Audio OR Field mixer

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

Yes it does and I don't use them because they are unbalanced..


Also, unbalanced line level often means consummer line level of -10 dB. Dunno, haven't bothered fuguring out what the RCA inputs are.

Well, the X2 is a pro-consumer camera. It didn't have standard XLR inputs until recently, only if you bought an add-on.

That's why I singled out pro cameras on my comment.

I haven't had so bad luck with line level unbalanced lines though, RCA or whatever. Just can't stand 1/8" sockets.

[Ty Ford]

Um, the XL2 has had XLRs since it first came out.
I have friends in Pro shops who replaced their MII gear with Canon XL2 cameras for corporate industrial work.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

Um, the XL2 has had XLRs since it first came out.

You might be right on that one. But I still think you would get best results by using an external mixer on it and going in through the XL2 line inputs, even unbalanced.

[Kundal Saab]

Whoa! I wish I knew what you guys were talking about :-/

I thought most cameras had both Line & Mic... although its quite possible I don't even know what those are.

Anyway, I do think I need 4 channels, which the SD MixPre doesn't have. I'm assuming that with the ENG-44 I can mix 4 mics down to 2 channels?

I think ENG-44 is the way to go, when I upgrade my mics I can get the SD302. Since I don't even know what SD 302 can do that the ENG-44 can't do, I think its a safe option for me.

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Kundal Saab

Whoa! I wish I knew what you guys were talking about :-/

If you stay in this, in time you will know.

I thought most cameras had both Line & Mic... although its quite possible I don't even know what those are.

Most pro cameras will have mic & line input. Consumer usually just mic input. Mic inputs are more sensitive, but easily overloaded if the preamp is not too well designed. Line inputs are less sensitive, and are the inputs where you will preferably plug your mixer to, if you have them.

Then there are balanced and unbalanced connections. The former are better, noise free and allow long cable runs. In pro cameras and some pro-sumer they are used for mic inputs. Unbalanced inputs demand shorter cable runs and are the standard on most consumer cameras.

To know more about that you should really go into some audio recording books.

Anyway, I do think I need 4 channels, which the SD MixPre doesn't have. I'm assuming that with the ENG-44 I can mix 4 mics down to 2 channels?

Yes, it will, as most portable 4 input mixers do.

I think ENG-44 is the way to go, when I upgrade my mics I can get the SD302. Since I don't even know what SD 302 can do that the ENG-44 can't do, I think its a safe option for me.

You will spend less, particularly if you need 4 inputs. Later on you can get a 302 or a 442. But you should spend your money in better mics before that.

[Jim Boda]

Originally Posted by Kundal Saab

...Anyway, I do think I need 4 channels, which the SD MixPre doesn't have. I'm assuming that with the ENG-44 I can mix 4 mics down to 2 channels?

I think ENG-44 is the way to go, when I upgrade my mics I can get the SD302. Since I don't even know what SD 302 can do that the ENG-44 can't do, I think its a safe option for me.

Yes, you have 4 inputs...your 2 lavs, Boom, & handheld can all get mixed to Left, Right, or Center. I like to boom the dickens out of everything so you can isolate the Boom mic to the the Left or Right channel and then mix the lavs on the other channel. If your doing all lavs, you can isolate the host or main mic to Left and mix the rest to the Right. If your not able to ride the levels, then you can separate the channels in order to create distance between lavs...so that you have less opportunity for phase cancelization w/ the omni lavs.

Both mixers sound good and that is the bottom line. The 302 gives you more control over panning, limiting, gain, metering, low cut filter, monitoring, phase reversal...just an overall better design and easier to adjust. It's also much easier to Market.

The 44 has some advantages w/ the extra channel, soft limiting, longer battery life, light weight, low cost... but, you really need to setup the gain properly in order to not over-use the soft limiter.

[Ty Ford]

There's a big difference between the ENG-44 and a 302. Oddly, the difference is proportional to the price.

:)

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Kundal Saab]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

There's a big difference between the ENG-44 and a 302. Oddly, the difference is proportional to the price.

:)

Regards,

Ty Ford

Yep, that's the way it is with everything, eh? Thanks for all the info folks, appreciate it.

k

[Jim Boda]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

There's a big difference between the ENG-44 and a 302. Oddly, the difference is proportional to the price.

:)

Regards,

Ty Ford

That is an odd thing isn't it? I should add that the difference that you can actually hear...with the Poster's current set of mics... would not be equal to that $700 price differential. That stinking law of diminishing returns keeps kicking in.

[Vasi Hasan]

Originally Posted by Jim Boda

That is an odd thing isn't it? I should add that the difference that you can actually hear...with the Poster's current set of mics... would not be equal to that $700 price differential. That stinking law of diminishing returns keeps kicking in.

Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing actually... I'm pretty much in the same boat as Kundal.... I was wondering if I should get better mics first and THEN get a better field mixer (the SD 302 for example) or get the SD 302 first and get better mics later when I have the money?

Which ones comes first? Better mics or better mixer?

Vasi.

[Jim Boda]

Originally Posted by Vasi Hasan

Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing actually... I'm pretty much in the same boat as Kundal.... I was wondering if I should get better mics first and THEN get a better field mixer (the SD 302 for example) or get the SD 302 first and get better mics later when I have the money?

Which ones comes first? Better mics or better mixer?

Vasi.

Now that would be a good test:

Which system would perform and sound better?

1) SD 442, ME66/K6 Boom, ME 2 lav

2) ENG-44, Schoeps CMIT5U, COS 11 lav

[Glenn Chan]

Which system would perform and sound better?

1) SD 442, ME66/K6 Boom, ME 2 lav

2) ENG-44, Schoeps CMIT5U, COS 11 lav

I don't have particularly golden ears, but I'm not a big fan of the ME-66 as other mics sound noticeably better than it. In some situations, even the on-board mics on the DVX100 will sound better if both are picking up a lot of reverb (this is for a ME-66 mounted on a camera; obviously moving it closer helps a lot). Shotguns can sound weird indoors, and the ME-66 makes this worse.

The Sennheiser 416 definitely sounds better than the ME-66... though if you're on a budget, others mics like the AT4073 may give comparable results.

IMO the mixer doesn't make that a huge difference in your sound, though I've found the Sound Devices stuff to be very well thought out (convenient /saves a small amount of time / slightly less screwups). It's more important to get the mic close, pick quiet locations or make the location quieter, use the right mic for the application, etc.

[Ty Ford]

Glenn,

I'm with you on the 66. THE SANKEN CS3E is also a versatile shotgun.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Oleg Kaizerman]

if you can live with 3 channels i can suggest you 302 with audio technica
4073 , mbho 603+500 -hyper cardioid and sanken coss 11
thats -2900usd
if you need aditional inputs you can add mix pre -700(incl cable to mix bus)

the sign video 44 is one of the worst i ever checked , the schoeps shotgun is the waist of your money as in 95% .

you will be better with sanken cs-3 outside and with good hyper inside
me 66 is also something that i will ever touch for quality dialog ( especially to work between the walls)