuff that will get you better results.

If you REALLY wanted to spend $1K on a mic... and it was that simple... I'd suggest you get a great condition Sennheiser MKH-416 off ebay... or, if you feel better buying new and appreciate a 10 year warranty... I'd get a Rode NTG3 from Guy at DVestore. The thing about the Sennheiser and Rode... they have a similar sound... making the Rode a total bargain at it's price. If they're the same price then I'd get the Sennheiser. Guy had some package deals a while back where you'd get a boom pole and other necessary parts... making it an especially good deal. (It was like getting a boom pole "thrown in"). I'd look into that IF you really want to spend that money.

If you're wanting to get back into production... then I'd go the first route... get a cheaper mic to begin with... or go with lavs (since it sounds like you won't have a dedicated sound guy on location)... and make that commitment to do what you need to do... to get good sound. You could also get a friend to learn some basics of sound... and team up with him/her.

I could talk to somebody for 5 minutes and get better audio then you'll get having a mic on-cam (again, unless it's close). If you can't find somebody to do sound... put the mic on a stand and block your action accordingly... or.. get lavs.
 
Here's an article from my blog that might be useful. It's written from the perspective of my own experience and the equipment I use or am familiar with.



How to Get Great Production Sound




As pointed out in my other article , production sound is almost more important than a great image. If your image is a bit noisy or the whites are blown out, the average viewer won't even notice. But if the sound is lousy and the dialogue is hard to make out, the general perception will be, "bad movie". Never underestimate the importance of good production sound.


Even on the very first feature I shot in 1999, I understood this. I had a long way to go cinematography wise, but the sound in the film was not too bad. I was an audiophile and had a collection of mics, mixers and other equipment that I put to good use. Even without a book or website to guide me, I instinctively knew the number one requirement for good production sound: getting the mic as close as possible to the subject. They were hidden in plants, under clothing and other places- but they were CLOSE.


So here are the two golden rules of production sound: 1) Use the proper mic for the job, and 2) make sure the mic is never more than 24" from the actor's mouth (99% of the time, this rules out the one camera mic, which is usually too low of quality anyway) . These also happen to be the two most broken rules in low budget filmmaking (I know, I've broken them a few times myself). So I'm going to go into some detail here to help you understand why these two things are so important.


This is probably over simplified, but sound travels in a straight line. Pristine sound happens when the correct mic is placed the correct distance from the actor at the correct angle. The only thing that can screw that up is ambient noise or reflected sound. So two other things you need to pay attention to are other sources of noise in the location, and the acoustic characteristics of the location itself.


Ambient noise in an interior location is simple. There are only a few possible sources of noise - those caused by people and those caused by machines. So if you are shooting in an office building, you will need to shoot at a time when only you and your actors and crew are there to prevent the noises of a functioning office from intruding. In a house, you'll have more problems with machinery noise. The primary culprit will be refrigeration equipment, whether it be an air conditioning unit or an actual fridge in a kitchen. You absolutely MUST remember to turn them off when recording dialogue. If you don't, you will be faced with the difference in sound on various takes as the unit cycles on and off.


The acoustics of the inside location are very important. A room with hardwood floors, drywall ceilings and no upholstered furniture can be a nightmare of echo-ness (is that a word?) A carpeted room with overstuffed furniture and a "popcorn" ceiling can make a good recording environment. If your room if more like the first example, some moving blankets and throw rugs can help make it more like the second. Killing the sound from bouncing around the room in this way is one of the easiest, cheapest ways to improve your soundtrack.


Shooting outside can be a nightmare at times. While shooting "Flowers for Fannie", we encountered all types of outdoor noise. Usually we shot on weekends , and it was late summer in a residential neighborhood. Lawn mowers for miles around cranked up and we had absolutely no control. Shooting "downtown" in our small town was equally problematic- loud four wheel drivers and motorcyclists would see us on the sidewalk shooting and proceed to circle the block to see what was going on. All we could do was patiently wait until the noise source died down.


But there was one source of noise that never went away. During the first several weeks of shooting, our section of Tennessee was invaded by a variety of locust called the "Cicada". It sounds much like a tree frog and at times the sound was loud enough to drown out normal conversation. SInce we couldn't "wait out" this source of noise, all we could do was get the mics so close that the noise was as far in the background as possible. We ended up incorporating the sound of the bugs into the "soundscape" of the film rather than trying to completely eliminate the sound, and it actually added to the overall ambience of the soundtrack.


What types of microphones are used for dialogue? Depends on whether you are outside or inside. When outside, you will need a "shotgun" mic mounted on the end of a boom pole, handled by a skilled person. The mic must be mounted in a "shock mount" so that the noise generated by the operator's hands on the pole are not transmitted along with the dialogue. You can expect to spend several hundred dollars on a shotgun mic. About the only way around that is to find an older, obscure model mic on Ebay (such as the Sony C74 or 76) that was once used in TV production. These can be great mics, but they are heavy and hard to swing around on a boom pole.


Current model shotgun mics that are both good and affordable include the Rode "NT" models, and the AT 4073. I have used the AT for my last two features, and have been very pleased with the sound. It has a "low cut" switch that when engaged, can almost eliminate boom handling noise issues, as long as the operator has a certain skill level. It's other great attribute is that it is one of the most sensitive mics on the market, bar none. This not only means it has a lot of "reach", but that it can record sound at a certain level at a low setting on your camcorder's level control. A less sensitive mic will require that level control to be turned higher, resulting in more noise from the camera preamps. With certain less sensitive mics it's a losing game - too much preamp noise for useable production dialogue. The only alternative is an external mixer/ preamp, and that usually requires hiring a sound mixer.


Bringing a professional sound mixer onboard is a great idea if you can possibly swing it budget wise. This will allow you to focus your concentration of the image and other aspects of the production as opposed to audio. But oftentimes, budget limitations do not allow this. That's why I'm concentrating here on the most simple and inexpensive ways to get respectable quality production dialogue with just a boom op.


With this setup, it's going to be up to you to get the sound levels right. The way to do that is to run the audio from the one mic into both channels of your camcorder. Run one channel at optimum level (just short of peaking). Run the other channel several DB lower. In post, whenever you get serious peaking, you will go to the second channel for usable audio. You'll find it doesn't happen very often, but when it does, you'll be thankful for the alternative channel.


One camera setting that will help insure usable audio is the limiter function. Not all camcorders have this feature and not all behave the same, but if yours has a limiting function that can "clamp" the very worst audio peaks without affecting the audio otherwise, it can be very useful. I usually have this feature engaged at all times.


Monitoring your audio if of course extremely important. Using a long headphone cable or wireless remote transmitter, get some quality headphones on your boom op (Sony 7506 are legendary). Only try to monitor sound yourself on extremely simple shoots.


Shotgun mics are best for exteriors, so what works for inside? The "hypercardiod" is the mic of choice. It's an extremely directional mic that does not tend to record too much of the reflected sounds bouncing off the walls and ceiling. A shotgun used in an echo prone acoustic environment will tend to pick up the echo more readily, giving your sound that "hollowness" you hear so often in low budget flicks. I use an AT 4053a (the new model has the "b" designation) because it sounds just like the 4073 I use outside, and has the same useful low cut switch. If you can't afford the $600 or so it costs, consider the Oktava MC-012. This is a Russian mic designed to emulate a much more expensive brand. It also amplifies handling noise, so be prepared for that issue- but the sound it produces is exemplary. Do your research before buying one as fakes are everywhere.


So there it is, the quick and dirty version of how to get great production sound. Use the right mic, get it as close as possible to the subject, (usually booming down instead of up), keep ambient noise under control, and monitor with good headphones. In a future installment I'll talk about wireless lavalier mics and a few other things that will help you get that crisp dialogue.


 
Thank you for the informative responses, guys.


Nickpickles -- I do actually have that in mind for some circumstances; I don't rule out that possibility, as occasionally it'll be a kind of "run-and-gun" scenario, where working alone would probably be a more economical approach. I'm approaching a skeletal definition of what a film "crew" could comprise of, in the Robert Rodriguez, Shane Carruth sense, simmered down to a rudiment, but as an even more solitary presence. I know, it's not ideal, crazy even, but I do plan to work alone in some instances. Although I do also foresee working with a sound person, for some projects, and the ability to jump back and forth between these two options would be ideal (in the form of a microphone, I suppose, that can be both mounted on-camera and also on a boom pole.) In both cases, though, I plan to plug directly into the DVX's XLR input. Ultimately, the crux of it is that I don't believe the camera's on-board mic would be sufficient even for my purposes, as used towards an end product, and as such, I hope to build a low-budget but still formidable, bare-bones audio setup (if not a complete package, as you've suggested.) Understandably, I may be pursuing completely unrealistic expectations, but as a layperson I really do hold out hope for some quality of standard, if to rule out a "one-size-fits-all" solution.

LyleGorch -- originally I was thinking that I might just spend the $1000 on the microphone, but on second thought, perhaps that was too impulsive a decision: would a thousand dollars be sufficient to support an infrastructure along with a decent microphone?

Jema -- thank you for the suggestions. I would, indeed, be receptive to the idea of different types to cover my bases. If at the bare mininum I would need both indoor and outdoor solutions, I would not hesitate to consider that dichotomy. In line with my philosophy of minimalism, I'm not particularly fickle in the constantly changing technological landscape: just that I come to acceptable standards, via quality tools. This is, I suspect, more difficult than it sounds: thus I confess my neophytism! But I have looked at one possibility: the NTG-1. I haven't had enough time to thoroughly peruse the literature, yet, but based on consumer confidence, it seems to be a compelling choice, at least in one application.

MattinSTL -- I can see how choosing an SD camera now may seem like a queer choice in our modern, high-definition world, but I've always been of the belief that the DVX produces very film-like images, and that aesthetic appeals to me. I'm also of the belief that those particular aesthetics still hold relevance in today's world, in spite of its lack of resolution. David Lynch, in his employment of the PD150 for Inland Empire, may be one inspiration, along with November. Perhaps I've been seeing all of the wrong images, but from what I've observed of DSLR footage, my perception is that that cinematic likeness has been lessened, somehow. May that be bias, post-processing, individual discrepancies, I don't know. But the DVX somehow still remains an ideal for me, in my mind. And I suppose since my application of it is not client-based yet, used more so as a showcase of photographic and directorial abilities, I am not restraint by the current climate of high definition inclinations. Most importantly, I could also get a DVX at basement bargain prices, which is a defining factor given my limited means. I suppose since I assume an ability to procure a DVX at such low prices, I can spend more on audio, which by most accounts, is half the picture. Thus an allotment of an up to $1000 budget for various parts (or just one really good one!) Yes, as mentioned above, I do consider an independent mic setup a possibility. Although, not so much an independent recorder, as I'll likely work alone in some capacity. Not sure if it would be sensible to invest in a standalone recorder if it either does not get used when I'm running and gunning, or if I end up wearing it myself (a bit of a silly proposal, perhaps.) Re-imagining the idea of a film crew here, I guess, once again. Suppose it doesn't get any more auteur-like than that, huh? I have indeed heard much praises for Rode, in particular the NTG-1. Not sure if I'd need the NTG-2, if I plan on using phantom power, via the DVX? Lavs are probably a good idea, too. Just out of curiosity: for "cinematic" purposes, would lavs sound too ENG? That perhaps subjective perception of people sounding too "close", like when ADR work falters sometimes, and people sound too intimate for the proximities depicted. If not, I would love some entry-level suggestions.

mainstreetprod -- very informative read, and boiled down to essentials. Thank you! Hypercardoids and shotguns, then. I guess that should indeed, perhaps along with lavs, be a part of a starter kit of sorts. The Oktava I've heard a lot about in years past, as with the ME66, but I wasn't completely sure if they were still the gold standards.
 
Fidelio said:
Lavs are probably a good idea, too. Just out of curiosity: for "cinematic" purposes, would lavs sound too ENG? That perhaps subjective perception of people sounding too "close", like when ADR work falters sometimes, and people sound too intimate for the proximities depicted. If not, I would love some entry-level suggestions.
Click to expand...

For entry level lavs I think the Oscar Sound Tech lavs, in my opinion the 801 model, is the one to get. I like Trams better, and if you can find a used Tram in good condition (this is harder than you think... most people sell them once they're really old) then I'd go that route.

As for spatial/vocal perception... I think that concern is overrated. I see movies all the time where a couple is a hundred yards away on the beach... and yet we hear their intimate conversation as if we're in the same room together. It's another one of those things that we all accept within the film experience as necessary to keep the viewer engaged... When seeing an emotion (facial expression) is necessary... there has to be light on the face... and when hearing dialog is necessary... we have to hear it clearly... even if, in both cases, you wouldn't see/hear clearly in reality.

Obviously giving motivation for light and sound is more professional... but it's better to see/hear than not... if the story requires it.
 
Well honestly man, I was in the same boat. I did some research and found the rode videomic pro. It's a great little mic and you can see/hear many tests of it on youtube. I ended up going to amazon and buying this mic-boom-cable package and it cost me about $350 all together. I have a Tascam DR-40 that I'm going to plug it into during the shoot so I can monitor the audio quality. I used it directly into the camera for a short documentary I did at a truckstop. It clipped occassionally due to subjects yelling into the mic over the sounds of multiple diesel engines, but other than that it performed pretty well.
 
Thanks for the suggestion, TJBlack2. Would you happen to know how it compares to the Rode NTG-1? They're around the same price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top