Indoor interviews: Lav? Or boomed mic?

[Scott Wilkinson]

Our teams shoot a lot of indoor, sit-down interviews. Our default audio approach has always been to slap a wireless lav on the subject and be done with it.

The sound we get from our Lectrosonics lavs is perfectly fine...but I want to ask them to start using a boom and mic for the following reasons...
• no chance of rustling clothing noise or whapping the lav (which often happens)
• no awkward moments asking important people to unbutton their shirts to run a wire
• no chasing subjects who jump up and take off with the lav (even if we remind them ahead of time not to do it)
• relieving the camera operator of monitoring audio
•*because it's something different from what we normally do (and I want our people to be practiced in different techniques)

---
What do most folks here do for indoor, sit-down interviews?
Lav? Or boom/mic?

Scott

[Rick Reineke]

All of the above.
Double-edged sword though. A sound deaf video editor can and will often use both, which sounds a little strange in stereo and worse when summed to mono. ie: phase issues.

[Warren Kawamoto]

For sit down interviews, I would use 2 lav mics one on the left, one on the right lapel. That way, one channel is always free of rustling and thumps. If the subject turns his head and speaks, he's always talking into at least one mic, no matter who he's talking to.

I don't use a boom because the boom almost always picks up more room reverb than a lav. In an interview, I want the cleanest sound with the least amount of reverb. Besides, a boom is one more thing to carry.

[Seth Bloombaum]

Both. In this situation I'd *want* to use wired lav plus boom.

Boom would most often be a hypercardoid, either on a conventional boom with fishpole holder on a c-stand or more likely my custom stand/boom, the top tube from an "atlas-style" roundbase mic stand chucked into the grip head on the end of a c-stand's arm.

[Don Bloom]

I used both techniques. Depends on the situation I'm in and who the interviewees are. Sometimes the lavs are better, sometimes the boom is better. More and more I'm using the lavs but that's only because I'm looking to carry less gear and not having to carry a stand and boom is a plus for me.

[Christopher Young]

Originally Posted by Scott Wilkinson

What do most folks here do for indoor, sit-down interviews?
Lav? Or boom/mic?

Scott

I use both methods of recording at the same time, lapel and boom if given the time and space. It depends on how we want the audio to sound when intercut with other footage and it’s audio. It’s also a nice cosy feeling to have a fail-safe having the two channels in case one channel has issues.

Regarding lapel handling noise and clothing rustle. Some years back I tried out Sony’s ECM-88 lapel mics. I was blown away by their capacity to handle some of the worst movement and clothing noise issues I have ever encountered.

They are now my prime ‘go-to’ lapel mics for situations where I know there are going to be issues when using concealed mics or where performers and talent have to move a lot on the location. In fact the more I think about it I tend to favour them in most situations. I carry two of them with my radio mic kits on most jobs.

One thing I have noticed though is that they seem to be a little more susceptible to wind noise than say the ECM-77, MKE-2 or COS-11 when used outdoors.

Rundown on the ECM-88 here:

Sony's ECM-88 Lavalier Microphone - YouTube

Chris Young
CYV Productions
Sydney

[Steven Digges]

I set up both. I consider the boom mic, usually a Sennheirser ME66, sometimes a Rode NT1a a back up track. You would be surprised how often the boom track sounds better than lavs and I use it. It all depends on the situation and the voices.

I should note that sometimes I am using my Sennheirsser ME2 lavs. I like Sennheisser products in general but I have no idea why this omni capsule is standard with G3s. The ME2 does exactly what it is supposed to do. When they say omni they MEAN omni. It is very sensitive and it picks up ambient sound from everywhere. Not a good choice for interviews or live sound reinforcement. My lavs are not G3s, they are the first generation EW100. I thought a couple of omni lavs would be good to have at the time because I already had cardioid lavs. In reality, I have found very few situations where the ME2 is the mic of choice.

Either way, I will always set up both for sit downs because I am a back up maniac. It does not matter which of my lavs I am running.

Steve

[Finn Yarbrough]

If you have a soundperson to run it, I would go with the boom for all the reasons you mentioned, plus superior sound rendition.

If you plan on using a stand, it's too risky without the lav as backup (in case your subject turns his/her head or the boom drifts out of alignment) and I would use both, as others have suggested.

In any event, if you have access to wired lavs, they are more reliable and have a lower noise floor than wireless (even with the same mic capsule). For sit-downs, there's no reason not to use them. Most mic manufacturers sell inexpensive adapters that will turn your wireless heads into wired XLR, with or without battery phantom.

[Rick Reineke]

" I have found very few situations where the ME2 is the mic of choice."
Yes Stephen, the ME2 ain't the greatest.. it's functional and a 'better than nothing' back-up That's about it.
The only time I would use a directional lav is in a live sound situation where feedback is a problem.

[Brian Drysdale]

The best sound recordists I've worked with usually use microphones mounted on booms fitted on mic stands. The mics point down into the speakers mouth and are placed just out of the top frame.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

The best sound recordists I've worked with usually use microphones mounted on booms fitted on mic stands. The mics point down into the speakers mouth and are placed just out of the top frame.

Yup - a boom mic. will nearly always give better sound than a lav.

Listening at home with the TV sound through the hi-fi I can always hear that nasty chesty sound that a lav. mic. has (and that's even those that are put on by experts who really know how to attach a lav.).

[Daniel Epstein]

A couple of notes here. I think the spelling is hypercardioid not hypercardoid which seems to be creeping into the lexicon as people pronounce it incorrectly as if it is related to android.

For interviews I try to boom as well as lav people. There are many times the boom sounds better but in noisy situations the Lav often is closer to the source and doesn't pick up as much ambience as a boom. Background noise can be more distracting which is why many producer prefer Lavs even if sound technicians think booms are better. Record both and use whatever works in the mix is my approach.

[Brian Drysdale]

It depends on the location, but sound recordists often turn off any extraneous sound sources when possible. Mightn't be possible on a factory floor, but items like fridges do get turned off for an interview. Just remember to turn them on again.

[Jon Fairhurst]

A trick for unplugging a fridge - put your car keys in there. You'll definitely plug the fridge back in before you leave. :)

[Chris Medico]

I prefer boom audio if the room isn't too noisy. I run a AT4053 on a boom with a fishpole holder just above and in front of the speaker (pointing back at them). If there is any question about noise in the room I'll also rig a LAV and make the choice in post.

I also LAV the interviewer to have a clear capture of the questions.