![]() |
Quote:
Well, the X2 is a pro-consumer camera. It didn't have standard XLR inputs until recently, only if you bought an add-on. That's why I singled out pro cameras on my comment. I haven't had so bad luck with line level unbalanced lines though, RCA or whatever. Just can't stand 1/8" sockets. |
Um, the XL2 has had XLRs since it first came out.
I have friends in Pro shops who replaced their MII gear with Canon XL2 cameras for corporate industrial work. Regards, Ty Ford |
Quote:
|
Whoa! I wish I knew what you guys were talking about :-/
I thought most cameras had both Line & Mic... although its quite possible I don't even know what those are. Anyway, I do think I need 4 channels, which the SD MixPre doesn't have. I'm assuming that with the ENG-44 I can mix 4 mics down to 2 channels? I think ENG-44 is the way to go, when I upgrade my mics I can get the SD302. Since I don't even know what SD 302 can do that the ENG-44 can't do, I think its a safe option for me. |
Quote:
Quote:
Then there are balanced and unbalanced connections. The former are better, noise free and allow long cable runs. In pro cameras and some pro-sumer they are used for mic inputs. Unbalanced inputs demand shorter cable runs and are the standard on most consumer cameras. To know more about that you should really go into some audio recording books. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Both mixers sound good and that is the bottom line. The 302 gives you more control over panning, limiting, gain, metering, low cut filter, monitoring, phase reversal...just an overall better design and easier to adjust. It's also much easier to Market. The 44 has some advantages w/ the extra channel, soft limiting, longer battery life, light weight, low cost... but, you really need to setup the gain properly in order to not over-use the soft limiter. |
There's a big difference between the ENG-44 and a 302. Oddly, the difference is proportional to the price.
:) Regards, Ty Ford |
Quote:
Yep, that's the way it is with everything, eh? Thanks for all the info folks, appreciate it. k |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing actually... I'm pretty much in the same boat as Kundal.... I was wondering if I should get better mics first and THEN get a better field mixer (the SD 302 for example) or get the SD 302 first and get better mics later when I have the money? Which ones comes first? Better mics or better mixer? Vasi. |
Quote:
Which system would perform and sound better? 1) SD 442, ME66/K6 Boom, ME 2 lav 2) ENG-44, Schoeps CMIT5U, COS 11 lav |
Quote:
The Sennheiser 416 definitely sounds better than the ME-66... though if you're on a budget, others mics like the AT4073 may give comparable results. IMO the mixer doesn't make that a huge difference in your sound, though I've found the Sound Devices stuff to be very well thought out (convenient /saves a small amount of time / slightly less screwups). It's more important to get the mic close, pick quiet locations or make the location quieter, use the right mic for the application, etc. |
Glenn,
I'm with you on the 66. THE SANKEN CS3E is also a versatile shotgun. Regards, Ty Ford |
if you can live with 3 channels i can suggest you 302 with audio technica
4073 , mbho 603+500 -hyper cardioid and sanken coss 11 thats -2900usd if you need aditional inputs you can add mix pre -700(incl cable to mix bus) the sign video 44 is one of the worst i ever checked , the schoeps shotgun is the waist of your money as in 95% . you will be better with sanken cs-3 outside and with good hyper inside me 66 is also something that i will ever touch for quality dialog ( especially to work between the walls) |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:09 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network