Two lavs, one with the phase flipped?

[dustinguished]

In some environments with a lot of low end noise and in locations we probably shouldn't be shooting in anyway, I often find that flipping the phase of the lavs helps reduce the low end buildup at my headphones and helps me to discern my signal to noise ratio of my lav track and discern that from what's hitting my headphones externally. Of course this only helps in my ears, but I am making a lot of decisions and I think it helps me in really noisey locations.

Great tips so far: lav mics closer to the mouths than normal, kill the music...keep it simple lol

See what u can do to control ice and glasses,if you're right next to the bar that can kill your dynamics and hit your limiters

Also, ask the director if you can ask for louder speaking from the talent, it usually raises their energy level (if they're capable of that adjustment) so tell the director it'll even raise their energy if you think that's what he wants to hear.

I did a bunch of interviews for a national beer commercial in Chicago bars, the last time the Hawks were in the Stanley Cup. Every bar was packed and noisey! I found that asking the talent to speak up didn't usually work, but if I separated the two people in the conversation with more physical distance, they both naturally spoke up. Maybe you can even keep them from whispering in each others ears and keep some distance between the characters so they have to project their voices to hear each other.

[Jesper Magnusson]

Though typically larger than a powered lav, a dynamic lavaliere can be effective in reducing off-mic noise.

I've heard this before, that a dynamic mic would somehow pick up less background noise than a condenser, but I haven't found any tests or technological explanations to support it. I'd like to learn about it if someone knows more.

[studiomprd]

" the  bar music on "

not just clearance issues, but editing nightmare

[podgorny]

Yes, I mean flipping the polarity (which shifts the phase by 180º).

 

From the 552 manual:

"The polarity (sometimes referred to as a phase inversion) of inputs 2 and 4 can be reversed"

 

From the SQN 5S manual:

"The [PHASE] switch acts on CH2, independently of the settings of the other switches. When it is moved to the right (arrow), it inverts the phase of the signal"

 

 

Just because some manual uses the term incorrectly doesn't make it right.

You cannot rotate phase 180º arbitrarily. Phase is frequency dependent. Polarity is not.

[Soundwil]

If I have reversed the polarity by flicking the switch haven't I shifted the phase of all of the frequencies of that signal by 180º?

Hmmm ...... possibly not. Inverted them.

Only if it were a sine wave - one frequency.

[Jay Rose]

I've heard this before, that a dynamic mic would somehow pick up less background noise than a condenser, but I haven't found any tests or technological explanations to support it. I'd like to learn about it if someone knows more.

 

I haven't heard any explanations either. 

 

Assuming both the condenser and dynamic have identical polar patterns*, the off-axis noise pickup at dialog frequencies should be identical...

 

BUT the dynamic will have lower voltage output for the same SPL. Maybe this is what some people mean: that since you've got to turn the preamp/recorder's gain up more, the background noise will be buried more by the system hiss?

 

---

*Unlikely except for basic omni and cardioid, since the dynamic diaphragm is likely a lot bigger. But if we don't assume the patterns are the same, what exactly are we comparing here?

[pkautzsch]

" the  bar music on "

not just clearance issues, but editing nightmare

 

IME people who want to shoot in an operating/uncontrolled bar don't think about editing nightmares before they encounter them during editing.

And then blame it on the sound person afterwards.

[Johnny Karlsson]

@ Jesper and Jay:

 

A dynamic mic doesn't have a diaphragm, but rather a moving coil.

if you'd like more details, I suggest you read up on the specifics, but think about it this way:

In general, a condenser mic is, by design a lot more sensitive, designed to pick up subtle details in a voice, instrument etc. in a controlled environment, such a (sound proofed, isolated) sound stage or music studio.

Dynamic vocal mics - if you are familiar with SM58, M58, MD42 etc - are designed to pick up sounds within a close proximity, and therefore work well in situations where we need to record interviews in noisy environments (and for a rock vocalist onstage with a drum-kit, four Marshall stacks, 1500 watt bass amp, PA + monitors, all at full blast). 

 

 

On the OT - there are a lot of good suggestions above. Keep it simple.

[studiomprd]

" A dynamic mic doesn't have a diaphragm, but rather a moving coil. "

er...

what supports that "moving coil" ??

 

" designed to pick up subtle details " + " designed to pick up sounds within a close proximity, "

your source for this Internet disinformation, please ?

[Johnny Karlsson]

studiomprd, on 26 Jun 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

" A dynamic mic doesn't have a diaphragm, but rather a moving coil. "

er...

what supports that "moving coil" ??"

 

Sorry sir, I mis-spoke (or mis-typed actually). Of course there is a diaphragm present that moves the coil in the magnetic field.

There is of course more to this, hence my suggestion to "read up on this…"

 

 

 

 

"" designed to pick up subtle details " + " designed to pick up sounds within a close proximity, "

your source for this Internet disinformation, please ?"

 

You mean misinformation, right? I meant to say, that "by design" it lends itself better to…

 

I also want to clarify that I, in the same post, typed OT, when in fact I meant OP.

[studiomprd]

" "by design" it lends itself better to… "

I'm not sold on that, either...

 

" designed to pick up sounds within a close proximity, "

I would say that about a "noise canceling microphone, dynamic or condenser...

just as I would say an interference tube microphone (dynamic or condenser shotgun) is by design (aka designed) for somewhat distant pickup.

Edited June 26, 2013 by studiomprd

[Johnny Karlsson]

" "by design" it lends itself better to… "

I'm not sold on that, either...

Please explain.

[studiomprd]

" designed to pick up sounds within a close proximity, "

I would say that about a "noise canceling microphone, dynamic or condenser...

just as I would say an interference tube microphone (dynamic or condenser shotgun)  by design lends itself to (aka is

 designed) for somewhat distant pickup.

Edited June 26, 2013 by studiomprd

[podgorny]

Polar pattern is polar pattern. A microphone doesn't know how far away a particular sound is.

Due to low output and inherent self-noise, dynamics are generally less desirable for applications requiring lots of gain. Some of these gain issues are mitigated by transformers in the microphone, but these sacrifice transparency for level. With only a few exceptions, there is no application for which I do not prefer a quality condenser microphone over a dynamic. Those exceptions are 1.when a source's SPL exceeds the capability of any available condenser (e.g. close-miced snare drum), 2.when the non-linearities of a particular dynamic microphone create a desired sound (e.g. close-micing a snare drum), and 3.when I'm worried about an expensive condenser microphone sustaining damage from a careless individual (e.g. a mic placed close on a snare drum).

[podgorny]

Reason for choosing a dynamic number 4.when environmental humidity causes a condenser to malfunction (e.g. close-miced snare drum).

[podgorny]

If I have reversed the polarity by flicking the switch haven't I shifted the phase of all of the frequencies of that signal by 180º?

Hmmm ...... possibly not. Inverted them.

Only if it were a sine wave - one frequency.

 

 

If we're talking about a sine wave, you've more or less accomplished the same thing, except that if you're "shifting phase" by 180º, you would actually be delaying the signal (by one half cycle at a particular frequency).

[studiomprd]

" A microphone doesn't know how far away a particular sound is "

er...

maybe not, but still, I do differ, in that directional mic's (condenser, dynamic, etc) do have measurably different,  frequency responses as a result of their design,  to sounds that are originating in close proximity. (aka proximity effect)

" there is no application for which I do not prefer a quality condenser microphone over a dynamic. "

that is your subjective decision, of course.

 

let me just note the many performers who still prefer the dynamic SM-58's over the many other suitable options, including condenser models, available for their live performances, though using other choices for their recordings, etc....

 

" Reason for choosing a dynamic number 4.when environmental humidity causes a condenser to malfunction "

you could also choose another, more rugged condenser mic...eh ?

Edited June 26, 2013 by studiomprd

[podgorny]

" there is no application for which I do not prefer a quality condenser microphone over a dynamic. "

that is your subjective decision, of course.

 

let me just note the many performers who still prefer the dynamic SM-58's over the many other suitable options, including condenser models, available for their live performances, though using other choices for their recordings, etc....

 

 

See reasons 3 and 4.

 

When put up side-by-side in a controlled environment, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who prefers an SM58 to a U47 for sonic reasons.

[studiomprd]

" See reasons 3 and 4. "

BULLFEATHERS

[studiomprd]

" other choices for their recordings, "

for a Michael Jackson recording, renowned engineer Bruce Swedien decided to use a dynamic mic (Shure SM-7) and famously purchased and individually auditioned a number of them from which he selected the "hero" used on the session

Edited June 26, 2013 by studiomprd

[Johnny Karlsson]

U2, Aerosmith and others have also used Shure SM58 for vocal recordings on their albums.

[Constantin]

First of all, there isn't one dynamic mic. Instead there are variants of the same principle (induction). Best known are moving-coil mics and ribbon mics. The latter are very sensitive, so much so that they seem to be very tricky to be used as a boom mic. Plus they usually have a figure of 8 polar pattern, which may make matters worse.

Moving-coil mics are less sensitive, because the sound wave has to move the membrane (which needs to get going) as well as the coil. This array needs more energy to be moved and thus these mics are less sensitive (in a sense they need more spl to get to work) and their sound is less detailed. This lower sensitivity (Senator Mike will undoubtedly dispute this, possibly by providing a list of dynamic mics) also means that sounds further away will be picked up much quieter than they would by a condenser. This is one of the reasons why it seems like they "hear" less background than condensers. The other reason is simple signal to noise ratio. For a moving-coil dynamic mic to sound good you need to get it pretty close to the source. So close that the preamp doesn't need to amp so much and the noise will appear quieter. But if you were to use a condenser at the same distance, I'd bet it's the same scenario.

Dynamic mics (not the ribbon kind) are popular for live applications partly because they are a lot less susceptible to feedback

None of this has got anything to do with polar pattern.

This is my attempt at an explanation.

[Constantin]

If we're talking about a sine wave, you've more or less accomplished the same thing, except that if you're "shifting phase" by 180º, you would actually be delaying the signal (by one half cycle at a particular frequency).

Except, you are not shifting the phase, but inverting it, turning it upside down. That doesn't delay it.

[LarryF]

If I have reversed the polarity by flicking the switch haven't I shifted the phase of all of the frequencies of that signal by 180º?

Hmmm ...... possibly not. Inverted them.

Only if it were a sine wave - one frequency.

Yes, you have shifted the phase of all the frequencies present by 180 degrees. Also you have inverted the signal. And yes, you have "switched the polarity". All mean the same.

Best,

Larry F

Lectro

[old school]

I like this turn of the topic better than the OP.  I'm a hobbyist when it comes to recording vocals for songs/music and I have used U87's Rode's SM7's, 57's, 58's, and it all depends on what you and the song need as to what mic you use. Seldom does a vocal stand alone and raw in a song. It is shaped & processed and fucked with so much the mic choice is second to all the processing IMO. Now we can all find examples where the mic is critical to the sound but mostly it depends.

CrewC