Large diaphragm mics for documentary shoot?
 

Hey guys, I could really use your experience/expertise.

I'm about to shoot a documentary, and intend to use two ECM77B lavalier microphones, and a Rode NT3 for the indoor/booming situations.

My question is this, I'm considering not using the NT3 and suggesting that we rent an Audio Technica 4053 or, obviously the superior Schoeps CMC641 (ideal).

However, my friend already owns a bunch of great studio mics, and I'm not sure if we should be trying to use those...Is there a downside to consider?

I assumed they would be heavier, since they are physically larger, but they don't really seem to be any heavier than the NT3 I have (though even that is a tad heavy).

I read in another thread that they may not have as much reach, but if we're booming above the subject, wouldn't it be okay? I guess the only concern is that they would be terrible for on-camera mounting, but you could say that's worse for any mic.

The specific mics in question would be the AKG414 or the AKGC451 EB.

Now, I know that cardioid wouldn't be the best pattern and that if we're shooting indoors a hypercardioid would be more practical....however, I'd like to stay away from that aspect of it for now, and just evaluate the pros/cons of these types of mics outside the studio (since we all agree they're great for VO/dubbing mostly).

Size, weight, lack of reach, and lack of directionality all say those studio mics would be a poor choice for location dialog. And have you actually put the NT3 in a shock mount out on the end of a 12 foot lever arm and tried to hold it over your head by the other end of the boom, keeping the boom horizontal and the mic precisely aimed for, say, 5 minutes to 10 minutes, without letting the mic dip or sway? (Booming for dialog is not a static mic stand with a horizontal arm.) If your arms are capable of that over and over through the workday I want you on MY side whenever I have to venture down a dark Toronto alley :)

use the right tool for the job. if you studio pal has some mic's he uses for drum overheads such as senn K184, SCX-1, even a Oktava 012, or AT something pencil condenser, it will all work ok.if you got the bux, CMC641. Big studio mics are way too heavy for boom polling. They are made for close micing. That said, I did do a shot with a big studio condenser, but it was right in the shot as _part_ of the shot. looked cool so I got away with it just fine. don't think thats your case.

Steve Oakley

I second all of what's been mentioned.

Large diaphram condensers need pretty close sound sources. Generally no more than a maximum of 2' distance. Bass response on these mics rolls off quickly. You could certainly use any mic and get a signal but the warm rich sound a good quality large diaphram condenser would give used in it's typical application will not be apparent when boomed above and away from your source. It will sound thin and noisy picking up much of the environment at the same level as your source signal.

And heavy.....fugetabuotit.

I would have said even closer that that for good speech recording. With a typical 1" side-address cardioid studio mic I think somewhere around 6" to 8" from the mouth as the starting point for spoken word and singing. 2 feet would be suitable for micing instruments like saxophones, etc.

You contradicted yourself. If "we all agree" they're for VO/dubbing then why are we even having this discussion?

If you're really dead set on using these mics then go ahead. Then post about what happened.

Bad mics for capturing dialog on a set.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Agreed. Would also like to see a still of your sound op with the AKG414 hanging off the end of a boom pole.

Yes, closer is better particularly with voice. I probably overstated the range a bit. Considering you typically have a pop filter in front of a large diaphram condenser about 3 or 4 inches off the mic, and the talent is very close again to that pop filter, the range is in that 6-8" range more often than not.