is there such a mic

[Spike Spiegel]

I am in a situation where theres a group of people (golfers) out in the field, and theres crucial audio that I need to capture. There is no dedicated audio because the situation is not boomable, and we cannot prop them with lavs. So we have to rely upon a camera mounted microphone of some sort. Because we dont want a unidirectional mic, a cardioid woudl be my best guess for this type of job. I need something thats sensitive and something that has a wide range so it can pick up a group of people as they are interacting.. Any ideas?

[Robin Davies-Rollinson]

I think that a Sennheiser 416 operated by a recordist would be the best answer. He/she would be able to swing the mic to whoever's speaking, rather than relying on an on-board mic.
We've covered items just like this and it works a treat.

Robin

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Spike Spiegel

I am in a situation where theres a group of people (golfers) out in the field, and theres crucial audio that I need to capture. There is no dedicated audio because the situation is not boomable, and we cannot prop them with lavs. So we have to rely upon a camera mounted microphone of some sort. Because we dont want a unidirectional mic, a cardioid woudl be my best guess for this type of job. I need something thats sensitive and something that has a wide range so it can pick up a group of people as they are interacting.. Any ideas?

There is no way you're going to get decent audio from a camera mounted conventional mic at any distance at all from the subjects. Even shotguns are desgned for close-in use and as far as mounting omnis, cardioids, or hypercardioids on camera ... fogeddaboutit. The physics of acoustics is working against you.

You might google for "parabolic microphone" as these are designed for capturing sounds from a distance - so-called "spy mics" are one application, also birders use them a lot for recording distant bird calls. One mounted on a pistol grip and aimed by a sound-person standing beside the camera would work well.

I think Audio Technica makes a mic that's a line array made up of a number of mic capsules mounted togther that's popular with network live sports broadcasting crews but it's very expensive.

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Spike Spiegel

I am in a situation where theres a group of people (golfers) out in the field, and theres crucial audio that I need to capture. There is no dedicated audio because the situation is not boomable, and we cannot prop them with lavs. So we have to rely upon a camera mounted microphone of some sort. Because we dont want a unidirectional mic, a cardioid woudl be my best guess for this type of job. I need something thats sensitive and something that has a wide range so it can pick up a group of people as they are interacting.. Any ideas?

A cardioid IS an unidirectional mic.

Why can't you put wireless lavs on them?

Ty Ford

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Steve House

I think Audio Technica makes a mic that's a line array made up of a number of mic capsules mounted togther that's popular with network live sports broadcasting crews but it's very expensive.

That mic (AT895 iirc) is for noise cancellation.

Ty Ford

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Ty Ford

That mic (AT895 iirc) is for noise cancellation.

Ty Ford

I thought I saw one somewhere that looks like a cluster of pipes that acts like a similar to a parabolic for long distance capture. Any ideas what I'm thinking of?

[Ty Ford]

don't go there.

Ty

[Ralph Keyser]

Originally Posted by Spike Spiegel

...theres crucial audio that I need to capture. There is no dedicated audio because the situation is not boomable, and we cannot prop them with lavs. So we have to rely upon a camera mounted microphone of some sort.

So this statement seems a bit confusing. If the audio is crucial, why can't you do what you need to do to capture it? If I told you that there was crucial video that you needed, but you weren't going to be allowed to put your camera inside the building where it was happening...well, you get the idea.

BTW, if you go with the parabolic microphone approach, make sure you find someone who is familiar with their use.

[Mark Bournes]

In your particular situation a parabolic is the only way to go. Also find someone who knows how to use it.

Mark

[Stu Holmes]

I was actually going to do a little docu myself of 4 golfers and i had thought about the audio issue and the problems.

My thoughts were to use 4 wired lavs, 1 on each golfer, connected to 4 iriver 700-series or 800-series flash recorders. That was, each golfer is permanently recorded for the entire round. In mono, the flash players will easily have enough flash memory for the round (say 4-4.5hrs).

Supplement this with an on-camera shotgun and also i was thinking about something like an NT3 wired into the cam (unplug shotgun..) or maybe the NT3 with a Sennheiser SKP100 plug-on transmitter for "on the tee, pre-teeshot brief player interviews".

This way there's no need for 4 expensive wireless lavs, irivers much cheaper. Not sold anymore so you'd have to ebay for them or similar.

Any comments welcome on my suggestion.

[Chris Barcellos]

Stu:

I ve been toying with trying offer a golf "grudge" match video service in my area. I have done some preliminary testing with a small Panny GS120. I know mics will be an issue if I ever move forward with it. The iRiver sounds like the best idea, but man, how would you like to match up 4 hours of sound footage for each golfer. With one camera man (myself), my next attempt is going to include my FX1 with the Sennheiser ME66. At that point I won't actually be playing in the foursome. Ultimately, I think that you will get plenty of banter at the tees, and when on the fairways, you just have to move around to get a good angle. My experience so far is that coming of with a half hour to 45 minute video is all you will really want, and some of that will include slow motion shots, setting shots, and so on.

[Spike Spiegel]

hey everyone, thanks for the response. The reason why we can't lav or boom the players is because, simply, the client doesn't want that "Tv-look" for the program. They dont' want the audience to see the players wearing mics, It IS being broadcasted in Comcast Sportsnet, and they dont want hte players wearing lavs or they don't want to see any accidental shots of the booms in any shots.

Thats why I suggested we could probably go with a camera mounted microphone, because, if the players are trash talking, or sayin something useful, the camera will have to be pointed at them, and in a normal dialogue db, itll most likely be captured by the mounted mic...

Whats worse is, we can't use any iRivers, HiMD, Ipod method of capturing any recorded lav audio because we have a 3 day turnaround time on post production... Perhaps we can convince the client to let us use lavs, and simply rig up the wireless receiver directly to the cameras, and record onto tape!

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

It's VERY easy to hide lavs. a bit of gaffers tape reversed, bandaids, moleskin with adhesive all can be used to hide lavs beneath a shirt, in hair, in the apex of a bra, etc

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

Stu:

I ve been toying with trying offer a golf "grudge" match video service in my area. I have done some preliminary testing with a small Panny GS120. I know mics will be an issue if I ever move forward with it. The iRiver sounds like the best idea, but man, how would you like to match up 4 hours of sound footage for each golfer. With one camera man (myself), my next attempt is going to include my FX1 with the Sennheiser ME66. At that point I won't actually be playing in the foursome. Ultimately, I think that you will get plenty of banter at the tees, and when on the fairways, you just have to move around to get a good angle. My experience so far is that coming of with a half hour to 45 minute video is all you will really want, and some of that will include slow motion shots, setting shots, and so on.

I predict you won't be very happy with your me66 if it's more than 4 feet away.

Ty Ford