Wireless on a boom pole?

N

nyvideo

Active member
The other evening I was watching a show on TV where there was a brief "backstage" view. There was a guy holding a very long boom pole across his torso to pick up sound from a actress or a model. A device just above the mic on the end of the pole looked like a wireless transmitter. Is it possible that someone would use a wireless rig on a boom pole? If so, would it be to reduce weight?
 
most of transmitter have no way to monitor sound, so it the boompole guy is working "blind".
you can also use a transmitter plugged into a splitter that give a mic output and headphone monitoring.
in that case all the heavy part are usually on the belt of the boompole guy, so no additional weight.
 
Great responses. I’ve a lot to learn.

I can see that much of the information about audio and picking the right gear to go with the job is so true. For a live event with lots of noise and activity, going with a shotgun and a wireless transmitter on the long pole (It looked like it could have been 20 feet or more.) was the way to go.

On a quiet set where nuance in an actor’s voice is so important, a different rig would probably have been used.

No wonder there’s apparently no end to the gear that filmmakers, audio guys, and videographers desire. Another item to add to the old “You can never be too…” adage. :)

Thanks for the informative answers.
 
I've used an internally-coiled K-Tek pole with the Sennheiser plug-on transmitter, it makes it possible to visually monitor the audio to some degree, and added weight is close at hand instead of dangling on the far end.
 
Simple: boom operator can have his own reciever to monitor his mic. It is perfectly possible to have an unlimited number of recievers listening one channel.
 
I think the only transmitter that can be remotely adjusted is made by Zaxcom. That's the ultimate high-end. In general the levels need to be set with great care and foresight. If not you'll get distorted signals. In an ideal world wireless booms shouldn't be necessary because there would be enough time to cable up everything. But on a fast paced TV series set it's often the only way for the sound department to keep up with the others.
 
Yea, I know that's the simple way. But, with the varying levels coming from the boom, I would think the best gain staging would occur but being able to adjust the level before it hits the transmitter. I know sometimes when I'm swinging a boom, I don't have time to grab the gain knob and have to simply move the mic further away from the talent. Since I wear my bag when booming, and have the PSC Alphamix which gives me a remote fader for my pole, I've gotten used to being able to adjust both input trim and level to the recorder as needed during the take. I'm sure having a separate person on location mixer takes care of most of these problems. I guess I'm also used to be able to see the meters, to know when I'm hitting either the input or the output at too high a level, neither of when can be done by using a second receiver for boom monitoring.

Maybe I'm just being a bit anal about being in control of the level coming from the boom and how hard I'm hitting the input to whatever device is being used to send the signal downstream.

Petrus said:
Simple: boom operator can have his own reciever to monitor his mic. It is perfectly possible to have an unlimited number of recievers listening one channel.
Click to expand...
 
gpforet said:
Yea, I know that's the simple way. But, with the varying levels coming from the boom, I would think the best gain staging would occur but being able to adjust the level before it hits the transmitter.
Click to expand...

Well, you asked about monitoring, not gain riding...
 
i've done quite a bit of wireless boom. i use a sound devices MM1 to phantom power my mic, that also has a headphone jack and XLR out, which i plug my transmitter into. works great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top