Sennheiser G2 100 with ME66 at DVinfo.net

Tony Jones · December 14th, 2005, 02:29 AM

After a lot of thought and great advice from the DVinfo forum, I think I have decided which mic combination to buy - I'd just like to check before going ahead that the two are indeed compatible in terms of how I would like to use them.

I'd like to use the Sennheiser G2 with the plug-on adapter, then use this with the ME66 so we can use wireless boom.

I'd just like to check that the 'K6' module can be battery powered, so I could plug this into the end of the ME66, and then plug on the wireless plug from the G2 - have I understood that correctly?

Graham Bernard · December 14th, 2005, 02:49 AM

Tony, "I'd just like to check that the 'K6' module can be battery powered, . . " you HAVE to use the K6 with the 66. You have no choice in the matter! And yes it "holds" the battery needed for the combo, as well as the switch and click on battery warning light. The K6 also has a "bass" roll-off dip switch you can use. The rear end has the male XLR socket.

The reason for this K6 is so you can swap-out different front ends. Get on the Senni site where there's heaps of useful info.

Grazie

Graham Bernard · December 14th, 2005, 03:01 AM

Tony - "I'd like to use the Sennheiser G2 with the plug-on adapter, then use this with the ME66 so we can use wireless boom." I've also just tested this out for you ( . .and me! HAH!) with my Senni Rx ew100. I used SKP 100G2 plugged into the bottom of the K6 WITH the Senni 66. Plugged a Senni set of cans on the output of the ew100 and monitored this. Works a treat for me!

Hope this helps,

Grazie

Tony Jones · December 14th, 2005, 03:30 AM

What a star! Thanks Graham!! :)

Graham Bernard · December 14th, 2005, 03:51 AM

.. yeah, me Mum thinks so too! - Pleasure .. Grazie

Marco Leavitt · December 14th, 2005, 10:02 AM

As cool as this setup sounds, how is your boom op going to hear what he or she is recording? Aiming correctly will be critical with the ME66.

Jim Feeley · December 14th, 2005, 10:51 AM

Marco's comment is spot on. One standard way to set up a wireless boom is to run a cable from the back of the pole down to a small mic preamp w/ a headphone & mic/line output, such as a Sound Devices MM1 or the one from Shure or Whirlwind, connect the preamp output to a wireless transmitter, and also connect the headphones to the device. Stick all that in a small pouch on your belt or pants.

Some people do use a stick plug transmitter on a boom, but they usually get an audio feed sent back to them by the mixer (so they wear a receiver).

Or on small eng/efp gigs, the boom operator also mixes, and then sends two channels of wireless to camera. I do that a lot. Works fine.

Of course, a breakaway cable or a boom cable system will cost less and provide better audio quality. For example:

<http://www.remoteaudio.com/boom.htm>

Some of these solutions will cost you more but you gotta decide if you can afford poor-quality boom sound...

Best,

Jim

Tony Jones · December 16th, 2005, 04:13 AM

Thanks very much indeed!

So just to clarify .. with this setup, I run a standard XLR lead from the mic to say the MM-1, then I connect another short XLR from the output of the MM-1 to the G2s plug on adapter. I plug my headphnes into the MM-1 and monitor audio this way? I've not seen a field mixer in the flesh, so I'm picturing it that way.

At a push, on a limited budget - could we not have the former setup and set levels on rehearsal? So for example ... we run through the scene with the camera person concentrating not on video but on the cameras audio meters. We then shoot the scene several times. On scenes where we may be using a tripod, could we also have a pair of headphones plugged directly into the camera, where the camera man can also keep an eye on levels? (I'm thinking this is probably extremely bad practice). This is not how I'd ideally do things, I'm just exploring options as there are maybe only three or four scenes that would need booming in the project we're working on - the G2 would do for 95% as it's mainly one subject in close proximity and seated interviews.

I'm asking only as potentially it could be another £300-£400 to accommodate just a few scenes - but if it's totally impractical any other way, of course we'll find the cash!

Bill Ball · December 16th, 2005, 08:36 AM

If you are on a tight budget I would suggest the Rolls PM50sOB Personal Monitor Amp ($65) to go between the mic cable and the wireless transmitter while providing headphone monitoring for the boom operator (necessary). Get the belt clip for it ($5). I also had Rolls mount a locking collar on the XLR out socket for me. It's not the perfect unit, but it does the job. Short of disconnecting the cable, the unit (or boom operator) cannot screw up the sound from the mic to the camera.

Also, if you have not already bought the mics consider if the ME66 is right for you. It is a very hot mic and overloads the inputs to my GL-2 without use of an external attenuator. It is also heavy and adds a lot of of axis coloration (not to be used indoors). The ME64, while still needing attenuation, is much more forgiving and less colorizing while being somewhat shorter and lighter. I use it far more than the ME66.

Both the camera person and the boom operator should be monitoring with good headphones while someone is whatching levels. In my experience audio is a lot easier to permanently screw up than video.

Marco Leavitt · December 16th, 2005, 08:46 AM

The continual reports of the ME66 overloading camera preamps (assuming you aren't just clipping) fascinate me. I have used that mic for years and have never experienced this.

Tony Jones · December 16th, 2005, 10:19 AM

Thanks Bill! This could be a cheap way to accomplish the same thing for us on this occasion. I've checked it out and it also seems extremely small and easy to use.

Someone has just mentioned the Rode NG-2 as an alternative for the boom mic. I'd made my mind up 90% on the ME66 as it seems to be an 'industry standard' and I was thinking that so many people cannot possibly be wrong (going for the 'safe bet'). With the Rolls unit in between, would this mean the hot signal would not be an issue? (we could use the Rolls 'Mic Level' to reduce this if needed).

Bill Ball · December 16th, 2005, 10:50 AM

Macro: I dont know about other cameras but I can assure the Me66 or Me64 will easily overload the inputs on a GL-2 without clipping in the meters. See the technical testing data supplied by Fred Retread in the following DVINFO discussion:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...overload+input

Tony: no the Rolls unit will do nothing to help with the overload issue. The XLR in from the mic is hard wired directly to the XLR out to your camera. There is a headphone tap/amp that is tied into that so that you can adjust levels in the boom op's headphone. But nothing you do with the controls on the Rolls unit, including turning it off, will affect the signal being sent from the mic to the camera.

For attenuation you need something like the Shure A15AS inline pad ($39). I keep mine set at -15db.

The setup I usually have is ME64 on a rycote softie on a boom pole with a 10ft XLR cable to the boom op. The rolls unit belt mounted with the Shure A15S stuck on the XLR output (or sometimes on the back of the mic for balance), a pair of Sony 7506s on the boom op, a 25ft XLR cable back to the cam into as Shure A96F adapter ($37) to deliver the balanced XLR singal to the unbalanced minijack on the GL-2, and a pair of 7506 heaphones on the camera op (me).

I am sure there are other good mics, probably better ones for your use. The AT897 gets a lot of support in DVINFO. You will have to get advice from someone else on mic choices.

Marco Leavitt · December 16th, 2005, 10:51 AM

If you need to attenuate the signal, do it at the camera end. The XLR adapter you buy should have passive faders on it, such as this one:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search

With the ME66 you'll generally want to turn the in-camera attenuator on as well.

By the way, the MM1 is a lot more than just a headphone monitor. If you can possibly swing it, you'll be glad you did. For one thing, it will give you access to phantom power which will make a lot more mic choices available to you. It also has an excellent limiter, which is very usefull for dealing with the limited dynamic range of miniDV cameras.

Jim Feeley · December 16th, 2005, 10:59 AM

Marco, I've seen...uh, heard, the ME66 overload DV camera inputs. Depends on the camera, and even the version of the camera. But nothing that can't be fixed with a pad or a mixer (as you pretty much point out). The Shure A15AS ($40ish) is a decent adjustable mic pad. Info on it and other Shure problem solvers here:

<http://www.shure.com/accessories/acc-problemsolvers.html>

And you're right about the MM1. Way more expensive than some other choices, but worth it. Considering how much you can improve overall perceived production quality with good audio, seems like it's worth investing a bit more in your audio gear...

Of course, I'm an audio guy at heart.

Jim

Marco Leavitt · December 16th, 2005, 11:03 AM

Bill,
I don't doubt you. I've seen those posts.

I guess my point is only that if you follow standard procedure and keep the camera's gain levels at about 50 percent to 75 percent and set your levels from there by turning down the faders on the XLR adapter, you'll never have a problem. I see you'been using an inline attenuator to accomplish the same thing.

Yeah, I would expect a person would have problems if they tried to adjust the levels by turning the gain much below 50 percent on these cameras. That's a no no.

December 14th, 2005, 02:29 AM	#1
Tony Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 28	Sennheiser G2 100 with ME66 After a lot of thought and great advice from the DVinfo forum, I think I have decided which mic combination to buy - I'd just like to check before going ahead that the two are indeed compatible in terms of how I would like to use them. I'd like to use the Sennheiser G2 with the plug-on adapter, then use this with the ME66 so we can use wireless boom. I'd just like to check that the 'K6' module can be battery powered, so I could plug this into the end of the ME66, and then plug on the wireless plug from the G2 - have I understood that correctly?

December 14th, 2005, 02:49 AM	#2
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	Tony, "I'd just like to check that the 'K6' module can be battery powered, . . " you HAVE to use the K6 with the 66. You have no choice in the matter! And yes it "holds" the battery needed for the combo, as well as the switch and click on battery warning light. The K6 also has a "bass" roll-off dip switch you can use. The rear end has the male XLR socket. The reason for this K6 is so you can swap-out different front ends. Get on the Senni site where there's heaps of useful info. Grazie

December 14th, 2005, 03:01 AM	#3
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	Tony - "I'd like to use the Sennheiser G2 with the plug-on adapter, then use this with the ME66 so we can use wireless boom." I've also just tested this out for you ( . .and me! HAH!) with my Senni Rx ew100. I used SKP 100G2 plugged into the bottom of the K6 WITH the Senni 66. Plugged a Senni set of cans on the output of the ew100 and monitored this. Works a treat for me! Hope this helps, Grazie

December 14th, 2005, 03:30 AM	#4
Tony Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 28	What a star! Thanks Graham!! :)

December 14th, 2005, 03:51 AM	#5
Graham Bernard Old Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: London UK Posts: 3,633	.. yeah, me Mum thinks so too! - Pleasure .. Grazie

December 14th, 2005, 10:02 AM	#6
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	As cool as this setup sounds, how is your boom op going to hear what he or she is recording? Aiming correctly will be critical with the ME66.

December 14th, 2005, 10:51 AM	#7
Jim Feeley Supports LPFM Radio Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Northern California USA Posts: 170	Marco's comment is spot on. One standard way to set up a wireless boom is to run a cable from the back of the pole down to a small mic preamp w/ a headphone & mic/line output, such as a Sound Devices MM1 or the one from Shure or Whirlwind, connect the preamp output to a wireless transmitter, and also connect the headphones to the device. Stick all that in a small pouch on your belt or pants. Some people do use a stick plug transmitter on a boom, but they usually get an audio feed sent back to them by the mixer (so they wear a receiver). Or on small eng/efp gigs, the boom operator also mixes, and then sends two channels of wireless to camera. I do that a lot. Works fine. Of course, a breakaway cable or a boom cable system will cost less and provide better audio quality. For example: <http://www.remoteaudio.com/boom.htm> Some of these solutions will cost you more but you gotta decide if you can afford poor-quality boom sound... Best, Jim

December 16th, 2005, 04:13 AM	#8
Tony Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 28	Thanks very much indeed! So just to clarify .. with this setup, I run a standard XLR lead from the mic to say the MM-1, then I connect another short XLR from the output of the MM-1 to the G2s plug on adapter. I plug my headphnes into the MM-1 and monitor audio this way? I've not seen a field mixer in the flesh, so I'm picturing it that way. At a push, on a limited budget - could we not have the former setup and set levels on rehearsal? So for example ... we run through the scene with the camera person concentrating not on video but on the cameras audio meters. We then shoot the scene several times. On scenes where we may be using a tripod, could we also have a pair of headphones plugged directly into the camera, where the camera man can also keep an eye on levels? (I'm thinking this is probably extremely bad practice). This is not how I'd ideally do things, I'm just exploring options as there are maybe only three or four scenes that would need booming in the project we're working on - the G2 would do for 95% as it's mainly one subject in close proximity and seated interviews. I'm asking only as potentially it could be another £300-£400 to accommodate just a few scenes - but if it's totally impractical any other way, of course we'll find the cash!

December 16th, 2005, 08:36 AM	#9
Bill Ball Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: NEW JERSEY Posts: 216	If you are on a tight budget I would suggest the Rolls PM50sOB Personal Monitor Amp ($65) to go between the mic cable and the wireless transmitter while providing headphone monitoring for the boom operator (necessary). Get the belt clip for it ($5). I also had Rolls mount a locking collar on the XLR out socket for me. It's not the perfect unit, but it does the job. Short of disconnecting the cable, the unit (or boom operator) cannot screw up the sound from the mic to the camera. Also, if you have not already bought the mics consider if the ME66 is right for you. It is a very hot mic and overloads the inputs to my GL-2 without use of an external attenuator. It is also heavy and adds a lot of of axis coloration (not to be used indoors). The ME64, while still needing attenuation, is much more forgiving and less colorizing while being somewhat shorter and lighter. I use it far more than the ME66. Both the camera person and the boom operator should be monitoring with good headphones while someone is whatching levels. In my experience audio is a lot easier to permanently screw up than video.

December 16th, 2005, 08:46 AM	#10
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	The continual reports of the ME66 overloading camera preamps (assuming you aren't just clipping) fascinate me. I have used that mic for years and have never experienced this.

December 16th, 2005, 10:19 AM	#11
Tony Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 28	Thanks Bill! This could be a cheap way to accomplish the same thing for us on this occasion. I've checked it out and it also seems extremely small and easy to use. Someone has just mentioned the Rode NG-2 as an alternative for the boom mic. I'd made my mind up 90% on the ME66 as it seems to be an 'industry standard' and I was thinking that so many people cannot possibly be wrong (going for the 'safe bet'). With the Rolls unit in between, would this mean the hot signal would not be an issue? (we could use the Rolls 'Mic Level' to reduce this if needed).

December 16th, 2005, 10:50 AM	#12
Bill Ball Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: NEW JERSEY Posts: 216	Macro: I dont know about other cameras but I can assure the Me66 or Me64 will easily overload the inputs on a GL-2 without clipping in the meters. See the technical testing data supplied by Fred Retread in the following DVINFO discussion: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthrea...overload+input Tony: no the Rolls unit will do nothing to help with the overload issue. The XLR in from the mic is hard wired directly to the XLR out to your camera. There is a headphone tap/amp that is tied into that so that you can adjust levels in the boom op's headphone. But nothing you do with the controls on the Rolls unit, including turning it off, will affect the signal being sent from the mic to the camera. For attenuation you need something like the Shure A15AS inline pad ($39). I keep mine set at -15db. The setup I usually have is ME64 on a rycote softie on a boom pole with a 10ft XLR cable to the boom op. The rolls unit belt mounted with the Shure A15S stuck on the XLR output (or sometimes on the back of the mic for balance), a pair of Sony 7506s on the boom op, a 25ft XLR cable back to the cam into as Shure A96F adapter ($37) to deliver the balanced XLR singal to the unbalanced minijack on the GL-2, and a pair of 7506 heaphones on the camera op (me). I am sure there are other good mics, probably better ones for your use. The AT897 gets a lot of support in DVINFO. You will have to get advice from someone else on mic choices.

December 16th, 2005, 10:51 AM	#13
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	If you need to attenuate the signal, do it at the camera end. The XLR adapter you buy should have passive faders on it, such as this one: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...ughType=search With the ME66 you'll generally want to turn the in-camera attenuator on as well. By the way, the MM1 is a lot more than just a headphone monitor. If you can possibly swing it, you'll be glad you did. For one thing, it will give you access to phantom power which will make a lot more mic choices available to you. It also has an excellent limiter, which is very usefull for dealing with the limited dynamic range of miniDV cameras.

December 16th, 2005, 10:59 AM	#14
Jim Feeley Supports LPFM Radio Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Northern California USA Posts: 170	Marco, I've seen...uh, heard, the ME66 overload DV camera inputs. Depends on the camera, and even the version of the camera. But nothing that can't be fixed with a pad or a mixer (as you pretty much point out). The Shure A15AS ($40ish) is a decent adjustable mic pad. Info on it and other Shure problem solvers here: <http://www.shure.com/accessories/acc-problemsolvers.html> And you're right about the MM1. Way more expensive than some other choices, but worth it. Considering how much you can improve overall perceived production quality with good audio, seems like it's worth investing a bit more in your audio gear... Of course, I'm an audio guy at heart. Jim

December 16th, 2005, 11:03 AM	#15
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	Bill, I don't doubt you. I've seen those posts. I guess my point is only that if you follow standard procedure and keep the camera's gain levels at about 50 percent to 75 percent and set your levels from there by turning down the faders on the XLR adapter, you'll never have a problem. I see you'been using an inline attenuator to accomplish the same thing. Yeah, I would expect a person would have problems if they tried to adjust the levels by turning the gain much below 50 percent on these cameras. That's a no no.