Phantom Power / xlr for XL-1s at DVinfo.net

Jeff Pryor · May 10th, 2004, 10:09 AM

How much of an advantage is phantom power? I've got a AT835b, a Xl-1s, and am trying to decide berween the beachtek dxa-6 w/phantom and the dxa-4 without. Cost difference is about $90... Also I've heard both the canon xlr adaptors have a tendency to add noise and buzz; anyone with this experience? Any help is very much appreciated, Thanks.

Bryan Beasleigh · May 10th, 2004, 10:15 AM

Phantom opens up a considerable number of choices and better quality for less money. You may want to go the whole 9 yards with a DXA-8. It has preamps, phantom and limiters.

Jeff Pryor · May 10th, 2004, 10:24 AM

Thanks Bryan. I'm working the no budget feature at the moment though. I could probably just swing the dxa-6 at $250. Could you elaborate a little bit on the advantages of phantom; you mentioned additional choices it offers...

Bryan Beasleigh · May 10th, 2004, 10:58 AM

Most condenser microphones require phantom power, very few include a battery powered option and then most of those are at the southern end of the pecking order.

The preamp will raise your input so that you depend less on the on camerapreamplification.

The limiters will save the day by compressing loud passages rather than distorting.

The DXA-8 is so much more complete

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=FetchChildren&Q=&ci=1427

Have a look at the various mic specifications and see how many include battery power options. Even if they do the signal to noise and the dynamic range are improved.

Jay Massengill · May 10th, 2004, 11:26 AM

I agree with Bryan, but if you don't have the budget for the DXA-8, the DXA-6 should be far superior to the Canon MA-100 (which doesn't provide phantom anyway). I don't know if Canon solved the noise problem with the XL-1s improvements, but in my opinion the MA-100 adapters that I worked with on the XL-1 were unusable for quality sound.
Fortunately the XL-1 mic inputs on the camera itself (front and rear) and the line inputs (rear) work reasonably well if you don't overdrive them. However, the 835b is a fairly low-gain mic, so you may have the opposite problem of not having enough gain. Depending on what you're recording, you may greatly benefit from the preamp feature of the DXA-8. Or if this project has fairly loud subjects, you could look at getting the DXA-6 now and investing in a better mic later.
At any rate, having a phantom power adapter really opens up the choices you have for quality mics.

May 10th, 2004, 10:09 AM	#1
Jeff Pryor New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Brainerd, MN Posts: 12	Phantom Power / xlr for XL-1s How much of an advantage is phantom power? I've got a AT835b, a Xl-1s, and am trying to decide berween the beachtek dxa-6 w/phantom and the dxa-4 without. Cost difference is about $90... Also I've heard both the canon xlr adaptors have a tendency to add noise and buzz; anyone with this experience? Any help is very much appreciated, Thanks.

May 10th, 2004, 10:15 AM	#2
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Phantom opens up a considerable number of choices and better quality for less money. You may want to go the whole 9 yards with a DXA-8. It has preamps, phantom and limiters. __________________ Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting ".......holy smokin rubber lips...what a ride!"

May 10th, 2004, 10:58 AM	#4
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Most condenser microphones require phantom power, very few include a battery powered option and then most of those are at the southern end of the pecking order. The preamp will raise your input so that you depend less on the on camerapreamplification. The limiters will save the day by compressing loud passages rather than distorting. The DXA-8 is so much more complete http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=FetchChildren&Q=&ci=1427 Have a look at the various mic specifications and see how many include battery power options. Even if they do the signal to noise and the dynamic range are improved. __________________ Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting ".......holy smokin rubber lips...what a ride!"

May 10th, 2004, 10:24 AM	#3
Jeff Pryor New Boot Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Brainerd, MN Posts: 12	Thanks Bryan. I'm working the no budget feature at the moment though. I could probably just swing the dxa-6 at $250. Could you elaborate a little bit on the advantages of phantom; you mentioned additional choices it offers...

May 10th, 2004, 11:26 AM	#5
Jay Massengill Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Burlington Posts: 1,976	I agree with Bryan, but if you don't have the budget for the DXA-8, the DXA-6 should be far superior to the Canon MA-100 (which doesn't provide phantom anyway). I don't know if Canon solved the noise problem with the XL-1s improvements, but in my opinion the MA-100 adapters that I worked with on the XL-1 were unusable for quality sound. Fortunately the XL-1 mic inputs on the camera itself (front and rear) and the line inputs (rear) work reasonably well if you don't overdrive them. However, the 835b is a fairly low-gain mic, so you may have the opposite problem of not having enough gain. Depending on what you're recording, you may greatly benefit from the preamp feature of the DXA-8. Or if this project has fairly loud subjects, you could look at getting the DXA-6 now and investing in a better mic later. At any rate, having a phantom power adapter really opens up the choices you have for quality mics.