The Great Divide - Professional and Amateur

P

pmk396

Well-known member
Being a member on this forum for almost a year and I have noticed one big thing; both professionals and amateurs use the forum.
I have seen it crop up occasionally that among the chatter of professional/experienced forum users discussing technical specs, an newbie/amateur comes forward asking advice on where to begin. Straight away the newbie is advised to spend $300+ on an audio recorder, $200+ on a shotgun mic, another $200+ on a hypercardioid mic, $300+ on a pre-amp/field mixer, ~$200 on boom pole, cables, dead cat, etc. Based on this advice, the newbie is to consider forking out over $1000 on equipment for a "hobby" that they are new to.
I raise this point because I sometimes think that the wrong advice is given to a newcomer in this area. I know that the experts in this field have pride in their work and their equipment but one must still have consideration for the amateur filmmaker who is trying to move one step on from using their onboard camera mic to recording audio separately without having to splash out the cash.
I know that there is a sticky on the forum regarding audio equipment for the newcomer on various budgets. It provides a good guideline but I think that it could be updated.
I know some of the pros here are going to argue back by saying that the newbie will regret not investing in the proper equipment and they'll benefit on the long run but what if the newbie can't afford this equipment and has to settle for what they can afford. For example, I once suggested a starter kit of the Zoom H1 audio recorder with something like the Rode VideoMic as a very basic starter kit for audio. I know that there are the disadvantages of the unbalanced signal but it's definitely somewhere for the newbie/amateur to start.
I don't mean to keep rambling on about this but I just think that a guide of equipment for the various types of users could be put in place (similar to the sticky on this forum) where a simple low budget audio kit might be recommended (eg. Zoom H1 w/ Rode VideoMic), followed by the next level up from basic beginner (eg. Zoom H4n or Tascam DR-100 w/ AT875R or Rode NTG-2) and then onto the experienced prosumer level (eg. Tascam DR-100 or Marantz plus the Juicedlink with AT897 (shotgun) and Oktava MK012 (hypercardioid)) and from there onto the more high end professional equipment.
Again, this is all from my own observations. My best way to describe this thread would be that when a person takes up a new hobby, they don't go and buy the expense gear straight away, they simple buy something to get them started and, if they like their new hobby and as they get better/more experienced, then they might considering upgrading their gear.
I hope this makes sense.
 
nice one :)
i personally think that the investment step between your first option (H1+VM) and second one (H4N+AT785) is almost favorable toward the latter in every respect, even for a begginer.
not such price difference, and much more quality control.
 
Actually the prices you quoted are pretty cheap and bottom end when it comes to equipment.

When I started out - as a hobby - my audio recorder was the equivalent of about two months wages of what I was earning at the time. My microphones were a couple of weeks wages. And that was total money earned, not spare cash.

Equipment nowadays is extremely cheap and $1,000 is nothing compared to what it would have cost 20 years ago or more.

A hobby is something you do for enjoyment - and I know plenty of amateurs that have better equipment and are better skilled than many professionals.

Certain things - microphones, lenses and similar are mature products that if you buy wisely at the start will last you a lifetime. I have microphones that are over 25 years old - still work perfectly - and I can still buy the same thing new now if I wanted. The only thing is, is that today's price is x5 or x6 what I paid for them and the second-hand value is at least double what I paid - so a good investment.

Please don't put down people who offer good advice - not all amateurs are cheapskates - and it's best to advise someone to get equipment that will give best value for money and won't have to be thrown away in a couple of years and to spend the money all over again.

If someone states a budget, then people can advise the best way of spending the money. But if the budget is tight it's best to ask before you have bought anything as you can then get the best advise to get the best mix of equipment for the money. It's not very good to ask later when you have spent all on the camera and have nothing left for the sound when the best advice would have been to get a cheaper camera and have a larger sound budget, for example.

It does amaze me nowadays that everyone seems to want everything cheap cheap cheap when the cost of good equipment is a tiny fraction of what the same sort of thing would have cost 30 years ago.
 
PMK,

We all have opinions about the minimum entry level equipment to achieve decent audio. You have one which recommends an H1 and a RVM. No problem. Most regular contributors to this forum (speaking for the flock) think that a higher level of gear is needed to produce a decent result.

The thing that amazes me most are the new posters who query, " I just spent XX thousand on a new cam and now I want a pro audio kit for $300 cause that is all I have left". Really? Did they ever consider audio before or was it an afterthought? Did they have a budget for audio before they got into the moving picture business or was their intention to do silent? Did they do any business planning at all?

Cams are expensive, but at this point, my two cams represent only about 30% of my kit, at most.

Grant
 
Guys, guys, guys!I knew my comment would ruffle a few feathers. The point that that I am trying to make is that an amateur needs a starting point when they want to move on from using their cameras onboard mic to something a bit better. That's all that I am trying to say.
 
John, I am not trying to put down people who offer good advice. I think that a guideline of what is out there should be made available to amateurs/newcomers regardless of their budget. If there is low-budget stuff out there, the newbies should be told about as well as the advantages and disadvantages of getting these.
I'm not saying that all amateurs are cheapskates. I just think that sometimes it is forgotten that maybe people can't afford to buy the more advised equipment and that they need to start somewhere on a very low-budget, especially in these recessionary times. Instead of saying "don't spend less than $200 on a mic" or "you have to buy two mics; a shotgun mic for outdoors and a hypercardioid for indoors", it should be explained that low-end gear is available but there are a lot of disadvantages if someone was to go with this gear. We can always advise them on the advantages and disadvantages of different equipment that is available on the market but we should let them decide for themselves whether it for them or not.
 
pmk396 said:
Guys, guys, guys!I knew my comment would ruffle a few feathers. The point that that I am trying to make is that an amateur needs a starting point when they want to move on from using their cameras onboard mic to something a bit better. That's all that I am trying to say.
Click to expand...
Of course one needs a starting point, but the recorders, mics, and similar gear of the level generally discussed in the forum, like the Zoom H4n recorder at $400, ARE often starting points, by and large entry level to midstream consumer/hobbyist gear. Considering recorders, for example, entry level professional gear starts at the Sound Devices 702, Edirol R-4, or Fostex FR-2 level, all of whose price point are around 5 times the oft-discussed Zooms and pro gear moves up from there. For top shelf professional recorders you're looking at price points in excess of 10 grand, while top-level mics, mixers, etc have prices with similar multipliers over the gear usually discusssed here. How many times have you seen someone here suggest to a newcomer that they should buy a Schoeps hypercardioid mic at over $2 grand? I can't recall anyone ever recommending that to an audio virgin. Yet the Schoeps could arguably be said to be the standard go-to professional-grade mic for interior location booming in the North American feature film world. To be sure there is a lot of gear discussed that is in the overlap zone between high-end hobbyist gear and entry level professional - for example the popular Sennheiser G3 wireless could be considered high-end hobbyist or entry-level professional. There are levels under which it simply not cost effective to buy anything at all and most of the gear suggested here is at that level or only slightly above.

It's like cameras - if all you want is something to throw in your pocket when you going to the kids birthday party, get a $100 point and shoot. But the kids birthday party shooter isn't likely to be hanging out on a photographer's forum asking questions about how to get great pictures. If someone is seriously intersted in starting photography as a hobby interest, one needs to start out with a camera that is at least capable of serious work - it doesn't need to be a Nikon D3 or a Leica M9 or S2 but it does need to reach at least a reasonable level of capablilty
 
Last edited:
Steve,
I take on board exactly what you are saying. But all I am saying is, if a person comes on the forum looking to get into audio on a budget under $200 or $300, at least we can tell them that there is equipment out there that is in that price range but a lot of disadvantages comes with getting them. For low-budget, we will probably recommend that the best option would be something like the H4n or the DR-100 along with the AT975R or NTG-2 as they'd produce better results than anything cheaper but as I said earlier, something like a Zoom H1 with a Rode VideoMic (although it might not be best recommended) would still be an improvement from using the onboard mic on their camera.
Look, this is just my opinion and I thought that I'd share it.
 
I must be missing something. Haven't we been doing this all along?

pmk396 said:
Steve,
I take on board exactly what you are saying. But all I am saying is, if a person comes on the forum looking to get into audio on a budget under $200 or $300, at least we can tell them that there is equipment out there that is in that price range but a lot of disadvantages comes with getting them. For low-budget, we will probably recommend that the best option would be something like the H4n or the DR-100 along with the AT975R or NTG-2 as they'd produce better results than anything cheaper but as I said earlier, something like a Zoom H1 with a Rode VideoMic (although it might not be best recommended) would still be an improvement from using the onboard mic on their camera.
Look, this is just my opinion and I thought that I'd share it.
Click to expand...
 
pmk396 said:
Steve,
I take on board exactly what you are saying. But all I am saying is, if a person comes on the forum looking to get into audio on a budget under $200 or $300, at least we can tell them that there is equipment out there that is in that price range but a lot of disadvantages comes with getting them. For low-budget, we will probably recommend that the best option would be something like the H4n or the DR-100 along with the AT975R or NTG-2 as they'd produce better results than anything cheaper but as I said earlier, something like a Zoom H1 with a Rode VideoMic (although it might not be best recommended) would still be an improvement from using the onboard mic on their camera.
Look, this is just my opinion and I thought that I'd share it.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but IMHO a Zoom H1 with a Rode Videomic plugged into it is not going to give a sufficient improvment over most built-in camera mics to be worth spending any money on it at all. Sure it might be slightly better sounding, but is it better sounding ENOUGH to justify spending a couple of hundred dollars on it? I don't think so. And we still haven't spent any money doing what is more important to good sound ... getting the mic away from the shooting position and up close and intimate with the talent. It's not enough to be DIFFERENT from one's existing tools .... the result must be signifigantly BETTER than that obtainable with one's existing tools. IMHO, as a general rule of thumb for upgrades, one needs to at least double one's current level of quality to justify doing the upgrade at all.
 
I respectfully disagree, Steve. With that line of thinking the hit film Paranormal Activity would have been shot using the built-in mic, and would of had much less of a chance of becoming the hit film that it became.

This is a good audio forum. There are many other good audio forums out there as well. Talented and trusted people share their opinions, and newbies learn new things. If you make a sticky saying the best cheap set up to start out with is a H1 and a Rode VideoMic, you can bet that before long the best option becomes the VideoMic Pro, and within a week that sticky is old news.

Newbies just need to continue asking questions, and they need to research and read a lot of posts in forums. This thread isn't going to change that.
 
$50,000 was spent on ADR for Paranormal Activity, nearly $1m on ADR for Blair Witch.

Sam Mallery said:
I respectfully disagree, Steve. With that line of thinking the hit film Paranormal Activity would have been shot using the built-in mic, and would of had much less of a chance of becoming the hit film that it became.

This is a good audio forum. There are many other good audio forums out there as well. Talented and trusted people share their opinions, and newbies learn new things. If you make a sticky saying the best cheap set up to start out with is a H1 and a Rode VideoMic, you can bet that before long the best option becomes the VideoMic Pro, and within a week that sticky is old news.

Newbies just need to continue asking questions, and they need to research and read a lot of posts in forums. This thread isn't going to change that.
Click to expand...
 
Right. There was something salvageable there.

I make a point of encouraging people who have an idea that they want produce to go for it, and not to put everything on hold until they can save gobs of money to invest in sound gear. When someone suggests high quality gear, they are usually making good suggestions, but the other side of the coin is making sure that a film gets made, and that the idea isn't trashed because of budgetary limitations.

There are a lot of people out there with very little money, and those are the ones I like advise. I'm sure a lot of you feel the same way.

It's like when I was in high school and I wanted to start a band. I didn't have a guitar. I didn't have an amp. I didn't have anything. On top of that I didn't have the first clue how to play a guitar. But I made it happen. I borrowed an ultra crappy flea market guitar from a friend, I bought a $30 used Gorilla amp from a pawn shop, and I played non-stop. I found a drummer who didn't have a drum set and I was in heaven. The music sucked pretty bad for the first 6 months, but after that we got pretty good.

If someone has no money, but they have a burning desire to create something, I do my best to help them out. There's no point in discouraging these people. They're going to go for it anyway.
 
I've got to agree with Steve, the gear that's get recommended here over and over again is generally very inexpensive, bottom of the line gear. It's not even at the level of what a new sound person needs if they want to be taken seriously and get paid work. It's being recomended because it's inexpensive but will get the job done for hobby projects.

The people giving advise here really care about getting good sound, they get how important sound is to a project. But we get people coming in over and over again asking things like 'I know sound is half of picture, but I just spent $2000 on a camera and I only have $100 left for sound, what can I buy so I can get great sound?'
 
The advice I give is usually geared towards avoiding hiss, and getting a mic that does not sound thin. The hiss thing is big on DSLRs, so a mixer is always in order (except for now with the Rode VM Pro and it's 20db boost) and the cheapest mixer that gives some gain and sounds clean is the JuicedLink JL-CX231 for 299.00. If the user is usually asking how best to get clean sound, or usable sound at budget prices, the user must get their gear to a cretan level. If they hear that advice and don't want to follow it that's fine. It's impossible to give someone what they want if their budget is unreasonable. Hey I want the image if a red1, but my budget is 1,000.00. Well I can't have that now can I? So I feewl it's my duty to tell the person what they need to get hissless audio in the cheapest way I know. Because the options below what I suggest are all going to sound hissy and lacking, so they don't need advice for that. Just spend your 300.00 total budget on whatever you want and live with it.

BTW a VideoMic and an H1 is not a bad 2nd system solution for 250.00! But oh wait, you don't want to deal with lining up audio files in post? Back to square one...
 
Steve House said:
I'm sorry, but IMHO a Zoom H1 with a Rode Videomic plugged into it is not going to give a sufficient improvment over most built-in camera mics to be worth spending any money on it at all.
Click to expand...

Steve, I can tell you for a fact that sticking an SM57 ($50 at your local pawn shop) into a DVX and getting it close to the talent (even with a painter's pole) is a massive improvement over the DVX's (really rather good for what it is) internal mic.

I've avoided being an audio-for-video guy for the last several years (though I have a very nicely equipped pro tools music studio), but last week I bought a $300 Rode blimp and stuck a $60 ADK small diaphragm condenser in it for an outdoor interview, and I can tell you for a fact that I got massively better audio than the built-in shotgun (which would have been unusable).

So, C-stand, superclamp, $15 XLR cable, $300 blimp with fur, $60 mic (and a sand bag, subject was a 5-time NFL pro bowler I didn't want to thump)... great sound. (And yes, I'll admit I sold my $600 pencil condenser when I tried the cheap ADK, but still...)
 
The magic word: renting :-p

Or finding someone who wants to help you...because you'll give him a self home made pancake...(and two if possible).

But in my eyes it's strange that people don't want to pay 2000 $ for sound equipment, but they have 54646468464646658460408674640846087486046 different lenses....which are not cheap neither. This was just in general...not to someone in person...
 
pmk396 said:
a guide of equipment for the various types of users could be put in place (similar to the sticky on this forum) where a simple low budget audio kit might be recommended (eg. Zoom H1 w/ Rode VideoMic), followed by the next level up from basic beginner (eg. Zoom H4n or Tascam DR-100 w/ AT875R or Rode NTG-2) and then onto the experienced prosumer level (eg. Tascam DR-100 or Marantz plus the Juicedlink with AT897 (shotgun) and Oktava MK012 (hypercardioid)) and from there onto the more high end professional equipment.
Click to expand...

I thank that sounds like a great idea.
Maybe you could write up what you think would be a good starting point for the guide and post it in this forum, then the other members could chime in with their thoughts on the different levels?
After a little back and forth we can probably have a good updated guide for future (and present) members.
Go for it - and when you have a draft just start a new thread, and post the link in here (then we can close this thread and start fresh).

:thumbsup:
 
Sam Mallery said:
I respectfully disagree, Steve. With that line of thinking the hit film Paranormal Activity would have been shot using the built-in mic, and would of had much less of a chance of becoming the hit film that it became.

This is a good audio forum. There are many other good audio forums out there as well. Talented and trusted people share their opinions, and newbies learn new things. If you make a sticky saying the best cheap set up to start out with is a H1 and a Rode VideoMic, you can bet that before long the best option becomes the VideoMic Pro, and within a week that sticky is old news.

Newbies just need to continue asking questions, and they need to research and read a lot of posts in forums. This thread isn't going to change that.
Click to expand...

Paranormal Activity is I guess 60% ADR. When you look it up on IMDB you see A LOT of soundpeople... All trying to make it as good as possible (boom operator, sound recorders) and then.. to make it as "bad" as possible but still understandeble.... So it's actualy the soundpost guys saying to the soundrecorder and boomoperator "very well done, and now we're going to ruin it" :-p

Even without IMDB I would have known it was a mix of boomed sound, ADR, foley... When someone turns his head away from a camera (and from the mice) that person will sound like if he was miles away...
But "every day happy people" don't hear that because they're not aware about it".
 
Michael Carter said:
Steve, I can tell you for a fact that sticking an SM57 ($50 at your local pawn shop) into a DVX and getting it close to the talent (even with a painter's pole) is a massive improvement over the DVX's (really rather good for what it is) internal mic.

I've avoided being an audio-for-video guy for the last several years (though I have a very nicely equipped pro tools music studio), but last week I bought a $300 Rode blimp and stuck a $60 ADK small diaphragm condenser in it for an outdoor interview, and I can tell you for a fact that I got massively better audio than the built-in shotgun (which would have been unusable).

So, C-stand, superclamp, $15 XLR cable, $300 blimp with fur, $60 mic (and a sand bag, subject was a 5-time NFL pro bowler I didn't want to thump)... great sound. (And yes, I'll admit I sold my $600 pencil condenser when I tried the cheap ADK, but still...)
Click to expand...

Yeah it's mostly about how you use the mic. The videoMic is the same capsule as the NTG-2, and that's a respectable shotgun. Sure there are much nicer ones, but you can get a great sound out of it. As a matter of fact I'll prove soon enough that its more about how you use the mic. I have recorded a full production rock song using only lavs. I have these two PinMics and a Rode Lav, and on a lark I decided to try to record a whole song using the mics as I would studio mics. And the sound ain't bad! Still editing the video - I recorded most of the parts simultaneously for video & audio. Not the vocals - I couldn't get those all the way through.. But here is the drum track. I used the Glyn Johns 3 mic method made popular with John Bonham of Led Zep. It's all how you use the mics....

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top