Unsure what to get. $2500 budget for starter audio kit.

M

mandrean

Active member
I have a $2500 budget for a starter audio kit, but I'm unsure what to mic and mixer or recorder to buy. I'll mostly use them for narrative shorts (mic to the recorder or mixer) and event coverage like parties (mic straight into cam.)

I'm shooting with a Sony FS100 (2 XLR), but I'm unsure if I should get a 2ch mixer or an Oade Brothers Edirol R-44 Super MOD with much better preamps than the stock one, plus the R-44 has gain pots for each channel so it works like a 4ch mixer?

Regarding the mic, I've thought about Sanken CS-1/CS-3, Senneheiser MKH416/MKH60.

What kit would you put together with $2500?
 
Last edited:
I was in the same boat you are in. Almost exact budget as well.

I got the Sanken CS3e because from everything I have read, it is the most versatile for indoors and outdoor situations.

I got the Tascam DR-680, which sounds great, and I have it out currently for the Busman pre-amp mod. Without accessories that put me right around $2500.

I haven't had a chance to use the Tascam/mod with the CS3e, but individually they sound great to my ears. But I am no audiophile yet.

I have heard great things about the new or upcoming MixPre-D, but with that and a recorder you may have to choose a different mic to stay within budget.

But i'll bet that whatever you choose above, you will be very happy with the results. Good hunting!
 
The MKH 60 is considerably better than the 416, but today I would get the new MKH 8060. I'm not sure of the exact price, but it should be a good deal cheaper than the MKH 60 (the rest of the MKH 8000 series is cheaper than the old series.

The 8060 matches the sound of the rest of the 8000 series and even has a digital module available if you want to convert it to a digital microphone later.

In fact, if you use this MZD 8000 module now, together with a connection kit from Neumann or Schoeps, you can go direct in to an AES3 or S-PDIF input of the recorder - completely by-passing all the analogue stages for much better quality.

For recorders, The Foxtex FR-2LE is a good little unit and the original FR-2 (still a current model) is even better (the original FR-2 has an AES3 igital input as well as analogue). The new Tascam DR-680 is nice and is a 6/8 channel unit. The new Nagra SD is also a nice little machine (stereo).
 
Last edited:
The MKH 60 is considerably better than the 416, but today I would get the new MKH 8060. I'm not sure of the exact price, but it should be a good deal cheaper than the MKH 60 (the rest of the MKH 8000 series is cheaper than the old series.
Click to expand...

~$1,250 so a couple hundred under the CS-3

In fact, if you use this MZD 800o module now, together with a connection kit from Neumann or Schoeps, you can go direct in to an AES3 or S-PDIF input of the recorder - completely by-passing all the analogue stages for much better quality.
Click to expand...

Could be handy but I have my doubts about the "much better quality" part. You using a preamp squashed down into a mic body and you would have no local level control. If your going streight into a Zoom or something then yes probably a quality bump but if your going through some decent mic pres?


For recorders, The Foxtex FR-2LE is a good little unit and the original FR-2 (still a current model) is even better (the original FR-2 has an AES3 igital input as well as analogue). The new Tascam DR-680 is nice and is a 6/8 channel unit.
Click to expand...

As with all of this stuff some things are facts and some are preferences. I didn't like the FR-2, at all. I found the gain poor, the screen way too small, the metering very poor (it's a small section of the LCD, so B&W and hard to read clearly and poor resolution) and the battery compartment a nightmare (it takes two hands to change the batteries because one needs to be holding them down while you slide the cover on fast, or they pop all over the place like those joke candy boxes). The FR2 Le may be better in some of those areas but I find all of the really small recorders a PITA for regular use. I do like the switch mechanics of the FR2. Luckily I can get that with the PMD-671 which I like a LOT better than the FR-2.

I think the point of the above is it's important to get your hands on a box and see how you like it. Some issues you can read about and know it's an issue for you or not, but a lot of what will drive you crazy you won't know about till you get your hands on it and find out You don't like XY&Z.

The new Nagra SD is also a nice little machine (stereo).
Click to expand...
I think you mean "Nagra LB", yes it is but it's also his whole budget (in the US anyway).
 
It's nice to talk about all of the expensive toys, but you still need to get all of the boring stuff - a boom-pole, shock-mount, blimp, dead cat, quality XLR cables, battery packs and cases. That will eat up a big piece of the budget.

Marantz PMD-661 - $600
Porta-Brace case - $170
Rechargeable Battery - $120
Audio-Technica AT897 Kit - $600 (includes boom-pole w/case, shock-mount, softie)
Audio-Technica AT4053b - $500

You'll add a bunch of XLR cables ($250), other misc items and insurance and you are at your $2,500 budget.
 
You should probably call up one of the production sound audio dealers and talk to them about what your needs are, and your budget, and they can get you dialed in pretty good. When I used to sell gear, this type of situation you have was at least 50% of what I did.
 
Noiz2 said:
(re: MZD 8000 AES42 digital module) Could be handy but I have my doubts about the "much better quality" part. You using a preamp squashed down into a mic body and you would have no local level control.
Click to expand...

Sorry, this is not correct at all. You are definitely not using a "squashed down preamp". There is no preamp at all - it is directly out of the mic. into an ADC tailored to the system. This is an ultra top quality ADC equivalent to the best around. You don't actually need any level control at all - digital microphones are not like analogue microphones at all in this respect. AES42 digital microphones have been around for 10 years now, with over 40 microphones available from four major microphone companies. If you want to know more see my paper "Digital microphones - what's it all about?" presented at the European AES Convention in May this year. I will be giving a further paper on digital microphones at the AES UK Conference "The Ins and Outs of Audio" at the University of Surrey in a couple of seeks time. There are also downloadable info on the Neumann and Schoeps websites.

I have been using AES42 digital microphones for five years now.



Noiz2 said:
I think you mean "Nagra LB", yes it is but it's also his whole budget (in the US anyway).
Click to expand...

I did actually mean the new Nagra SD - it's about £600 in the UK.
 
John Willett said:
If you want to know more see my paper "Digital microphones - what's it all about?" presented at the European AES Convention in May this year
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to this? I'd like to read it. In all my experience, I've only ever used the Neumann Solution D mic that came out back in 2001 to record body impact sounds for some fight scenes for a movie I was working on. At the time, I didn't know much about the mic, and didn't see what all the fuss was about, but that was one of the first digital mics that came out (if I remember correctly, I could be wrong). Things could have changed a lot since then. Basically, I'd like to know the advantage, if any, of a digital mic.
 
So you have no level control at all? That sounds problematic. That would also mean no limiter. And you of course have a preamp. The transducer has to get the signal into the A/D converter. Well I guess I shouldn't say must have mic level A/d ? Still zero control, that would bother me but maybe I'm just too old school.

The Nagra SD has only 1/8" mic in and no digital in. So to use it with the mic you suggest he would also need some kind of a mixer/ adapter. I couldn't find a price for one in the US. Assuming the 600 GBP is the same here that's around $1,000. That would make it pretty pricy for basically Nagra's version of the H4n (with out mic ins). Now it's Nagra so it is I'm sure built like a tank and probably sounds very good but I don't think it fits what the OP is wanting to do very well.

To the OP, see we get right into preferences and opinions! I would rather have a box like the PMD-671 or the Tascam HD-P2 for around the same bucks, or the Tascam 680 for less. I personally didn't like the Edirol boxes when I had a chance to play with them but some people swear by them so YMMV.
At your price point I would stay away from hand held recorders and the funky weird ones. You actually have enough money to get something that you can use with out having to squint at tiny menus and futz with tiny buttons. Your going to be using it under stress so get something that doesn't add to that stress.

Buttons/switches that you can reach into the bag and hit with out having to look too close and big clear displays that let you know what's going on are big pluses. Long battery life is another.

Sound quality certainly comes into it but really at given price points the boxes are pretty similar and in the ~$1,000 range and up there aren't any really bad choices in terms of quality, that I know of.

There are two things that cloud a lot of judgments that you should be aware of. First all of us to some extend will defend our choices, so it's really hard to get any unbiased opinions. It doesn't make them invalid but keep in mind that what so and so loves or hates may be because they own or chose not to own that box. Their reasons probably wont be yours.

Second a lot of high quality mic preamps sound different. They are all really good but their particular choices give them all a slightly different "sound". Different people are attracted to different sounds. So you will find people who just LOVE the SD preamps, or even just some of them. I have a friend who really likes the MixPre but finds the 702 "sterile". So when you look at things like noise and frequency response everybody in the same price range is pretty much in the same ball park. But you will get strong opinions about what preamp is superior and what box sounds so much better than XXX.
Also as I pointed out in another thread there are different qualities of noise. All these devices have some noise, it's the nature of analog electronics. So they all have some form of "noise shaping' that goes on. Two units can have the same noise spec and one you find noticeable and the other not. This tends to show up most in microphones but it is also true of mixers and recorders. As far as I have been able to tell peoples opinions more influenced by personal preferences than by actual realities.

So again it's important to get your hands on the box ahead of time and get a feel for it. Rent one, borrow one, if you have a relationship with a professional dealer they may let you try out a loaner.
 
Last edited:
There hasn't been much mention of a mixer....don't know why since this is the most basic equipment for quality work. At the $2500 price point, you will have some compromises to make, and need to decide what types of mics you need. Given your budget, I would advise against any mic that would take over half your budget in lieu of several mics. IMHO a mixer and a cheapo recorder is better than a more expensive recorder without a mixer. The cheapo recorders have their flaws, but consider the type of work you mentioned; parties and short narrative with a handycam. For that type of use, the audio quality of a cheapo recorder will be fine, especially with a mixer in front. When recording to cam, you can use the mixer to great advantage allowing better control and superior limiters. In my case, I mount a SD302 to my tripod, but the new Mixpre can be mounted to your cam baseplate. If you buy a CS3e for $1300, that's great, but what about suspension and a blimp? That could put you north of $1700 minimum. Do you need a lav or wireless? You asked for a list, so here is mine:

$750 SD Mixpre new edition
$300 DR100 Recorder
$600 NTG-2 with Rode Blimp (includes suspension)
$175 Basic K-tek aluminum boom pole
$ 80 Headphones
$675 AT4053b w/ baby ball gag and shock mount

Note: The NTG-2 has been reported to have good sound but low output. This is a non-issue with a mixer. (I have different shotguns).

This already puts you over $2500 without luggage, cables or misc.

If you had a bit more money:
Swap the NTG-2 for a NTG-3, add $350 for a very nice improvement.

Add or substitute a Senn G3 wireless kit for $600-$800.
Another thought for parties is a dynamic interview mic like a RE50 ($175) and the plug-on option for the G3. This will also work with a phantom NTG-2 since it self powered = wireless shotgun.

If you knew that only the one mic, like a CS3e, could do all your work, you could consider going with that, but I would still want a mixer.

Grant
 
davefisk said:
Do you have a link to this? I'd like to read it. In all my experience, I've only ever used the Neumann Solution D mic that came out back in 2001 to record body impact sounds for some fight scenes for a movie I was working on. At the time, I didn't know much about the mic, and didn't see what all the fuss was about, but that was one of the first digital mics that came out (if I remember correctly, I could be wrong). Things could have changed a lot since then. Basically, I'd like to know the advantage, if any, of a digital mic.
Click to expand...

PM sent.

You can purchase the papers from the AES Library - I am not allowed to put them on-line.

Actually, the first digital studio mic. was from Beyer, but the Neumann D-01 was the first AES42 mic.

I explain it all in my papers.
 
Noiz2 said:
So you have no level control at all? That sounds problematic. That would also mean no limiter. And you of course have a preamp. The transducer has to get the signal into the A/D converter. Well I guess I shouldn't say must have mic level A/d ? Still zero control, that would bother me but maybe I'm just too old school.
Click to expand...

Yes you have level control, but it does not matter as you get an ideal translation from the ADC. Yes, there is a built-in limiter. In most AES42 mics it's the capsule + FET and that's about all. The Sennheiser MKH 8000 series takes normal mic. out directly into the ADC. There are also built-in filters and equalisers. I talk about it all in my paper - but, yes, it is a totally different thing to get your head around and it took me a while. I thought "nothing special" before I started looking into it in detail and now I don't like to use analogue mics.



Noiz2 said:
The Nagra SD has only 1/8" mic in and no digital in. So to use it with the mic you suggest he would also need some kind of a mixer/ adapter.
Click to expand...

The SD uses plug-in microphones that secure very well to the body. There is a standard adaptor that plugs in instead of a mic. head that can take a mono or stereo mic.

No, no digital in - it's a half way point between the cheap pocket machines and a fully pro unit like the Nagra LB and the SD 702.
 
Tis true. The MixPre was one of the best investments I've made in sound. I had a good preamp at the time (Black Audio Devices - serial #5) but it took a slew of batteries. Anyway the MixPre is the front end of it's fourth recorder now.

I think the reason we left it off is that many of the better recorders have pretty decent mic pres and you save a box and $750. I personally wouldn't go for any scenario that left me with a handheld recorder. The pain factor is just too high. But you could get a Tascam 680 or a PMD671 for $800 or so. I used a NTG-2 once and was very pleasantly surprised. I expected a noisy thin sound and it was neither. I even had to use it indoors, OK it was a bedroom so not too bouncy, and it was a lot better than I expected.

You could also save a bit with an Oktava as the hyper. And you can put the hyper in the Rode zeppelin. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the mount slides up to allow short mics to get into the right location. You will have to live with a BIG zep on a little mic but that shouldn't be a problem most of the time. In either case you should be able to take the zep off and still use the shock mount. Again that may be a problem with the Rode zep but it shouldn't be.
 
FWIW, I recently purchased a 680 and am very pleased with it. I have a DR100 also, and frankly, with a mixer in front, I don't think I could tell the difference in audio quality. Maybe my ears are bad. I felt like I wanted the 680 for bag use and to give me more channel options. Probably more sophisticated ears could tell the difference, but for what the OP stated as his purpose, I think a cheapo recorder would work fine (with mixer in front). In a post futher up, someone mentioned the poor display quality of the DR100, but in fact, the DR100 display is every bit as good if not better than the 680 IHHO, and the menu options work much the same way.

Grant
 
Thanks for the help so far.

Talked with some guys at B&H today. Basically, they confirmed that I could get maximum performance from a mic by getting a mixer and going Mic -> Mixer -> Camera rather than Mic -> 4ch recorder with replaced preamps, but that the modified Oade Brother's Edirol R-44 (which i mentioned in the first post) would give me more or less the same quality plus 2 extra channels (since it has pots for every channel, it's like a mixer.) I'm unsure about limiters and stuff though. How are they in the R-44 compared to a MixPre?

I would love if someone could answer the question: Can an Oade Edirol R-44 with modified preamps replace the need of a mixer so I don't need to get a bunch of boxes or hook up to the camera?

Also, the guy praised the Rode NTG3, saying that it's a MKH 416 killer at a cheaper price and that people basically stopped buying the ME 66 after the NTG3 came out. So if you guys give me thumbs up it seems like a great choice.
 
Mandrean

The advice I suggested for recording to cam was to use a mixer if possible, which is a real improvement over going without. And for simple projects, like interviews, recording to cam is a viable option. But I would never suggest that any audio, recorded to cam, will be as good as using most any phantom - xlr equipped recorder, especially something approaching the professional level.

With regard to how you configure your kit on a budget; this is better answered by what type of projects you shoot rather than saying "I'll get 7.5% better sound with this box so I have to buy this box", because your kit needs to be versatile.

The NTG-3 is indeed a good sounding mic, and for me has delivered good value. Though, I can't compare to the higher end products.

Grant
 
mandrean said:
Also, the guy praised the Rode NTG3, saying that it's a MKH 416 killer at a cheaper price and that people basically stopped buying the ME 66 after the NTG3 came out. So if you guys give me thumbs up it seems like a great choice.
Click to expand...

The NTG3 is certainly not an MKH 416 killer - but I would say it certainly gets close at a lower price.
 
ggrantly said:
Mandrean

The advice I suggested for recording to cam was to use a mixer if possible, which is a real improvement over going without. And for simple projects, like interviews, recording to cam is a viable option. But I would never suggest that any audio, recorded to cam, will be as good as using most any phantom - xlr equipped recorder, especially something approaching the professional level.

With regard to how you configure your kit on a budget; this is better answered by what type of projects you shoot rather than saying "I'll get 7.5% better sound with this box so I have to buy this box", because your kit needs to be versatile.

The NTG-3 is indeed a good sounding mic, and for me has delivered good value. Though, I can't compare to the higher end products.

Grant
Click to expand...
Thanks. I feel that I wanna know which one of these is the better option: Mic->SD MixPre-D->Camera, or Mic->Oade Edirol R-44. If the Oade Edirol R-44 is actually, you know, a pretty decent recorder/mixer combo unit I might just go with that and future-proof my self with 4ch. Note that the Oade version supposedly, according to some forum members, is like a totally different product because of the modified better preamps.

John Willett said:
The NTG3 is certainly not an MKH 416 killer - but I would say it certainly gets close at a lower price.
Click to expand...
Good to know. Thanks.
 
"Thanks. I feel that I wanna know which one of these is the better option: Mic->SD MixPre-D->Camera, or Mic->Oade Edirol R-44. If the Oade Edirol R-44 is actually, you know, a pretty decent recorder/mixer combo unit I might just go with that and future-proof my self with 4ch. Note that the Oade version supposedly, according to some forum members, is like a totally different product because of the modified better preamps."

My point was two things really and it relates to how you want to shoot, which will decide which option is better:

If you know you will be recording all your audio to a recorder, then maybe buying the best box would be fine if it has enough gain and good control for field mixing. Does the R-44 have tape out or line out? Do you always want to sycn up your audio in post?

If you intend to record to cam, and can work a mixer into the plan, it will be a big improvement over not having a mixer. A mixer will always bring versatility to your kit.

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