Suggestions for basic field recording setup
 

Hello, my name is Bernardo Ortiz, first time on these forums and I’m glad to find such a great resource on field recording. :)
I come from the music studio background, wich I’ve been fading away for audio post for commercials, film and radio production. Now I want to expand my services towards field recording for the same markets.
I’ve been saving for a field recording setup and I need some pointers. Obviously I don’t have an unlimited budget, but I don’t want to skimp on solid audio gear either.
I’m looking for a flexible setup. This is what I have so far.

Boom mic & accesories:
I’m looking at a flexible setup that will allow me to work well in indoor/outdoors. I’m leaning towards the Sennheiser k6 module (battery/phantom) with 64, 66 and 67 capsules. 64 for indoors, 66 and 67 for outdoors. I already own some other small diaphragm condensers from my studio that could work well indoors too. Somewhere else I read the hypercardiod capsule works very well for indoors, would this be a better pick than the cardioid? I know it depends on the particular site, degree of isolation provided from the polar pattern, but wich one could be more usefull in general?
For this one I’m going to pick one of the packs at B&H with K6 and ME66, boom pole, rycote softie, rode sm3 shock mount, hand grip etc, and then get the capsules separately.
I’m also gettin the Rolls personal monitor for the boom op.

Field mixer: Sound Devices 302 seems like a no brainer. 3 inputs for 2 lavs, boom mic, nice pre’s, nice limiters, nice meters, tape return monitor, 2 pair of outputs, good for sending to recorder with backup to camera. Separate preamp gain/fader trim. Price is reasonable.

Field recorder: I’m debating between the sound devices 702T or the Tascam HD-P2. The SD is of course very nice, but maybe overkill regarding price, because I will be getting the 302 mixeras front end. Price is very attractive on the HD unit. Functionality seems the same on both give or take. Tascam’s can sync to SMPTE and video, wich is very handy. The thing I’m not still sure is if the HD can be fed line level signal trough the balanced XLR connectors. It is stated in the manual that the XLR inputs can accept mic or line level signals, so does the silk screen legend above the XLR inputs on the unit itself. However, I read on this same forum that a user switched to the SD because the XLR inputs couldn’t take line level. I’m clueless. Also I read somewhere SD is working on making their units write to external fw hard disks. Tascam should definitely look into this as well I hope.

Wireless/lavs: I’m debating between the sennheiser EW 100 or 500 series, or the Audio Technica ATW units. I know Lectro is the shizznit, but its price is out of my range and maybe overkill for my uses.
I’ve had very good experiences as references from sennheiser wireless units for stage use. Those were diversity units though. However, I’ve read mixed comments here and there from the EW 100 and. The AT is balanced XLR, but I don’t know a thing about AT, only that they make terrific mics for studio use (40xx large diaphragm series beign very familiar with). I’ve read good comments on them, but they chew 2 12 volt batteries.
The sennheiser is unbalanced on 3.5 mm, wich may be ok, since the receivers will be most of the time always near. The price is right on the 100 series.
I want 2 sets of trans/belt pack receiver and prolly a plugin. Here’s a question…I was looking into a pair of lavs. I was thinking either Tram 50 (due to its nice variety of mounting accessories), or the country man stuff. B&H has them wired for 3.5mm. My question is, what’s the deal with power supply for lav’s. Do they need phantom, like a regular mic? I bet if they’re condensers, but maybe they are electrect, so their capsules are kept polarized. Neither on the EW 100 or 500 series manual, not on the ATW, regarding the beltpack transmitters, there’s no mention that lav’s require phantom, so can I assume the transmitter already supply’s some sort of power already?

Regarding battery usage. On the long run, what would be the best way to power at least the recorder and mixer and recievers, without having to chew normal batteries?

Is there anything I’m missing in this basic kit.

Any comments are appreciated, thanks in advance :)

Hello Bernardo, and welcome.

Of course there are a lot of ways to spend more money, but I understand where you're coming from. Perhaps after you're making some money, you could upgrade - I think the first thing on your list to upgrade would be the K6 system. You'd probably be using the 302 for a long time...

If your line level is too hot, you can always use one or two inline xlr attenuators, available from 10-50db of loss. AT makes one that is switchable from 10 to 30db of loss. A true line-to-mike att. would be about 50db. The only instance I've had trouble with this is the (line) output of some Sony VTRs, which are hot, hot hot. (no, I don't have the HD-P2 or 702T, but have used the 744 which is great.)

Actually, they are balanced on a 3.5mm stereo plug. Sort of a mini TRS.

When you buy a lav for a beltpack trans. you need to buy the version that is set up for your transmitter, yes, the trans. supplies power to the cap. and all the pinouts are different. If B&H doesn't spec this, try the manufacturer's web site. I like Trams a lot, Countryman has a great rep but I've not used them other than the E6 earset which sounds great.

To really set up for field use, you'd want a portabrace or petrol bag that holds mixer, recorder, receivers, a battery system, and other accessories.

Typically a battery system is going to be 3-4 NP1-style batteries, a 2-4 bay charger, a custom "battery cup" to attach to the batt., a little distro box, and power cables to each device. Check out Remote Audio for bits and pieces, IDX for Lithium or NiMH batteries and chargers.

Seth, thanks a lot for replying

Is would you consider that there are better options than the k6 system for the price? Or is this last in the line between decent and seriously good?

Sounds like a good idea, but that would mean using the HD-P2's preamps to raise the gain to line level again....hmm haven't read much about the quality of the HD-P2's preamps. I tought the 302's output level could be adjusted down to mic level?
Now that you mention this..u got me thinking. I was planning on using the XLR outs on the 302 to feed the HD-P2, and the tape out in the 302 for camera, as a backup. I guess some cameras only have mic inputs?

Okie, good to know. B&H does have them wired specifically for the EW100 series.


Yup, I've tought that too. Any good suggestions? I was checking out one from SD made for the 302 mixer and 702 recorder wich I think could work well with the HD-P2 as well...


Ok, wrote that down too thanks a lot.

Re : field RecordingSetup
 

Berns
The Senn G2 Rad setup would be good for your app and budget but transmitter and receiver req 2 x AA batteriries so if left on chew thru the juice. As far as mixer goes the 302 should sufice . Lavs ... well the G2's come with them but if Budget warrants get Sanken Cos 11 s obviously don't need power as they are remote but are suprior mics . Will work well in MOST situations.
NTG 1 Rode Cardoic shotie with mount and windsock ( Koala ,also Aussie) should suffice for outdoor loc

Thanks a lot Mark. Have you tried the rode shotgun mics?
I own some of their studio mics, and like em, but don't know how the shotguns are working

I'll second that as long as you're getting a 302, you might as well get better mics than the K6 system. Lots of choices in the same price range. The K6 is a nice system, but it's really designed for people who don't have access to a mixer.

Berns...

"Wireless/lavs: I’m debating between the sennheiser EW 100 or 500 series, or the Audio Technica ATW units."

I've been using a pair of ATW-101 diversity wireless units since December and hadn't had a single dropout at ranges of 50 yards or less. Hadn't had to shoot anything further than that. Tests seem to indicate a working range up to 100 yards, line of sight. They're equipped with Countryman B3's.

Regarding the Tascam P2, a friend who is a recording engineer and composer had the chance to work with a pair of them recently. He said the performance was impressive. For background, he's recorded one of the world's best classical guitarists (who said it was among the best recordings ever done for him), as well as a number of other artists and, of course, his own works. So he's got a very discerning ear.

Dean Sensui: Thanks for the good nfo. How long a run do u get with batteries on the ATW series. I wonder Why would they need more power, (2 9 volts against 2 AA on the sennheiser's...Its nice to have a monitor out directly on the reciever and true diversity tough...I wish I could try before buying :S decisions...decisions...
About the HD-P2, I guess that's a very trusty point...

Marco, could you elaborate on other options for shotgun mics?

Mark, have u used the EW100 G2 Series personally...I would like to know your comments about them..

Sorry for all the questions fellas, but beign here, its hard for me to try this any of this stuff before I buy. Its even hard to find most of this gear here.

Berns...

I run the two receivers off a single 12-volt pack made up of 10 AA NiMH batteries, and they're good for at least 5 hours. The transmitters are now being run on rechargeable 9v Li polymer batteries that seem good for 5.5 hours. Maybe 6. Swapping batteries is a fast procedure. Maybe 30 seconds each.

The diversity receivers have two receiver circuits in them, which is probably the reason for the additional power draw.

As for other wireless mics, I know of someone who uses a wireless system that has 1/8" TRS connectors, like the type you find commonly used for headphone plugs, and he has bad connection problems every single time. I keep reminding him to get those units serviced or replaced. But he insists he wants to keep them because they have a long battery life. For me, I don't care if a wireless unit runs for three days -- if it keeps having dropouts and connector crackles, I'd rather use something else.

Prior to the AT's, I had pair of Lectrosonic 185's. Good fidelity. But prone to interference and dropouts. It was a rare day that I didn't get at least one static burst along the way.

With the AT's the only better signal I got was through a wire... until someone tripped over it. :-)

Here's a good review of three inexpensive shotguns (Azden, Audio-Technical, Sennheiser.) http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage...tgun_mics.html

I've used the AT815b (longer brother of the AT835b reviewed above). My application was recording dialog during an end-user interview and product evaluation. We put the mic just our of the peripheral vision of the subject, so they wouldn't feel "under the microscope". Distance was 3-4 feet. The big problem was that the HVAC system in our interview room was absolutely screaming.

The above article notes that the AT mic had a HF peak and was thin at the low end. This was true in spades. We ran without a windscreen. You want some HF peak to compensate for windscreens, but this was a bit much. Note that the LF cutoff starts at 180 Hz, so if you're trying to cut rumble with it, your subjects will sound thinner still.

I would have liked more directivity with the mic, as well as a hotter signal.

Judging from the review above, the Senn would have been the better choice for us, giving a clean hot signal without as much HF emphasis.

Of course, in post I could apply a noise canceller, EQ it to death and ride the mix syllable by syllable. We did record it, but we were also sending a live feed to a nearby observation room, and over a video conference link overseas.

All I had was a compressor and a 3-channel EQ strip to work with. I really needed a real-time noise canceller and a nice parametric EQ to do the job properly.

But the Sennheier 67 would have helped a bit. With more directivity, a hotter, cleaner signal and flatter response, I would have needed less aggressive processing.

At NAB I spent some time playing with the Sennheiser MHK-70. Now *there's* a shotgun. I was able to listen in on coversations 20 and 30 feet away. Still, the NAB show floor is a noisy place, and even with a narrow lobar pattern, the mic picked up a lot of reflected noise with all that narrow-beam gain.

I've also spoken with a few independents who swear by the Senn MKH-416.

There are a few ways to go here: If your next production requires absolute top quality, rent one of the higher-end mics. If doing a number of mid-level productions, go for the 66/67, and sell it on ebay when it's time to move up.

I've owned a dynamic AT mic for more than 20 years, and I'm really happy with it. By contrast, the AT815b wasn't really what I was looking for.

I hope this is helpful.

-Jon Fairhurst
http://poorlyprojectedpictures.com

Jon I think you hit the nail. Most of my projects are going to be low-mid budget. Even commercials here don't have budgets as in the US. Other than that, it would be indie films and corporate video stuff. I'm going for the k66 and some capsules and take my chances for a while.
Also Dean, thanks for the solid info. I'm going to start diggin more about the ATW series before I make my final decision.
Thanks a lot to all who contributed with their valuable opinions :)

UPDATE: Thank God I just got a hold of an K6/ME66 capsule combo from friend to try out for the evening. This thing sucks, I don't like it at all. Everything put through it sounds like talking through a horn, very telephone like. To much mid-high bump, and a big lack in bass. This obviously makes anything sound so thin, shrinked. Rejection at off-axis is not that good either. This was the K6 module, but run with 48 phantom from a very nice & clean studio preamp. Its weird, it seems the mic is not very sensitive as I would have expected. I have my own weird theory...I think sennheiser might have bumped the mids and highs to compensate for the lack of sensitivity in this mic. It registers alright, but it registers because everything has been eq'd to hell.
And this tests were done inside my studio...I don't want to think how will it do on location. On a quick comparison, tough not the appropiate, but one of my cheapie oktava sounded way better than this, even at a distance. Maybe a tad bit noisier though, but much more better in terms of natural sound.
I need other suggestions...:S

I swear by the 416. I have a 66 mounted to the camera... and it sounds like a NAT mic... The 416 is a standard and is nothing short of awesome. If you have more, get a set of Schoeps, a cardiod and hypercardiod capsule. I've been wondering about the Sure (SM89?) shotgun. It looks pretty decent, acceptable.

Thanks for replying Daniel. Right now I'm leaning over the Audio Techinca 4073a because I'm still under a budget. I did a little more diggin and found a link with very nice comparisons of this mic VS the 416 and it faired well.

Certainly don't go for the AT815b - It's even less sensitive and thinner sounding than the ME66.

However, comparing the AT4073a to the AT815b on paper, the AT4073a looks like an interesting animal.

* Directivity
The 9" long 4073 has roughly the same directivity as the 15" 815b, but horizontally only. The 4073 has more pronounced lobes, which might sound "interesting" off axis. The low-directivty vertically may help negate a hollow sound at the expense of in-line response. If you're not happy with the ambient sound, just rotate it 90 degrees and check if it's better...

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/re...073a_polar.jpg
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/re...815b_polar.jpg

* Frequency response
The 4073 is *much* flatter than the 815. Add a windscreen and it might be a bit muffled. In any case, as long as the signal is clean, you can EQ to taste.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/re...4073a_freq.jpg
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/re...t815b_freq.jpg

Of course, if there's any way that you can try before buying, or rent and apply the cost to your purchase, that would be ideal.

And don't underestimate the value of noise reduction. If you can sample the ambient noise, remove it, then EQ, you might get decent results - even with the ME66. Part of the hollow sound is due to the echo of the voice. The other part is due to the signature of the ambient noise. You can't get rid of the voice echo, but you can get rid of the ambience. When outdoors, this should work well.

Keep us informed. I was interested in the ME67 before. Now I'm starting to think seriously about the AT4071a...

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/re...071a_polar.jpg
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/re...4071a_freq.jpg

The 4073 has a lot of reach outdoors but tends to
get hollow indoors, which I guess most all
shotguns do.

re: tascam hd-p2

i did a lot of research on this and even downloaded the manual and the salesperson assured me that it would in fact record line level in on the xlr inputs.

i got one and it in fact will NOT record line level on the XLR.

it will only record line level on the rca inputs.

but that aside, it felt like a toy and its design does NOT lend well to working out of a bag. too many of the controls are on the top of the unit where it would be damn hard to get to with it in a bag.

i ended up returning it and got the sound devices 744t.

i have had the 302 and loved it and then i sold it and upgraded to the 442 so i have 4 channels of input to match the 4 channels of recording i have on the 744t.

its a bit pricey but the sennheiser 416 is hard to beat.

good deals can be found on used ones that are in great shape.

i would stick with a 302 and whichever 7 series recorder best fits your needs.

both of these items fetch great prices used if you outgrow them and want to go from say a 302 to a 442 or if you want to go from a 2 channel recorder to a 4 channel recorder.

one advantage of the sound devices is if you have two of them you can get a simple y-cable to let you use one np-1 battery to power both.

the petrol eargonizer 2 bag holds a 302 or 442 and any of the 7 series recorders with a special cut out meant to hold an np-1 battery.

i started out with an me-66 and upgraded to the 416 for shotgun and i currently use the oktava mk-012 from the soundroom.com

the 416 is great for outdoor booming but for indoor booming the oktava works better (in my experience)

i'm thinking of upgrading to the sanken cs-3e but i haven't had a chance to really try out out yet.

the schoeps mics are great but many times more expensive than the oktava mk-012.

for a lavalier i use a pair of the sanken cos-11's

i also use the g2 and g1 sennheiser wireless.

my favorite is to use the sennheiser plug on transmitter it lets you plug into a soundboard if your filming a live show and it also lets you take ANY mike that has an xlr connection and make it wireless.

be advised though that there are two versions of the sennheiser plug on transmitter. the $200 version (skp-100) does NOT have phantom power and the $400 version (skp-500) does.

i can't say enough about how convenient it has been to have the ability to take anything xlr and make it wireless.

its not my first choice but in a pinch you can even make a boom mic wireless, or if you have a plant mic that really needs to be hidden and you can't have xlr cables running from the mic the skp really comes in handy.

i love the sanken cub-01 as a boundary/plant mic.

one other suggestion, i wouldn't use b&h to put together your sound kit.

i would use one of the companies that specializes in just doing sound.

they can really make a big difference helping you put together the right stuff and they can point out things you might have overlooked.

i have been using gothamsound.com and micah there has been super.

other great sound only companies are...

trewaudio.com locationsound.com coffeysound.com

and probably a bunch of other ones i missed but these are the ones i have heard great things about. my experience is almost solely with gotham.

b&h is a great place to buy stuff but if your putting together something like a sound kit i'd definitely recommend using a sound specialist.

matthew

Sorry for beign late, mucho work these last weeks.
Matthew, thanks for chiming in. I appreciate a lot that you have taken the time to write down this info fer me.

Regarding the Sennheiser wireless, have u had any bad experiences with them...dropouts etc?

no i have never had a single problem with the sennheisers.

i had the evolution 500 series for a year and a half and then got the g2 as a secondary.

i know a lot of people who use them as well with no problems.

there are certainly more expensive ones but for the money the sennheiser g2 series is hard to beat.

i like the set that comes with both the beltpak transmitter and the plug on transmitter.

matthew

Berns,
I'm new here, and to recording, but I will share with you what my ears heard at B&H in a recent audition of several of the mics you have mentioned.

like you, I found that the ME66 was not to my liking. metallic is the way I would describe, although your description also would be apt for what I heard.
I was shocked to hear that this is something of an industry standard, but it seems as if this mic is meant for emphasizing voice, i.e. an 'indoor shotgun', if you will. it definitely has a NON-flat freq response.

the 416 was very, very nice, my favorite of the bunch I auditioned that day.

the AT 4073a also sounded good to my ears, but not as natural and realistic as the 416.
As I recall, I thought the 4073 sounded a bit like a cross between the 416 and the ME66.

the mic I settled on for now, until I can justify the $$$ for an MKH series (416 or other), is the Rode NTG-2. It didn't have the 'reach' of the 416, but it did have a very similar sound, and was overall more natural to my ears than the others I listened to - at least in the B&H sound-isolation booth, on that day.

as an audiophile, I realize that personal taste plays a huge part in what 'sound' is preferred, but, if I had the money I would go straight to an MKH416.

best of luck,
clay


ps, after writing this I goggled the comparisons you mentioned.
the freq response charts that were described seem to bear out
my placement of the 4073 as a cross between 416 and me66 -
the 4073 has a lower bass response that is consistent with the 416,
but has a pronounced 'bump' in the treble, which would correlate
with the similarity I heard between 4073 and ME66. although
those who reported the striking similarities between the 4073
and 416 seemed not to notice this hot high treble of the AT mic.
perhaps it will not bother you, but given your 'reaction' to the
the ME66, you should at least check it out before making a
final decision.

pps, the pronounced high end of the 4073 just might be the
'hot' ticket for use with a Rycote softie or other windshield,
hmmm....

I am using a sennheiser me-66 and a audio technica 4073a. Was going to return the me-66, but I felt it really complemented the 4073. The pair sounds really good together.

-p

The ME66 may have its faults, but lack of sensitivity isn't one of them. It's an extremely popular choice among videographers, particularly nature shooters, precisely because of its senstivity and many people are happy with its overall sound in many situations, so it doesn't suck for everyone. Other people have commented on a tinny character compared to other mics, so I'm not saying you're wrong about the sound. Youve been around and you know what you want to hear and you weren't getting it from the ME66. Based on posted sound clip comparisons I decided several years ago that I didn't want one either.

But back to the sensitivity. At a nominal 50 mV per Pascal of sound pressure, the ME66 is more sensitive than 95% of the mics out there. You seem to be a very comptetent observer, so I'd have to conclude that your friend's specimen is a lemon. And if it's sensitivity is below spec, it's frequency response may be off too.

On the other hand, we may be placing too much emphasis on sensitivity. High sensitivity is a convenience, because it's easier to get high levels during recording and monitoring. And it also implies that the signal to noise (i.e. self-noise of the mic) is higher. But since you can do what you wish with levels in post, and you can very effectively remove mic noise, it stands that there would be no difference in the post production results of a high sensitivity and a low sensitivity mic, provided that their patterns and frequency responses were the same.

All that being said, I return to your original post. If you want excellent and economical coverage of indoor and outdoor situations in a single mic, I'd strongly recommend the AT4053 hypercardioid ($395 at B&H). A hyper is the only correct choice for most indoor situations where high directivity is needed, a shotgun being virtually always the wrong choice. And due to its high directivity, a hyper will work in lieu of a shotgun in many outdoor situations. On a boom in particular, the 4053 will give the same excellent performance indoors or out. the AT4053 has a very respectable sensitivity of 22 mV per Pa.

Want a shotgun too? Consider the AT897 ($250 at B&H). At these prices you can probably afford both. All the pros think highly of the sound of the AT897. I had one a few years ago and liked the sound too, but as a neophyte I returned it because of the sensitivity issue (10 mV per Pa). If I had known then what I know now I would have kept it, and I'll probably correct that error in the near future.

The Rode NT3 hypercardioid ($199 at B&H; bulkier and heftier than the AT4053, but reportedly quite good) and the Rode NTG-2 shotgun ($270 at B&H; more sensitive-- than the AT897) would make for a good indoor/outdoor coverage kit too.

I'd like to hear what people are using for a shockmount for
the NT3 for booming.

The first way to judge a mic for dialogue recording is to compare them and see which sound more natural. By natural I mean closer to how voice really sounds. This may seem obvious but it's not.

This discussion may take weeks or years, as that naturalness is what most mic manufacturers are after... when you solve the directionality issues, which are what we filmmakers have to deal with.

So in the end is a personal choice. That you, Bernardo, will have to make.

The choices mentioned above are quite good, and I would add another one which is flexible and resonably affordable: AKG SE-300/Blue Line. They are real condenser mics, not electret ones like the ME66 kit or most ATs. The AKG shotgun and hyper-cardioid capsules sound great and will cover 99.99 % of your micing situations.

The MKH416 is an industry standard (the ME66 is not, just to correct an above misinformation), so maybe you should judge the others compared to it. But first of all try to see what sound you like best.

Learning to listen is the hardest part in the sound recordist profession, and when you solve that you can usually get good results with almost every microphone. But picking a mic that will do that more easily is much better.

Carlos

Just to correct: the Blue Lines are in fact electrets, although the CK93 actually has better s/n than the AT4053, which is a true condenser. Only downside I can see to buying an electret in this case is you'll have to replace it in, oh, 30 years or so. You should have your money's worth by then.

Dave: I use a shockmount for a large studio condenser and two laps of that "foam stuff" you get with Pelican cases. Works a treat!

Wow, I tought this thread was getting behind. Its great that there's people still chiming in. Even better for me.

Yeah, I might have been rude by using the word suck with the m66, not meant to offend anyone by al means, but quite simply I didn't like the sound of that mic. The mic had a very eq'd sound to my ears. You're right that sensitivity specs are really up there than others, wich would explain why this mic's output is hot. However, the detail, I dunno, it wasn't there for my ears. When I tested it, I tried various sources. One thing that clearly came up front was the emphasis on the mid high - highs the mic has. I did a little but very good test while jangling my home keys in front of the mic, and the high end was...well...dunno how to spell it correctly, but harsh, fatiguing. Kind of like when you insert a bad eq shelf and boost the highs a lot. Sort of phasey harsh. I didn't personally found the low mid - lows natural either. It might be that the mic I tried that occasion was flunked, but then, I heard somewhat the same signature on the 416 vs me66 comparison web page, and also on the other site where there's comparisons of the 4073,416 and me66 as well. All these sound clips from the me66 had those hyped mid mid-highs. I guess the me66 might work well at ditance because the bump might be well around 3-5k, and in situations where capturing inteligible dialog as a prioirity without enphasis on natural sound, well, certainly this mic might help on making speech more inteligible at longer distance and of axis. I'm kind of worried at the of axis though. The mic's bump make off axis sounds weird. I guess any shotgun would, but the clue might be wich make off axis content sound smooth, even if were are looking to reject those sounds, wich in practice, might still be dificult even with such pickup.
The 416 also has a sheen on the highs, but it sounds silky, and the lows sounded very very natural to me, more comparable to the sound of a studio mic, wich is what I'm accustomed. The problem is that the price is a little steep for me atm. From the lower priced mics, I found the 4073 somewhere in the middle. I didn't found the high end harsh, and the lows, altough they didn't have the same definition as the 416, they still kept natural sounding, and somewhat better of axis sound than the me66. The rode NTG2 also sounded good, but I like the lows better on the 4073. So I'm leaning for the 4073a for exterior, and the 4053 for interiors. If everything goes right I'll update to the 416 afterwards.

As far as I know they are real condensers.

Depending on how far in the field you will be recording, I seriously recommend something like a Korg D12 hard disk recorder/mixer. *If* you have access to power, this gadget is quite handy. From plugging wireless receivers into it, to running lines in from a house board, you'll get good audio recording, and will be able to manually adjust levels later.

If you are literally in a field, and the closest power is a good ways off, you're out of luck. Same goes for intermittant power failures, you'll lose what isn't saved.

"As far as I know they are real condensers."

You can download the Blue Line data sheet here:

http://www.akg.com/products/powersla...uage,ENUS.html

It says "all models prepolarized condenser capsules." That's code for electret.

Then they are really on a league of their own. Because it's the only mic than can compare, sound-wise, with brands like Neumann, Schoeps and Sennheiser.

I've been pretty impressed with the CK93 for the price as well. Check out the frequency response chart at the Web site. Now that's flat. The AT4053 is supposed to be amazing for the price as well though, but I don't have any experience with it. Comparing the specs, the AT4053 looks to be more even off axis, but there's some bumps in the frequency response. I don't know how much difference that really makes in practical use.

I want to underscore this suggestion, after years of working with minimal equipment consisting of a single shotgun and a Tram-50 lav (or a sound person who brought all of their own gear), I recently started doing more sound work and as a result purchased a Sound Devices 302 mixer. I'm very happy with it, it's quiet, small, versatile, and robust. You really have to spend a lot more to find a better mixer, it's the ultimate balance between portability and professional performance. If your needs grow, there's always the Sound Devices 422 mixer.

I haven't used a 302 but what seems nice
about it is that it allows for a basic
setup of 2 wireless lavs and 1 boom.

Yes I'm going for the SD 302 mixer for sure. I'm still debating between the tascam HD-P2 and the SD 702T recorder. I need at least sync to timecode, but the 702 T just goes double up n more the price of the HD-P2. They both have more or less the same functionality. I know the 702T is a better product, but I can't justify the price difference.

The Tascam accepts timecode from a TC source such as a camera with a TC out but does not generate code on its own. The SD702T OTOH actually has its own TC clock. Sound Device's uses a timecode module supplied by Ambient so they are rock solid.

Tough choice ain't it? The Edirol R4 looks pretty cool too, although I have a feeling if that if I had all those extra tracks people would just get lazy and start demanding we put wireless on everybody, so I almost don't want to give them that option. :) I can say that with audio every time I compromised on a lesser purchase I ended up regretting it down the road. I'm just drooling over the 702t, but that's a pretty big outlay.

Tough choice ain't it? The Edirol R4 looks pretty cool too, although I have a feeling if that if I had all those extra tracks people would just get lazy and start demanding we put wireless on everybody, so I almost don't want to give them that option. :) I can say that with audio every time I compromised on a lesser purchase I ended up regretting it down the road. I'm just drooling over the 702t, but that's a pretty big outlay.

Tough choice ain't it? The Edirol R4 looks pretty cool too, although I have a feeling if that if I had all those extra tracks people would just get lazy and start demanding we put wireless on everybody, so I almost don't want to give them that option. :) I can say that with audio every time I compromised on a lesser purchase I ended up regretting it down the road. I'm just drooling over the 702t, but that's a pretty big outlay.

Sorry, I'm all thumbs today. Can those extra posts be deleted?