Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interference

Luke Arndt · September 10th, 2012, 08:56 AM

I have not tried equalizing, as it would take up a lot of time to equalize each video after the fact so I don't think it would be practical.

As of now, I'm thinking of trying an AT899. Will report back if I do or if I come across some other mic.

Greg Miller · September 10th, 2012, 03:22 PM

Luke,

I'm surprised that it would take more than a few minutes to EQ an entire track (before editing).

What is the total length of one shoot that you're talking about?

Luke Arndt · September 11th, 2012, 08:31 AM

The total length varies from 30 minutes to several hours, depending on the length of the deposition.

I don't know that the EQ itself would necessarily take a while, but it would require a few more steps in the process. Instead of simply having a master DVD that is good to go, I would have to rip it, EQ it, render it, and burn it.

Richard Crowley · September 11th, 2012, 09:55 AM

I thought we were talking about DEPOSITION recordings here? Why are we worrying about EQ? Speech intelligibility is the #1 requirement for the sound track here. Certainly absence of interference noise (including cell phones) is a significant factor. But I fail to see how subtle tonal changes is even worth discussing.

Now if we were talking about a big-time dramatic production that would be a different matter.

Greg Miller · September 11th, 2012, 09:25 PM

Richard,

I'm inclined to agree with you. As I see it, there are two important issues for deposition recordings: they should be noise free, and the intelligibility should be good. The mic in question solves the first issue. The mic's LF rolloff will not have any adverse effect on intelligibility; in fact it might improve intelligibility because it will reduce pickup of LF room noise (air handlers and the like) as well as bumps and thumps when the person moves around and bumps the mic. The problem is solved (assuming the OP is really recording depositions, and not doing something else).

Yet now the OP is unhappy because this mic's response is not the same as a mic which he was unable to use because of cellphone interference. [extraneous blather removed]

Luke,

As I see it, if you really want more LF but are unwilling to devote any time to achieving that, you have two choices at this point in time.

First: go on an unending quest for another -- different -- better -- more super deluxe -- microphone.

Second: use a mixer like the Mackie 802-VLZ3 which has some analog equalization. Crank up the LF boost about half way and that will restore a lot of the bottom end to the Shure mic, so it sounds more like the [useless] electret that you like. (Remember that the LF boost by itself will add to room noise and LF thumping noises, but the Mackie also has a LF cut switch to get rid of the really low end.)

Of course you will probably find something you don't like about the Mackie. And, indeed, we haven't tested it for GSM/RF immunity so I can't speak to that point.

Steve House · September 12th, 2012, 05:30 AM

FWIW, I've been given to understand that ANY post-production manipulation of the recording - editing of any sort, sound sweetening, whatever - can get the testimony in a video deposition invalidated and tossed out of court. I've been told the only thing acceptable as evidence is the original camera raw footage and the only "editing" allowed being in-camera editing, stopping tape when the attorneys agree to go off the record and resuming recording before going back on the record. Even an exact duplicate copy of the original recording is unacceptable in some courts - the only valid evidence being the actual camera original media.

Greg Miller · September 12th, 2012, 05:46 AM

Interesting, Steve, and that may be valid.

If that is the case, would it be acceptable to use some analog EQ as part of the recording process? Or would that also be taboo?

Steve House · September 12th, 2012, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg Miller

Interesting, Steve, and that may be valid.

If that is the case, would it be acceptable to use some analog EQ as part of the recording process? Or would that also be taboo?

Just guessing but I would think EQ during recording would be acceptable as its use would be clearly known by the attorneys for both sides.

September 10th, 2012, 08:56 AM	#61
Luke Arndt Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Southern Illinois Posts: 47	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen I have not tried equalizing, as it would take up a lot of time to equalize each video after the fact so I don't think it would be practical. As of now, I'm thinking of trying an AT899. Will report back if I do or if I come across some other mic.

September 10th, 2012, 03:22 PM	#62
Greg Miller Trustee Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 1,791	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen Luke, I'm surprised that it would take more than a few minutes to EQ an entire track (before editing). What is the total length of one shoot that you're talking about? Last edited by Greg Miller; September 11th, 2012 at 08:23 AM.

September 11th, 2012, 08:31 AM	#63
Luke Arndt Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Southern Illinois Posts: 47	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen The total length varies from 30 minutes to several hours, depending on the length of the deposition. I don't know that the EQ itself would necessarily take a while, but it would require a few more steps in the process. Instead of simply having a master DVD that is good to go, I would have to rip it, EQ it, render it, and burn it.

September 11th, 2012, 09:55 AM	#64
Richard Crowley Trustee Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 1,238	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen I thought we were talking about DEPOSITION recordings here? Why are we worrying about EQ? Speech intelligibility is the #1 requirement for the sound track here. Certainly absence of interference noise (including cell phones) is a significant factor. But I fail to see how subtle tonal changes is even worth discussing. Now if we were talking about a big-time dramatic production that would be a different matter.

September 11th, 2012, 09:25 PM	#65
Greg Miller Trustee Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 1,791	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen Richard, I'm inclined to agree with you. As I see it, there are two important issues for deposition recordings: they should be noise free, and the intelligibility should be good. The mic in question solves the first issue. The mic's LF rolloff will not have any adverse effect on intelligibility; in fact it might improve intelligibility because it will reduce pickup of LF room noise (air handlers and the like) as well as bumps and thumps when the person moves around and bumps the mic. The problem is solved (assuming the OP is really recording depositions, and not doing something else). Yet now the OP is unhappy because this mic's response is not the same as a mic which he was unable to use because of cellphone interference. [extraneous blather removed] Luke, As I see it, if you really want more LF but are unwilling to devote any time to achieving that, you have two choices at this point in time. First: go on an unending quest for another -- different -- better -- more super deluxe -- microphone. Second: use a mixer like the Mackie 802-VLZ3 which has some analog equalization. Crank up the LF boost about half way and that will restore a lot of the bottom end to the Shure mic, so it sounds more like the [useless] electret that you like. (Remember that the LF boost by itself will add to room noise and LF thumping noises, but the Mackie also has a LF cut switch to get rid of the really low end.) Of course you will probably find something you don't like about the Mackie. And, indeed, we haven't tested it for GSM/RF immunity so I can't speak to that point. Last edited by Greg Miller; September 12th, 2012 at 06:11 AM.

September 12th, 2012, 05:30 AM	#66
Steve House Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Posts: 5,742	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen FWIW, I've been given to understand that ANY post-production manipulation of the recording - editing of any sort, sound sweetening, whatever - can get the testimony in a video deposition invalidated and tossed out of court. I've been told the only thing acceptable as evidence is the original camera raw footage and the only "editing" allowed being in-camera editing, stopping tape when the attorneys agree to go off the record and resuming recording before going back on the record. Even an exact duplicate copy of the original recording is unacceptable in some courts - the only valid evidence being the actual camera original media. __________________ Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams!

September 12th, 2012, 05:46 AM	#67
Greg Miller Trustee Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 1,791	Re: Looking for a good lavalier mic that is impervious to GSM / cell phone interferen Interesting, Steve, and that may be valid. If that is the case, would it be acceptable to use some analog EQ as part of the recording process? Or would that also be taboo?