Using the DPA 4017

[Glen Trew]

Received my DPA 4017 shotgun demo today and put it to use on the show I'm working. Other than being very lightweight (much lighter than my Schoeps w/GVC swivle) and very nice looking (stylistically it goes great with the Sonosax SX-ST board), it appearantly holds up well with very loud voices. One scene today involved serious yelling, but we decided to keep the mic close anyway (12" on the closeup) to overcome some loud ambience. There was no breakup during moments that I would have had to add the 10dB pad on the Sennheiser MKH series. It sounded great, and had no proximity effect problems working that close.

More on the mic later next week, but I'm convinced it's going to be a winner.

Glen Trew

[Fernando]

Thank you Glen.

What about it's "reach" for weaker speech?

[Glen Trew]

So far the only two days I've had the DPA 4017 have been mostly MOS and sfx, so I can't fully answer your question fully yet. However, based on some general listening, I expect the "reach" (combination of front width and side/rear rejection) to be about like the CMIT and MKH-60. Hopefully i'll have more first-hand observations to report in the next few days.

Glen Trew

[Glen Trew]

I just finished a feature. Part of the reason I stay involved in production is because there's no better way to get familiar with the gear made for location film/video production. One new piece of gear I used this time was the DPA 4017 short shotgun microphone. Please consider this a brief account of my first use with this mic, and not an in-depth review.

I the mic about the second week into the film and used it for several scenes. It is exceptionally light weight, so it could be used in a number of traditional mounts, but it seemed a perfect match for the mount that comes with the DPA WindPac system I already had, so that's what we used. SIDE NOTE: The WindPac system sounds great and gives an impressive amount of wind protection, but not as much wind protection as from the more traditional basket-and-fur arrangements (i.e. Windjammer and similar models). It seems to keep wind away from the microphone very well, but when broadside against the wind the skin starts to behave like a drum head which results in a low frequency flutter. My preamp was a Sonosax SX-ST mixer.

The first real opportunity to use the 4017 for dialog on this show was on an exterior set (a simulated African hut with an fairly open and high roof). The floors were dirt. The mic had to be higher than we would have prefered because of verticle lighting shadows and to keep the TV frame safe.

Over all, the microphone is very quiet and has what I keep describing as extraordinary clarity. It doesn't have and doesn't seem to need switchable pads. It can handle high levels that would have normally prompted me to switch in the 10dB pad on my MKH-60.  Several of our interior sets had low door frames, in which case I resorted to my Schoeps MK41 with GVC swivel for "low profile mode".

The only concern I had is that what I call extraordinary clarity was sometimes translated by my brain as being extraordinarily bright. I use Sony MDR-7506 phones, which would have exaggerated that perception, so it may not have been an issue at all if monitoring with speakers. But, none-the-less, there were a couple of times that, after listening to the DPA during rehearsal, when the camera rolled I switched to a "known quantity": the Schoeps CMC6/MK41.

There were several occaisions that the addition "reach" of the 4017 made it the better choice. An exterior walk-and-talk scene comes to mindl, where the mic had to be worked at around 5 feet, that sounded great. However, in my opinion, this is not a microphone to be used close to the actor unless there is serious wispering. When worked close on interior sets, the shotgun pattern tends to make any ambience seem unnaturally dead (but, to be fair,  I've noticed the same phenomenon when using the Schoeps CMIT).

I never felt the need to engage the high freq boost or the low freq cut switches.

So, the bottom line is that it is an exceptionally high-quality microphone with ultra low noise and distortion with characteristics well suited for high-end film/video production. As others use this microphone, it will be interesting to know if the exceptional brightness is an issue for them or if it was just my imagination.

Morre later.

Glen Trew

[bcopenhagen]

I just posted a few comments about the 4017 over in this thread:

http://www.jwsound.net/SMF/index.php?topic=2000.msg13241#msg13241

Brian

[bcopenhagen]

no experience with the CMIT, sorry.