Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'shotgun'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Main Board
    • Current
    • The Daily Journal
    • General Discussion
    • Equipment
    • Cameras... love them, hate them
    • Recording Direct to Computer
    • Workflow
    • The Post Place
    • Images of Interest
    • Macs... and the other computer
    • All Things Apple
    • Technical Reference
    • Do It Yourself
    • Manufacturers & Dealers
    • Work Available - Available for Work
    • Post to the Host
    • Donate to Support JWSOUNDGROUP


There are no results to display.




Website URL








Found 13 results

  1. Hello everyone, I recently got a Sennheiser mkh416 and a classic softie to go with it. During my first test (indoor) I noticed that the softie (to my ears) considerably improves the directionality and generally the sound of the mic (if compared to the mic naked). This came as a surprise to me, as I originally thought that the softie would just block the wind and damp the highs a bit. Am I being fooled or are there actual sound improvements with the use of a windjammer? Thank you in advance for any clarification, Leonardo
  2. Hi everyone I'm in the midst of some filming for a documentary project and I'm hoping for some recommendations regarding indoor run-and-gun recording. For my main shotgun microphone I'm using the RODE NTG-3, which is excellent for outdoor shooting or in rooms with minimal reflective/echo'y surfaces. The problem is I'm finding myself in environments where it sounds quite echo'y and/or shallow, where I need to follow the action of one or more people. I do have my main subject mic'ed up with a TRAM TR-50, but the main subject is at times not close enough to another subject to capture their dialogue at an appropriate level. It's a documentary so I don't expect the audio to be flawless, but it would be great to get a little more even recording between subjects than I'm achieving at the moment. I'm a one man band using a Canon C100, so introducing a sound mixer, etc. is out of the question. I've got two XLR inputs, so in addition to my TRAM, it would be great to find out if another shotgun mic will meet my indoor needs better than my NTG-3. Thanks guys! Sean
  3. Hi folks; I was told I had a budget of around $5k for some new gear at the video production company I'm now at as audio guy and video assistant editor. So I know it's everyone's favourite question in boom mic land, but I'll phrase it differently Currently they're using Sennheiser ME66 and ME2 boom/lavs and when I priced out some Sanken COS-11 and Rode Lav wires and a complete package Senn 8070 (with grip, blimp, and rycote total of over $3k), the answer I received was "You wanna spend HOW much on one microphone?!?! You're crazy! What's wrong with using lavs, we already have a boom mic!" So: in order to keep with a 21mm/22mm mic shockmount and zeppelin rig (which will make them happy by keeping cost down), I'm looking for bang for buck and was maybe entertaining idea of Shure VP89 short and long capsule. Ideally, I'd go with Schoeps CMC6/MK41 for interior sit down interviews but my concern for these folks is the outdoor location shoots (it's 'corporate video' etc and sometimes can be in factory/mining/manufacturing/outside in windy prairie fields) so if I have to use the ME66 indoors, I shall. I know I can't serve both needs equally (indoor sit-down and possible distance-shot location with desired rejection) but which mics would you suggest I look at for the sub- $1200 ish range? I haven't been in location audio for awhile (mainly a post guy who polishes it later) so the go-to's for me used to be Senn 416, Neumann 81 / 82. I've recently been reading about Rode NTG-3 and the Shure VP89 series. Cheers! Jeff
  4. Is anyone here using 1 mono shotgun/hyper and 1 stereo mic housed together in 1 blimp? I'm considering placing a stereo mic like the AT BP4025 underneath a CS-3e in the same blimp to capture stereo along with mono. Seems like a simpler way to do it than M/S for times when the post guys aren't comfortable with decoding M/S. I suppose this means there'll be two (three?) cables out of the blimp (3 pin XLR for CS-3e and set of 3 pin XLRs for BP4025). I'd be recording onto 3 channels, but it seems like a handy setup for docs or to get FX with the option of a little stereo ambience with it. What do you guys reckon?
  5. Last year's 'SHARE YOUR SANKEN STORY' was such a huge success that we are adding to the fun this year with VIDEO. Reenact it, show it or just tell it, you story is worth hearing about. Follow the link below to get involved!
  6. I direct you all to view this hilarious video of a reporter falling off a boat. Classic. Hilarious. Possibly all fake. Point is is the second this accident happens this sound guy comes in, wearing no headphones, and INSTANTLY throws his boom towards the woman as if for her to grab on for dear life. Though sorta seemed to try to be nottttttt quiettttttt clossssse enough as if he was second guessing his decision. What do you think? Is this a real sound guy? Is this a real video? What would you do? What type of mic would you save a drowning woman for and which mic would you pretend you're jusssssst notttttt quietttttt close enough?
  7. Brian McCarty, an audio professional presently living in Australia, seeks to conduct a series of tests to evaluate subtleties of microphone performance. His theory is that the shift away from interference tube microphones to cardioid and hypercardioid designs yielded an improvement in the intelligibility of dialog recording. Even if background noise increased slightly with the less directional designs, the dialog itself was more understandable and this more than compensated for the additional noise. He will be in Los Angeles later this month and would like to conduct some controlled tests to produce data to prove this theorem. He expects to be here from about the 17th to about the 22nd. Some tests will be done in a workshop under controlled conditions. He would also very much like to make some tests on an active set. The idea is to rig two microphones, one with an interference tube and one without, to a single boom and make matching recordings of dialog in a real-world environment. The resulting recordings would then be carefully evaluated for any differences in intelligibility. He is working in close association with Dr. Peter Mapp, a UK expert in audiology who has computer software that can help quantify any perceived differences. To make real world comparisons, he needs cooperation from someone working on a project who might be able to extend an invitation to visit the set and briefly encumber the boom operator with a second microphone. He would particularly like to conduct this test in an exterior scene but any working project would provide an opportunity to make meaningful tests. Probably the whole business could be accomplished in an hour or so. An independent production would probably be best as it is difficult to persuade the studios to allow anyone to make recordings, even briefly, and take away copies. Brian used to live in Los Angeles and was a member of both Local 695 and Local 700. He is presently the head of Coral Sea Studios in Australia ( and is also chair of the AES Technical Committee on Sound for Digital Cinema and Television. If you can help, please post here or send me a PM. Thanks very much. David
  8. Here's a little something I found today while clearing out some old bookmarks - an in depth look at a few of the usual (and maybe not so usual) shotgun, hyper, super and cardioid suspects. Now, I did not write this and to be perfectly honest I don't know if I would agree with some of the stuff that this guys says (admittedly, he is a video guy apparently) but I thought it did make interesting reading and there are some decent samples recordings with each mic that he reviews. Apologies if this has been posted before, I did do a search (yes, on google) with no results, so here goes.. Enjoy - Chak
  9. Hey guys, I'm recording a short this weekend and I can not rent the shotgun I normally use these days (good ole 416) as they don't have any available. They have either the NTG-3, the CS2, or the KMR-81i. Pretty straight forward shoot (single camera, two wires). I'll be recording indoors (typical office with drop ceilings, desks, carpet, etc), as well as outdoors (rural farm, and it's a bit colder. I'm up in Ontario). This is about all the info I have on my locations as i was not on the tech scout. Was wondering what you guys thought about the above mics as i have never used any of them. I will definitely do a shoot out of all three before I rent today, but I thought I would see what you guys had to say before I head in. Thanks you in advance for your thoughts/advice. I'm early in my career recording for film and TV, and I love it. I know a lot of you are further down the road, so I really appreciate your time. Cheers!
  10. Hi all, Last Saturday morning a bunch of local Atlanta mixers, boom-ops & utilities met over breakfast at Whit's house to field test the Super CMIT. We had all heard how successful the Super CMIT had been used by Simon Hayes on “Les Misérables” in studio conditions. We wanted to test the practical applications of using the Super CMIT in the field. (Note: I am writing this from memory a week later, so I encourage any involved to correct me or add more details to our findings!) The Gear -788t / CL-8 Bag rig -Neumann KMR82i on a 22' Ambient Boompole -Schoeps Super CMIT 2U on a 22' K-Tek Boompole Note 1: To use the 788t in AES mode, you have to enable “AES Power” in the menu and also on the individual tracks (in same place you select phantom power). Hook up your AES Cable to the back. The cable we had was set to put the DSP (super-CMIT) channel on channel one, the CMIT (non-dsp output) on 2 through a single XLR output. The cable also had a second XLR to hook up a second Super CMIT if desired. Note 2: There are two preset DSP modes. One is “standard” DSP and the other what we termed “extreme”. From the Schoeps website: -Preset 1 1: moderate directivity increase (green LED); ca. 11 dB reduction in diffuse sound (5 dB greater than a Schoeps CMIT 5 U or channel 2 of the SuperCMIT 2 U) Preset 2: strong directivity increase (red LED); ca. 15 dB diffuse sound reduction. This setting is reserved for special applications since sonic artifacts can occasionally be heard. In our tests, we did not tinker much with Preset 2 as it isn't very applicable to our purposes with the introduction of artifacts into our tracks. We also did not engage the filters on the CMIT and left them open. This kind of became a test of three, as we compared all results between the Super CMIT in DSP mode and in standard CMIT versus the Neumann KMR82i. The "Shooting Range" Whit's house has some good conditions for a proper field test. There is a good-sized waterfall and a busy road nearby. Also, there is a small airport nearby. At the back of Whit's house is fairly quiet (except for the occasional aircraft). Test 1: Waterfall While booming a single person near the waterfall we noticed that the Super CMIT had amazing background rejection and pulled the dialogue right out of the waterfall. The background could still be heard, but was diminished greatly. The standard CMIT and the 82 performed as expected and did a good job of bringing the dialogue forefront, leaving the sound of waterfall in the background. While booming between two people have a conversation, the CMIT and 82 sounded “natural” while cueing. The Super CMIT had some issues here. Some noticed artifacts while cueing as the processing tried to match the movement and change of position of the mic relative to the background. To fight this effect, a BoomOp would have to be careful to keep the mic on a the same plane of axis when cueing. Which is better? Well, I suppose the answer is “It depends”. If that waterfall was instead a generator, perhaps the directivity would be exactly what you want. The waterfall as part of the scene, perhaps not. Test 2: Running Diesel Truck in Background We experienced similar results with the rumble of the truck as with waterfall. Again, if the rumble was a generator you couldn't get turned off, perhaps the Super would be the way to go... If a picture car, the CMIT or 82i sounded more natural to most of us. Test 3: The Wide We conducted this test with stationary subjects with an imaginary frame above our “actors” of 10-12 feet. On pavement, we noticed a reverb effect on all mics that was added. When moved to the grass, this was removed. The 82 lost a lot of low end frequency at this height, but was still very legible. The Super and CMIT both kept more of the low end and sounded better to most of us, with Super CMIT having a slight edge in a controlled situation of two actors having a one to one conversation. Whit brought up a very valid point here though: The Ad-lib. What if there were other actors in the scene were known to adlib often. Would you want the more directional and less forgiving Super CMIT? Likely not. Test 4: The “Really” Tight We ALL agreed the Super CMIT sounded too present and “splattered” when used to close to the source. It needs some air in between to sound natural. Test 5: Walk & Talk We did walk & talks two ways: from above, and from below. From above, all mics sounded nice. Noted that the Super CMIT might be nice in mitigating the sound of gravel or crunchy footsteps if boomed from the proper angle, if so desired. From below, they also sounded good. Of course, all were in some form more susceptible to aircraft noise with the Super CMIT giving a few more moments of “acceptable” sound than the others by mitigating some of the off axis background noise. The Conclusion Someone in the group called this mic a “very expensive one trick pony”. While it may be useful in more than just one scenario, it certainly is a very specialized microphone and at $4,449US it is certainly very expensive. Is it something to have in the kit? As a wise man once said... “It depends”... While it certainly would be nice in certain situations to have, it is one of those items that might be difficult to recoup costs outside of your standard kit rental. It is an amazing piece of technology and if you can afford it, and it would be a nice microphone to have in the arsenal. That being said, I don't think any of us rushed out to get one after our testing. But time will tell! The Players Mixers: Whit Norris, Chris Durfy, Aron Siegal, Todd Weaver, David Terry Boom/Utility: Chris Harris, Matt Derber, Maaike Snoep, Dana Simmons ENG/Post: Michael Wynne Special thanks to: -Whit & Kathy Norris for hosting us at their house. -Trew Audio for arranging the Super-CMIT appointment. -Redding Audio for supplying the demonstration Microphone. -Michael Wynne for taking the pictures of the event. THANKS!!!
  11. Hello everyone I know they have been covered separate, but just want to hear from people using either or both as their main all-rounder. I have been using a CS-1e and love it, but need a new all-rounder for noisier, outdoors and so on. CS-3e was the obvious choice to complement the 1e, but found a CMIT5u used for the same price so i thought i check Thanks
  12. Not sure how many of you know about these already, but I thought I'd post about it anyway with some pics for those that do not as I think this is a very good solution for any that have been looking. I bought a Sennheiser MKH-416 last year and like many of us newbies dabbling in the DSLR video and audio world I started with the Rode NTG-3 as a first shotgun mic. When I decided to upgrade to the 416 and sold the NTG-3 I was sad to see the storage case that the Rode came with go. For those that dont know the Rode NTG-3 comes with a very nice aluminum, pipe bomb looking, rubber gasket sealed storage case. There is nice squishy black foam inside the barrel and in the end caps as well. And since the NTG-3 and MKH-416 are nearly identical in every way, the 416 happens to fit in the NTG-3's storage tube. So I began looking around to see where I could get just the storage tube alone. Turned out no one sold it by itself and most places I talked to didnt even know what I was talking about. Eventually I found myself contacting Rode at 1-925-548-9451 and learned that the case is called a Baton in Australia and a Storage Cylinder here in the states by Rode's customer service people and that the part number is: 310-001-1-2. After talking to a Rode rep here in the states, he was nice enough to just give me a storage cylinder for free! I didnt even have to pay shipping. While I cant guarantee they will do that for anyone that calls, I at least wanted to make those that werent aware something like this existed and will be MUCH less expensive and IMO better than cases made by say ALFA (LINK) or any others. And I figured even if Rode wanted to sell you one I doubt they would charge much. Anyway, hope this info is of some use to someone. Just trying to give back a little.
  13. I'm buying a new mic. I need a short very directional mic, and have norrowed it down to 3. I want to know what people think of them and which one would you recommend. It is between Sennheiser MKH50, Sennheiser MKH8060 and the Sanken CS-3e. Any coment will be great.