Jump to content

Best boom mic for noisy environments.


chrisyking

Recommended Posts

The best mic for the job is the one you have with you -- from there it is about your ability.

I've challenged extremely noisy environments with a 416 (even the governor in a working steel mill), 60, CS3e, Schoeps, omni stick mic, and a variety of lavs.

Yes, it's important to have "the right tool for the job," but number one on the list is the killer combination of experience and technique.

Please note:  "Magic Mike" is only a movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I love when producers tell me: Last sound mixer told me that boom mics sound better then Lavs.

I answer : Well this myth has been going for a long time. A quick comparing proves the opposite.

It depends on the circumstances. If the last guy was not in a noisy environment then he was probably right.

It's not a myth anyway, a well-placed boom will sound better than a well-placed lav. This is what I keep telling my directors so they won't start to frame the boom out of everything. And it's true, too.

However, in a challenging environment it is often impossible to place the boom well and that is when your statement becomes true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ty Ford said:

I've waded through a large cocktail party and my CMC641 did a great job until the alcohol really kicked in. Then, taking the phones off and listening to the volume of the babble it was obvious that no mic was going to get much of anything. 

Just use the Audio Breathalyzer

...it's a lot of fun at parties.

03365c787a49fe1baed9b08d8bb00360-orig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use the Sanken cs-1 for these situations. Don't own a cs-3 or 8060 so can't comment on those.

The cs-1 has been great for me, 10years +/- so far. Worth checking out.

 

edit:

Just saw Mr B's post. He sums it up, as usual.

Yes, it's important to have "the right tool for the job," but number one on the list is the killer combination of experience and technique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would use the Sanken Cs3e.... but many will work well depending on surroundings or floor covering..  Agree, Lav is huge in these situations...

 

Poor mans rejection test...

   if in doubt go outside and find a noisy situation from one spot around you...  freeway in front of you...Point the mic at it.... then rotate in a circle... as you rotate away from the bad noise source, see which of your mics does the best job eliminating the sound in question or rejecting it...  This is a good way of testing off axis noise rejection, but.. your mic will point downward in actual use... this dirty test just gives an idea of off axis rejection. Many of the mics work great doing this,..but again, you open the mic a bit to the bad sound when pointed downward...  Use your aim to help out.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chrisy, as you have probably concluded, your 8060 should do just fine...

Just get it in close.

Rado, the boom is almost always better than a lav given favorable conditions, even DPA lavs. Reality is one thing but I wouldn't want to watch a whole movie recorded just with lavs even if they are DPA. I work mostly in reality and doc and the boom rarely gets used except for interviews but I don't skip it on interviews even though some reality producers give me a strange look like "why are you bothering with that old thing". No one is going to tell me the boom doesn't sound better on a close up interview.

No need to tell producers the boom is passe they don't have the ability to understand the whole picture and it can only lead to some annoying conversation for some other sound mixer some day.

Sorry for the rant Rado, heart u! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎1‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 3:03 AM, RPSharman said:
24 minutes ago, Derek H said:

Chrisy, as you have probably concluded, your 8060 should do just fine...

Just get it in close.

Rado, the boom is almost always better than a lav given favorable conditions, even DPA lavs. Reality is one thing but I wouldn't want to watch a whole movie recorded just with lavs even if they are DPA. I work mostly in reality and doc and the boom rarely gets used except for interviews but I don't skip it on interviews even though some reality producers give me a strange look like "why are you bothering with that old thing". No one is going to tell me the boom doesn't sound better on a close up interview.

No need to tell producers the boom is passe they don't have the ability to understand the whole picture and it can only lead to some annoying conversation for some other sound mixer some day.

Sorry for the rant Rado, heart u! ;)

 

I love you too my friend.

Did you enjoy Les Misérables ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the years I've found that in really noisy situations the diffs between all the fave shotguns kind of disappear.  I like the no-rear-lobe-ness of the CS3e, but the main issues are A getting in close and B trying to get the mic so it is pointed in the least noisy direction re the BG noise.  In some cases that could be straight up in the air (from below), or from 90 degrees to one side and so on.  The mic position usually turns out to be WAY more important that what mic is in play.   RE: lavs, they can def. be your friend but really mostly if the talent has their back to the noise source.  If they are facing it or it is all around, then the ability of the shotgun  to "play" the BG becomes a big advantage.  I have done some work with directional lavs, keep one around just in case, but they are a really specialized tool that didn't work well for me if the talent was acting like a normal person, ie turning their head and moving around while talking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CS3e and CMIT 5u. Keep in mind the CMIT5u does not like rain:)

That's not entirely true. No mic likes rain if out in the open, except maybe the MKHxx range, but I'm not sure about the MKH80xx range.

But I have put the CMIT into a zep with the rainman and it works very well, even in pouring rain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use to do a lot of conventions and red carpet events. I always pushed for a stick mic but if the production did not want one I always tried to use a lav on a clip in addition to the boom and honestly most people don't mind it. It takes 2 second to put on and take back. Downside is not very useful on dresses...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the premiers I've done, the presenter will usually just use an m58 but I pin them with a cos-11 as backup. I frequently find that once the bigs stars turn up they won't always come to every journalist and if the channel you are working for aren't in favour the journalist doesn't get the interview, so you end up with every crew crowding around the one journalist that does get the interview - boom is the only answer in this scenario.....can't get a hand mic in, can't mic up the star, your journalist can't get near.........boom it is......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The Sanken CS-3e is AMAZING bang for the buck in high noise situations. I always keep one ready to go in my gear bag for those sticky situations. I'm sure there are better options by now (Super CMIT) but at a high price.

Sanken CS-3e is a "Don't leave home without it" kinda tool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if you were to buy just one boom mic to take everywhere, what would it be?

For me, my desert island mic, so to speak, has become the DPA 4017. It has become my go to mic, indoors and outdoors, within the last year. I have always loved Schoeps mics, but I find the CMIT to be less of an allrounder than the 4017. Especially indoors blue pales compared to black. Plus, the self-noise of the Schoeps was beginning to annoy me.

When all conditions are perfect, I'll still prefer the CMIT, but otherwise the DPA is the perfect mic:

- well balanced and natural sound

- good off-axis suppression

- very natural sounding off-axis suppression

- small and light

- it shines indoors, where usually I would have chosen a super cardioid

- it sounds close at surprisingly big distances

- so far it holds it up well, no rf interference, no weather issues

- and so on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On January 12, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Ty Ford said:

I've waded through a large cocktail party and my CMC641 did a great job until the alcohol really kicked in. Then, taking the phones off and listening to the volume of the babble it was obvious that no mic was going to get much of anything. 

 

Drunk booming isn't something you just want to dive into.  If you got acclimated to it first, you know, taking a pull of liquor on your regular job here and there, gets your tolerance up and then pretty soon you will find being a functional alcoholic is not that hard to do.  That way, when you get to the big parities, you can go hog wild, feel good, and still keep good control over your boom mic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I posted this in another post, but it's also relevant to this one...

Here's a very very quick and not very good test of background noise rejection which I nailed out really quickly at lunchtime. Unfortunately I din't have the fur for the 8060 so there is a bit of wind noise as it was b£%ard windy out there, but you get the idea. From this quick and not very good test it seems that the two mics are very very similar and could almost cut together. The 8060 is slightly toppier, but then I don't have the fur on. I tried to keep the tips of the mics at the same distance from my mush. There's no bass cut on either, so the wind noise gets bad in places. If I get time I'll do another one with no wind. Notice I ditched the MZL kit and made myself up a nice silk covered red cable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On January 12, 2016 at 7:44 PM, Michael Miramontes said:

I have a CMIT-5U and it seems to do a decent job. It's great and removing sound from behind the mic. 

I heartily agree.

On January 12, 2016 at 0:20 PM, Ty Ford said:

I've waded through a large cocktail party and my CMC641 did a great job until the alcohol really kicked in. Then, taking the phones off and listening to the volume of the babble it was obvious that no mic was going to get much of anything. 

 

Yours or theirs, Ty?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On January 11, 2016 at 5:10 PM, chrisyking said:

So I bought a 8060 to replace my 60 recently...

For all practical purposes on a boom, the Senn MKH-8060 will sound exactly like the MKH-60. In a blind test, it would be more difficult to distinguish the 60 from the 8060 than any other mic. The significant differences are that it's smaller than the MKH-60 and has a removable body that allows a filter/attenuator module to go between the mic and XLR adapter, or a digital output module can be screwed onto the mic. The suspension and wind protection choices are more important than with the 60 because of the reduced mass and extended low freq response of the 8060. I use the 8060 myself, and like it a lot, but other than those things, if you are expecting the 8060 to make a difference, it will not.

Glen Trew

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Glen Trew said:

For all practical purposes on a boom, the Senn MKH-8060 will sound exactly like the MKH-60. In a blind test, it would be more difficult to distinguish the 60 from the 8060 than any other mic. The significant differences are that it's smaller than the MKH-60 and has a removable body that allows a filter/attenuator module to go between the mic and XLR adapter, or a digital output module can be screwed onto the mic. The suspension and wind protection choices are more important than with the 60 because of the reduced mass and extended low freq response of the 8060. I use the 8060 myself, and like it a lot, but other than those things, if you are expecting the 8060 to make a difference, it will not.

Glen Trew

Hi Glen,

In practical terms with doc and eng work, what are the differences between mkh8060 and 60 in handling noise? The 60 has the HPF so perhaps the 8060 needs to be considered with and without the filter module or similar. 

And if used with a digital O/P module how does the remote control of the HPF compare to the 60? 

Are their differences in how the typical machines handle this Eg. Zaxcom, SD?

kind regards,

dr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, daniel said:

Hi Glen,

In practical terms with doc and eng work, what are the differences between mkh8060 and 60 in handling noise? The 60 has the HPF so perhaps the 8060 needs to be considered with and without the filter module or similar. 

And if used with a digital O/P module how does the remote control of the HPF compare to the 60? 

Are their differences in how the typical machines handle this Eg. Zaxcom, SD?

kind regards,

dr.

As mentioned earlier, more care needs to be taken with the 8060 with regards to low freq rumble from handling and wind. I normally use the screw-in filter to help with this. The computer interface allows the digital module to shaped about any way you like, but that can't really be compared to the 60, which already sounds pretty much exactly like the 8060. All of the recorders with 48V phantom will handle these mics the same.

GT

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...