Bruce Watson
Forum Replies Created
-
[Ty Ford] “Odd. What I came up with for the Faulkner phased array included two parallel Figure of Eight mics, spaced and aimed at the sound source.”
Some call his AB eights “Faulkner phased array”. He also uses a different array using four mics with aligned capsules. He says he didn’t name either array, that other people apply names. This of course confuses people; at least it confuses me. It would be nice to have a uniform naming convention, but that’s probably asking a lot considering the vast number of microphone techniques in use every day. Just look at all the things people do under the name “Decca Tree” for example.
Faulkner’s post #9 from the above link is one place he’s posted about the names.
-
[Peter Robertson] “That sounds like a Faulkner phased array.”
It isn’t really. Faulkner describes it like this: “The second array consists of a wide stereo bar with omnis spaced at around 67cms, and a pair of directional mics in between them spaced at around 47cms apart (both sets with the mics angled outwards)…For these arrays I normally use Schoeps CCM series or Rode NT6 mics. When using the Schoeps I would use CCM2H omnis and CCM21 subcardioids. When using the Rodes I would use their regular omni capsules on the outside and their regular cardioids in between.” His full post is post #14 of this Gearslutz thread:
Faulkner’s writings and postings on the subject seem to be just this specific, and he doesn’t mention (that I know of) using anything in the middle besides his 47cm spaced sub-cards. So no XY, M/S, ORTF, etc. in the middle for Mr. Faulkner. Other people on Gearslutz do use all kinds of things as the middle pair and they get a wide range of results. But they don’t call what they are doing a Faulkner Phased Array for obvious reasons.
But this has little to do with your original question of using a second recorder for backup. If you use one recorder for one pair of mics, and another recorder for the second pair, you still don’t have redundancy. What you have, is a second point of view. If you do this with a Faulkner Phased Array, you’ve got something that’s suboptimal, since the placement of the array is suboptimal for either individual pair — by design. Faulkner’s intent is to use both pairs in the mix. If you loose one pair, you loose the mix.
If you’re going to use another recorder for backup, you should either use really good mic splitters, or you should use a backup mic array that’s optimally placed.
If you’re really serious about backup, you’d want to back up everything — that is, two mics at every mic placement, separate cables, separate stage boxes and snakes, separate mic preamps and AD, separate recorders. But who is really willing to double their equipment costs and more than double their setup and tear down costs for backup purposes? The only time this would seriously matter is during live broadcasts, and this is the time that they won’t let you do it, because of the visuals. So… it’s very seldom done.
-
[Ty Ford] “…nailing it to their head keeps them from having to think about how close to work a hand held.”
It does indeed. And this is an important point, well worth reiterating.
I brought up handhelds because some clients like that visual better than the earsets and they are ubiquitous on TV. Viewers hardly register them anymore; big and clunky as they are they fade toward invisibility when used well. When used badly though… your story proves that point.
-
[phil sheldon] “I will be filming some interviews in fairly noisy laboratories and would like a recommendation for a lavalier mic that will cut out as much surrounding noise as possible.”
If you’re inexperienced with lavs, stick with omnis. Even if you’re pretty experienced with lavs, stick with omnis. Why? Because using a cardioid lav requires that you fully train your “talent” on how to use it. If you don’t, you’ll regret it the first time they turn their head and take their mouth out of pattern. You’ll spend inordinate amounts of time in post trying to recover what is basically unrecoverable. You’ll also have to deal with proximity effect, which you’ll learn about the first time they dip their chin toward their chest while talking. Again, unless your time is free this isn’t something you want to be trying to fix in post. And the real problem here is that the client is going to blame you for the poor sound. Doesn’t matter if the talent didn’t follow your instructions, you’re still the sound person, and it’s still your responsibility. And this is why I don’t even own a cardioid lavalier.
If you’ve got a situation where an omni lav is insufficient, you might want to consider the head worn “earset” mics (like the Countryman E-6 that Ty referenced) that put the mic right at the corner of the mouth. Again, use an omni. But if you feel you’ve just gotta have a cardioid, an earset card will probably work for ya since it will maintain it’s orientation and distance to the mouth as the head turns. IOW, you don’t really have to train the talent how to use a cardioid earset mic. But you’ve got an amazing noise problem if you need a cardioid earset mic. Just sayin’.
If you don’t want an earset mic, consider a good reporter’s “stick mic” like the Electro-Voice RE50N/D-B. Hold this 10cm from the mouth and you can get excellent audio capture on a crowded and hyper-noisy trade show floor (I’ve done it many times myself, and seen video from trade show floors made using the RE50 mics countless times). And since it’s an omni (there’s a theme here…) you don’t have to train the talent very much how to use it.
-
[Nicholas Dean] “We do a lot of outside audio and other field work. I got approval for a new pair of headphones and am having trouble finding the right pair.”
There are a couple of “standards” for dialog recording. One is the Sony MDR-7506. Another is the Sennheiser HD 25-sp II. There are of course others, but these seem to give the professional dialog recordists what they want.
-
[Tom Smith] “Are there any systems that will sync straight to the camera to get good sound?”
Syncing sound to picture is a pretty easy and simple process. Hollywood has been using a clapper board (clapper sticks, slate, etc.) for decades for this purpose. We’ve now got software like plural eyes that can automate much of the process in your NLE.
That said, if you really want to record sound via the camera, Beachtek has some XLR interfaces that feed the camera’s mic-in, and if you want better there’s always the Sound Devices MixPre-D (field mixer, not a recorder). It has excellent limiters, excellent preamps, and a specific output for DSLR cameras (unbalanced mic-level out). It even has a bracket for attaching it underneath your camera to make mixer and camera and single unit.
If you want a mixer/recorder from SD, there’s always the SD 633 (way more money). And you can always go the full on recorder, with something like the new Zoom F8 (more inputs than you need, but that’s how it comes), or the somewhat higher quality (but way more expensive) SD recorders up to and including the SD 788T. Not to mention recorders from Marantz (PMD 661 mk2), Edirol/Roland (R-44), Tascam (DR-680), Fostex (FR-2 LE), and many many more.
The problem with recording in the camera with a DSLR is that typically the DSLR’s are optimized for picture (that’s what they are selling). Audio is an afterthought, which almost always means cheap chips and automation you can’t turn off (think automatic gain control). None of the stand alone recorders have these problems as their only purpose is to record audio.
Finally, I own and use a MixPre-D and the Schoeps mics. First rate products.
-
[Ty Ford] “The Sanken CS3e LOOKS like a shotgun, but it is decidedly not a shotgun. (Sorry Bruce)
A shotgun has the mic element at the bottom of the interference tube. That’s the long tube with slots on the side.
The CS3e has the mic element at the tip of the mic and behind it are two other capsules that are under the slotted tube portion of the body. It uses the signal from the side capsules in its attempt to narrow the pattern. It’s sort of a Franken-Mic.”
My bad, I believe you. In my defense (if that’s possible) I was rushed and took B&H’s description:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/406096-REG/Sanken_CS_3E_CS_3E_Short_Shotgun_Microphone.html
at face value. Didn’t take the time to actually read up on it, and I’ve never used one. All the discussions I’ve read over the years, most everyone calls it a shotgun mic, and people tend to use it like a shotgun mic (for exterior booming).
That said, I don’t think the rest of what I wrote was too far off.
-
The Sanken cs3e is a shotgun mic. The Schoeps CMC6-mk41 is a hypercardioid. You can’t easily compare them; it’s like apples and oranges.
People tend to default to hypers for interior work, especially if that work is in existing buildings (as opposed to purpose built sound stages). Hypers tend to perform better in the face of rapid first reflections. That is, when you are close to walls and/or ceilings, which is quite likely in rooms with “standard” 8′ ceilings. Using shotgun mics in the same interiors can be problematic because of the way shotgun mics use interference tubes — the rapid first reflections off the nearby surfaces interfere with the direct sound from the speaker’s mouth resulting in comb filtering artifacts. IOW, it sounds pretty bad, and can’t be fixed in post.
People tend to default to shotguns for exterior work, especially if that work is away from reflective surfaces such as building walls. This is where shotgun mics shine.
Given that you’re using JuicedLink electronics and recording to a DSLR, you aren’t getting Hollywood level sound anyway. IOW, your two mic choices are overkill, the rest of your system isn’t up to that level of performance. You could upgrade to a low end recorder like the Tascam DR60mkII, or the DR70. This would improve the level of recording and let you hear more of what these mics can really do, for not much money. Alternately, you could look at mics like the AT4053b or the Audix SCX1-HC (both hypercardioids) which are favorites of the indy movie crowd for interior dialog work. You could then perhaps find a used Sennheiser MKH 416 shotgun for exteriors, also a favorite of the indy movie crowd.
But if you really really really want just the one mic, and I have to choose between the two you’ve offered, I pick the Schoeps mk41.
-
[Todd Schmidt] “Thanks, I need to figure out how to use this thing. Not really sure how to change the blocks. I understand what it means to change the blocks, just don’t know how. I do see that my G3 operates in the 600 MHz range, and the G2 plug I was given is in the 500mhz, at least that’s where it’s set on. So I’m guessing if I change a block, I’ll be able to fine a 600mhz range?”
You can’t change the blocks (frequency range). Sennheiser sets blocks at the factory.
If you have an A transmitter, you have to have an A receiver to go with it, similarly B works with B, and G with G. Can’t mix blocks. How to tell which block a device uses? Read the labels on the devices.
Then you have to pick an individual frequency within the block, and set both transmitter and receiver to that exact same frequency.
-
They will work together, as long as the plug-on transmitter and the receiver operate in the same frequency block (in the US, A, B, or G) and are tuned to the same frequency in that block.