Jump to content

Lavalier mics with low ambient noise


RogerBansemer

Recommended Posts

I'm new to the forum but glad to find it thanks to someone over at the Sony Vegas forum.

My wife Sarah and I film and produce a PBS television series called Painting and Travel. We shoot on location and often auto traffic, etc is a problem as I'm doing one of my paintings on camera.

I need to use a lavalier mike and we have two. One omni directional and one lavalier. Both sennheisser.

I recently was told that an "un-sensitive" mike is what I need. I was not familiar with this term.

Can anyone begin to clarify this and give me some suggestions as to what we might use.

I didn't know it but apparently the mics come rated as -20db, -40db, etc.

I'd sure like to get a mic that will suit us better so we won't constantly have to deal with so much post audio trying to get rid of unwanted sounds.

Thanks

Roger

www.paintingandtravel.com

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 118
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You can get lav mics that are "padded" so they can handle louder sounds. Effectively, this will only help if the person wearing it speaks louder. This will bring up the voice but lower the BG noise.

If you are ok seeing the mic on camera, maybe you can try a headworn mic, such as the Countryman E6, this will put the mic very close to the sound source ( mouth) effectively reducing BG noise.

Another option is a directional lav.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen this term thrown around a lot too.... I most often hear it regarding Trams and old mikes like ECM-50s though, in that they are "less sensitive" to the surrounding ambient noise. Comparably the COS-11s seem to hear everything. I never did an A/B of this, but the Trams do seem to pick up less of something when I've used them. 

 

There is also the concept of "proximity lavs" which I was going to make a thread about. What the hell are they? And why is it that nobody seems to use them. ECM-55, Countryman EMW, and apparently VT500s are "proximity lavs". But if I go look on Coffey Sound and Picture at articles about TV shows, everybody just uses COS-11s anyway—indoors and out. So what do they do? 

 

 

The dot rating (Sanken green vs Sanken red, for example) of microphones wouldn't help you, I think, unless you shouted everything all the time. 

 

 

Are you guys doing post yourselves? What about getting yourselves Izotope RX 2 to improve the post side of things a bit? 

 

 

EDIT: You can also put mikes up at the throat to improve signal-to-noise. If it's just you, you could put two lavs on up there for head turns.... 

 

 

Sawrab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All mics are affected by their proximity or distance to the sound source. The closer the mic is to the source the louder it sounds. All mics hear everything, some by polar pattern design hear less at certain points of the polar pattern so the ambient sound is surpressed relative to the main sound source. Since almost all lavs used in production sound are omni directional they will hear equally in a 360 degree circle. A mics sensitivity has a lot to do with how well it hears what's around it. 

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All mics are affected by their proximity or distance to the sound source. The closer the mic is to the source the louder it sounds. All mics hear everything, some by polar pattern design hear less at certain points of the polar pattern so the ambient sound is surpressed relative to the main sound source. Since almost all lavs used in production sound are omni directional they will hear equally in a 360 degree circle. A mics sensitivity has a lot to do with how well it hears what's around it. 

 

Eric

 

Not only the Tram but on this site some have said the Sonotrim is also good for reducing ambient noise. And I did mention the VT500 and EMW. I'm seeing a pattern of side-address mikes here. Does this have something to do with it? 

 

You can also face them into the vampire or tape-down clip for some more suppression. 

 

 

 

Sawrab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you guys seen that directional 'gun mic' lav made by DPA?

I haven't tried it yet but it looks interesting (if the talent is doing a piece to camera without headturns).

 

Jan said over in Simon's that she found that the DPA lavs (4060 series) actually picked up less ambience than the COS-11s, and those picked up less ambience than the B6. Interesting. You wouldn't think so. And I believe the Country B6 is considered a proximity lav too. Maybe because they are "proximity" you don't get the benefit unless they're right up at the throat? 

 

 

 

 

Sawrab

Edited by srab1138
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all these replys. To answer a few of the questions... I do a lot of head turns during our show but a compressor helps and also I use a program in post called "vocal rider" which evens out things nicely.

I also rely on iZotpe quite a bit which is wonderful.

I'm not up to speed on any technical jargon or terms so forgive me.

I'm naturally soft spoken and keeping up volume on my voice for an hour isn't possible as the program is very conversational so the padded mic (not even sure what that is) probably won't work.

I do place the mic close to my throat as possible but wearing a head set type mic wouldn't work as I don't want it to show near my face.

 

On B&H Camera they have a DPA Microphone - 4061 omnidirectional miniature low-sensivity mike. Is that something that would fit the bill? The low sensitivity thing is what I was told would work best in my case.

 

There must be a realistic soloution to this because I watch weathermen in hurricanes standing in surf and I can't hear the waves and reporters on busy street corners and I can barely hear the semi that rolls by. I know they are using hand held mics but isn't there something compatable with a lav?

I'm really stumped on this and have been for a long time..

Thanks

Roger

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm new to the forum but glad to find it thanks to someone over at the Sony Vegas forum.

My wife Sarah and I film and produce a PBS television series called Painting and Travel. We shoot on location and often auto traffic, etc is a problem as I'm doing one of my paintings on camera.

I need to use a lavalier mike and we have two. One omni directional and one lavalier. Both sennheisser.

I recently was told that an "un-sensitive" mike is what I need. I was not familiar with this term.

Can anyone begin to clarify this and give me some suggestions as to what we might use.

I didn't know it but apparently the mics come rated as -20db, -40db, etc.

I'd sure like to get a mic that will suit us better so we won't constantly have to deal with so much post audio trying to get rid of unwanted sounds.

Thanks

Roger

www.paintingandtravel.com

Hi Roger,

Reducing all the above comments to a simple statement, a low sensitivity mic will not reduce background noise or change it one iota. It is a common misconception that it will help. Low sensitivity reduces all sounds including those that you want and it reduces all of them equally. Since you now have to turn up the gain of the mixer to get your desired sound levels back up, you are right back where you would be with a standard sensitivity lavaliere. A crude analogy is that you can cut background noise by sticking your fingers in your ears but it won't help you hear any better. Getting the mic closer to the person's mouth is the only strong solution. Directional lavalieres might be of a little help.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger, I had a look at the sample show on your website. I wonder whether a lavalier is your only alternative. You might have a look at these Schoeps microphones: http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/categories/special_speech

 

The CCM mics are quite small, and with the MK series mics it is possible to separate the microphone itself, which is very small, and the microphone amplifier, by using a cable:  http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/kc/overview

 

Might not work for you, but perhaps worth a look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On B&H Camera they have a DPA Microphone - 4061 omnidirectional miniature low-sensivity mike. Is that something that would fit the bill? The low sensitivity thing is what I was told would work best in my case. 

 

I think we have an issue of jargon/semantics here. When a microphone is sold as "low-sensitivity" it refers to the the microphone's actual response, and is used for shouting or gunfire or something like that.

 

But when we talk about whether a microphone is "less sensitive" such as a Tram being "less sensitive" than a "COS-11" we are talking about how clearly it is hearing the ambient noise. I don't believe any ambiennce is reduced, it is just heard less clearly and becomes "less of a problem". Trams are a much older brand of microphones than the COS-11 and this may be why. It's just not as accurate. No microphones are sold because of this, however. There is no convention for this way of using the words. It's a thing that people say -- colloquialism. 

 

 

 

Sawrab

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

here must be a realistic soloution to this because I watch weathermen in hurricanes standing in surf and I can't hear the waves and reporters on busy street corners and I can barely hear the semi that rolls by. I know they are using hand held mics but isn't there something compatable with a lav?

I'm really stumped on this and have been for a long time..

Thanks

Roger

 

Hi Roger,

You will also note that the handheld mics are held right next to their mouths, not down on their chests or collars where a lavaliere is usually mounted. There is no magic here with magic mics. Also note, the handheld mic element has a very large windscreen compared to the little windscreens (if any) on lavalieres. The equivalent of the hand held mic in a "lavaliere" version would be a head mounted miniature boom mic that is right at the edge of the lips. Scarcely visible, it follows the strong rule of getting the mic close to the mouth. They work very well.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Roger,

Reducing all the above comments to a simple statement, a low sensitivity mic will not reduce background noise or change it one iota. It is a common misconception that it will help. Low sensitivity reduces all sounds including those that you want and it reduces all of them equally. Since you now have to turn up the gain of the mixer to get your desired sound levels back up, you are right back where you would be with a standard sensitivity lavaliere. A crude analogy is that you can cut background noise by sticking your fingers in your ears but it won't help you hear any better. Getting the mic closer to the person's mouth is the only strong solution. Directional lavalieres might be of a little help.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics 

Thanks for that bit of knowledge. That clears that up and a good explaination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger, I had a look at the sample show on your website. I wonder whether a lavalier is your only alternative. You might have a look at these Schoeps microphones: http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/categories/special_speech

 

The CCM mics are quite small, and with the MK series mics it is possible to separate the microphone itself, which is very small, and the microphone amplifier, by using a cable:  http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/kc/overview

 

Might not work for you, but perhaps worth a look.

I just took a quick look at them and some say they are good for distances under 19" (50cm). So what is the difference in them than what I am using now as my lav is now only about 6 to 8 inches from my mouth by my throat. Are those mics different in some way?

I'm green at this audio stuff despite the fact we've produced over 60 TV shows. It's amazing I've gotten through any of this as we have no one else who does any of the audio/video/editing, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took a quick look at them and some say they are good for distances under 19" (50cm). So what is the difference in them than what I am using now as my lav is now only about 6 to 8 inches from my mouth by my throat. Are those mics different in some way?

I'm green at this audio stuff despite the fact we've produced over 60 TV shows. It's amazing I've gotten through any of this as we have no one else who does any of the audio/video/editing, etc.

 

 

One difference is that those Schoeps microphones are more directional (cardiod and supercardiod) than your lavalier (omnidirectional).

 

You might find it helpful to read one of the following books:

 

Jay Rose: http://www.amazon.com/Producing-Great-Sound-Film-Video/dp/024080970X/ref=la_B000APKOEM_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363879271&sr=1-1

 

Tomlinson Holman: http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Film-Television-Tomlinson-Holman/dp/0240813308/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1363879292&sr=1-1&keywords=holman+sound

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out the Countryman E6, if you haven't already. It is very unobtrusive.

If you are soft-spoken, I think your only solution is to get the mic as close to your mouth as possible.

What I have now are:

Sennheiser EW11 2P G2 lavalier - omni directional - Frequency C (whatever that means)

Sennheiser ME 104 capsule - cardiod Frequency B

 

The cardiod works best in the field. Is this a pretty good choice?

Sorry to be so dumb on this stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One difference is that those Schoeps microphones are more directional (cardiod and supercardiod) than your lavalier (omnidirectional).

 

You might find it helpful to read one of the following books:

 

Jay Rose: http://www.amazon.com/Producing-Great-Sound-Film-Video/dp/024080970X/ref=la_B000APKOEM_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363879271&sr=1-1

 

Tomlinson Holman: http://www.amazon.com/Sound-Film-Television-Tomlinson-Holman/dp/0240813308/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1363879292&sr=1-1&keywords=holman+sound

I will check those out... Thanks. I hope they don't get too technical. Since it's just the two of us in the field and travel in a small RV, we can't deal with extra equipment. We really have to go with plugging in the XLR's to the camera and going for it.

I am on camera most of the time. My wife has on the headphones and can alert me to wind noise, etc but anything more technical for her is out of the question other than just monitor my audio. So keeping it simple is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I have now are:

Sennheiser EW11 2P G2 lavalier - omni directional - Frequency C (whatever that means)

Sennheiser ME 104 capsule - cardiod Frequency B

 

The cardiod works best in the field. Is this a pretty good choice?

Sorry to be so dumb on this stuff.

The frequency designation has nothing to do with the mic being used. It refers to the radio frequency the system is designed to work on. Frequency C or the C block is above 698Mhz which is not allowed here any more. The B block is fine to use.

 

Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately most cardioid lavs are subject to attenuation when the wearer turns their head away from the mic.

IMO, the Tram is not much good for attenuating extraneous BG noise due to it's 'open' sound. The ECM55 could be considered, but it's huge by today's standard.

I agree a head-set mic is probably the best alternative, although it would be 'visible' to some extent.

The ME2 omni lav that comes with the Sennheiser 100 series is basically a POS and many users replace it with a higher quality mic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger,

 

If you have ruled out a headset (and I understand why you find the option unattractive), I think that you need to learn about directional microphones (cardiod and supercardiod) and start thinking about how you can shoot your show in a way that accommodates one.

 

On your sample show and on some of your material on YouTube, it seemed fairly clear to me that you could accomplish the shot with a directional microphone mounted on a tripod just outside the frame or mounted, but disguised, close to your body. What I'm trying to say is that if you want good sound, don't just look at the microphone, but also at what you can do with your camerawork to contribute to good sound.

 

I think you'll find Jay Rose's book very good at helping you to expand your thinking about the sound recording/video recording relationship.

 

As someone who comes at this from the visual side more than the sound side, and has learned that they are of equal importance, let me suggest that you might find it really helpful to hire a professional location sound recordist for a couple of days to help you get your sound sorted out and make specific recommendations for getting the best sound for your show and budget.

 

Good luck.

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...