Post EQ or low cut on-mike is better? at DVinfo.net

Jeff Kellam · May 13th, 2009, 11:32 AM

Is it best to use the on-microphone low cut filter or to just do the low cut in post during the audio edit? FYI, this is usually for wind rumble, but other distracting LF sound too.

It's a little more work to do it in post, but I think the end result is better tailored to needs.

I am curious what the audio experts do.
Thanks

Sacha Rosen · May 13th, 2009, 12:54 PM

I'd say you want to record the cleanest sound possible so if you can kill it before it goes to tape do it.

Andy Tejral · May 13th, 2009, 02:15 PM

Back in the analog days, I would definitely recommend doing during recording--there is a lot of energy in the low end and it could easily overwhelm a tiny analog recording channel. Still potentially a problem with the electronics too.

I'd vote to do it on the mic. You may or may not be able to get it better in post. But if you leave the shoot knowing you've got good audio, that can't be bad.

Steve Oakley · May 13th, 2009, 10:59 PM

generally better to lowcut at the mic, or mixer input PRE limiter because the sometimes massive LF input can trick any limiter / compressor to kick in when it shouldn't causing a drop in level that shouldn't be there.

Gary Nattrass · May 14th, 2009, 01:51 AM

Low cut on the mic as it is done at the capsule stage and prevents the amplifier in the mic overloading, this goes for attenuators too they prevent overloading the op amp inside the mic.

Jeff Kellam · May 14th, 2009, 01:36 PM

Thanks for all the answers, using the low cut filter on a mic certainly makes a lot of sense for several reasons.

May 13th, 2009, 11:32 AM	#1
Jeff Kellam Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 656	Post EQ or low cut on-mike is better? Is it best to use the on-microphone low cut filter or to just do the low cut in post during the audio edit? FYI, this is usually for wind rumble, but other distracting LF sound too. It's a little more work to do it in post, but I think the end result is better tailored to needs. I am curious what the audio experts do. Thanks __________________ Panasonic HMC150/Canon A1/JVC HD1/Sony Vegas 8.0c

May 13th, 2009, 02:15 PM	#3
Andy Tejral Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New York City Posts: 523	Back in the analog days, I would definitely recommend doing during recording--there is a lot of energy in the low end and it could easily overwhelm a tiny analog recording channel. Still potentially a problem with the electronics too. I'd vote to do it on the mic. You may or may not be able to get it better in post. But if you leave the shoot knowing you've got good audio, that can't be bad. __________________ Andy Tejral Railroad Videographer

May 14th, 2009, 01:51 AM	#5
Gary Nattrass Trustee Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Cornsay Durham UK Posts: 1,992	Low cut on the mic as it is done at the capsule stage and prevents the amplifier in the mic overloading, this goes for attenuators too they prevent overloading the op amp inside the mic. __________________ Over 15 minutes in Broadcast Film and TV production: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1044352/

May 14th, 2009, 01:36 PM	#6
Jeff Kellam Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 656	Thanks for all the answers, using the low cut filter on a mic certainly makes a lot of sense for several reasons. __________________ Panasonic HMC150/Canon A1/JVC HD1/Sony Vegas 8.0c

May 13th, 2009, 12:54 PM	#2
Sacha Rosen Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada Posts: 86	I'd say you want to record the cleanest sound possible so if you can kill it before it goes to tape do it.

May 13th, 2009, 10:59 PM	#4
Steve Oakley Trustee Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 1,158	generally better to lowcut at the mic, or mixer input PRE limiter because the sometimes massive LF input can trick any limiter / compressor to kick in when it shouldn't causing a drop in level that shouldn't be there.