|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
June 6th, 2006, 06:59 AM | #1 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 595
|
Video Expo/Seminar Findings...
Today I went to an video expo/seminar, and just thought I'd bring up some of the points a highly experienced field audio guru said:
* He uses a "Sennheiser MKH 50" for most of his work; indoors and out. He claims that it's a fantastic all-round microphone. He suggests it's a 416 replacement. Having never used a MKH 50, I'm not sure, but this seems a little far-fetched. Your thoughts? * I can't remember what brand he uses (something in the AUD$7000 range), but he suggests that products such as the "Sound Devices 302" (which are in the AUD$2000 range) are too low end for professional use; meaning the sound quality is not acceptable for, I guess, Hollywood scale productions. From what I've read the 302 is a fantastic product and a lot of people are using it for quite major projects. Your thoughts? * He claimed the XLR outputs on a Sony Z1P do not provide a full 48 volts of phantom power, resulting in poor audio quality from the microphones. Personally, I have never experienced this and have always preferred to use the phantom from the camera as opposed to using batteries in my NT3, for example. Is this true? Should I use batteries instead of relying on the Z1Ps phantom? Most of what the guy said was on par with what I've read on this forum, in books, etc. I just want to clarify some of the points (listed above) that made me scratch my head. Thanks in advance! ~ Chris! |
June 6th, 2006, 07:11 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Sounds like a lot of personal opinion was interjected, which is fine, so long as it's stated as such.
I've seen the 302 used on quite a few sets; it's a great tool. Personally, I'd disagree with the mic comments, but that's just me. Regarding the Z1p, he's correct, and incorrect. For most mics, it doesn't matter.
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
June 6th, 2006, 07:17 AM | #3 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 595
|
Yes, his comments were very much personal opinions as he clearly stated.
Thanks for your reply Douglas! |
June 12th, 2006, 10:17 PM | #4 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 595
|
Just to clear things up, which allows the microphone to work at its best:
- Using Phantom Power OR - Using a battery (if it has the ability) ON - Consumer Video Cameras? - Prosumer Video Cameras? - Professional Video Cameras? - Prosumer Field Mixers? - Professional Field Mixers? Thanks! ~ Chris! |
June 13th, 2006, 07:48 AM | #5 |
Fred Retread
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Hartford, CT
Posts: 1,227
|
Whatever input they're plugged into, you'll find that the specs on dual powered mics tend to show significantly better specs with 48V phantom than with a 9V battery. If the mic is plugged into a crappy preamp, or if the program material is noncritical, it doesn't matter, otherwise it may.
__________________
"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence..." - Calvin Coolidge "My brain is wired to want to know how other things are wired." - Me |
June 13th, 2006, 04:23 PM | #6 |
Major Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 595
|
Thanks Fred...
|
June 13th, 2006, 05:01 PM | #7 | |
Kino-Eye
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 457
|
Quote:
As a counterpoint, G. John Garrett, C.A.S., a respected professional sound mixer I've worked with wrote in his review in DV Magazine of the Sound Devices 302 mixer that it "sounds and works great [...] The only mixers that come close to the 302 in fidelity and functionality cost over $3000 [...] a rugged, compact, feature-rich field mixer with superb sound and great flexibility [...]" and I can attest to that, as I own one and I listen to the results of using it all the time: the Sound Devices 302 mixer a professional mixer in terms of sonic qualities. You can track down the full review on the magazine's web site.
__________________
David Tames { blog: http://Kino-Eye.com twitter: @cinemakinoeye } |
|
| ||||||
|
|