It's true that I'm relatively inexperienced.

That doesn't matter. The setup I have (and I've been using it) works well for what I need it to. I'm good with the primary setup. I'm stellar with it. My problem is that for that primary audio, I've got multiple points of failure: The Lav, the Wireless, the Camera, the tape.

I want the H2 as a backup because it's a single device with a single point of failure. I don't think that's going to complicate things much at all.

Here's what I've got now.
http://img239.imageshack.us/img239/320/beforeyl4.png

Here's what I hope to have.
http://img106.imageshack.us/img106/1804/afterik9.png

Yes, it's one more piece of equipment I have to have working.

Keep in mind, the backup recording is exactly that. A backup incase the mic fails, the wireless fails, the camera fails or the tape fails. If all goes well, I should NEVER have to deal with it. Not once. But things don't always go well...

And I might as well get something that's got a good sound quality to it.

I'm getting too much of a hiss on the Olympus WS-300M, I think, which is why I was considering upgrading to the H2... here's a good sound sample.

http://www.audiotranskription.de/eng...ws-series.html

If there's any way to fix this in post, I'll just go with the Olympus.

I think a point that you're overlooking is that in this context a true backup recording needs to have all of the quality of the primary recording. Should the you need to use the backup to cover a glitch, you should be able to cut from the primary over to it and back again completely seamlessly, with no noticable difference in sound quality whatsoever. With a very few fine-arts exceptions where the real subject of the film is the film-making process, the techniques used should be totally invisible to the audience. If the backup recording is noticably different from the primary, cutting between them causes the process to intrude into the the audience's consciousness, bringing them out of the film's perceived reality that you have carefully crafted and snapping them back into their personal reality. That's the last thing you want to happen when someone is watching your video.

Maybe I should just get a second camera.

There's also another reason why I think I should get a second audio recorder.

The plan is to record on the lav mic, but the wireless system I have does pick up some interference from cellphones. You have to be -close- to the cellphone for it to happen, but I haven't figured out the right settings to avoid it.

I have the shotgun to back it up on the other channel, but there's two options there I really don't like.

I could mount it directly on the camera, but then it's not as close to the subject as I'd like it to be, it's more likely to pick up tape hiss, etc. If I move it closer to the subject via a boom pole, I'm increasing the length of the 1/8th input. I suppose I could get an XLR shotgun and an XLR boompole and an XLR converter, so that cabling's not as much of an issue but even then it'll still be a little bit of an issue.

On the other hand, with a portable audio device like the H2, I can just plug the shotgun directly into the H2, and my sound engineer - if I have one - can move to wherever the sound needs to be.

Did some tests with the WS-300M by the way - it picks up too much hiss and I'm not sure it's got good levels for the shotgun microphone.

Then again, I probably should just go ahead and upgrade to the Rode Videomic.

Sorry for being snippy.

As I said, I'm probably going to get the H2...

Unfortunately there's no combination of settings that will fix the cellphone issue. It's just the nature of the beast that if the phone is powered on, it "phones home" every few minutes and the only real solution is to insure all cellphones on the set are shut off - not just set for silent ring but actually powered down completely.

Since you're thinking of a wireless on your subject they must not object to being wired. How about using a hard-wired lav instead?

I'll also point out that this issue is not a matter of settings or what level of wireless (consumer, prosumer, pro) gear you have. It happens with every piece of wireless I've ever worked with including my Zaxcom TRX900 and Lectrosonic 411a units.

I personally like the wireless route over the wired lav, but that's because most people that I've done interviews with weren't glued to a chair and tended to act more naturally without a cable tethering them to the mixer/camera. However, in all cases where I use wireless in interviews I also still use a boom and place the boom in one channel on the camera and the wireless on the other channel. This may or may not work depending on the situation. But it does give you two separate channels to use in post.

Wayne

Oh, yeah, I'm just including the wireless in case for some reason the subject wants to walk around the room... you know what? I think you're right on this. I'll get the audio to tape, use the wired lav.

Just really nervous. I'm very afraid something is going to go terribly, terribly wrong. :(

More recorder suggestions :-)
 

I just went through the same decision process. Both of the minimum candidates I found cost more than $225.

The two recorders I finally settled on were:
Zoom H4
Edirol R09

I bought the H4, because it has 2 XLR connectors. The sound quality is excellent with my wired, phantom powered, Sony Lav mic.

The only problem I have with the H4 is the tiny, hard to read LCD and relatively convoluted user interface. I spent an evening setting it up for my recording needs, and now all I do is hook up the lav mic and press record.

I think if I were going to do it again, I'd wait, save the $$ and go for a Marantz 6xx field recorder.

Hope this helps.