C100: Impressive Audio!

[Seth Bloombaum]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

...i did another video, this time using the same wireless lav, but plugged into the 3.5mm port instead of XLR. didn't change any settings, and the different in tonal quality is vastly different. i'll have to go in and see what settings there might be to cause this, or different preamps for the xlr vs 3.5mm...

The 3.5mm version sure sounds as if trimming the receiver's audio output down would help. Hard to be sure, but it sounds like the camera input is overloaded, constantly on the verge of nasty overmodulation.

Is it possible that the 3.5mm version video had some autogain setting enabled on the camera? I'm hearing the dialog almost overmodulated, followed by pumping aka breathing that might occur with some sort of dynamics processing like autogain, limiter, or compressor enabled.

[Darren Levine]

you're probably right. can check on it at some point later on

[Darren Levine]

you know what, i just checked and it does look like a solid case of user error. prior to doing that video i was seeing if any laptop mics would work and i was jacking up the levels, and the mic Attenuation was on, so that would make perfect sense the dynamics of that audio. will do my next video with proper levels.

[Matt Davis]

Okay, so I re-ran my 'One hen, two ducks' test today, recording onto the C100 straight, onto my PIX220 with its wonderful mic pre-amps, and direct into the Roland UA-25 USB Audio interface, and measured everything up in Adobe Audition CS6. I haven't touched the 3.5mm jack yet.

Immediate conclusion is that, yes, the mic pre-amps in the C100 are very good. Better than the FS100 to my ears, and close to the PIX220 (though lacking that last bit of oomph on the lower frequencies).

I tried my Neumann TLM103, which belts out such a signal we're not really testing mic-pres, but provides a rich tonality. That was fine in comparison to the Pix and UA-25. Next I tried the COS-11, which has a far lower level. Again, no haunting discrepancies between the C100 and the PIX220/UA-25 - a little thinner, a little extra noise, but nothing like the difference between the PIX and the FS100.

I tried the limiter and wound up levels to give it a workout. It wasn't quite as natural or as unburstable as the Pix, but as always, it's a rubber sheet in case of accidents. You don't really want it there, but if there's a chance it might be needed...

I'd post up the movie or make the sound tests available for download, but really - it would be a very boring movie. Just a voice droning on about Macedonian oysters on rollerskates over and over again.

So, well done Canon.

[Andy Wilkinson]

Excellent info about the C100 pre-amps being pretty damn good - this confirms my intial impressions too, with a much shorter/less impressive XLR mic/gear list. I think much better than the audio pre-amps on my Sony EX3 :-)

Thanks Matt!

[Darren Levine]

another sample, this one was rec'd with a mk66

Canon C100 production shot, eos standard profile, tungsten light, iso850 on Vimeo

[Philip Lipetz]

All of these tests merely show that the C100 audio is better than DSLR audio, but then none of them are a direct A-B test with the incredible results you get using an external mixer. try it and be amazed. While the C100 is good it really shines when used with a mixer. All of my work that is not run and gun is now done through a Mixpre D. You have listen with good headphones, but even through in camera playback you will hear a difference.

[Darren Levine]

i don't quite see the point of that, phillip...

either you have the ability to have a mixer on set or you don't, i don't think anyone is suggesting that any camera's built in mini dials or other functions are better than a proper mixer's.

the only point to this thread or any thread discussing built in anything audio related is whether it works well as a standalone, not as a replacement for any external recorder and/or mixer which usually and should come with their own operator.

Internal sound is useful for run and gun, 1 man operator, or any other situation that simply does not merit extra devices. it's practically always implied that if the situation and budget merit it, you're going to have external audio of some kind.

the consensus it would seem is that the c100/300's internal audio is as good and possibly better than most any other high end camera's built in audio, and that's all you can really take away from this, because no one is going to tell you that any camera's built in audio trumps a proper external mixer/recorder/audioguy

so my point is that you're right, but it isn't really relevant :)

[Matt Davis]

Originally Posted by Philip Lipetz

All of these tests merely show that the C100 audio is better than DSLR audio, but then none of them are a direct A-B test with the incredible results you get using an external mixer. try it and be amazed. While the C100 is good it really shines when used with a mixer.

Philip, I am with you on this - right up until the point I reached this morning, where I shoved a COS-11 and a TLM-103 up the audio-hole of my C100.

https://soundcloud.com/mdmatv/one-he...00-tlm103-into

So this shows how, given a nice strong signal (like the use of the Sound Devices preamp), the Canon takes it as read and is uncoloured. Unlike the use of a pre-amp, note that both mic recordings are uncoloured, so the Mic input is fairly neutral.

Now lets get tougher with a real-world microphone - the COS-11.

https://soundcloud.com/mdmatv/cos-11-tests-mixdown

I warned you! It's not the most exciting listen. Just to say that, unlike the FS100, the C100 can do decent audio given a nice mic at a good level.

https://soundcloud.com/mdmatv/one-hen-one-c100-final

[Philip Lipetz]

Originally Posted by Darren Levine

i don't quite see the point of that, phillip...

either you have the ability to have a mixer on set or you don't, i don't think anyone is suggesting that any camera's built in mini dials or other functions are better than a proper mixer's.

the only point to this thread or any thread discussing built in anything audio related is whether it works well as a standalone, not as a replacement for any external recorder and/or mixer which usually and should come with their own operator.

Internal sound is useful for run and gun, 1 man operator, or any other situation that simply does not merit extra devices. it's practically always implied that if the situation and budget merit it, you're going to have external audio of some kind.

the consensus it would seem is that the c100/300's internal audio is as good and possibly better than most any other high end camera's built in audio, and that's all you can really take away from this, because no one is going to tell you that any camera's built in audio trumps a proper external mixer/recorder/audioguy

so my point is that you're right, but it isn't really relevant :)

What I ahve not made sufficiently clear is that the Mixpre D can be mounted below the C100 and then you also replace the handle with a XLR to 3.5mm input direct to the stripped C100 body. Very compact, not much more in weight and much better sound. And I can have WFM and audio VU at same time. This is not a separate mixer but an attached mixer extension.

[Richard Gooderick]

That's very interesting Philip
I have a SD302 mixer. I am surprised to note from the Sound Devices website that while the Mixpre D is a lot smaller it is not much lighter ie

SD302
Weight:
0.85 kg, (1.8 lbs) unpackaged with three alkaline AA batteries
Dimensions:
47 mm x 214 mm x 114 mm (H x W x D), 1.8" x 8.4" x 4.5"

Mixpre D
Weight:
0.7 kg, 1.5 lbs with batteries
Dimensions:
43 mm x 94 mm x 140 mm (h x w x d), (1.7" x 3.7" x 5.5")

Would be interesting to see how you have mounted your Mixpre.
Any chance of a photo?

[Lee Mullen]

I love the audio on the C300, so crisp and rich.

[Philip Lipetz]

In Europe, will try to post pics of the Mixpre D + C100 rig ASAP/

[Richard Gooderick]

Many thanks. Absolutely no rush.

[Richard Gooderick]

Hi Philip
I didn't want to put you under any pressure. But I don't want to sound ungrateful either :-)
If you could find time to post a photo when you have stopped travelling I would appreciate it very much.