Field Mixers

Battle Vaughan · August 27th, 2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Cofrancesco

On a related note I'm looking to get some dirt cheap wired lavs. Anyone have used these? Samson QL5-CL Lavalier At only $54 a piece I can pick up 4 for little over $200.

You might like the Audio-Technica ATR35s, which is about $35 on Amazon; I bought several of these for reporters' Edirols and they are quite nice (watch the polarity on the button battery, however, if you get it backward the mike doesn't work well and it's easy to do this).
Battle Vaughan / MiamiHerald.com retired vidoegrapher

Jon Fairhurst · August 27th, 2009, 02:29 PM

juicedLink mixers are perfect when feeding a camera or recorder that accepts an unbalanced, stereo, mic-level, 1/8" input. They're super clean, and have enough gain to let you turn down the preamp in your camera/recorder and get a solid result. The preamp needs to live with the camera/recorder to keep the unbalanced line as short as possible.

If your camera already has XLR inputs and can accept line levels, then there's no need for the juicedLink. In this case, you'd want a field mixer with line level output, separate from the camera.

In a recent shoot, we used the juicedLink into a 5D2 with no field mixer. The boom op and I (assistant camera) wore headphones. I controlled the gain minimally - if the actor's line was loud, I turned it down for those takes. Otherwise, we stayed at a nominal gain level. We didn't clip a single word, and preamp noise was nice and low. Granted, this was an easy shoot with consistent mic distance and position, mostly calm dialog, and little background noise. In post, my son still had to correct a bit for falling lines, weak syllables, and when the head tilted down, away from the mic. The usual stuff.

Anyway, consider what you want from a field mixer. Will you have somebody actively mixing, pumping up those falling lines? If so, separate that from the camera. Is it "set and forget", or "set per clip"? In that case, you can set the gain at the camera, if one of your camera ops has audio sense and if that's convenient for you and your budget. In either case, having clean gain before the camera can really help keep the electronic noise levels down.

Pete Cofrancesco · August 27th, 2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

Actually, consider a Shure FP410 auto mixer. It can be used manually or in auto mode to duck mics that are not being spoken into.

It has been discontinued but I saw these: Shure SCM410, Audio-Technica ATMX341A

I can see how auto mixer is a nice way to prevent mics near each other from interfering with one another. How does auto mixing work if there's a boundary mic in the middle of the table? Would the boundary mic cause all the lavs to be muted?

Rick Reineke · August 28th, 2009, 10:55 AM

Auto mixers 'should' be used with same type of mics.
I use them occasionally with great results. However they need to be set-up properly, but they ain't foolproof by any means, especially in a non-studio environment where extraneous noises can trigger the standby mics to open & close, which can be quite annoying.

Pete Cofrancesco · August 28th, 2009, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Reineke

Auto mixers 'should' be used with same type of mics.
I use them occasionally with great results. However they need to be set-up properly, but they ain't foolproof by any means, especially in a non-studio environment where extraneous noises can trigger the standby mics to open & close, which can be quite annoying.

If I have everyone miced with lavs, if two people are talking at once or if a lawyer objects while the witness is talking am I going to miss critical audio. Is it better to have all mics on all the time? I see that auto mixers are often used for legal proceeding so may this won't be a problem. So are you saying that one shouldn't mix boundary mic with lavs?

Ty Ford · August 28th, 2009, 01:30 PM

Pete,

the fp410 is programmable to several different modes.

the chairman mode pushes down anyone else when that mic is on.

the other modes continue to mix them all together.

to the other poster, I was not implying that automixers are set and forget.

They do, however, effectively reduce the phasey hollowness of too many mics open.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Nicole Hankerson · August 29th, 2009, 04:28 PM

Don't use the Azden. I used that before and hate it. The preamps are not that good.

I recommend the PSC DV Promix 3 very nice 3 channel mixer. The ENG44 is good as well. Don't know about Roll's mixer.

Nicole

Eric Vecchi · August 30th, 2009, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Cofrancesco

It has been discontinued but I saw these: Shure SCM410, Audio-Technica ATMX341A

Wow, these are 4 channel mixers and at a greatly reduced price from manufacturers with good reputations. I have almost decided to get a Sound Devices MixPre, but these and the Sign ENG 44 as well as the Promix 3 have me doing more investigating.

Is the quality and features of the MixPre head and shoulders above the rest? (I only need 2 channels for now.)

Thanks for of your input.
-Eric

Jordan Block · August 30th, 2009, 01:50 PM

Automatic mixers are very different than field mixers, so take your time with your decision. Perhaps rent one of each before committing your cash to either solution.

August 27th, 2009, 02:29 PM	#17
Jon Fairhurst Inner Circle Join Date: May 2006 Location: Camas, WA, USA Posts: 5,513	juicedLink mixers are perfect when feeding a camera or recorder that accepts an unbalanced, stereo, mic-level, 1/8" input. They're super clean, and have enough gain to let you turn down the preamp in your camera/recorder and get a solid result. The preamp needs to live with the camera/recorder to keep the unbalanced line as short as possible. If your camera already has XLR inputs and can accept line levels, then there's no need for the juicedLink. In this case, you'd want a field mixer with line level output, separate from the camera. In a recent shoot, we used the juicedLink into a 5D2 with no field mixer. The boom op and I (assistant camera) wore headphones. I controlled the gain minimally - if the actor's line was loud, I turned it down for those takes. Otherwise, we stayed at a nominal gain level. We didn't clip a single word, and preamp noise was nice and low. Granted, this was an easy shoot with consistent mic distance and position, mostly calm dialog, and little background noise. In post, my son still had to correct a bit for falling lines, weak syllables, and when the head tilted down, away from the mic. The usual stuff. Anyway, consider what you want from a field mixer. Will you have somebody actively mixing, pumping up those falling lines? If so, separate that from the camera. Is it "set and forget", or "set per clip"? In that case, you can set the gain at the camera, if one of your camera ops has audio sense and if that's convenient for you and your budget. In either case, having clean gain before the camera can really help keep the electronic noise levels down. __________________ Jon Fairhurst

August 28th, 2009, 01:30 PM	#21
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Pete, the fp410 is programmable to several different modes. the chairman mode pushes down anyone else when that mic is on. the other modes continue to mix them all together. to the other poster, I was not implying that automixers are set and forget. They do, however, effectively reduce the phasey hollowness of too many mics open. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

August 28th, 2009, 10:55 AM	#19
Rick Reineke Inner Circle Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: New York Posts: 2,039	Auto mixers 'should' be used with same type of mics. I use them occasionally with great results. However they need to be set-up properly, but they ain't foolproof by any means, especially in a non-studio environment where extraneous noises can trigger the standby mics to open & close, which can be quite annoying.

August 29th, 2009, 04:28 PM	#22
Nicole Hankerson Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norcross, GA Posts: 143	Don't use the Azden. I used that before and hate it. The preamps are not that good. I recommend the PSC DV Promix 3 very nice 3 channel mixer. The ENG44 is good as well. Don't know about Roll's mixer. Nicole

August 30th, 2009, 01:50 PM	#24
Jordan Block Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: BC, Canada Posts: 67	Automatic mixers are very different than field mixers, so take your time with your decision. Perhaps rent one of each before committing your cash to either solution.