Need good XLR adapter for your camera? Check this out...
 

If anyone is in need of a good, very affordable, quiet XLR adapter for their camera, like my FX1.
Then you may have interest in my latest Blog, posting on a quick review of a new XLR box on the market from Juicedlink.
It uses active pre amps that are very quiet and I do mean quiet.
Checkout the Blog.
http://lvptools.blogspot.com/2008/04...r-adapter.html

If it has a pre-amp, what's the difference between this and a field-mixer?

That's he point, it basically is a field mixer (especially the 4 channel one).
The difference is that it's in a much smaller form factor, so you can attach it to your camera(s), without the need for sling it over your shoulder like you would a field mixer. I am a one man band, and as such am very critical about my audio, but don't have the luxury of having a large video/audio setup due to work constrictions in my shooting.

Most videographers who own consumer/prosumer cameras (like my FX1) don't have the luxury of having built in XLRs. And as such, they might like the usefulness of having separate XLR inputs, as well as separate channel adjustability.

Most XLR adapters are passive and as such have a loud noise floor. Since this is an active unit having built in pre amps lowers the noise floor, making for a much quieter audio capture to tape. The only unit in the CX211/CX231s class right now would be the new Beachtek DXA6HD, which has built in limiters as well and plugs into the cameras 1/8 mic port and uses the camera "line in" port rather than the cameras "mic port", thus bypassing the noisy pre amps.

First thing is that the DXA6HD is much more expensive than the Juicedlink boxes, as well as not having as much adjustability, as far as channel recording goes.

Both boxes are very good though for someone who wants to expand their audio quality for im camera recording in a small attachable form factor.

Hello Michael,

In physics and electronics, passive devices don't really contribute noise other than Brownian (thermal) noise unless they are horribly designed or improperly used.

The contribution to noise floor to which you refer comes from bad active camera input circuitry. There is, of course, additional noise due to the fact that FX1 audio is not 16-bit, 48 kHz linear PCM, but MPEG1, layer 3 at 384 kbps; about 1/5 the data rate of 16-bit, 48 kHz linear PCM.

Using more sensitive mics is another way to reduce the noise floor and get better recordings because you don't need to rely as much on noisy, cheaply designed preamps.

For example, stick an AT 4073a Audio Technica shotgun in and compare it to almost any other camera mic and you'll hear less noise floor because the mic is a lot more sensitive than other shotguns.

Regards,

Ty Ford

...and have an attenuator on standby.

OK TY you got me on that one.
What I meant to say is that passive boxes won't lower the noise floor like an active box can with pre amps.

And while a good shotgun and wireless can help with enabling you to get louder recoding levels. You can't use two audio devices like 2 wireless units or shotgun and wireless simultaneously, if your camera doesn't have built in XLRs. That's where the need for a good XLR box to get the audio into your camera, like a Beachtek or Juicedlink box.

I know that you're not a fan of these devices, but there are those of us out there in the trenches who can't afford to have a sound tech running audio at live events like weddings and such.

Now when it comes to recitals and live shows and the like, that's a whole other ballgame. For me as I can wire my audio from different sources and have it fed into a unit like an Edirol R-44 recorder for 4 channel live audio. Then mix down in post.

But for run and gun events I need the best and most mobile all in one solution that I can. And that means on me to travel anywhere.

Hey Mike,

Sorry, I didn't mean to be mean. Please remember, I'm also a shooter/editor.

So you bought an FX1, A camcorder without XLR inputs. I gotta say I would not have made that choice. It put you in a box where you have to deal with adapter boxes.

Hey, I'm not in your shoes. I'm sure you spent a lot of time before buying. I did too. HDV was being sold when I bought the XL2. The main reasons I didn't buy HDV were the highly compressed video and MPEG audio. The main reason I bought the XL2 was professional video guys in Baltimore were buying and using them to do professional work.

Do people do pro work with HDV? Yes. If it works for you, that's great, really. We all have to make choices. Best of luck with the box.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Ty, no harm no foul. I'm pretty thick skinned. My response was mainly in regards for others who shoot alone (or only in pairs) and need a small compact setup like I use myself.

As for my choice in choosing the FX1's, this was entirely due to budget constraints. I wanted to get the best cameras that I could afford (I need 3 identical). And the FX1 was the best bang for the buck. I couldn't afford 3 Z1's and I did look into the Canon A1, and although I do shoot in "Manual" everything all of the time, the A1 was too customizable for me, that and I like the FX1 better in low light conditions.

So the trade off for me was on the audio end, XLR capability mainly which as you know can be compensated for in the form of a good XLR adapter box, if desired.

Also in regards to audio, I already have recorders and mics that I use for most if not all of my primary audio...
A Zoom H2 (only use for built in 4 channel audio mic recording or musicians during ceremony), and an Edirol R09 and Marantz PMD620 (I really like this little box), and just sold my Edirol R4 and am awaiting the arrival of the new Edirol R-44 for 4 channel recording.

What I ma thinking about doing in the near future is run everything into the R-44 either by wireless feed (during ceremony, wireless from groom, musicians and place on podium and miced for readings and such), then send that to my camera via wireless or hard wired, for monitoring purposes and backup audio. Then have a perfect mix to be used in post. And for reception use take stereo board feed (or double mic PA stack, in both horns) and take another stereo mic to get ambient audio crowd reaction, as well as send a wireless feed to my camera for sync backup audio. Then once again mix down in post.

As for the HDV codec, I conform all of my video to an I-Frame based codec either Cineform in Sony Vegas or DVCPRODH/ProRes in FCP.

Overall I'm trying to get all of my audio off of my camera if possible. But I also must say the new Edirol F-1 (SD/HDV audio recorder) looks mighty tempting to me now. Record SD or HDV audio to removable 120GB hard drives, and also have the ability to record 4 channels of audio, two to tape and 2 additional XLR 1/4 TRS ports to record an additional 2 channels of uncompressed audio. Pretty sweet little box, and a great idea by Edirol if you ask me.

Just got my Juicedlink CX231 (2ch, Phantom Power).

Awesome box. Way better than my Beachtek DXA-4.

Using an AT3031 with great results in MEDIUM gain. And good results with an AT897 in HIGH.

Funny thing is even though the AT897 isn't as hot as the AT3031 (in v/PA terms) the AT897 wields less noise when in high gain. Maybe because of its polar pattern?

Some pics of the setup:

http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?i...1000906sp3.jpg
http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?i...1000909jt1.jpg
http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?i...1000918ox0.jpg
http://img296.imageshack.us/my.php?i...1000919rc0.jpg