Johnny Karlsson

Well... almost. From Shure: "The SM57 and SM58 microphones are based on the same cartridge design. The main difference is in the grille design. The SM58 was designed for vocal application and it uses a ball grille that acts as an effective pop filter. The SM57 was designed as an instrument microphone where a smaller grille size is preferred. In this application, pop and wind are not usually a concern. The SM57 uses an integral resonator/grille assembly, where grille is actually a part of the cartridge. These two grille designs place the diaphragm of each microphone in a different acoustical environment. The distance from the top of the grille to the diaphragm is shorter on the SM57 compared to that of the SM58. This allows for a closer miking position with a more pronounced proximity effect. The different resonator/grille assembly design of the SM57 is also responsible for its slightly higher output above 5 kHz" --- You can't go wrong with a SM58, but personally, I prefer the Beta 58. I've had mine since 1995. It's has a slightly "better" high frequency response, and it's super cardioid, which improves monitor feedback resistance (if you're on stage).

Yes, Crew. I got to see this first hand, shooting some BTS and related thing there. I can't talk about any details, of course due to NDA. But I can say this; it's pretty amazing, and looks real. It does, however, have some aspects of it that are not exactly ideal for sound. You can use your imagination... For example, a lot of it will not sound like what it looks like. The mixer had to use some things to counter this. I think she did a great job, and successfully made it work.

Still a pretty good song compared to the price of new units. Two new transmitters alone would be about that price. Either way, gear should pay for itself over time with proper rental rates charged. I would recommend going for this. It will sound great with the 4061. It’s also sturdy, reliable kit and will give you good RF performance.

With a heat gun! On the low setting too. Eric is probably right that starting farther away from the heat might have helped. It was an old mic though, so the plastic may have been generally "brittle" already, which was the reason it needed repair in the first place. LOL - a match?? Sems like a very bad idea near any gear.

Just a word of caution: I once attempted to repair a DPA lav with shrink tubing close to the head. The result was that the plastic literally in a split second melted off the cable before the tubing even shrunk to size. YMMV.

If it's near the head, it's probably caused by the method of mounting the mic. But hey, if you've got 15 years out of a lav mic, I would that's a good run. You got your money's worth for sure. Perhaps it's time for a refresh...?

If this works as advertised, it looks like it could be a great tool. https://www.izotope.com/en/learn/introducing-dialogue-match.html?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=ACS&utm_campaign=2019+iZo+Newsletter&utm_content=All&utm_term=Nov+9 And hopefully will not become an excuse to foregoing getting good sound on set...

RF Explorer.

“they insist on adding pu on the name of the previous take. So after a full take 3 they will have a take 3 pickup. Which does not make sense” Agreed. Makes no sense. IMHO, slate would say “take 4pu”, but no need to even add “pu” to the file name. I would simply roll “take 4”. Anyone with notes, TC and common sense should be able to figure out what goes where.

And another one : https://www.sounddevices.com/product/888/

Assuming you have tried: - turning down the pre amp gain, - adjusting the input level trim in 633 ch 4-6, - engaged the hi-pass filter (70Hz?) in the 633 ch 4-6, - different cables.... - maybe this 633 needs to go in for a checkup...?

I haven’t looked at the actual specs, but just an idea to check: maybe this mic needs a full 48v phantom supplied. This would explain why it sounds fine when hard wired.

Copy. Thanks Larry!

Looking at the the UFM50... Could it be used as a passive filter if not feeding it power (not using the amp)? Just toying with the idea of having it be a 'filter only' when using short cable runs and then firing up power when/if needed for a remote antenna setup... or would one have to be swap it out for a PF50?

Agreed - the Stingray harness does take longer than I would ideally like. For run&gun stuff, this results in me keeping the bag on, rather than taking it off / putting it on - and instead find somewhere to sit whenever possible. Unless I know I'll be standing down for at least 10 min or so. BUT... once it's on, I feel that it really works for me - certainly better than anything I have tried. I have not tried the Orca, but just looking at it, I agree with what allistair said above. I definitely do not want anything sticking out the back..