Jump to content

Mike H

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mike H

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interested in Sound for Picture
  • About
    Sound mixing/mastering.

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Mike H

    Which Schoeps mics for documentaries?

    I see that the PIA-1 weighs 370g, or 13oz. That is almost a pound! Has this bothered you? We are going light with a Zaxcom ZMT3.5-Phantom mounted on the pole. I'm just worried about the extra weight. Needless worry? Thank you for reinforcing the choice. The info on use is helpful.
  2. Mike H

    Which Schoeps mics for documentaries?

    Thanks, I think this is where I end up: MK4/MK41/CMIT5. We'll still have the 416, of course, for comparison. There are options for wind screens: 1. B5D - hollow foam - minimal 2. W5D - large hollow foam - for heavier wind 3. PIA-1 - elaborate basket windscreen for CMIT5. Do you use any of these?
  3. Mike H

    Which Schoeps mics for documentaries?

    In response to comments: 1. When only one subject is involved, we are fine with what we have when the subject is stationary. Either 416 or lav will work. However, the 416 is less than ideal in indoor situations with sound reflecting off walls. 2. When walking outdoors and using the Steadicam, the 416 is too focused because you can't easily hold it perfectly on the subject. Normally we use the lav mic here, but then when others come into the discussion, the 416 is just too narrow. 3. The 416 is simply too narrow in any group discussions when people are talking quickly back and forth. 4. Yes, we work to minimize distances to subjects. But sometimes you can't control this like you'd like. The 416 and 4063 are great mics, they work fine within their designs. The idea is to get some additional mics (maybe omni, wide cardioid, etc.) that will be more suitable for group situations, that is all we are looking at.
  4. I am looking at a Schoeps kit for documentary work. Currently have only MKH 416 and DPA 4063 lav. Many situations don't work with these mics: Stationary single person interview (3-10ft to subject) – Can lock in on subject at +/-15 degrees – Usually inside but sometimes outside. Walking, outside interview with Steadicam (6-12ft) – Subject can get off-center, maybe +/- 30 degrees. Discussion with 3-5 people (6-12ft.) - Spread across 120-180 degrees – Often in a barn, winery, or outside. I know it is preferable to use much shorter mic-to-subject distances, but if you're talking with farm or vineyard workers on-the-job, they don't easily stand in close to a boomed mic. So, have to deal with it. The stated distances are worst case. Here are two options I am considering: - CMC6U amp, CUT60, MK2XS/MK4/MK21/MK41 capsules, or - Drop the Omni and add a shotgun: CMC6U amp, CUT60, MK4/MK21/MK41/CMIT5. There are obviously lots of possible combinations. BTW, I do not want to trigger a Schoeps vs. Sennheiser debate. I know Sennheiser has a modular system also, and both brands are outstanding. I am just looking at Schoeps right now. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks you!
  5. Jack, Thank you. A very simple explanation that I can understand. On the last job I got a waveform that was flat at -6dBFs, with a few spikes above this. The audio did not sound like clipping, but it was muffled and not useable. I found the compressor threshold set at -6dBFs with attack on fast. I don't know what happened; I guess I somehow set the transmitter gain above -6dBFs and missed it on the check. I don't understand the peaks above -6dBFs that "blew through" the compressor. So this made my aversion to compression during tracking even worse. Based on what you said, am I correct that I could: (1) Switch the compressor off by setting the threshold at 0 (2) Monitor the 702 level during sound check and set the transmitter gain so that the peaks are around -10dBFs (or lower if the dynamic range is high) (3) Switch the 702 limiter off and simply rely on the NeverClip to prevent clipping if I have an occasional spike. This would keep me out of possible trouble with the compressor. You are confident enough in NeverClip to rely on it alone?
  6. Thank you very much Tom for taking the time to explain this. It really helps. Since, just from habit, I am more comfortable compressing in post, I will probably try setting the threshold closer to -2dBFs with say 4:1 ratio and treat it more as a limiter. But I will try your settings also; maybe I will become more comfortable with it. Two questions please: (1) You say you use a limiter also. I assume this is a limiter in your recorder, as I do with the 702. Is this correct? (2) Can you tell me how NeverClip fits into what we are talking about? I have seen several threads on this, but I honestly don't understand how it works and what it does. Is it intended to avoid clipping during the wireless transmission? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks again.
  7. Mike H

    Worth buying IFB200 for a simple mono system?

    Will a used IFB100 do everything I need?
  8. For sitting interviews, I normally run a wired Sennheiser MKH-416 mic into a Sound Devices 702 and adjust input level for max peaks at around -10dB below clipping. I have the 702 limiter on but it is rarely needed, only for sudden loud unexpected sounds (laughs, coughs, etc.). For field interviews, I use: - DPA 4063 lav mic - Zaxcom TRXLA3 transmitter - Zaxcom QRX200 - Sound Devices 702 recorder. I recently experienced clipping with the TRXLA3 during an interview. Possibly I somehow incorrectly setup the compressor. I don't want any compression to occur during recording; if I do any, I can do it in post. Zaxcom tech support's advice was "Set max peaks at -20dB." Well yes, that will probably do it but signal/noise ratio can become a problem at this level, at least in analog systems. I've done studio recording for years and never set peaks that low. My questions are about how you set up your TRXLA3: What max peak level do you adjust gain to? What settings do you use for the compressor (most importantly threshold)?
  9. I have a basic system for recording mono audio during field interview shoots: - DPA 4063 lav mic - Zaxcom TRXLA3 transmitter - Zaxcom QRX200 - Sound Devices 702 recorder. I bought this system last year based on advice here on the forum and it has worked extremely well. However, it is a real pain during setup/soundcheck adjusting the transmitter level. I never anticipated this, just lack of knowledge. You can only ask the talent so many times to let you reach under his shirt. I believe the IFB200 transceiver is what I'd need to be able to adjust transmitter level remotely. I'm just asking for advice on this. The cost is about twice what I'd like to pay for this basic 2-person operation, but I don't see an option. Many of you use the IFB200? Work well? Worth buying?
  10. Jeff, Is the audio recorded to the Zaxcom transmitter recorder ever used for the final product, rather than the wirelessly transmitted signal? For example, wirelessly transmit the signal to headphones for monitoring and to the camera to enable audio wave sync in post, but otherwise not use the wireless signal?
  11. OK, well stated, I won't belabor it anymore. That I can understand. And I understand that a more limited frequency range can be adequate for speech (rather than music). I would only suggest to Zaxcom that the TRXLA3 specs be changed or elaborated upon because stating 24/48 implies (at least to the uninitiated like me) that these will be the specs of the digital data transmitted. It just seems misleading to me. Enough said. I agree that the sound is what matters. We will rent gear and compare Zaxcom and Lectrosonics sound quality before making a final decision (DPA lav mics, Zaxcom TRXLA3/QRX200, Lectrosonics LT A1/LR A1). Regarding sample rate of the 702 recorded material, I don't see a problem recording at 96kHz and then SRCing when later going into Pro Tools. Any problem with this, other than doubling the amount of recorded data? Thanks again for all the help. I'll report back on the results of the sound quality comparison.
  12. I'm sorry but I don't understand what you said. The TRXLA3 A-to-D conversion sample rate is 48kHz (if I read the TRXLA3 specs correctly). So the digital files being sent to the receiver should retain the 48kHz-sampled file information.............or does the wireless transmission change this somehow? I also note that the specs say 24-bit. This should define the operable frequency range, shouldn't it? Sorry but I am not knowledgeable about the effect of the wireless transmission on content of digital data. Clearly I am missing something. Sorry.
  13. Oh, I missed that. So, in looking at the QRX200 manual, I can set the digital output sample rate to either (1) Normal [which I assume is 32kHz rather than 48kHz] or (2) 96kHz. Do I read this correctly that, if I select 96kHz: - the QRX200 will upsample the 48kHz digital file from the TRXLA3 to 96kHz - I will thus retain all the 48kHz information in the 96kHz digital output to the Sound Devices 702 - I can then sample rate convert back to 48kHz in transferring to Pro Tools in post and not lose any original 48kHz information. Am I correct on this?
  14. rich, I was referring to the sample rate of the A-to-D in the transmitter. There is no need to convert in the receiver. As a mixing/mastering guy for almost 20 years, I will respectfully have to disagree with you on 48kHz vs 32kHz (although I will admit I certainly may be wrong for more common uses, versus mixing music). Just say it is a bias I cannot overcome. But as I said above, the spec sheet says the TRXLA3 sample rate is 48kHz: https://zaxcom.com/products/trxla3/ If this is correct then I am happy. Glenn and Jack, Thank you.
  15. Thank you Glenn. Subsequently, I did get some good info from Nick at Gotham Sound NYC, plus your Tech Support: - I should be looking at the TRXLA3.5 and the QRX200. - The QRX200 can receive ZHD modulation, but cannot take advantage of the narrow bands. For my simple system with few channels this is not an issue. In fact, I should use XR instead because of slight advantage in sound quality and latency. - Your transmitter converts A-to-D, then transmits digital. The QRX200 can send either analog or digital to the Sound Devices 702, so digital out will avoid any conversions at that end. - There was some confusion on ADC sample rate (32kHz vs 48kHz), but in the specs for the TRXLA3 on your website I find it says 24-bit/48kHz. (48kHz is just right, much better than 32kHz). - Major advantages: Recorder in transmitter for backup (a big one); only one conversion (A-to-D) versus several (a big one); potential to use narrow bands with a different receiver in the future if my system becomes much more complex (maybe useful, but not any time soon).. So, for right now I have my questions answered, Glenn............except for a few more: - I am nervous about buying a receiver just before you produce a dedicated ZHD one. However, am I correct that a dedicated ZHD receiver is a poor choice for a simple system, since I could only use ZHD with the new receiver? - I am planning on buying the DPA 4060 mic, but I have gotten some advice that I should buy the 4063 to properly match bias. Then I've been told no, some users have had problems with the 4063 and Zaxcom receivers. I wish to buy the 4060, a tried and true product.........is this OK? - Any other major advantages I missed? Thanks, Glenn.