Boom Op monitoring question... at DVinfo.net

Ross Jones · May 27th, 2006, 09:25 AM

My set up is: Boom Op with mic -> SD302 -> camera, with headphone monitor from the 302 back to Boom Op.
Second/Third lav mics direct to 302.
The Audio guy/gal then monitors off the camera, but watches the 302's meters and adjusts levels as needed.
Problem with this is that the Boom Op can't have a feed of just his mic, and the audio guy can't preselect channels to listen to without changing what the Boom Op hears. ... and me directing/shooting can't have an audio feed at all.
What's the 'industry standard' solution here? perhaps a SD MM-1 for the Boom op..?
Thx, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ty Ford · May 28th, 2006, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross Jones

My set up is: Boom Op with mic -> SD302 -> camera, with headphone monitor from the 302 back to Boom Op.
Second/Third lav mics direct to 302.
The Audio guy/gal then monitors off the camera, but watches the 302's meters and adjusts levels as needed.
Problem with this is that the Boom Op can't have a feed of just his mic, and the audio guy can't preselect channels to listen to without changing what the Boom Op hears. ... and me directing/shooting can't have an audio feed at all.
What's the 'industry standard' solution here? perhaps a SD MM-1 for the Boom op..?
Thx, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Buzz Turner,I'm sure, has a thingee for this. He's a great guy. I would let him sleep wth my wallet.

http://www.turneraudio.com

Regards,

Ty Ford

Ross Jones · May 28th, 2006, 12:15 PM

Thanks, Ty.. I'll check it out.
For the Boom Op tho', would you recommend the MM-1?
If that's the best solution for the Op, then audio guy can take a line level feed from the MM-1 to thr 302 and have complete flexibility on monitoring. I guess that I could then listen from camera h/p out that way I can hear what should be going to tape..
Rgds, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ty Ford · May 28th, 2006, 04:50 PM

Sure.

Regards,

Ty

Oleg Kaizerman · June 1st, 2006, 01:12 PM

you can buy a simple headphone amplifer as boostaroo and send the boom operator one of the unbalance outs from the 302 ( mix out )
of course there are planty companies who making ifb boxes for the same porpases , check with oudio dealers

Ross Jones · June 1st, 2006, 04:57 PM

Trouble is, I want the Boom Op to hear only his mic. The last shoot we did he could hear both his own mic plus the lavs. It was impossible for him to tell when he was off target as he could always hear the lav(s) loud and clear. The outs on the 302 are either going to the camera (Ch 1 & 2), or to the headphones (depends on what monitor the Audio Op selects), or the Tape Out - which again, is the camera mix, i.e. not what the boom op needs.
I think that the SD MM-1 seems to fit the vill of what I need: the mic pre is the same quality as the 302's, the headphone monitor allows either just the Boom Op's mic, or can include another mix sent back to it from anbother source (off camera, from 302, etc..). It's a bit pricey, but I've been so impressed with the 302's quality, I'm prepared to save my pennies...!
Rgds, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marco Leavitt · June 2nd, 2006, 08:06 AM

This is exactly how we use the MM1, and it works great. I'm convinced the MM1's limiters sound better than the 302's as well. I find you can't hit the 302 limiters too hard or the sound flattens out too much. The MM1's limiter usually sounds a lot more natural, but you can't control it as easily. At higher gain settings, it's more active. If there's a lot of dynamic range in the scene we turn the gain up on the MM1 and the pots down on the 302. We leave the 302 limiters on as well (they're transparent) as a fail safe. If really loud, we turn the gain down on the MM1. Having the flexibility of that extra preamp really helps.

Oleg Kaizerman · June 2nd, 2006, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross Jones

Trouble is, I want the Boom Op to hear only his mic. The last shoot we did he could hear both his own mic plus the lavs. It was impossible for him to tell when he was off target as he could always hear the lav(s) loud and clear. The outs on the 302 are either going to the camera (Ch 1 & 2), or to the headphones (depends on what monitor the Audio Op selects), or the Tape Out - which again, is the camera mix, i.e. not what the boom op needs.
I think that the SD MM-1 seems to fit the vill of what I need: the mic pre is the same quality as the 302's, the headphone monitor allows either just the Boom Op's mic, or can include another mix sent back to it from anbother source (off camera, from 302, etc..). It's a bit pricey, but I've been so impressed with the 302's quality, I'm prepared to save my pennies...!
Rgds, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

\

if you not mix the separate channels , the tape out ( bus out) will carry separate signals so you pick up only the boom side and send it to the boom operator
never mix lavaliers and boom if you have spare track , so this way with cable and headphone amp you eliminate the mm -1

Ross Jones · June 2nd, 2006, 01:01 PM

Oleg, good point. I always keep the boom mic separate from the lavs, so yes, I guess I could split that channel output and send part of it back via a headphone amp. Downside is that there would be no chance of getting any other mix back to the Boom Op, should the need arise..
Thx, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oleg Kaizerman · June 2nd, 2006, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross Jones

Oleg, good point. I always keep the boom mic separate from the lavs, so yes, I guess I could split that channel output and send part of it back via a headphone amp. Downside is that there would be no chance of getting any other mix back to the Boom Op, should the need arise..
Thx, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

smart switch in the middle left /right / stereo would help you with that - not a problem to make your self if you know how to solder

the mm-1 doesnt eliminate another cable if you need communicate with the boom operator

Bob Grant · June 3rd, 2006, 04:25 AM

The Rolls PM50sOB is exactly what you want.
The boom op can adjust his levels to whatever he/she wants with no effect on the downstream mic feed. This unit is also very cheap.

Oleg Kaizerman · June 3rd, 2006, 04:47 AM

nice box , little bit heavy but definitely will work

Ross Jones · June 3rd, 2006, 06:37 AM

Bob, the Rolls unit looks very interesting. I assume that the mic pass through really does mean that there is no mic preamp touching the signal as it's passed along..? Obviously there is for the h/p feed..
Rgds, Ross.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Bob Grant · June 3rd, 2006, 07:02 AM

That's correct.
The internal amplifier simply bridges the mic line so it has no effect on what goes down to the camera / audio mixer.
You can get a belt clip with the unit or else pull the one off a cheap tape measure.
You can also feed a line level input into it from elsewhere, probably not much use for a boom op.
What the unit was originally designed for was so a singer could get their own foldback with their mic at a level to suit themselves without them upsetting the house mix.
The units with the 'OB' suffix are just a slightly moded version for use by a boom op. If you don't like the belt clip idea we've also used a cheap camera bag (about $3) so you can hang it over the shoulder.

Oh and it's LOUD. One of my biggest gripes about most cameras is the headphone output just doesn't have enough power, you could add a headphone amp but the Rolls unit solves so many problems if you've got a boom operator.

Bill Ball · June 3rd, 2006, 07:43 AM

I used the Rolls unit until I got a small field mixer. It definitely is worth the money for your purpose. My only concerns were no locking XLR inputs (which Rolls kindly added for me when I sent it back to get the newly announced belt clip option), exposed switch, and a questionable battery mount (like none, the battery is just crammed into the case). Still, for the money, its great. The op can hear and there is nothing they can do to mess up the signal, short of disconnecting cables.

May 27th, 2006, 09:25 AM	#1
Ross Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Harvard, MA Posts: 155	Boom Op monitoring question... My set up is: Boom Op with mic -> SD302 -> camera, with headphone monitor from the 302 back to Boom Op. Second/Third lav mics direct to 302. The Audio guy/gal then monitors off the camera, but watches the 302's meters and adjusts levels as needed. Problem with this is that the Boom Op can't have a feed of just his mic, and the audio guy can't preselect channels to listen to without changing what the Boom Op hears. ... and me directing/shooting can't have an audio feed at all. What's the 'industry standard' solution here? perhaps a SD MM-1 for the Boom op..? Thx, Ross. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __________________ XH-A1; HV-20; Miller DS-10; Manfrotto 695/3229; SD302/702; PCM-D50; FCS2; MacPro; 2.25TB

May 28th, 2006, 12:15 PM	#3
Ross Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Harvard, MA Posts: 155	Thanks, Ty.. I'll check it out. For the Boom Op tho', would you recommend the MM-1? If that's the best solution for the Op, then audio guy can take a line level feed from the MM-1 to thr 302 and have complete flexibility on monitoring. I guess that I could then listen from camera h/p out that way I can hear what should be going to tape.. Rgds, Ross. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __________________ XH-A1; HV-20; Miller DS-10; Manfrotto 695/3229; SD302/702; PCM-D50; FCS2; MacPro; 2.25TB

May 28th, 2006, 04:50 PM	#4
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Sure. Regards, Ty __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

June 1st, 2006, 04:57 PM	#6
Ross Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Harvard, MA Posts: 155	Trouble is, I want the Boom Op to hear only his mic. The last shoot we did he could hear both his own mic plus the lavs. It was impossible for him to tell when he was off target as he could always hear the lav(s) loud and clear. The outs on the 302 are either going to the camera (Ch 1 & 2), or to the headphones (depends on what monitor the Audio Op selects), or the Tape Out - which again, is the camera mix, i.e. not what the boom op needs. I think that the SD MM-1 seems to fit the vill of what I need: the mic pre is the same quality as the 302's, the headphone monitor allows either just the Boom Op's mic, or can include another mix sent back to it from anbother source (off camera, from 302, etc..). It's a bit pricey, but I've been so impressed with the 302's quality, I'm prepared to save my pennies...! Rgds, Ross. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ __________________ XH-A1; HV-20; Miller DS-10; Manfrotto 695/3229; SD302/702; PCM-D50; FCS2; MacPro; 2.25TB

June 2nd, 2006, 01:01 PM	#9
Ross Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Harvard, MA Posts: 155	Oleg, good point. I always keep the boom mic separate from the lavs, so yes, I guess I could split that channel output and send part of it back via a headphone amp. Downside is that there would be no chance of getting any other mix back to the Boom Op, should the need arise.. Thx, Ross. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __________________ XH-A1; HV-20; Miller DS-10; Manfrotto 695/3229; SD302/702; PCM-D50; FCS2; MacPro; 2.25TB

June 1st, 2006, 01:12 PM	#5
Oleg Kaizerman Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: israel Posts: 296	you can buy a simple headphone amplifer as boostaroo and send the boom operator one of the unbalance outs from the 302 ( mix out ) of course there are planty companies who making ifb boxes for the same porpases , check with oudio dealers

June 2nd, 2006, 08:06 AM	#7
Marco Leavitt Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Albany, NY 12210 Posts: 2,652	This is exactly how we use the MM1, and it works great. I'm convinced the MM1's limiters sound better than the 302's as well. I find you can't hit the 302 limiters too hard or the sound flattens out too much. The MM1's limiter usually sounds a lot more natural, but you can't control it as easily. At higher gain settings, it's more active. If there's a lot of dynamic range in the scene we turn the gain up on the MM1 and the pots down on the 302. We leave the 302 limiters on as well (they're transparent) as a fail safe. If really loud, we turn the gain down on the MM1. Having the flexibility of that extra preamp really helps.

June 3rd, 2006, 04:25 AM	#11
Bob Grant Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 1,570	The Rolls PM50sOB is exactly what you want. The boom op can adjust his levels to whatever he/she wants with no effect on the downstream mic feed. This unit is also very cheap.

June 3rd, 2006, 04:47 AM	#12
Oleg Kaizerman Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: israel Posts: 296	nice box , little bit heavy but definitely will work

June 3rd, 2006, 06:37 AM	#13
Ross Jones Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Harvard, MA Posts: 155	Bob, the Rolls unit looks very interesting. I assume that the mic pass through really does mean that there is no mic preamp touching the signal as it's passed along..? Obviously there is for the h/p feed.. Rgds, Ross. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ __________________ XH-A1; HV-20; Miller DS-10; Manfrotto 695/3229; SD302/702; PCM-D50; FCS2; MacPro; 2.25TB

June 3rd, 2006, 07:02 AM	#14
Bob Grant Trustee Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 1,570	That's correct. The internal amplifier simply bridges the mic line so it has no effect on what goes down to the camera / audio mixer. You can get a belt clip with the unit or else pull the one off a cheap tape measure. You can also feed a line level input into it from elsewhere, probably not much use for a boom op. What the unit was originally designed for was so a singer could get their own foldback with their mic at a level to suit themselves without them upsetting the house mix. The units with the 'OB' suffix are just a slightly moded version for use by a boom op. If you don't like the belt clip idea we've also used a cheap camera bag (about $3) so you can hang it over the shoulder. Oh and it's LOUD. One of my biggest gripes about most cameras is the headphone output just doesn't have enough power, you could add a headphone amp but the Rolls unit solves so many problems if you've got a boom operator.

June 3rd, 2006, 07:43 AM	#15
Bill Ball Major Player Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: NEW JERSEY Posts: 216	I used the Rolls unit until I got a small field mixer. It definitely is worth the money for your purpose. My only concerns were no locking XLR inputs (which Rolls kindly added for me when I sent it back to get the newly announced belt clip option), exposed switch, and a questionable battery mount (like none, the battery is just crammed into the case). Still, for the money, its great. The op can hear and there is nothing they can do to mess up the signal, short of disconnecting cables.