jpbat

The chance to take a good picture of a wild animal is small. Even a still picture. The chance of recording a good sound of a wild animal is smaller. Any of those activities require the patience of a stone. The chance to have the two occurring at the same time are near zero. As said Olle : "One for image, one for sound, is how one makes movies." And as said the Senator : "anyone who thinks there is a mic that will cleanly, clearly, closely, perfectly pick up the rustle of a bird in its nest 100 meters away has been watching too much television." Sorry, but now you know. (I spent ten years of my life in the wild doing sound recordings. A shotgun on a camera isn't going to make it. This is magic thinking)

Depending on the show, a mic on the camera can be a very good idea, or a very bad one. There is a show I'm doing where it's a *very* good idea. The camera has 4 tracks, and I make use of any of them. On the 4th track, there is *always* the camera mic, which is actually a KMR81 with a Softie, because it's in my drawer doing nothing. In case you wonder, I talk with the editing guys everyday, and we work with each other pretty well since 5 years on this show. Most of the time, they don't use the 4th track, but there has been a few occurrences when it helped, or even saved the shot. Which is precisely the purpose. But there are shows where I would never put a mic on the camera.

Since I'm generally not even allowed to be in the small plane/helico myself, and given I have 5 minutes to find a solution, I put a lav inside the camera guy's headphones with a piece of gaffer, fix the transmitter somewhere outside of the way, stick an old 190 Lectro on the camera, put that channel in auto, verify that the levels are not hitting too hard the limiter, and go grab a coffee when they fly. That's the best I can do, right ? Actually the result is perfectly fine, the right level of ambient noise and "grit" on the voices to know you are in a plane. Also, be right there when they land. Everybody will want to go out there as fast as possible, will have forgot everything about the rig, and will tear out each and every wires they can in a matter of seconds.

+1 for the car, although always on the rear seats. If not, the reflections on the windshield are awful. And I found a regular handheld dynamic omni mic, really close-up, gives the best results. Too good, the mic reveals the drawbacks of the place too much. We shouldn't do voice-over outside a proper recording environment in the first place, but productions needs are what they are, so... they have the result they deserve. And, actually they don't care, because they don't hear any difference. And even if, efficiency beats quality any time on those low budget TV prods. It happens quite often these days that I'm asked to record VO's in some very inappropriate places, where the color of the room is really audible, and it seems I'm the only one to notice the horror. So... I cash the check anyway.

I'll have to try those Westone. I carry my old Etymotics in the bag at any time for high level of ambient noise situations, but the problem I got with the IEM's is that they are difficult to put/remove. And since they protect very well from the outside noise, you have to put/remove them often, loosing a few seconds each time. But they have their place, of course.

With a hat, I use the PMX 60 Sennheiser. Not bad (better than the Sony's offerings), actually this is the best I found. I tried, a few years ago, all the models I could get my hands on. Don't know about the PMX *90*, the PMX60 is more expensive, so is supposed to be better (?) This is a consumer product, look at Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/Sennheiser-PMX-60-Lightweight-Headphones/dp/B00009LI55 In any case, the behind-the-neck design is a nice approach in some case (run-n-gun, reality shows, extreme conditions) where the practicality take precedence, but there is a trade-off in the audio quality. I learned to live with the drawbacks quite well. Works for me.

Truth. Not only it sounds wonderful, but nice medium wind protection is included. Traditional lavalier + transmitter installation on anybody at any temperature under zero celsius is no fun. Anything that helps is welcome. (don't talk about today in Montreal, OK ? I'm getting a bit old, I'm afraid)

I had to make the same move last year. I would've make another bag but it's not only the mixer, there is also all the other gear, the cabling, the configuration, the BDS system... too expensive to maintain. So the SQN is now recording my guitars. It excels at the task, too...

Two pairs of mittens. One polar, one leather. You can remove them easily depending of the level of precision you need. With the polar mittens, no problems with switches and pots. Avoid anything that block the blood circulation. No gloves, no convertible mittens. And just to contradict myself, I recently found a super thin silk pair of gloves that I can use on an iPhone screen (another recent type of trouble that needs another approach). So if the weather is not that bad (like no more than -12/-15 Celsius without wind) I tend to wear those as a first layer. But even if I bought the too large model for my hands, they have a negative effect on the blood circulation, anyway.

There is one thing that is good with digital equipment in cold weather : it stays warm much better than analog. All these moving 0's and 1's are generating heat. Less problems. (I operate in Quebec, so I have my share of outdoor shoots all day long by freezing temperature) Unfortunately, we, poor humans, are not digital yet. But this is something to experiment the *complete* silence outside a recording studio. You have to be on the Arctic ice in winter, but worth it.

I don't know about a commercial version, but I use a stethoscope as a source (among many others) on my musical projects (not the guitar ones, although I have something in progress that mix the two worlds) Anyway, I just put a lavaliere in one of the "ear" of the stethoscope. Weird results, but this is the purpose. I generally use one of my remaining Sony ECM70, but mainly because they have the right dimension (and I got a boatload of them in the drawers)

Never tested really, but the reception on the R1 depends also of the headphones wire which acts as an antenna. An UCR 100 could be more predictable maybe.

Don't worry too much, I was in the exact same situation a few weeks ago (LMa feeding R1a in the wrong mode). [face palm...] Larry himself came to the rescue. In the occasion, I learned that a UCR 100 receiver *can* be used (in a pinch) with a LMa in IFB mode. Not good, but better than the other way around, which gives, as you noticed, an interesting but unusable result.

The LM is back from repair, and the UCR100 sounds *way* better when receiving an IFB mode signal (not much bass, but clear signal...). No comparison with a R1 of course, but usable in a pinch. I bought two R1 for my plan to work, but I know now that I *can* use the UCR100 as a spare. Thanks Larry.

(ahem) it *depends* (of the film) I own and use a R24 for personal projects. Fine machine (disclaimer) for the price (although i'm using maybe a tenth, at best, of what the machine can do, it's actually unbelievable what it delivers for two peanuts and a half). But I'll not use it in my usual (paid) professional duties. Too much drawbacks to deal with.

Thanks Larry. (we love you) I tested the R1 with the LM in mode 100, and the sound off the R1 was way bad : boomy lows, no highs to speak of. Unusable. Now when I wanted to test the other way round (emitting in IFB mode to see how the UCR100 is receiving), the LM stopped working, and is presently on my tech's bench. The experimentation will take place in a few days. Another point : since the R1 uses the headphone cable as an antenna, what about using it in a bag, feeding the monitor input of a mixer ? One foot of Mogami wire buried inside the bag... is it an issue ?

I use a Lectro LM transmitter to monitor the camera I'm feeding wirelessly. A UCR100 is in my bag to receive the signal. So far so good. I would like to use R1 IFB receiver for people how need to monitor the sound. But I can't transmit *at the same time* on the UCR100 and the R1, right ? The 100 mode and the IFB mode aren't compatible, ok ? (I know... but I ask anyway, maybe... a miracle ? something ?... :-)

Stretching a condom on a mic gives a very funky result. Not what you want to hear, except for SFX. Even then.

I used several (and the A77 too, and also the Studer's) in the 70's and 80's. The very first "serious" guitar recording I made (in... ahem... 1970), was on a friend's B77. I sold my last one around 1988 (I guess...) These machine where everywhere. I wouldn't be surprised if some "B77 aficionados group" exist somewhere on the inter web. Good luck with yours.

I love it for run & gun situation. Very fast to deploy. You're not the only one. For a drama i'm not so sure, cause you cannot turn the pole (along the axe), or swing it like a standard one, for example to follow several characters. And it's 9' only max. More appropriate in doco IMO.

I use the Neos line since a few years now with great success. A small pair for the city, and a bigger pair for outside trips. I have Baffin and Sorel too but I prefer the Neos now. In Quebec we have pretty rough days in winter. The trick is keeping the feet dry. Have several pairs of socks, and change during the day.

Thanks guys of the wealth of info. For what I have in mind (low to medium level sources), I'll choose the 4060. And I will avoid the micro-dot altogether and solder a TA5F in there. I don't plan to use them with anything else than Lectros.

For use mainly on SM Lectro, what is the most appropriate ? The 4060 is the most sensitive, right ? Is it too much for a "general" application ? (say, dialog *and* occasional music recording, like chamber orchestra, or symphonic, or anything acoustic) Should the 4061, less sensitive, be more adequate ?

I didn't go any further after my investigation (came to the conclusion that it was no piece of cake...), and took another route (passive premix in a regular input) But thanks Chris for the schematic, which will be kept in archives for future use.

I use that way. I feel officially old school now.