Rode Videomic - Live Band - Settings

[Jon Fairhurst]

$500/mo for transportation? Ouch. And the time cost on the road. Double ouch.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

$500/mo for transportation? Ouch. And the time cost on the road. Double ouch.

Yep, I'm usually on the road by 06:00 and getting home about 18:00 - 18:30. And that $500 is just operating cost, doesn't include the car itself, repair & maintenance, or insurance.

[Stelios Christofides]

I have the Stereo VideoMic Pro and use it with my Canon 60D. What setting do you use in live bands?

stelios

[Rick Reineke]

"I have the Stereo VideoMic Pro and use it with my Canon 60D. What setting do you use in live bands?"
Analogy: I have a automobile with 5-speed transmission, what setting do you use for hills?

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Stelios Christofides

I have the Stereo VideoMic Pro and use it with my Canon 60D. What setting do you use in live bands?

stelios

There is no such thing as a "setting for live bands" or any other type of gig. It all depends on the band, the music, the venue, your mic position, etc. The only way to set it up properly is to do a "dress rehearsal" sound check for each shoot and experiment.

[Sabyasachi Patra]

Originally Posted by Steve House

Whether its paid or a hobby, there's pride in craftsmanship.

What the client expects of you should be less important than what you ought to expect of yourself and I believe that one's personal standards should be to never deliver a job that is in any way less than the very best your skills are able to produce. If that means you have to spend a couple of bucks in order to gear up to do it right, then that's what you do.

I think this is a phenomenal lesson. Money will come, however, the moment one compromises, the first person to know is your conscience.

[Lucas Cheadle]

I have to chime in because I video live bands all the time. That earlier comment about a camera mounted mic being not good is odd. Camera audio, either built-in mic or shotgun, is essential especially when using syncing software like PluralEyes. You will never go wrong by having great camera audio...even if it will never get into the final edit.
My experience:
Camera will never give you good live band audio.
Being tethered to a properly placed mic on a stand is impractical... unless your camera is on sticks.
Your best bet at good sound is a field recorder. I use a Zoom H4n. You can get a feed from the PA board AND record with the built-in stereo mics. Set up your recorder next to the board. After you get that method dialed in you can get SPECTACULAR audio of bands. If you don't have a Zoom or the like ask the sound guy if he can record a CD off the board.
This is all applicable to capturing an over-all ensemble performance, a complete song,
the big picture.

[Paul R Johnson]

I quite agree, mixer left and right plus room stereo will give you something solid to work with - much depends on your relationship with the person doing the mix - some will be responsive, others a total pain in the bum.

I did love the gas price comment. Here in the UK at the moment, it is $2.25 a litre!

[John Nantz]

This is a great thread. "Audio" is a GREAT subject matter section!

The past week I was in travel status and when I returned this week I started putting together my camera and mic rig (kit? Still trying to learn the proper terms for everything.)

The kit (rig?) I've been trying to put together is something that I can use for making a video on a SAILboat. Read: it's breezy and windy most of the time. The second problem is there will be NO sound man onboard (Captain's rule). Also, there will be NO sound female on board (Admiral's rule!). Only one Captain and one Admiral will be on board.

The third problem is this is only a 35-foot boat so it's not very big and the cockpit is small. There is NO room to move around, or at least not much. No place to set up a tripod. So, How to do this?

Last month I picked up a Rycote Windshield with a Windjammer for the mic to deal with wind noise. This week I found a Stroboframe bracket that seemed stout enough to support the Windshield. Put together a home-made adapter plate and placed the Windshield on top, attached it to a quick-release, bolted everything to the Stroboframe bracket, mounted the camera, hooked up the wires, and voila! Whew! As of last night I had a camera and mic that I can use on the boat. I was Soooo Happy!!!

Well, maybe except for one thing. The sailing season is over and it'll be next year before I can try it out. Other than that, I can admire the rig.

Today I was playing catch-up on the posts here and came across one that rained on my parade. Talk about popping your bubble!

Originally Posted by Richard Crowley

NOTE: Mounted ON TOP of the camera is virtually NEVER EVER the right place for ANY microphone. An extension cable is only a few $/₤/€ and it will have one of the biggest cost/benefit ratios of anything you have acquired this month.

Richard: What's a (poor) guy to do? A cable is not an option. Lavalier? This is on my radar but even a cheap one is pretty pricy but I'm still looking but for "used."

Camera and mic rig:


Home made adapter plate:
Note:
Home-made adapter plate made from a piece of fairly heavy framing metal bought for $2 from Home Depot. Put this together yesterday. The fasteners are temporary until I can get something more professional looking and hopefully spray-paint the metal with black paint. After all, this needs to look really professional, right? The coiled pigtail is not shown.

The quick-release plate is a Manfrotto 3270 that came with the Stroboframe bracket when I bought it used.

The Rycote Windshield as a unit can be easily installed or removed with one hand thanks to the quick-release plate.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by John Nantz

...
Today I was playing catch-up on the posts here and came across one that rained on my parade. Talk about popping your bubble!
....
Richard: What's a (poor) guy to do? A cable is not an option. Lavalier? This is on my radar but even a cheap one is pretty pricy but I'm still looking but for "used."

...

The problem is one of physics and unfortunately Mother Nature is indifferent to one's budget and staffing limitations. While there are lenses that magnify distant images, there are few equivalents in the microphone world for distant sounds and none that would be practical to mount on a camera. By their nature mics are close working devices and the best place to position a mic for optimum sound capture is almost never the best place to position the camera for pleasing pictures. A short shotgun needs to be within no more than about 24 inches of the speaker's mouth - less if possible - for capturing normal level spoken dialog and a face shot with the camera that close often results in a distorted image with a bulbous nose a la Wallace Beery, Karl Maulden, or Jimmy Durante. The mic also needs to be kept aimed within a relatively tight circle surrounding the mouth else the sound goes "off-mic" with a resulting loss of quality and that might not result in the framing you'd like for the picture if the mic and the camera are locked together and and move as a unit. With rare exceptions your options are to either get the mic off the camera and boom it into the proper operating position, hence the extension cable, or put a hard-wired lav on the subject with an extension cable to the camera, or put a wireless lav the subject to link back to a receiver at the camera. Mother Nature really doesn't give us many more options without compromising the quality of the sounds we record.

[John Nantz]

Thanks for your kind reply, Steve, and the good explanation.

Like we used to say at work, "If you don't want to hear the answer, don't ask the question." I pretty much knew what the "right answer" is but I guess I'm learning this the hard way.

Originally Posted by Steve House

The problem is one of physics and unfortunately Mother Nature is indifferent to one's budget and staffing limitations.

That is so true and I understand this.

Originally Posted by Steve House

A short shotgun needs to be within no more than about 24 inches of the speaker's mouth - less if possible - for capturing normal level spoken dialog... .

The physics part is understandable but I'm trying to do the best with what I've got. Sounds knda like a familiar refrain here, doesn't it?

Having said that, I'm also on the lookout for how I can improve the situation and a lavalier seems to be the only realistic next step but that's going to run several hundred dollars on the used market. A mid-level solution might be to have a small mic and a recorder on the subject and try and sync the audio in post but I've never done this before and dread even the thought of it. But something like a Tascam DR-40 can be had for a couple hundred bucks and would be nice to have in the audio toolbox for other purposes.

The Stroboframe can be adjusted vertically in very small increments but I don't have it set up to adjust horizontally. This is potentially possible but would take additional modification. 24"? I understand where Richard Crawley is coming from.

Originally Posted by Steve House

Mother Nature really doesn't give us many more options without compromising the quality of the sounds we record.

Compromise - the key word here. In the case where I want to record some music audio (instruments and vocalists), I'd want the minimum compromise possible. In this case, I'm much more open for less-than-perfect. The video and story-line, and let's not forget budget, is the most important so I'm open to a LOT of compromise but definitely not to the point of horrible.

Let's hope some good deal comes up in the next several months. One year it rained so much I didn't get out on the boat until July so I do have time on my side.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by John Nantz

...
Compromise - the key word here. In the case where I want to record some music audio (instruments and vocalists), I'd want the minimum compromise possible. In this case, I'm much more open for less-than-perfect. The video and story-line, and let's not forget budget, is the most important so I'm open to a LOT of compromise but definitely not to the point of horrible. ....

Don't forget, in most sorts of video program it's the audio that carries the story line - the pictures are visual aids that establish the locale where the story takes place and shows the audience the action. But most of the story and the mood is in the sound. Unless one is highly skilled in the art of the silent film, if compromise is necessary due to budget limitations it would be better to give up a little on the video side of things instead of the audio. (And even "silent films" weren't really silent - sound from musicians and FX artists in the theatres was a vital part of the audience experience. In fact, the term "sync license" applied to the use of music in a video soundtrack harks back to the days when music was performed live in sync with the action and mood of a projected film.) Try watching a TV show with the sound turned off then a similar show with the sound up but the picture dark. In which is it easier to follow the story? For many, many years radio dramas were very effective at telling the story effectively while using only sound to create the scene in the listeners' minds.

[John Nantz]

Steve: Okay. I give up. This rig cost me less than $2 to put together, plus a few hours of drilling holes, filing, and cutting, to put together. I've got probably a half-year until the weather clears enough around here to go sailing (and then it'll be cold) so I'll be working on a Plan B.

As for:

Originally Posted by Steve House

Don't forget, in most sorts of video program it's the audio that carries the story line - the pictures are visual aids that establish the locale where the story takes place and shows the audience the action. But most of the story and the mood is in the sound.

Maybe we should try to bring back the "If 2/3rds of good video is audio, how come there is only one Audio section?"

The old radio programs have not gone away entirely, in spite of so much TV. Our local Public Radio station has the "Lake Wobegone" program that has some audio stories with sound effects. Just looking at the number of viewers on this web site one can see that the Audio section consistently has more than any of the upper categories. I wonder if the management here will ever consent to some sub-sections but I'll have to say that probably "Only The Shadow Knows."

;-)

[Peter Riding]

John, I had a very similar Stroboframe - may even be the same model which I also endeavoured to pimp for shooting video. But in the end it was just too awkward to use in real life shooting despite it appearing to do the job when testing. Too difficult to handle and carry around, to put down safely, to hold steady when shooting etc. Shame because I really wanted it to work and to get some use out of the ancient and expensive Stroboframe.

You can get decent cages very cheaply now; thoroughly thought through and functional. Visit cheesycam.com for lots of on a budget tips. And through them the gearbox:

GearBox GB-2 - Video Accessory Cage w/ 15mm Rod Adapter by PNC | Photography and Cinema - Store

If you get the version with the attached rods it is very easy to put down safely. You can use risers such as Manfrotto style studs to made the handles taller if needs be. Use a collapsed / extended monopod for extra stability if required.

Your mic with wind protection would be difficult to accommodate on any heldheld rig but you could use a friction arm. They are readily available on Ebay in 7" and 11" version and with clamp and hotshoe versions e.g.

Variable Friction Power Magic Arm Kit (Short) For DSLR DV bh53 | eBay

Pete

[John Nantz]

Originally Posted by Peter Riding

John, I had a very similar Stroboframe - may even be the same model which I also endeavoured to pimp for shooting video. But in the end it was just too awkward to use in real life shooting despite it appearing to do the job when testing. Too difficult to handle and carry around, to put down safely, to hold steady when shooting etc. Shame because I really wanted it to work and to get some use out of the ancient and expensive Stroboframe.

Like your's, this rig I cobbled together is also a little awkward to handle. I haven't actually used it yet but just holding it, walking around the house, and showing it to my wife and explaining that this is what I want to film her with next summer on the boat, one thing I can say is, it isn't anything like handling the camera by itself.

On the other hand, I'm a bit of a loss for a better alternative. The Windshield I already had so there was no cost there. The Stroboframe I just bought and figured I could use it for something like maybe an on-camera light and there is room for a mic, too. Got this, with the little Manfrotto quick-release plate, for $70. There are other things I could use it for like maybe a monitor.

Making some video from a sailboat deck is going to be a challenge but I'm up to it. It's definitely going to be a challenge.

Originally Posted by Peter Riding

You can get decent cages very cheaply now; thoroughly thought through and functional. Visit cheesycam.com for lots of on a budget tips. And through them the gearbox:

That's a great looking setup! I really like it and I can see where it can be very stable to sit down. Your suggestions for attachments to elevate the attachments are excellent, too.

Originally Posted by Peter Riding

Your mic with wind protection would be difficult to accommodate on any heldheld rig but you could use a friction arm. They are readily available on Ebay in 7" and 11" version and with clamp and hotshoe versions e.g.

Yes, that Windjammer is definitely BIG. Currently, the way I have it mounted on the metal plate and the quick-release, it is surprisingly solid. This part really works well. Unfortunately, it didn't get any rave reviews. ;- ( The good news is I have several months to come up with alternatives.

Thanks very much for the feedback and the links.