Good wireless lav solutions

[Ty Ford]

Don makes good points. The actual size of the diaphragm comes into play. The larger the diaphragm, usually the more sensitive the mic.

Smaller ones may sound better, but have more hiss. If the ambient noise is high enough, you'll be OK. If not, you will hear the hiss if the tracks are bare.

There's also something about how a particular lav mates with a particular transmitter. Lots of gray area here, but it's true.


Regards,

Ty Ford

[Brett Sherman]

Originally Posted by Dean Sensui

If you're willing to invest a few hundred more, you can get Audio Technica's ATW-1821 for about $1300. It will provide two wireless systems with a pair of body packs and a diversity receiver that will reduce dropouts to almost zero.

I have an ATW 100 and plan to replace it with a G3. I love my ATW 100 and I can't remember the last time it dropped out. A G2 I was using dropped rarely, but occasionally. I'm hoping the G3 is more robust.

The main reason I'm going with Sennhesier is the smaller receiver for mounting on the hotshoe of an EX1 camera. Also I want a plug-on with phantom power. With Sennhesier I can get the SKP 2000 and have a wireless shotgun.

[Colin McDonald]

I've found the G2s to be extremely reliable, both indoors and outside, even in theatres with 10+ channels of stage mics and other radio stuff present. I found it hard to believe they weren't diversity at first. G3s should be rock solid (or as near as you get with wireless).

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

.... Also I want a plug-on with phantom power. With Sennhesier I can get the SKP 2000 and have a wireless shotgun.

Not a bad idea but don't forget the boom operator needs to hear the mic in order to keep it positioned properly. With a plug-on tranmitter on the mic itself, he can't do that. Perhaps a better solution for wireless booming is a headphone amp/mic preamp such as a Sound Devices MM-1 worn on the op's belt and whose output is connected to the line input of a beltpack transmitter he also wears. The MM-1 supplies phantom so the transmitter actually doesn't need to. Of course, if you plan to use a stick mic from time to time, having a plug-on available that does supply phantom will increase your flexibility and the number of mic options you have to work with.

[Paul R Johnson]

The size of the diaphragm makes a difference, but in practical terms, all condensers are more sensitive than dynamics. I have yet to find a condenser microphone at any price point that has any form of noise issue in normal useage. Noise in a microphone chain that includes a radio link invariably comes from RF issues. The reduction in signal to noise that results from poor signal strength is the prime culprit for noisy mic channels. Some cheap input stages on cameras or audio mixers are a little noisy, especially in quiet locations when the auto gain kicks in. The small omni mics found on cheaper radio systems are made from commonly available electret condenser elements that cost just a few dollars/pounds and I've never found any of these to be noticably noisy.

There is no doubt that moving from say a ME2 to a MKE2 will result in better sound, but these differences are not the kind that hit you in the face. Clarity and tone get better, handling noise seems to reduce. Better ones also have a smoother frequency response, especially at the top end - perhaps more important for live use with a PA, where feedback control is more predictable.

For video work, where the recording environment is often flawed, there is a limit to the value in having expensive microphones when the actual audio is compromised before you start. I can think of plenty of occasions I've used a $50 lav mic rather than a $500 one and not heard the difference. However, in a controlled, acoustically nice room, the expensive one has fine detail that the other won't have.

I used to do live TV here in the UK and we did one regular programme from a converted scenery store, next to one of the big studios. From time to time we needed extra kit which was hired in to suit the show, and in the sound suite the audio quality of the various mics could be clearly heard. The expensive Countryman mics were actually more difficult - they clearly picked up a low level rumble from the air con, while the cheaper Audio technicas on the hired in kit didn't. We rolled off the low end on the desk on the Countrymans to get rid of the rumble - and once done, I don't think the difference was worth talking about.

[Brett Sherman]

Originally Posted by Steve House

Not a bad idea but don't forget the boom operator needs to hear the mic in order to keep it positioned properly. With a plug-on tranmitter on the mic itself, he can't do that. Perhaps a better solution for wireless booming is a headphone amp/mic preamp such as a Sound Devices MM-1 worn on the op's belt

Yeah that would be ideal, but would require a crew of three. Camera, sound and interviewer. These days I'm doing everything stripped down. So the interviewer usually holds the mic. Or sometimes I do all three roles.

I have a Shure headphone amp that doesn't phantom power which would work for a boom operator in that rare situation I have a sound person.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

Yeah that would be ideal, but would require a crew of three. Camera, sound and interviewer. These days I'm doing everything stripped down. So the interviewer usually holds the mic. Or sometimes I do all three roles.

I have a Shure headphone amp that doesn't phantom power which would work for a boom operator in that rare situation I have a sound person.

Surely you don't mean you're using a shotgun as a handheld mic in the hands of an interviewer or you are trying to operate camera and boom by yourself? If the interviewer is holding the mic, a reporter's stick mic such as an EV 635 or RE-50 or a Sennheiser MD46 is a much better option than a typical boom mic - less handling noise, etc - and as they are dynamic mics, no phantom is required.