I own one Shure adapter. As soon as I received it, I modified it :
- to reduce the length of the cable (to keep the asymmetric line as short as possible)
- to swap the straight 3.5mm jack for a right-angle one.

But in fact I don't use it because it too heavy and too long when mounted at the end of the ME66 on a Mini-mount support.

I ended building an ultra short XLR->Jack 3.5mm cable. I did some tests to compare the both solutions. The Shure only provide higher volume (impedance matching). But the ME66 is so hot that it really doesn't matter. So from now this little XLR->Jack is always connected avoiding unnecessary insertions for this tiny 3.5mm connector.

When connecting an external mic to a GL2 using 3.5mm stereo miniplug, is there TRULY any difference than connecting an external mic (XLR) to an adaptor, that in turn plugs into the 3.5mm plug?

I am assuming, that since the adaptor is going to 3.5mm, that you would have the same quality and restrictions as if the mic was straight to 3.5mm to begin with...for example, external mic plugged into the 3.5mm plug only records (at least shows this way on the audio level meter) the left channel. I am guessing that through the MA-300 using an XLR mic would get you both channels, but the same XLR mic through an adaptor, such as those mentioned on these boards...Beachtek, etc., in effect converting the mic to 3.5 would bring you back to only getting the left channel, and would be no different than just using a mic with a 3.5mm plug.

Hope I am making sense. Would the above be an accurate assesment??

Thank you.

My straight XLR->jack 3.5mm gives sound on both channels.
It's great because I can have two different settings for the left and right channel so one of them would provide a little bit less gain. A kind of backup if the other channel has been saturated for any reason (and that happens a lot with the ME66).

This said, for short run direct connection is ok (asymetrical) but I would strongly recommend a box like (Beachtek, BP-Pro... or the I one I would love to own the MM-1). The box will perfom the symetrical (XLR) to asymetrical (3.5mm jack). A symetrical line protects you against noise on long distance.

So it's not just a connector adaptor but on very short distance running XLR to 3.5mm without a transformer would work.

David,
Yes, there could be an advantage to using XLR connections even through a Beachtek that ultimately connects via a 3.5mm jack. The primary advantage of using XLR connections, aside from mechanical security, is that they facilitate "balanced" audio signal transmission. Balanced transmission helps to minimize noise that might be induced into the cable over long runs.

Also note that most of the mic's you'll see discussed here are 1-channnel (mono). Devices like the MA-300 or a Beachtek take 1 channel of audio from each XLR connection. The 3.5mm mic jack leading from the Beachtek to the camera's mic port can send discrete 2 channels of audio if both XLR ports are active (with 2 mics).

Does that answer your question?

Thank you for the quick replies. That does indeed answer my question.

I am using the Schriber Acoustic SA-568, which comes with two seperate connectors, one XLR and one 3.5 mini. You use which ever cable is appropriate for your plug. The mic is mounted directly on the cameras hot-shoe and the cable is not long. IF I understand correctly, and I capitolize IF :) , 1) by hooking my mic up via an XLR adaptor and THEN plugging it into the 3.5 mini I would get both left and right channels. Or I am wrong, and 2 ) hooking my shotgun up to the adaptor would still only give me the left channel UNLESS I have a second mic plugged into the adaptor, in which case I would THEN get both channels?

Sorry, for being so naive, but I'm a bit new to the "higher-end" audio, as opposed to the simple mic built in to the camera.

Again, thank you for your helpful and insightful replies. :)

If you want both channels and don't plan to have any extra mic you have different solutions :
- the cable provided with your mike feeds left and right .. nothing to do
- you buy a 3.5 fem stereo to 3.5 male mono so the signal will be distributed on both channels
- you cut and make your own 3.5mm jack with left and right connections
- you build your own custom XLR -> 3.5mm. In that case you could use right angle connector for both XLR female and 3.5mm jack.

I strongly recommend right angle connectors especially for the 3.5mm connection not for the audio quality but mechanical aspect.

Dany

Hello again,

After reading through numerous posts here, I decided to purchase the Sign Video XLR Pro Adaptor and Azden SGM-1X microphone for my GL2. Nice products, although the SGM-1X may be a bit long and with the XLR cable attached, it's a kinda tough to get at the controls on the handle. I might have to take a look at the SGM-X with the mini cable.

If I attach the XLR Pro with the level knobs on the right, the palm of my hand hits and turns them. I'm curious if other users of the XLR Pro have had any problems with accidently turning the level knobs? If I switch the adaptor the other way, the XLR cable connectors are in the way. Would cables with angled connectors make a difference? Is the Beachtek DXA-4P any better in this regard?

Thanks!
Lyle

I'm pretty sure that this is the same product that was once manufactured under the name Studio 1. I orienate it so the faders are facing me and the cables attach at the front of the camera. It gives you a nice flat surface for the palm of your hand. It's impossible to handhold camcorder with the adapter attached any other way. I actually find it easier than handholding with no adapter because it gives you some extra leverage, even though there is some added weight. While this doesn't give the adapter as much surface in contact with the camera, I haven't had any problem. The only issue I can think of, is it throws the camera off axis when you mount it on a tripod so that when you pan the lens is swiveling on an oval instead of a circle. I've done a few crude tests and honestly, you can't tell the difference. If Sign Video has maintained the quality this product was known for, then you have a really great adapter by the way.

Lyle, you're correct. I have the same problems with my Sign Video adapter and so do many others. It's just a design flaw with those adapters but there are a couple of things you could try.

I have learnt to hold the camera with my palm just off the knobs. It don't think I'd like to do that for any length of time but it works.

Your adapter should have come with a belt clip, you can use that to take it off your camera.

I haven't tried it, but there might be a way to make (or buy) a small clip that can lock between the knob and the body of the adapter, effectively holding the knob in it's position.

The audio quality of the Sign Video adapter is excellent and was recommended to me by many people. Would I have bought a different one if I'd known of this hand holding problem, yes, probably, but now I have it I can live with it. Many more important things to buy ;)

Cheers
Aaron

In my book there are two solutions:

1 - Use the belt clip (there is one on the Studio 1 XLR PRO that I use)
2- Tape the box to one of the tripod legs.

Thanks everyone,

The XLR did come with a belt clip and I'll just use that for any longer shoots. I was just curious if anyone found a "magic" solution. Taping to the tripod is another good idea. It is definitley a quality product and now that I have it I'll just work with it.

Thanks again,
Lyle

I've conquered the problem I think.

If you look on our web site at http://www.imageonartworks.co.uk and look in the services then click on video, you can see our XM1 set up and see what we've done with this adapter.

This is my setup exactly, right down to the Mighty Wondercam! I usually put the light on the camera itself though.

I get a bit of Red Eye effect if I do that!

The mic is a Beyer Dynamic MCE86N

Thought you might like to know.... ?

Cheers

What are some other options as far as XLR adapters go for the GL2? Is the MA-300 the best out there? Is there something that doesn't have to be camera mounted? Any reviews?

Thanks in advance.

The Beachtek and Studio 1 (or whatever its new name is) are the two primary options aside from the MA-300. I like the Beachtek. Solidly built, clean electronics.

Studio 1 is far better. Much lower noise and better construction.

Lower noise? How much lower noise given that both are passive devices? Can you describe how the measurements were made?

BTW: A recent player is Signvideo, the OEM for the original Studio 1 product line. Studio 1 is still in business as well, with a somewhat revised set of products.

Are these adapters balanced? If so there should be virtually no noise.

The MA-100 is an active device (electronics including integrated circuit amplifiers) inside so there will be some electronic noise - but not much. The Beachtek is passive, so the noise willl be the thermal noise of the components plus what ever is picked up form the ambient electrical/magnetic fields, even less. Because both are balanced input, pickup from the leads to balanced sources will be minimal.

The Studio 1 XLR adapter - how does that connect to the GL2? I know the MA-300 goes through the accesory shoe...Does it make a difference?

I believe that, like the Beachtek, it screws into the tripod screw and plugs into your mic jac.

Is there any quality difference/loss between the accesory shoe and the mic jack?

I read (in Real World Digital Video by Pete Shaner to be exact) that when you use an adapter to connect an XLR cable to a mini plug, the mini plug only uses two of the three wires/lines that make up an XLR circuit, bypassing the feature of the unused wire, which is noise-canceling (meant to cancel 60Hz hum).

"Avoid using adapters except for stuff like headphones..." he says. "There's no substitute for XLR connectors and cables...if possible make connections at the mixer..."

But I haven't seen any discussion about this on this site. On the contrary, people seem to be pleased with their adapters and experiencing enhanced audio...

What am I missing?

Long runs of unbalanced cable (ie RCA and mini-plug tipped cables) can pick up interference due to their acting as an aerial for radio waves (think about how many mobile phones might be close to your line). The longer the cables run, the more efficient the cable is at picking up background. Balanced cables solve this problem by running twin signals that are 180 degrees out of phase and then recombining them at the other end. This means that the real signal can be recombined and the noise is phased out.

However, for short runs, an unbalanced cable is usually fine. The XLR converter (should) take in the balanced signal, flip it and convert it into an unbalanced signal that can be recieved by the mic input on the camera. The only issue is the length of run from the converter to the camera.

I use the XLR-BP-PRO for mobile work, but I much prefer to use a mixer whenever possible.

Of course, just hooking an XLR plug to one end of a cable and putting a 1/8" jack on the other is not the same as a proper adapter.

Thanks for the info, Jim. I have always been a little leary of audio (because I knew nothing, and that made me more afraid!). I am forcing myself into understanding it, and am learning a lot of what and how, if not always why.

Can you refer to me to a source/website where I can learn about using mixers with a camera and transfering to Final Cut Pro?

Also, I have a lav mic with a 20 ft cable. Is there a better/worse way to use the lav mic given the unbalanced signal? Does having the camera closer to the mic improve/worsen things, or does the length of the cable dictate my quality, or none of the above?

Diane, just did a search to locate at least a graphical represention of what is being discussed . .found one . . cleared it up for me:

http://www.nullmodem.com/Audio.htm

Grazie

Thanks, Graham! I love stuff explained in pictures (odd, considering that I am a writer by profession...)

Diane

. . but did it help you?

Well, when most audio people talk of long runs they're talking 20 metres rather than 20 feet, but it is wise to keep unbalanced cables as short as possible. It is also possible to get hold of high quality unbalanced cables with improved shielding if you're worried.

In terms of a mixer, you either need one with a mic-level output or you'll need an attenuator to drop line level signal to mic level. This is because the XM-2 only allows audio input through the mic input while recording and not through the line level AV port. Who knows why, but in my view it is THE biggest design fault of the camera.

The other way to shorten the runs is NOT to use the camera for recording audio. There's a little gadget called the mini-disc which is going out of fashion, but it shouldn't be. It's the ONLY compact digital recording method on the planet. Bung your sound onto an MD and then synch it in post. It's dead easy and it saves you all the trouble of trying to get your sound from your source to the camera. You can hide a minidisk anywhere, and they are as cheap as $150!

One really cool thing is to turn down the gain on the on-board mic and use it to pick up ambient. Remember an audio track is just an audio track. In post you can sample it out of the DV, mix it with whatever you got on your MD recorder, paste it back onto the video, and Bob's your mother's brother.

You might find some useful info here http://homerecording.about.com/library/weekly/aa082697.htm

I use the Minidisc option as a backup at shoots ie weddings where you do not want to lose that vital speech etc. I use a tie clip microphone attachment and the groom puts the minidisc in his inside pocket.

Recommended by the supplier of my XM2 2 weeks ago. Just make sure you get one that accepts the mic input.

In summary a well designed XLR adapter does NOT eliminate the noise cancelling benefit of balanced leads from the mic to the adapter. However, any wires onthe unbalanced side of the adapter are subject to noise pickup. For short leads this is not usually a problem. How short is short depends on the amount of electrical noise in the environment about you.

A simple XLR adapter that does not provide balanced-to-unbalanced conversion can eliminate the noise cancellig benefit. Concersion can be doen done with special audio transformers or with electronic circuits. The Canon MA-series uses electronic circuits.

I'll be videotaping a Christmass ball at a large hotel next month. The event is basically a short awards presentation from the podium and dinner and dancing. I purchased the Beachtek DXA-4p Dual XLR adaptor to help capture audio with my GL2. I'll be able to get a direct audio feed from the Sound people at the hotel. I'll be physically located next to the mixing board. Should I ask for a mike or line level if they are able to give me both? I've never used the adaptor so I'm not sure what settings to use. Also in the camera's audio menu is there a setting I should select to use with the Beachtek adaptor?
Thanks!

Most Music boards will output line, but your beachtek will handle it and convert it to mic level for your camera. There is no fidelity difference between the two. MIC level is used for shorter distances and line for longer (generally) But I would warn of another issue that you might not be thinking of. Most sound engineers for concerts position themselves at the apex of the sound, somewhere within or behind the audience and adjust the levels of the various instruments accordingly. Your mix will reflect their ears and the mix you get will be short of some instruments and heavy on others. as an example, a flute will be heavily amplified, while a trombone will be slightly amplified.

In addition, the mix they give you might be a group output which is a auxilliary output and they might simply give you 'some' audio of each channel.

I've recorded concerts for television. I've found that High Quality microphones positioned at the location of the sound engineer, or somewhere within the audience will work best if you can't mix the audio yourself.

Is there any good balanced XLR input accessory, preferably with phantom power but not necessarily, for the GL2? I was hoping for something that would send the audio straight through the camera digitally as opposed to going through the 1/8" unbalanced microphone jack.

I need something to record the output of a mixing board and I could buy a separate digital recorder but I already have two perfectly good ADCs in the GL2 that I would utilize. However, if the adapter costs just as much as a Korg or Roland recorder, then maybe it's not worth it.

See the Beachtek DXA-4p (http://www.beachtek.com/dxa4p.html).

Thanks,
Is there a certain setting in the gl2's audio menu that needs to be selected such as the attenuator or does the beachtek run independently from the camera?

No GL2 setting requirements are necessary. The beachtek takes balanced XLR audio at mic level and passes it thru to the 1/8" stereo connector which simply plugs into your camera.

I set my camera in audio 'auto' and leave the pots on the beachtek fully UP. That lets the camera compress the audio.

If you get LINE level from someone, simply place the mic/line toggel switch on the beachtek to line and it will attenuate the audio to mic level.

If you get one channel, place the toggle to MONO and it will put the left channel on both on the feed to the camera.

Get a good set of headphones. I can't tell you the number of times when thought we had a good mix or audio only to be disappointed.

I use a set of earplug stereo headphones i found at radio shack. They have foam compressible pads you roll between your fingers and then place in your ears. They are like ear protection foam plugs. The block everything except that provide by your GL2s headphone output.

Great, but it outputs via a stereo mini. Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose?

No, it doesn't defeat the purpose. The DXA essentially acts as the terminus of the signals from the XLR side. The cable from the DXA to the GL2 is also very short and not susceptible to noise. That aside, there would be no other way to get a sound signal into the camera (short of the hot shoe that the DM50 uses).

Search the "Now Hear This" forum for more info on the topic of XLR adapters. There are many threads and posts.

Ok thanks Ken. I think I'm just gonna get a hard disk recorder then. It doesn't seem worth it if it's gonna get converted to unbalanced line-level before entering the camera.

Just my .02, it's hard to beat a dedicated audio recorder. I just bought myself a GL2 and have been trying to justify buying the beachtek or some other similar adapter. I have a Roland 1680 and have been using it instead of the camera inputs for audio recording. Works great, and there is much more flexibility in it than any adaptor for a camera.

I would love to have a nice audio system sometime to mount onto my GL2, but at the same time, I think, why? Why should I rely on the audio circutry in the camera when I already have a good audio recorder? It's too easy to sync up in post and really isn't more involved in setting up than the camera.

Dragging one more case to the gig is worth the convenience of no wires tied to my camera, plus knowing my audio will sound good.

Whew! The 1680 is no longer available. Roland says the VS-1824CD is its replacement. With a list of $2000, about $1700 street, it's a big investment.

Will

Yes, it was quite an investment a few years ago, considering I spent about $2300 on it (yikes!) - But it has definitely paid for itself in the quality of audio and convenience. My buddy just picked up a Yamaha recorder similar to my Roland for about $1000.

I forget what the technique is called when you record the audio to a seperate recorder, but I do think it is the way to go.

Yes, I saw the Yamaha models when I went browsing to research your comments. The Yamaha AW16G is certainly close.

Why do you think the independent audio recording is better? You mention better quality, but assuming the same microphones were used and that the only difference is where the audio is recorded, it's a bit hard to grasp why two digital audio streams would be that different.

Will

Will: To answer that question, go find Jay Rose's feature article from DV mag/.com titled "DV Camera Audio: Real Numbers, Real Recommendations".

Edit: Here's the link to the article, although you'll need to login to DV.com first if you haven't.

http://www.dv.com/features/features_item.jhtml?category=Archive&LookupId=/xml/feature/2002/rose_feature1102&_requestid=694010

The short of it: DV camera audio circuits really are pretty crappy, even compared to just a "consumer" level audio device like an MD recorder. From my perspective, I'd say it depends on what you're recording; I'm not going to futz with syncing (and often re-syncing 20 minutes down the tape, since they don't always stay exactly in sync) a separate audio source to video if the audio isn't as important (just someone's speech or atmospheric audio). If the audio quality really is important, a separate source is very reasonable.

Brian pretty much summed it up. I figure, a video camera is primarily composed to record video. The audio circuitry in most cameras leave much to be desired. My audio recorder was designed just for that, recording audio.

I agree, some shoots don't warrant a seperate recorder. But some critical shoots, like weddings, for example, the audio is obviously critical.

I have yet to do an A/B test between my Roland and my GL2, but my betting money would go toward the Roland (or any stand-alone audio recorder, for that matter).

Anyone use the Roland VS-880EX? I think I'm gonna get that with a Jaz drive. 20-bit 48 KHz recording, up to 8 tracks simultaneously - definitely the best features for the value.

You know, I read that article but had forgotten about it. Thanks for the reminder.

Will

Just bought a Roland VS-880EX off ebay for $350 - 6-tracks simultaenous balanced audio recording to any SCSI device. Way better than any XLR converter I could have gotten for the GL2. Too bad they don't make these things anymore - from the sound of it, it's going to be great (48 KHz, 20-bit, etc.)