Richard Crowley
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
https://ktekpro.com/ would be first on my list of boom pole vendors. They make a wide variety of very nice products at sensible prices. I have one of their poles with internal cable and I much prefer it to the primitive way of doing business.
There are basically three ways of having the boom operator hear what they are doing.
1) Use a local monitor amplifier like the Rolls PM55 or, if you have deeper pockets and more up-scale tastes, the SoundDevices MP-1. And there are likely other similar options.
2) As you mention, you can use a “split” off of the mixer’s headphone monitor.
3) If you are “broadcasting” production audio (as on a “ComTek” system or equivalent), then the boom operator could listen on that source.However, the problem with (2) and (3) are that the boom operator won’t necessarily hear the result of their own microphone positioning, but may hear more of the mix which could be confusing and misleading. IMHO (1) is prefered.
Yes there are a few kinds of “boom cradle” which can hold the pole when not being used. For example:
https://ktekpro.com/products/audio/audio-accessories/boom-cradle/
https://www.filmtools.com/ikan-audio-boom-cradle-mount.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=boom%20cradleThere are dozens of choices for mic cable. As with most things you must make a trade-off decision for flexibility vs. durability. I have made all my own cables now for almost 50 years. I buy cable and connectors from https://www.redco.com. They also offer a custom service where you can select which cable, which connectors, and the desired length and they will make your cable for a modest charge. 25-30 ft is pretty short for some of us. All my cables are 50 or 100 ft. And I regularly have mic cable runs of 100s of ft.
-
” the signal is (technically) better on the System 10 since it is a true 48Khz transmission.”
There is no basis of fact in that statement. In fact the original decision between 48K and 44.1K was partly technical (because of the capabilities of consumer-grade low-pass filters back 40 years ago), and partly political. But clearly a 48K sample rate sounds more impressive if you are simply looking at numbers. Bigger is always better, isn’t it?
-
All of the modern digital systems use VERY similar technology. Because of the wide proliferation of Cellular, WiFi and Bluetooth devices by the 100s of millions, the 900MHz and 2.4GHz technology is well established and dirt-cheap. All of the microphone makers are jumping onto this next-generation digital bandwagon
IMHO, you are putting FAR more stock in the 48 vs 44 sample rate than it warrants. I would bet you $100 that you absolutely could not tell the difference between the same signal at 44.1K vs 48K sample rate. None of the microphones that come with ANY wireless mic produce frequencies high enough for you to detect any difference even with sophisticated test equipment. It is absolutely a non-issue.
Directional microphones like the Shure WL185 are very handy for rejecting noise like reinforcement system feedback, etc. But the downside is that they are much more critical for orientation. Since it sounds like reinforcement isn’t an issue, the directional pickup pattern is more of a liability than an advantage. If the actor turns their head too far, they are out of the sensitivity pattern and will give you level-shifting problems in editing. That is why people typically prefer to use omni-directional lav microphones unless they are fighting reinforcement feedback, etc.
-
The sample frequency of the transmitter/receiver system will have no discernible affect on the quality of the audio signal. The choice of 44.1K sampling rate for the Rode is of no significance in deciding between the two systems. Since the audio is delivered out of the receiver as analog, there is no issue with the video recording at 48K. The quality of the microphone is infinitely more important than the sampling rate of the TX/RX system.
Never judge the quality of ANY microphone from a YouTube “review”. Almost NONE of them are valid and meaningful IME. Most of them are a waste of time at best, and downright misleading at worst.
The AudioTechnica System 10 is barely a year or two older than the RodeLink product. I would not characterize ANY 2.4GHz system as “fairly old”. In fact they are all quite new and we don’t have any long-term performance reports from the field how 2.4GHz systems are performing in the Real World.
The microphone that comes with a wireless system is typically NOT a higher-quality model. The most effective upgrade you can do to ANY wireless system is to replace the “starter” default mic with a proper high-quality mic.
The camera-mount receiver is far more flexible as you can use it for both on-camera, portable use, AND for fixed-position. An XLR cable is a few dollars, but that big “fixed” receiver is completely impractical for portable use. There are no “issues” from using an XLR cable for either portable or fixed use-cases.
IME, the camera-mount receiver can be powered from the charger during operation.
The 2.4GHz systems seem to be the wave of the future since all of the traditional frequencies are being taken over by more profitable wireless services. It is still too early to tell how well the 2.4GHz systems will operate, especially in situations where lots of people are using WiFi, Bluetooth, etc. And remember that you shouldn’t expect them to operate within 1-2m of a microwave oven (which also uses 2.4GHz)
HOWEVER, buying an older traditional system is also a gamble that the authorities won’t take over the frequency band and render your gear obsolete. That is one advantage of 2.4GHz. It is quite safe well into the future and it is usable anywhere on the planet without worrying about local laws, etc.
No, I don’t think that ANY kind of clip-on mic and body-pack transmitter is safe for use by amateurs for the kind of physical contact and gymnastic activities shown in the BFGFBattles videos. At least the “Yoga” example. If one of the actors lands on the transmitter, it could do considerable damage to the transmitter AND/or the actor.
-
Will the signal from a dynamic micrphone work with the typical mic input of a computer? Yes, usually. It may not have great performance, though.
The mic preamp in a computer (ANY computer) is among the worst you will ever find. Only the mic preamp in a child’s toy or a cell phone is worse than the mic preamp built into a computer. That mic input was designed for simple communication (Skype, etc.) not for any kind of quality audio recording.
Furthermore, most computer mic preamps are designed to be used with electret condenser mics. So they are expecting a “hotter” signal than you would typically get from a low-end dynamic mic.
If you really want to use that microphone directly into a computer USB input, then get one of those “cables” which have a mic preamp and digital converter built into the cable. They have a female XLR at one end for the microphone, and a type-A USB plug on the other end to your computer.
There are many of these down around $15 which do NOT have phantom power. That is all you would need for your dynamic mic. THere are also several >$50 which include phantom power for use with condendser mics. In addition to generating phantom power, they are likely also higher quality than the $15 kind.
Examples:
https://www.amazon.com/HDE-Female-Cable-Instruments-Microphones/dp/B0050CEEIW
https://www.amazon.com/Blue-Microphones-Icicle-Converter-Preamp/dp/B001EW5YQSThere are probably dozens of other examples. No endorsement is to be infered from these examples. Although the brand names like “Blue” are probably a better bet than the no-name things.
-
That mic is rather the Shure equivalent of the venerable Electrovoice 635A microphone. One of the most popular hand-held “interview” mics is the Electrovoice RE50. But the RE50 is nothing but a 635A wrapped in foam and stuffed into a larger outer “shell”.
You could conceivably take a length of pipe at least 3/4 inch larger ID (inside diameter) than the microphone OD (outside diameter). Wrap your VP64L with foam just thick enough to keep it from falling out of the pipe. That will provide something of a “shock mount” to decouple the microphone handle from noise generated by the user’s hand.
-
A few years ago in some online forum a producer told about how he used a dozen cheap, tiny, one-piece voice recorders on participants in an informal round-table discussion of radioactive salt reactor technology. He just stuck one in each participant’s shirt pocket and let them run for the evening. He arranged for some acoustic event (hand-clap, etc.) as a “sync point” just before the discussion/dinner. I thought it was a brilliant way of using inexpensive modern technology.
For example here is one the size of a USB thumb drive with 150 hours of recording time. At <$10 (including shipping) they are practically disposable.
-
If it is making a hum or buzz even when nothing is moving, that strongly suggests that there is a problem with the electronic circuit inside the projector. It is quite common for equipment that old to have electrolytic capacitors which have dried out and lost their ability to do their job. Likely the largest electrolytic capacitor in your projector is the one that filters the power supply.
Hearing a hum/buzz like that strongly suggests that the main filter capacitor has dried up. Electrically, it is a rather simple repair, but mechanically, it may be somewhat challenging to get inside to replace the component. Any competent electronic repair resource could likely fix it rather quickly.
-
A fault like that which affects multiple circuits often turns out to be a power issue. Perhaps there is a faulty connection where the power is provided to the display circuits.
-
The Rode mic is a pretty good value for the price. And it is a generation (or two) newer technology design than the Sennheiser. But of course Sennheiser is no slouch. Either are quite nice.
It is curious, though, why you are using a shotgun mic for what seems to be a “locked-down” shot. It sounds like you my not be using the ideal type of mic (or deployment) for the job.