View Full Version : MA300 XLR microphone adapter
Albert Rodgers May 9th, 2003, 05:16 PM I again thank you for your advice.
The final decision came down to the Beachtek, Studio 1 Pro or the Sign Video XLR Pro as a audio adapter for my GL2.
After much research and weighing pros and cons, I decided to buy the Sign Video XLR Pro from B&H. I feel that this adapter is reasonable priced and I like the fact that I have the option of mounting under the cam or using a belt clip.
The mounting under the cam option (wasn't option) is great because my wife is my business partner and usually wears a dress when shooting formal occassions (belt clip won't work.)
Beachtek was under cam only.
Studio Pro 1 was belt clip only.
Sign Video both.
The quality for all three adapters seemed similiar.
I truly appreciate this forum.
Thanks again.
Al
Graham Bernard July 12th, 2003, 01:38 AM I want to plug my Senni ME66 into BOTH XLR channels on the MA300. Yes, yes, yes I know this single track can be copied over in post. But I'm working with a guy that wants to have my work with audio recorded on both channels. I need to keep this simple.
Supplier in the UK - pref in London - yeah?
Grazie
Don Berube July 12th, 2003, 03:25 AM Hello Graham,
Give Simon at Optex a ring.
http://www.optexint.com
- don
Graham Bernard July 12th, 2003, 07:29 AM Yeah - Thanks Don. I've also a call request with T2 at Uxbridge. Good people - d'yer know 'em?
Grazie
Graham Bernard July 16th, 2003, 08:20 AM Just made up my own "Y" splitter with male XLR one end and 2 x female XLRs at other. Works as it should. Auto Audio balanced nicely. Manual Audio allows me to alter each left and right mono independantly.
One company wanted £60GBps - I did it for £9.58!
Now, I wonder on what I can spend the 50 quid I just saved? . . . ( was it ever thus )
Grazie ;-)
Jim Pruett July 17th, 2003, 07:06 PM I have just purchased the Azden 500UDR system as my wireless mic for my GL2, along with the Canon MA300 adapter. Does anyone have a suggestion where on the camera to mount the wireless receiver? It came with some velcro to use to attach it, but there does not appear to be an obvious location on the camera that would be good. Should I try to mount it on the MA300? Or does someone have another suggestion? Thanks in advance for any help.
Jim
K. Forman July 17th, 2003, 07:38 PM I have the Azden WR model, and it came with an attatchment to mount it to the accesory shoe. Otherwise, I would just plug the reciever into a hard disk recorder, and stash it out of the way.
Jim Pruett July 17th, 2003, 09:19 PM Keith, I don't have a hard-drive recorder. My MA300 adaptor mounts on the accessory shoe, and while it also provides yet another accessory shoe, I don't find any connection on the receiver to mount it there. Maybe I will just use the velcro and attach it to the MA300.
Thanks,
Jim
Bud Kuenzli July 20th, 2003, 01:36 AM keep in mind the antenna of the reciever need to be, or should be, in alignment with the transmitter. If the transmitter antenna is vertical, so should the receiver be. I mentioned in an email I had just got my 500 and now I've used it a time or two. I put the velcro on my 5500mAh battery but I don't trust it so I also run gaffer tape around it and onto the each side of my GL2 in areas that still allow me access. not the best of solutions but perfectly workable. Add the beachtek, the wd58 and yikes...it becomes quite the monster. :)
Jim Pruett July 20th, 2003, 12:55 PM Thanks for the replies. I ended up using the velcro and attaching the receiver to the MA300 and it worked great! I filmed a wedding yesterday - which was outside - and the audio was great! Last night I played with the lapel mic and had a friend walk upstairs in his house and all over on different floors, and the 500UDR receiver picked it all up perfectly. I am very happy with the model I chose. I also think that it was a good choice to mount the receiver on the MA300 adapter, since I will never use the receiver without the adapter. Anyway, thanks for the replies.
Jim
Matthew Flesher August 8th, 2003, 09:19 AM I have an MA-300 which I have used to shot 20+ hours of footage. Sometimes I was bringing two seperate mics into the camera, one on each channel, but there were a lot of times where I only had one mic hooke dup. I have brought a bunch of my footage into my editing program and it seems like when there was only one mic hooked up, the MA-300 sent the audio to both channels. I am not complaining about this, (I'm actually quite happy about it). I am just wondering if this is normal behavior. I could not find anything in the MA-300 documentation that said it would do this.
When I was recording, the meters were only moving for the one channel.
Chief
Graham Bernard August 8th, 2003, 11:00 AM This is not normal behaviour. I really don't know how you did it! I spent £10 and some time making a Y splitter to get both XLR channels serviced by the single output from the rear of my Senni!! How - In all that is Marconi - did you do it??
Now, if this is a channel fault then you need to do some serious testing. Nothing worse than an untraceable audio leak across the poles - yeah?
Keep us informed . . .
. . . it took me 2 hours, a trip to my local electronics shop, parking meter fees, a lost morning soldering up these XLR connectors, fuel, wear and tear on my car . . . moan . . .moan . . . moan . . . and you did it without knowing how you did it - hah!!
Regards - Grazie
Brad Simmons August 8th, 2003, 11:11 AM hmm are you sure the sound you're getting isn't from the onboard stereo mic? (which goes to both channels). Perhaps you didn't set proper source from the menu?
I've never been able to get two channels on my MA200 with a mono mic unless I'm using a Y adapter. I'm assuming the MA300 works the same.
Matthew Flesher August 8th, 2003, 11:32 AM I'm sure it was hooke dup right, because I was also outputting a video signal from it thhrough the BNC connector. And according to the dirctions, there is no setting to choose, the MA-300 automatically overrides the built-in mic. Plus, the sound is too good and clean to be from the onboard mic. And like I mentioned, when I was actually recording, the levels display only showed the audio coming in on one track. Very strange indeed. I thought it might have soemthing to do wtih how I captured the footage, but I captured as channel 1 and channel 2 (as opposed to capturing in stereo). Maybe that setting somehow duplicates the audio to the second track?? I don't know why it would though.
Chief
Jonathan Richards August 8th, 2003, 03:26 PM When you play back the footage from the camera, are both channels registering on the level meters?
Alan Tran August 11th, 2003, 12:58 PM Hi!
This board is such a good place to find information, I love it!
I just bought my GL2 about a week ago and have used it once to film some family events, it works wonderfully!
I just had a few questions..
In the future I plan on shooting my aunt's shows..she is a professional singer. She sings songs all around the world, medium sized shows around 500 people.Would the MKE300 be alright for that? I'm only 18 so I'm on a budget too.
And I was wondering if someone who owns the MKE300 or DM-50 could post a picture of their setup.
Next..question
How would I know if me (personally) would benefit from a wide angel lense?
Thanks so much for your time guys!!!
Nathan Gifford August 11th, 2003, 07:35 PM You might want to look at anamorphic lens (16x9), but you say you are on buget and that len$ co$t$.
A better mic will probably help lots. If you can connect to the audio system she is using that would be your best bet. Check out the MA adapter for the GL2.
Bud Kuenzli August 12th, 2003, 09:04 AM The MKE300 was not meant to be used with long balanced mic cords if I recall correctly. If, for instance, you wanted to run a 50 foot wired microphone to a stand in front of your aunt, which is a reasonable possibility, you would probably want something else like a beachtek. A shotgun mic still needs to be near the singer so you can't put that canon mic on the camera and sit back in the audience and get professional audio. My suggestion is a beachtek adapter with a good voice mic on a stand with a long wire to the camera for those instances where that works, and a wireless lav for her when you can't run a cord to your camera. Add a minidisc or pro recorder connected to the house audio and you're there.
Richard R Rivera August 12th, 2003, 10:56 AM Some times a digital deck ewith a boom mic on a stick works great and you get proffessional sound then you match it up with time code on a post production editor. the problem is you need a second person to run the mic and deck. and it cost some $$$$ to to buy but not our of range. You can rent it from a recoding productions company or you acan sign one out at a local colledge like a community type.
I would tell you to get a Ma-300 adapter for the GL2 that has XLR connections then get a good 15 to 20 foot cord that has Xlr and a nice standard mic that fits it. peace your done and the quality of the sound will be nice. itsprobly the cheapest way to recored the sound other than the mic that comes with the mike.
try this link that takes you to what it looks like and how much it cost. this is the lowest i have seen it go for.
http://www.kit-tronics.com/xcart/customer/product.php?productid=2945&cat=111&page=1&XCARTSESSID=9d420ba8a3c9b35a259fd0b306d7dd35
well i hope this will help you out any.
Federico Dib August 12th, 2003, 12:03 PM Hi,
A few years ago I was in your situation... I was trying to have some live videos of my band....
and from all the experience we got doing it I wouldn“t mind too much about an external microphone for the GL2 (or any camera)...
I would try to have the sound engineers to record the gig for you.. then match the sound on post...
You could buy a simple consumer minidisc recorder and have some of the sound guys record the sound direct from their output on soundstage to you minidisc (or whatever media they can)...
Back then most of the sound guys only had tape decks.. (we didn“t have any Minidisc) so we recorded our gigs sound on a simple old fashiones TDK SA tape... and it sounded great...
It doesn“t matter what kind of microphone you have... unless your aunt sings "a capella" one Microphone cannot record right the sound of a live concert... maybe you can get some enviroment sounds of the crowd... and a improve a half decent recording of the concert... but the music will not sound very good...
But if you go for the mic.. whatever you do... make sure the MIC stays in the same place all through the concert... (usually the best place is in where the soundstage is and as far as possible from any loud voice from the crowd)...
If you use a Mic attached to your cam and you move your cam... then you will get a very annoying sound...
Just ask in the sound forum.. they would know better...
P.S... all of the above is a statement from the musicians point of view.. so maybe I“m just a little too picky about sound... or maybe not.. ?
Scott Corkran August 15th, 2003, 07:41 PM record directly from the audio board(best sound- hands down). use a beachtek line to mic converter, or use small mackie audio board that has that conversion. we just did a music video that way(w/the mackie) and the sound was awesome. good luck
Graham Bernard August 18th, 2003, 12:32 PM Okay - I'm getting my interview technique correct.
I seem to be relaxed doing the following:
1 - I stand on the left hand side of the XM2
2 - Camera on tripod, LCD screen spun round and allowing me to look to my right and see the "frame"
3 - MA300 with one XLR channel miked-up Senni and me holding under the nose of subject - out of camera shot
4 - Headphones on and plugged into Headphone socket.
5 - LANC extension in right hand to activate camera.
If I'm to include my voice in the interview I'm needing to keep switching the handheld backwards and forwards between the subject and myself
Now, what I'm thinking of using is a form of L/R Headphone set WITH a mouth boom mic. The Senni say on the Left Channel going to the left channel of the Headphone and the Headphone Mouth Boom mic going to the OTHER XLR channel on the MA300 and then BACK to the right Headphone.
So, guys and gals, any solutions? Ones that you've seen work?
I like this solution because I can keep one hand relatively free, I can speak "naturally" with the subject and get into more of a chat, including interruptions from both sides. No, I don't want to go down the wireless mic route - yet.
Grazie
Jonathan Richards August 18th, 2003, 01:11 PM I use a Senn EM112P Wireless Transmitter & Reveiver and ask open questions and then you don't have to hear the 'faceless voice'.
I never do a back and forth thing with the camera operator, only when using a handheld mic with a presenter aka Sports Interviewer style do I do it.
Not exactly a direct answer to your question Graham but an offer of technique I suppose.
Regards
Jonathan
Brad Higerd August 18th, 2003, 01:49 PM We've shot footage on Cocoa Beach (FL) with significant wind gusting and the Rycote fir on our Sen 66K6 and heard no wind noise whatsoever. I think it's an amazing little thing worth the price for those who need clean audio in windy environments.
Neil, I'm not debating that your idea could work, but I know the Rycote Softie does from experience.
Brad
Graham Bernard August 18th, 2003, 03:01 PM Errrmmm... Nice to hear from you . . . wrong thread maybe "Neil" is on another one . . . but if you've got an answer to this thread "XM2 MA300 XLRs Headset and Mic Boom".. . I'm all ears or eyes . ..
Regards,
Grazie
Craig Hollenback August 29th, 2003, 07:15 PM If you are editing with FCP...you might see bioth VU "meters" going...this does not mean that the source is on both channels...just a thought...Best, Craig Hollenback
John Aoki September 3rd, 2003, 12:03 PM I am wondering if anyone with an MA-300 has used the BNC Video Output to a regular TV? I have tried it with several TV's using a BNC Composite cable and a Converter to TV Antenna Input - no luck! Has anyone been succesful with it?
Tony Singh September 3rd, 2003, 12:47 PM You won't be able to input to a TV's Cable/Antenna input.
You will have to go to one of the TV's Video Inputs. If you are using the Cable/Antenna input, you will first have to send the signal through a RF Modulator.
Graham Bernard September 3rd, 2003, 01:59 PM You will also need the little link cable supplied with your kit. This takes the Video "up" to the MA300. Without this it will not get to the MA300 - Canon didn't Wake and Smell the design Coffee in this case IMHO!!!
Grazie
John Fitch September 7th, 2003, 09:00 PM Hi everyone.
Just wanted to post a quick question about the MA-300 XLR input adaptor for the GL2. From what I can tell, it doesn't look like the accessory piece itself has a mic/line selector switch for each XLR input, so does anyone know if there's a menu setting somewhere in the GL2 that allows the user to specify whether a mic or line level input is being sent to each of the two channels? I realize that the audio level for channels 1 and 2 can be adjusted manually using the audio level dials, but nonetheless I would think that in order to provide proper attenuation and prevent low audio or distortion, there should be a setting somewhere to specify whether the XLR inputs are being used as line or mic level audio inputs.
Graham Bernard September 7th, 2003, 11:59 PM Excellent question!
Craig Hollenback September 8th, 2003, 04:38 AM The beach teck adapter will let you spec line or mic. Also, it has a 1/8 jack pass through for wireless, etc.
John Fitch September 8th, 2003, 08:27 AM While looking through a GL2 accessory overview (http://www.dvinfo.net/canongl2/articles/topfive.php#ma300), I found the following statement about the MA-300 XLR adaptor:
"If you need balanced audio connections for long cable runs, then you might want to consider a different third-party XLR adapter solution, as the MA-300 is intended for unbalanced nearby sources. "
Unbalanced sources? As long as I've been working with audio and video equipment, XLR connections have been considered balanced. Even Canon's instruction sheet for the MA-300 (which can be found in the "accessory manual" section GL2 website) indicates that the MA-300 is wired for balanced connections...pin 1 shielded, pin 2 hot, pin 3 cold. Am I missing something here?
Chris Hurd September 8th, 2003, 09:57 AM Howdy from Texas,
I wrote that; sorry if it wasn't clear.
Basically, not all XLR cables and connectors are balanced -- some are, some aren't. The XLR connectors on the MA300 are unbalanced. Why? Because they don't need to be balanced, due to its intended use, which helps keep the cost down. The MA300 is meant for very short cable runs... either an onboard mic via the mic clamp on the MA300, or an onboard wireless mic receiver mounted on the accessory shoe on top of the MA300. These are extremely short cables, about twelve inches at most, with little chance of electrical interefence... therefore they're unbalanced (because they're not prone to hum by virtue of their on-camera location).
However, long cable runs across a studio floor, especially near sources of interference such as power cords, outlets, etc. will require balanced audio cables, and in order to preserve the protection that balanced XLR cables provide, they must terminate at a balanced XLR-to-RCA adapter, which the MA300 is not. For this job, you'll need a Beachtek (or Studio One or similar) balanced XLR adapter, which typically mounts below the camera, between the camera and tripod.
It's all a matter of choosing the right tool for the right job. For more info, see Jay Rose's excellent tutorial, "Balancing Act" (http://www.dplay.com/dv/balance/balance.html) which has scads more info about this topic. Hope this helps,
Don Palomaki September 8th, 2003, 07:05 PM Check the MA-300 manual at:
http://www.canondv.com/downloads/accessory_manuals/ma-300.pdf
It indicates that the input is balanced. The output would be unbalanced, but that is not a big deal since it is mounted on the camcorder with essentially no lead length.
However, because the MA300 uses electronics rather than transformers, it does not provide the same isolation from the source as the SignVideo, Studio 1 or Beachtek would. For most users this is not an issue.
Chris Hurd September 8th, 2003, 08:53 PM Thanks a lot, Don -- much appreciated!
John Fitch September 8th, 2003, 09:17 PM Thanks for your input, guys. So with the MA-300 technical specs in mind, does this mean that the adapter does, in fact, provide true balanced inputs, or is the issue still kind of up in the air in your opinion? I guess if all three pins for each channel have an accessory shoe contact and go into the camera then the connection is balanced, however if the cold and shielded are combined somewhere along the line then the connection isn't truly balanced. With that in mind, is there really any way to tell whether or not the MA-300 provides a true balanced input connection?
Don Palomaki September 9th, 2003, 04:47 AM The GL2 does NOT have balancd inputs, thus the MA-300 has to have a unbalanced output.
However, the input to the MA-300 is balanced, it provides the balancd to unbalanced conversion. If it is the same circuits as the MA-100, it does this using operational amplifiers. There are standard circuit arrangements for doing this.
The benefit of a balanced connection is noise reduction due to the common mode rejection of the amplifiers. (If the same signal is present at the + and - input, it is cancelled).
Because the MA300 is close-coupled to the camcorder (closer than the Beachtek, etc. would be), there is minimal chance for noise pickup in the couple inches of unbalanced connection between the MA-300 and the GL2's peamp.
John Fitch September 9th, 2003, 08:29 AM Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse, but I'd like to see if I'm understanding Don's post. The way I now understand it, the MA-300 XLR inputs are, in fact, balanced, and so if I, for example, I were to connect the stereo XLR outputs of a mixer to the MA-300, I would have balanced outputs from the mixer going to the balanced inputs of the MA-300. That said, this connection would benefit from the advantages of using balanced connections...low interference for longer cable runs, etc. However, within the MA-300, circuitry provides a balanced to unbalanced connection for the audio signal actually going into the camera, so the signal going into the GL2 is actually unbalanced, however this makes little difference since the connection between the MA-300 and the GL2's audio circuitry is relatively short. Is this reasoning correct?
That said, aside from the fact that the Beachtek and other after-market XLR adaptors have features like level adjustments and so on, is it safe to conclude that the MA-300 is similar to these in terms of performing the balanced to unbalanced conversion?
Don Palomaki September 9th, 2003, 06:55 PM Your summary is correct.
For most purposes the MA-300 and Beachteck, etc, will have similar perforamnce when use within their design operating envelope. However, the MA-300 (if like the MA-100/200) should be used with mic-level signals only (and it may offer some gain, which the Beachtek, etc. will not. ) It is not designed to use line level signals, and will go into clipping if you connect a typcial line level input to it. The -35 dB mic-level putput of most mixers is OK, the +4 dB level is NOT.
John Fitch September 9th, 2003, 08:51 PM Thanks for the note, Don. By any chance, would the GL2's microphone attenuator on/off setting allow line-level XLR signals to be sent to the MA-300 inputs? If not, then I can't say I exactly understand the purpose of the microphone attenuator setting, unless it's to be used for connecting a line-level signal to the GL2's 1/8" stereo microphone input.
Don Palomaki September 10th, 2003, 04:21 AM The MIC/MIC ATT setting changes the sensitivity of the min inpout form about 0.001 ivolts to about 0.030 ivolts. It is used when you are in a very loud venue, or have a very sensitive (high output) mic. Think of it as a 2-position volume control.
Line level signals are on the order of 0.300 volts for consumer gear, or 1.0 volts for professional gear. A one volt sine wave is has a voltage swing (peak-to-peak) of abotu 2.8 volts.
Speaking about the MA-100 (the MA-300 is probably similar) a line level signal is large enough to cause the amplifirs in the MA-100 to start to clip/distort. No surprise as it was designed as a microphone adapter. YOu can obtain in-line attenuators with XLR connectors (offered by Shure and others) to address this level issue.
John Fitch September 10th, 2003, 06:21 AM Now that I understand the function of the MIC/MIC ATT setting, does this mean that even with the MA-300 out of the picture, it wouldn't be possible to send a stereo line-level signal to the GL2's 1/8" mic input without any external attenuation? I understand that the GL2 does have manual audio level controls, but nonetheless I doubt that it would be possible to properly use a line-level source with the mic input without having some type of attenuation, which I now realize would probably have to be external since it doesn't appear as though the GL2 has an internal mic to line-level attenuation setting. It's too bad that Canon didn't build this kind of setting into the GL2, especially since it's considered considered a pro/pro-sumer camera.
Don Palomaki September 10th, 2003, 08:55 PM Without access to the GL2 circuit diagrams, or a GL2 for testing, can't say for sure, but it is likely that the input signal to the GL2 mic jack should not exceed around -10 to -20 dB peak for best performance.
Why not try run some tests to see what the limits are for your system and share the results with us all.
John Fitch September 10th, 2003, 09:03 PM I'd love to test the GL2 for line-level inputs, but there's still the minor issue of not having even purchased the camera yet :) Guess I'm just the type of person who likes trying to read up on every little detail before making a purchase. Anyway, if anyone has tried using a line-level source with the GL2's standard 1/8" mic input, any input regarding compatability and/or level mis-matching would be appreciated. Thanks!
Don Palomaki September 11th, 2003, 04:35 AM Looks to me from the GL2 manual that the mic jack is designed to accept only mic level inputs,
It appears to me that the only times line level (- 10 dBV) audio input is accepted is when doing an audio dub or recording in VCR mode using the A/V input. This is more or less addressed in the GL2 manual that you can download on line from the Canondv web site if youhaven't already.
But the apparent mic-level limitation is not a significant problem, it can be addressed quite nicely with some simple adapters.
Robert Morgan September 11th, 2003, 04:14 PM I think the ma-300 has a auto sensing circuit for line level inputs.
Robert Morgan September 11th, 2003, 04:22 PM I had the same problem!
The answer is that you dont have the ma300 pushed in all the way (it will click). also the display on the camera will have a letter "C" for connection. the video does not go thru the hot shoe connection, it comes thru the other cable off the back. That is why the video worked but the ext mike was not.
Don Palomaki September 12th, 2003, 04:28 AM Do not expect the MA300 to have any auto sensing in it, and expect it to not like line level signals, it is a mic adapter.
Beleive taht the GL2 allows selection of MIC or MIC ATT settings. Use MIC ATT with hot mics and in loud venues. It will provide the better noise floor when recording.
John Dimasi November 20th, 2003, 07:27 PM What do I use to make the mic I just bought fit snug in the MA300 mic holder?
|
|