Capturing Audio Separate from Video

Jay Massengill · December 16th, 2004, 06:44 PM

The DVX-100a has very good audio recording capabilities. Unless you're doing something like a lot of steadicam work for this project I'd record directly to the camera.
With the right equipment, techniques and level setting, you can get very good results using the camera and not have to deal with coordinating double-system recordings in post.

Jesse Davidson · December 17th, 2004, 10:24 AM

Thanks guys,
I have been tinking about it a ton and I think that capturing the audio to the camera is probably the way to go. If I have two mics, one a shotgun and the other the Audio Technica, could I just run the mics to the sound board, and then into the camera?

Thanks,
Jesse

Douglas Spotted Eagle · December 17th, 2004, 10:31 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Jesse Davidson : Thanks guys,
could I just run the mics to the sound board, and then into the camera?

Thanks,
Jesse -->>>

This is what I'd recommend doing, indeed. If you have a soundman, or can monitor what's happening with audio, you'll be very happy in this configuration.

Jay Massengill · December 17th, 2004, 12:55 PM

The DVX100a line input is designed for a 0db signal. As long as you take care not to overdrive the input with a hot line level signal you should get good results.
Remember that you have to listen to the audio coming from the camera to determine if you've overdriven the input. The meters won't necessarily show this problem. You can return the audio to the mixer from the camera's RCA outputs, this is a much better signal than the headphone amp.

Ty Ford · December 17th, 2004, 07:15 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Jesse Davidson : Ty,
I am probably wrong, but when I looked up the Schoeps microphone, the hits I got back said that they came in a set for 2 grand. Once again, from your reaction, i am probably wrong.

Also, this next question is for everyone. I have just upgraded my camera. I am now going to be using a Panasonic DVX-100a. It said that there were two XLR ports on the camera. Would you recommend just recording directly to the tape through the XLR imputs? If there is not that large of a difference in sound quality from capturing through the XLR ports on the camera and capturing separately, I would like to record through the XLRs. It would make my post process a lot easier, but I also want the best sound I can get with my equipment and puny budget.

Let me know what you think,
Jesse -->>>

Jesse,

Last time I checked the Schoeps were about $1350 each. I'd be very surprised if the price went up to $2k. Hmmm..brb...
Code: SCHCMC641SET
Price: $1,458.00
Shipping Weight: 5.00 pounds

OK, $1458! Don't forget to add the GOOD teardrop pop filter. Yes, you NEED it. It works better.

This is for dialog, right? You only need one, right? I compared the AT4053 with the Schoeps cmc641 and they are properly priced. The Schoeps sounds THAT much better.

It is a film industry standard. Once you hear it (provided you can tell the difference at this point), you'll go, "Oh! Right. That's the sound I want."

If you can't tell the difference now, wait six months til your ears catch up. Then you can deliver the lines, "Oh! Right! That's the sound I want."

Yes you can run the mic into the camera. HOWEVER, you can run ANY mic through a good mixer with a limiter and increase the record level (which gets you higher above the noise floor) without fear of clipping.

Also, a mixer allows someone to listen and adjust levels during a scene to accomodate changes in talent projection and to open and close mics as needed. That's hard (if not impossible) to do at the camera.

Clean dialog tracks don't just happen. They are the result of a good sound person with good gear.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Bryan Beasleigh · December 17th, 2004, 11:51 PM

Simply put, the schoeps mk41 makes most other mics sound like cr@p. That and my MKH60. But that's just my opinion. I didn't want to believe it, but once you get past the purchase price you feel great about your investment.

Jose di Cani · December 22nd, 2004, 01:11 PM

I think the 4041 has a really different character than the 4053. The 4041 is really bright sounding and is primarily meant for higher frequency instruments, like brass and cymbal overhead micing.
The good news is, the AT3031 cardioid is more balanced and costs less too. This is a case where you can't always depend on the numbering scheme as an indicator of increasing quality. The 3031 really breaks the cost/performance barrier. Unfortunately it is only available in two fixed patterns, cardioid(3031) and omni(3032), not as a hypercardioid or with interchangeable capsules.

Jay Massengill · December 22nd, 2004, 01:57 PM

Why are you quoting me from a different thread?

December 17th, 2004, 10:31 AM	#18
Douglas Spotted Eagle VASST Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Stockton, UT Posts: 5,648	<<<-- Originally posted by Jesse Davidson : Thanks guys, could I just run the mics to the sound board, and then into the camera? Thanks, Jesse -->>> This is what I'd recommend doing, indeed. If you have a soundman, or can monitor what's happening with audio, you'll be very happy in this configuration. __________________ Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com

December 17th, 2004, 07:15 PM	#20
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Re: Ty... <<<-- Originally posted by Jesse Davidson : Ty, I am probably wrong, but when I looked up the Schoeps microphone, the hits I got back said that they came in a set for 2 grand. Once again, from your reaction, i am probably wrong. Also, this next question is for everyone. I have just upgraded my camera. I am now going to be using a Panasonic DVX-100a. It said that there were two XLR ports on the camera. Would you recommend just recording directly to the tape through the XLR imputs? If there is not that large of a difference in sound quality from capturing through the XLR ports on the camera and capturing separately, I would like to record through the XLRs. It would make my post process a lot easier, but I also want the best sound I can get with my equipment and puny budget. Let me know what you think, Jesse -->>> Jesse, Last time I checked the Schoeps were about $1350 each. I'd be very surprised if the price went up to $2k. Hmmm..brb... Code: SCHCMC641SET Price: $1,458.00 Shipping Weight: 5.00 pounds OK, $1458! Don't forget to add the GOOD teardrop pop filter. Yes, you NEED it. It works better. This is for dialog, right? You only need one, right? I compared the AT4053 with the Schoeps cmc641 and they are properly priced. The Schoeps sounds THAT much better. It is a film industry standard. Once you hear it (provided you can tell the difference at this point), you'll go, "Oh! Right. That's the sound I want." If you can't tell the difference now, wait six months til your ears catch up. Then you can deliver the lines, "Oh! Right! That's the sound I want." Yes you can run the mic into the camera. HOWEVER, you can run ANY mic through a good mixer with a limiter and increase the record level (which gets you higher above the noise floor) without fear of clipping. Also, a mixer allows someone to listen and adjust levels during a scene to accomodate changes in talent projection and to open and close mics as needed. That's hard (if not impossible) to do at the camera. Clean dialog tracks don't just happen. They are the result of a good sound person with good gear. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

December 17th, 2004, 11:51 PM	#21
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	Simply put, the schoeps mk41 makes most other mics sound like cr@p. That and my MKH60. But that's just my opinion. I didn't want to believe it, but once you get past the purchase price you feel great about your investment. __________________ 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!"

December 16th, 2004, 06:44 PM	#16
Jay Massengill Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Burlington Posts: 1,976	The DVX-100a has very good audio recording capabilities. Unless you're doing something like a lot of steadicam work for this project I'd record directly to the camera. With the right equipment, techniques and level setting, you can get very good results using the camera and not have to deal with coordinating double-system recordings in post.

December 17th, 2004, 10:24 AM	#17
Jesse Davidson New Boot Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 19	Thanks guys, I have been tinking about it a ton and I think that capturing the audio to the camera is probably the way to go. If I have two mics, one a shotgun and the other the Audio Technica, could I just run the mics to the sound board, and then into the camera? Thanks, Jesse

December 17th, 2004, 12:55 PM	#19
Jay Massengill Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Burlington Posts: 1,976	The DVX100a line input is designed for a 0db signal. As long as you take care not to overdrive the input with a hot line level signal you should get good results. Remember that you have to listen to the audio coming from the camera to determine if you've overdriven the input. The meters won't necessarily show this problem. You can return the audio to the mixer from the camera's RCA outputs, this is a much better signal than the headphone amp.

December 22nd, 2004, 01:11 PM	#22
Jose di Cani Major Player Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Holland, Europe Posts: 214	I think the 4041 has a really different character than the 4053. The 4041 is really bright sounding and is primarily meant for higher frequency instruments, like brass and cymbal overhead micing. The good news is, the AT3031 cardioid is more balanced and costs less too. This is a case where you can't always depend on the numbering scheme as an indicator of increasing quality. The 3031 really breaks the cost/performance barrier. Unfortunately it is only available in two fixed patterns, cardioid(3031) and omni(3032), not as a hypercardioid or with interchangeable capsules.

December 22nd, 2004, 01:57 PM	#23
Jay Massengill Trustee Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Burlington Posts: 1,976	Why are you quoting me from a different thread?