The Immoral Mr Teas

Wow - 99 dollars the Neumann - I’ve seen everything (tho with Neumann i’ve seen it all before I guess) the Smallrig (images) of the shock absorbers with (seemingly and hopefully) 3/8” (+ camera) threads look interesting to me ... I've collected several of the old rycote absorbers over the years but now it’s easy to pick up M5 (and M3) absorbers which can work with the - also sadly discontinued (older) - rycote modular bars: cheers Dan, I’ll look into those hmm, actually 99 bucks for anything Neumann seems genuinely cheap in retrospect! Heh, Jez

Audio Technica AT822 as a starting point. Simple, reliable, around the same quality / price point as the rode blimp, and once again, simple: slightly spaced from an XY pattern and you’ll get to learn how its fixed pattern works with the recordings you make so that eventually you will have a good idea from experience what mics and patterns you want to use for what purpose. Another alternative for nature recording would be two DPA 4060 lavalier mics, just spaced to either end of the blimp (so the mics each lie centrally where the end cap starts), but 4060s are expensive. Really, the best place to look and ask is nature sound recording groups who will have a much more thorough discussion of mics and accessories over a range of budgets - ie, two much cheaper omnis, or subcardioids like the Line Audio CM3 (I think) spaced either end of the blimp could be perfect for your needs. But you have to start recording to gain the experience of what works and what doesn’t, for differing subjects, recording conditions and desired results: most here record dialogue for film or ‘the needed sound’ for documentary etc, and end up with a wide range of tools to achieve the job. www.naturesounds.org? Omni mics are more forgiving of wind (whilst keeping often a superior low frequency response) than shotgun types like the NTG2 and it’s pretty much a scale of forgiveness between omni and directional/fig 8. A wider (fatter) windshield (stereo AD, AE, AF type rycote etc) offers more wind protection than a narrower one as there is more dead air between the mic capsule and the wind protection, regardless of mic type. You should be looking at keeping the capsule 3cm plus from the basket wall so attempting to fit stereo assemblies within a single basket is tricky even with a larger width ... and some mics (often the better ones!) need better suspension and wind protection than others. Best, Jez

About a year ago Michael this would possibly have slightly increased my enthusiasm of TBL’s dark web or whatever it calls itself these days. But if we are unable to second guess the RUR faction and they are happy to play the long game tantalising us with Kudelski parts then it seems Asimov was right. And we are doomed. I am now making sure ALL my Nagra accessories are wrapped up in extra thick black leather and safely zipped and press studded away. Thank you!! Jez

Or “awfultone” as we called them! Jez

Oh, this isn’t new Karl, I’ve had this technology in my kit since 1066!

Bumping this as I expect there are folks who may be able to answer ... assume Nothingham was an unexpected prediction of NAGRA, so “khaldrogo”, if you are able to change the thread title to Nagra Stabiliser Roller you might get the answers you need good luck, Jez Oh, and if it is a Nagra let us know what model (III, IV-L, IV-S, 4.2 or other). And if you don’t already know there is a very popular long running thread on all things Nagra on the Images Of Interest pages.

Ivanovich - excellent comparison; Jim, I’m with you! But somehow I’ve ended up with two sets of Genelecs, four pairs of Sonys, and not an NS10 in sight. Though I rather like another cheap Yamaha monitor my friend uses ... my cheap choice is the Fostex FM series edit (new to jw changes sorry) fostex pm

Not sure if it was because I was the last of the thread previously or because I’ve just had a few socially distant beers bought for me ... but, I’ve actually recently picked up my FOURTH set of 7506s despite what I’ve said and think about them, this time second hand because they were a cheap extra set of level limited phones which I can always use. All my sets now have crumbling pads (with new covers over them) but the “treble harsh and overwhelming “ was always there from new! For me, so far, apart from the earpads (in all cases less old than my DT phones where the ear pads are fine) I am pleased to say that they have not changed one bit! Jez

Hi Merijn, welcome to JWS. I’ve had my stereo pair of MKH 8040 cardioids since pretty much they were introduced, 2007 or 2008. I use them with softies, homemade softies, light waves and BBGs but always cover the back end with a short cut strip of tubular foam to catch the microphony wind noise when doing so. Find some cheap (pound shop) bicycle handlebar foam strips and cut them to just cover the remaining body length and a tad more over the XLR ... it’s the body of the MXS which is sensitive so you don’t have to cover the entire XLR. I prefer using a slightly softer handlebar foam than the more rigid but I doubt it actually makes any difference, it’s just covering the MXS xlr mic shell that’s important. Depending on how you’re using clips /suspensions it’s fairly easy to cut slits through handlebar foam to accommodate them without compromising where wind might hit: if using the mic clips which come with 8020 etc series just cut a slit 3cm at the bottom where the clip goes and all is covered fine. If using suspensions or whatever have a play about but I’ve never not been able to sort it out. If using supersofties I would be personally tempted to pull a nylon short stocking over the whole apparatus just as a final thing but again, that’s just me- I wouldn’t say it’s necessary. Really, in more than ten years this has solved the microphony noise problem whenever wind has been light enough to not need a full contained zeppelin- and possibly like you when wind is not an issue at all I am happy to use my Bruel and Kjaer omnis outside with absolutely no wind protection at all ... but this doesn’t happen all that often! In comparison, I would think that my 8040 body shells are more sensitive to wind/touch etc than my MKH40 but not even as much as my Schoeps which I couldn’t imagine using without suspension or cover. Hope this helps (and sets your mind at rest when you get a chance to find an open shop), best, Jez

Hmm, don’t have one (and prob never will) but is it not a question of the air around it optimising the successfulness? So a BBG or similar would be a good outdoor choice (long enough - I think so?) otherwise, going thinner, a ‘lightwave’ tube with windjammer? Yep I know this is not much help (ie there probably isn’t a ready made suspension with windshield option available) but I reckon it’s diy... possibly just a softie with a little extra foam for suspension and the softie attached somehow to the boom? Like I might do with 4060s (albeit not booming..!) ??? Jez

Hi Nicky, I filmed an octogenarian choir on the Polish Ukrainian border several years ago - a great time and a great bunch of folk and I hope they’re all getting close to or surpassing the 100 years ... Too many useful replies already to try to quote examples, but I would say this is one situation where I would try to get an MS rig in there : I am saying this as a post person and potential dubbing mixer ... 1: boom (swing boom) in mono - the S is both useless and a distraction in a non-fixed position for post and ambience can or will be added or faked even for the “deliverable necessities” so don’t worry about that - ‘content’ requires mono - “the message”! 2: if you decide to try MS (and having an MKH30 I think you should) use it only for fixed mic positions for subjects when there is a likelihood they may burst out in song (=all the time as far as your director is concerned!!) So, with that in mind: try to work out - can you swing a boom and have a stand ready with an MS rig? Does the MKH50 always have to be paired with the 30 on a suspension? I kind of go with Fred saying have a separate stereo ambience rig on a stand and two boom options for inside/outside. I also think that a wider mic than the 50 (even the 40 is a narrow cardioid) could be a nicer choice. But will you have this opportunity or speed to set up on the job? I don’t know- you might have a leisurely shoot or a frantic shoot. I would consider either having a totally separate MS rig (with stand) for all the music stuff (even the ambience, but for me this is secondary and less important from a content point of view) and a boom with indoors/outdoors choices, or have the mkh50 always ready with the 30. Just know that when “booming” MS to act like a tripod not like a boom. And let post know when, why and how you recorded the MS tracks (so if there are sudden shifts then post is aware). Big (stereo) rycotes are I believe considerably harder to boom than normal ones: I’m not sure what you have yourself. I would consider quicklocks between say 50 and 416, and maybe some easy way to mount a 30 to the 50 if you go that way - compromising the 30 but ensuring the 50 is good for sound. But it depends on what you and the director expect to record in what condition (specifically interior or exterior). There’s the possibility of keeping the 50 in a suspension with a clip to add the 30 when desired? Be aware the 30 will be microphonically (handling noise) more sensitive if it’s on an extra cable - which is why I like the older stereo connbox with plug in cables when working with either/or mono and stereo. One bonus for MS worth thinking about beyond filming is the (once in a lifetime) voices recorded have an extra ambience for eg a record release beyond the documentary. Enjoy the job. Best skies I have seen besides the Himalayas... Jez Adamson

Been away from JWS for quite some time. RIP Eric, and thanks! Jez x

I agree this is a really great thread with some good information (not to mention pics too)! To some extent I don't think it is the broadcast rerecording mixer who is to blame for the excessive dynamic range (although sometimes it most definitely is). It is usually the 'direct employer' of said mixer (who indeed may employ said mixer because they have a mutual understanding what dynamic range ought to be on a TV show)!? Have loudness standards really improved the intelligibility of dialogue ... ? Next, Izen Ears, "Those were the days" ... they're still with us in part: for every unconcerned team there's a concerned team; for every lousy location there's an ideal location; for every star who alternates SHOUTS and (whispers) there is an old stalwart who provides the same performance take after take... Hell, if it wasn't fun why the hell do it? Interesting thread from the same question we periodically ask ourselves! The stage pictures and RCA ribbons are a delight for me, thank you! Jez

Hi Dan, to answer your question to me first, as dialogue editor I would be looking for mono fill for the dialogue track(s) - being the 'fill' track which may have been recorded by the PSM specifically to help me with the edit. Of course there is nothing to stop me just using one leg of a stereo track if room tone has been recorded in stereo. If I'm handling the ATMOS tracks (which I might well do as a dialogue or effects editor on a job with a few editors) as well as the fill I would most usually put a couple of tracks of stereo room tone, although if I had a good track which fit the scene of a 4.0 or 5.0 I might use that (those). Although this really does depend on the film how we decide to prepare the tracks. Note that I am talking here about "bland" room tone, NOT a detailed ambient recording. Two stereo tracks is often sufficient to be blended and panned multichannel and fill out the mix (remember that the dialogue tracks and more characterful Atmos tracks are also present). In fact an added difficulty of recording a 'plain air' track in 4 or 5 channels rather than 2 is that attention-grabbing little sounds or areas become far more noticeable. Of course this 'difficulty' becomes an asset when recording an ambience (like a country or city scape) where you want to breath life into the sound and to some extent draw the audience attention toward it. I have recorded room tones (as opposed to atmos) in multichannel but it is only when conditions are very good (location acoustic) that you will get tracks suitable for this purpose. Again, if the conditions, and thus sound, was more characteristic, bingo, you are recording not a room tone but an interior and there is nothing to stop an editor using two legs of a blandish multichannel interior to reduce the stereo perception. You probably weren't asking me for a differentiation between room tone and atmos but you did use the term so got my answer thus. Back to the issue of ambisonics. I avoid it in film generally (search elsewhere why). For recording multichannel ambiences I actually favour a 4.0 approach but often go 5.0 (or am asked to) amusingly for its 'resale' value perception (people [think they] know what 5.1 is and it is surely superior to four point ... whatever it is you just did)! I often go for spaced omnis for all types of film effects but would push people to consider IRT recording. So a brief look back to your original post (which I'm afraid I can't be much help with either). For 1 and 2, I would say the first mics to buy for film making are a hyper and a shotgun. Perhaps you already have these, perhaps you have no intention to record dialogue but ONLY find jobs where you record effects and atmospheres. I'm not sure what your position is so couldn't think to give advice. For recording effects and field recording in general I would suggest a pair of cardioids or a pair of omnis, or both pairs. For multichannel that's 4 of either or of both. For 3, I have no experience so wouldn't have commented, but I notice that many are using ambisonics so that's very probably the route to go down. Again (2 again) if you want to sell ambisonic recordings then get an ambisonic mic: I am not in the marketplace for such recordings however. Personally I had several other mics before I bought my Soundfield or put together my first MS rigs. I use neither generally for film fx recording generally though but they both have other uses. My principal mics for fx are cardioids and omnis although others get a lot of use. My inkling, especially if '3' is really a plan, is to buy, hire or indeed build(?) an ambisonic mic and start experimenting with it. I must say I hadn't realised but am much impressed by your proposed intention to build an ambisonic mic, and a second order one at that! Me, I'm scared to solder a hirose .... Best, Jez Addendum for Werner - are you talking about post for broadcast or for feature film? It is the latter I do not like ambisonics (nor indeed MS) for. I also worked (over the decades) in TV, radio, music where I consider such phase related techniques an asset rather than an issue to manage.