Rodney Morris
Forum Replies Created
-
I’ve not used the 286A yet. I should give it a listen sometime.
I used the 528 in my previous job quite frequently. I felt that the 528 was the complete channel strip because it also included an EQ section. Also, you can use any section of the strip (EQ, compression, de-esser) as stand-alone components due to the in/out connections on the rear of the unit.
Good review Ty.
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
Bob, I didn’t intend to turn this post into an argument. I tend to think of things in terms of absolutes. To me, omni-directional means that its pickup pattern allows for all frequencies to be reproduced equally and accurately from all axes. So it’s impossible to have a tighter pickup pattern on an omni-directional without it becoming either a different polar pattern or a less sensitive omni. To me, it’s similar to asking whether or not there are more oval shaped circles. If they are oval shaped, then they can’t be circles.
In practice, however, few mics have perfect omni-directional qualities across the entire frequency range. While they might be perfect omnis at say 5KHz, they may be less sensitive at other frequencies.
You are absolutely correct that some mics sound more “open” than others. I own (and use) the Sanken COS-11 and Tram TR-50 mics. I think the TR-50 sounds more “present” and therefore slightly more “closed” compared to the COS-11, due to it’s frequency response. The Tram, as you know, has a presence boost starting around 4K and peaking around 9K. The COS-11 has a slightly flatter frequency response compared to the Tram.
In your situation with the blaring PA in the background, an omni lav is simply the wrong mic for the situation, thus my suggestion of a cardioid lav. You can also go in tight (from underneath) with a shotgun. It will isolate the subject a bit better, but it’s not a pretty sound. I know, because I used to be in that exact situation quite frequently in my previous staff job. We were a roving crew and were gathering soundbites from concert audiences. We didn’t have time to wire someone up with a lav, so the videographer would shoot tight and I would bring the shotgun (Sennheiser MKH-60) in very close and underneath. In that situation, it’s impossible to get good sound so you go for the most usable.
All the best to you Bob.
Rodney
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
Good question Min. If SD has hard time with this one, then I’m not sure I’ll be much help. But I’ll offer a couple of suggestions.
If you’re not using the TA3 outputs on the side of 702T, then you could take that output, which I’m assuming would be a TA3 to 2 XLR adapter, then use a simple “Y” XLR (2 female XLR to 1 male XLR) and plug that into channel 1 of the 302, line level of course. Repeat this for the other 702 and feed that into channel 2 of the 302. Now you can monitor both recorders at once. And you don’t have to worry about impedance issues, which you would if you used the tape output of the 702T, which is an unbalanced output. Of course this all assumes that you have the TA3 output cables and that they aren’t being used.
Let me know if this helps.
Rodney
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
I prefer the Symetrix 528E Voice Processor for live voice over processing. It’s a bit more expensive ($500), but you can get a very good sound with it, even with something as inexpensive as an SM57. 48V-Comp/Exp-DeEsser-EQ all in one box – 2 thumbs up!
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
There is no such animal as an omni with a tighter pattern. There may be less sensitive omni lavs, but that won’t help. What you need is a cardioid lavalier, such as the Sennheiser ME 104. Sony makes some decent cardioid lavs as well, though they’re not my faves. A stick mic, such as the EV RE50 would be a great choice for that situation if you don’t mind seeing the mic. Also the countryman headworn mics are a great choice, again if you don’t mind seeing the mic.
Rodney
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
Absolutely, but I would still want someone operating the board, ie: someone mixing. For us, the video feed is a “set it and forget it” type proposition (for the most part). If you have someone at the monitor console who is mixing for video, they could also be available to make mix changes for the monitor feeds. Typically, a monitor console uses the aux sends for the monitor feeds. Your auxes could be set as pre-fade sends, thus freeing the faders (and busses) to be used to mix and feed for video.
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
Use the smallest round table you can find!
Only 2 mics for eight people – yikes. You might be better off just using one omni directional mic in the middle of the table, assuming that it’s a quiet room and a small table. You could use 2 Shure SM57’s, but you’d need to be very conscious of mic placement.
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
Obtaining a feed from the FOH console rarely fits the bill. You should think of splitting the audio from the stage and have a separate mixer (board and person) just for the video feed. We use a FOH board feed at my church to feed the video system and it sounds awful half the time. However my church has neither the money nor the manpower to implement my above suggestion, which I’ve made to them on numerous occasions.
Rodney
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
BTW – the Zoom H4 has 2 XLR inputs, phantom power and 0 latency at the headphone jack. Plus it’s only $270. But if you do get one, I would suggest you spend LOTS of time familiarizing yourself with the recorder before you go out on a shoot with it. I find it’s interface to be a bit confusing – even something as simple as setting record levels is a multi-step menu dive.
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer
-
Well, you know what they say: “Sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good.”
Of course, they also say: “Luck favors the prepared.”
I’ll just say: “I’m glad it worked out for you.”
Freelance Sound Technician/Mixer