Jump to content

Lavalier mics with low ambient noise


RogerBansemer

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think I stumbled into a testosterone swamp. In my humble experience, I have found that an elderly ECM50 is somewhat less sensitive to high ambient environments than the cos11 or a tram. Boiler Rooms, Server Rooms, Nasty Street Corners and the like, dialogthat would be barely audible with a cos11 is "salvageable" with an ECM50.  Theories nothwithstanding, my practical experience,  the largish & foul sounding ECM50, circa 1979, will deliver an acceptable track considering the environment. Dunno why..... Just is.  I keep 3 nearby.   Cheers to all

 

Yes I have also heard this, and I mentioned it at the beginning of this thread. Why is this so? And are the ECM50s the only ones that do this? Have you used the modern ECM55 and what do you think of Trams? 

 

They're pretty large lavs. I'm sure it'd be a hassle to use them. 

 

 

 

Sawrab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most of the elders here started with ECM50 and then jumped to Tram (unless there was something inbetween that I don't remember)) because of the size.  We already had a serviceable ECM50 and saw/heard no benefit to the 55. Matter of fact, the 50 was a marvel to those of us who used them and on camera talent who loved the Beefy(maybe Bison)Bottom End.  'Twas Mostly men at the time with the exception of Jessica Savitch, Barbara Walters, Linda Ellerby, Connie Chung who loved the size and the Beefy Sound of Authority.  To painfully belabor a memory lane journey, the reason I resurrected the ECM50 in the 1990s was a sonic memory of an elder NBC Correspondent, Jack Perkins, who did a standup in some really crummy noise and when we got back to the feed point (way before internet) we were all thrilled at the minimal background sound. Been carrying an ECM50 around for the last 25 years.... I use it about twice a year.... can't fathom why we thought it was a great microphone though.

 

There should be quite a few surviving ECM50 out there...... as I remember, the 50 was silver and the 55 was black

 

Sawrab...... hassles are what we do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A de-esser can help in post. So can judicious editing.

 

But remember: excessive sibilance often takes the form of distortion. In pre-emphasized media (tape and most wireless) the highs are pushed almost to clipping, and an errant /s/ can push them over. Result can be a lot of harmonics that shouldn't be there. Having a de-esser pull the level down - or just pull the highs down - may sometimes fool the ear in context, but it isn't the same thing as cleanly recorded dialog.

 

So the best place to catch it is during production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A de-esser can help in post. So can judicious editing.

But remember: excessive sibilance often takes the form of distortion. In pre-emphasized media (tape and most wireless) the highs are pushed almost to clipping, and an errant /s/ can push them over. Result can be a lot of harmonics that shouldn't be there. Having a de-esser pull the level down - or just pull the highs down - may sometimes fool the ear in context, but it isn't the same thing as cleanly recorded dialog.

So the best place to catch it is during production.

I'm in full agreement. I've found, though, that 90+ percent of the time when people ask that question, they're asking about tracks they've already recorded -- the age old practice of not learning beforehand how to do it right, then asking after the fact how to fix it.

For properly recorded dialog that still has a bit too much sibilance (headroom is our friend), I've had great success with de-essers -- even with the one that comes stock with Pro Tools (and we have many).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" this is a public forum on the internet? Here no secrets are kept. "

and no incorrect or untrue information is ever posted...

right... :blink:

So? Even a helpful honest response can be wrong at times.

I'm sorry, I seem to missing the whole purpose of this forum. It seems at least partly, many here share the tricks of the trade (aka the secrets). Is this wrong?

With regards to the Tram mic: someone said it was good at reducing ambient noise. I use the very similar Voicetech VT605 or whatever it's called. When mounted, its capusle is pointing towards the noise and not towards the mouth. Sure, it's omni directional, but I still find it's particularly unsuited for high ambient noises.

Are there no dynamic lav mics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If you don't have anything nice to say, it may be better not to say anything at all". Don't know where that quote's from

"Bambi" (1942)

Mrs. Rabbit: What did your father tell you this morning?

Thumper: [clears throat] If you can't say something nice... don't say nothing at all.

Wow, how did you dig that up? Or do you just know the movie that well?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most of the elders here started with ECM50 and then jumped to Tram (unless there was something inbetween that I don't remember)) because of the size.  We already had a serviceable ECM50 and saw/heard no benefit to the 55. Matter of fact, the 50 was a marvel to those of us who used them and on camera talent who loved the Beefy(maybe Bison)Bottom End.  'Twas Mostly men at the time with the exception of Jessica Savitch, Barbara Walters, Linda Ellerby, Connie Chung who loved the size and the Beefy Sound of Authority.  To painfully belabor a memory lane journey, the reason I resurrected the ECM50 in the 1990s was a sonic memory of an elder NBC Correspondent, Jack Perkins, who did a standup in some really crummy noise and when we got back to the feed point (way before internet) we were all thrilled at the minimal background sound. Been carrying an ECM50 around for the last 25 years.... I use it about twice a year.... can't fathom why we thought it was a great microphone though.

 

There should be quite a few surviving ECM50 out there...... as I remember, the 50 was silver and the 55 was black

 

Sawrab...... hassles are what we do.

Beefy. Yes. I played bass in a bluegrass band in the eighties and nineties. The beefy bottom end of the ECM 50 worked nicely with the Kay plywood bass. I would stick it in the f hole inside of a Yamaha motorcycle tail light grommet, which acted as a good vibration absorber. ( Info passed on to me from another bass player, BTW) The front of the mic poked out of the grommet about 1/4 inch into the body of the bass. Worked great for Pa systems. sounds like a weird position, but it worked well. Very little feedback issues, which agrees with David's  theory that the ECM 50 did isolate well.

Recording was another story. Usually with a large diaphragm condenser mic out in front near the bridge, or a Schoeps MK4 for some kind of isolation.

Anyways, long after I stopped using the ECM 50s for voice, I was still using them for their useful qualities.

 

Regards,

 

Jim Rillie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone ever use an ecm 50 on an acoustic guitar? Try it sometime. 

Sorry for the digression. 

CrewC

At the studio I seconded at we had a special clip for putting an ECM 50 into the sound hole, facing up towards the strings. Usually combined with a SDC like a AKG 451, or a Shure SM 81 pointing a little up the neck.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

" You knew full well what I meant. "

sorry, but I had to re-read it, and re-read it again to realize it might have not been what it actually said in colloquial English, and thus possibly an acceptable error from a non native speaker.

 

that L635 (lav version) is quite similar to early lav mic's (except for the flared top) ..

EV, Shure, Sennheiser, and AKG all made dynamic lac's, amongst other manufacturers.  Shure still makes one (and its on their excellent, thorough website)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<br />With regards to the Tram mic: someone said it was good at reducing ambient noise. <br />

You really had to read that over and over to understand what I was trying to say? That is a surprise to me. Of course I didn't think it was a SuperCMIT in Lav-form. <br /><br />So with regards to the dynamic lavs, I wasn't really looking for the names, although that is a start. What I was hoping for is personal experience (from anyone, of course) and an answer to the question: could they be of help in the OPs stated problem? <br />A few here have mentioned that dynamic mics are less susceptible to ambient noise (better wording?) and thus might be helpful. Except for their need to be placed close to the mouth. That's why I thought a dynamic lav could be the answer. ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

" Are you offering to vet people's language skills before posting? Or is this only a post-posting service that you offer? "

I have been warned that I need to be careful and not lower the bar by undercharging...

 

" That is a surprise to me. "

I have seen wilder mis-statements ...

and microphones do not reduce ambient noise, though some may seem less sensitive to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...