A few folks have been discovering the awesome Giant Squid homemade lav's and based on a recommendation I picked a couple up....here's the results:

I have the Giant Squid Mono Omni lav and the Audio Technica AT830mW, both set up equidistant from a glass (about 2 1/2 inches) with the ATPro88W VHF transmitter/recievers into the DVX XLR inputs with a mic (as opposed to line) signal set to -60db (as opposed to the -50db default) in camera with the DVX preamps set to 50% recorded straight into Vegas Capture via firewire. Loosely modeled after a test that was also posted here a while back involving a shotgun mic.

The difference is pretty amazing, to say the least. On the Giant Squid, you can even hear the booming of my 3 year old and friend running through the house. And let me tell you, dammit Jim, I'm a videographer....not a singer, but what would a lav test be without some vocals! The Giant Squid SMOKES the AT in every way....clarity, fullness, and signal strenght. This is the NON battery powered mic. For anyone who would find it interesting, Darren of GS says that a battery powered lav gives you a signal 15 decibals LOWER than a non battery powered. Defies all logic, I know, but a test I did a couple of days ago between the AT and a battery powered Radio Shack lav does indeed point to this being true. The RS lav was promptly returned.

I will definately be contacting Darren for more of these awesomely priced and performing little beauties!They're pretty weighty too...when you pick em up, you feel like you've got something thats made to do some serious business!

Test Clips: (Right click Save As, please!)

http://runyon.cinemaelectronica.com/audiotechnica.mp3


http://runyon.cinemaelectronica.com/giantsquid.mp3


Giant Squid Audio Labs:

http://www.giant-squid-audio-lab.com/

I have zero relation to GS, aside from being a very impressed customer.

To make a clickable link, just add [url] to the front of the link and [/url/ to the end of the link with no spaces.

I'd like to hear this where you hadn't processed it in any way. In other words, the AT feeding one input, and the GS feeding the other, so we're getting one stereo file, that we can pan back/forth on. In Forge, it appears that the GS has been pumped up, or it's on a different surface than the AT.
It's definitely louder, no doubt. If it's that much louder on it's own, it's impressive, even though it's a little honkier.

Greets DSE, you must have looked before I got the link stuff figured out, thank you though Mr. Spot!

There is no post work done on these, outside splitting left and right and encoding to mp3. They were recorded into Vegas, but not edited or pumped up in any way. One was going into channel one of the DVX, and the other was into channel two, recorded simultaneous under completely identical setup. I swear this on my very manhood, this is as pure of a test I am capable of performing with the equipment I have in that I dont own any fancy meters or whatnot. In other words, DSE, this test is EXACTLY what you're asking for!


Wait a minute, I see what youre wanting with the single panable stereo file.....I'll make that right now!

Also, in regard to surface, there is no difference whatsoever. I had the glass centered on my desk in front of me, with each lav propped up at equal height, pointing directly to the glass at the same angle and distance, about 2 1/2 inches away and 1 1/2 inches high....actually, both were propped on a seperate battery cover from the back of the AT transmitters.

Ok, here's the stereo file...as requested!

http://runyon.cinemaelectronica.com/stereoGSleftATright.mp3

GS on the left, AT on the right...

Edit...
I think I must not be doing this right..they sound identical from both sides. DSE, I have Vegas set to NOT normalize, and I have channels set to both, yet it sounds like it blended them to me. ???

If you look at the peaks on the audio track though, it very clearly shows a significant amount more activity going on for the left (GS) channel.

Edit again:
Just opened the raw file in Sound Forge, and rendered to mp3 untouched again....and still cant tell a lick of difference in the files when I open it in Vegas and pan Land R. But if I go to the audio track and set it to either L or R, as oppoesed to both, the difference is clearly there. What am I getting wrong here?

Thanks for taking the time to setup the test. I bought squid today for my iRiver!

Jon

Your most welcom, sir East.

Ok, I dont really understand this at all, but when I pull the stereo mp3 up in any audio ap, the levels for the left channel are clearly hotter, but when I pan, I can't really discern a difference, unless I absolutely turn off one or the other.....then, it is super clear.....but, me no Spot!

Okie Dokie...
Today, I used the Giant Squid in a real world situation, and there is no doubt....these are amazing microphones!

I have been working on a documentary (for lack of better description) that has had me following my subject around at speakings, and some private interviewing. The first time out, I used a shotgun, as he was speaking while sitting at a table, and it was great audio. Another time, he was pacing as he spoke and I put the AT lav on him....got decent results, but was deeply disatisfied in the pit of my soul....dreaded having to ever use the lavs. But today, with fairly great confidence, I wired him up with the Giant Squid, and when I got home and imported the footage.....I was filled with joy at the beautiful, full, clear signal! I just ordered up three more for my iRivers, and feel as if I can now handle most situations with great confidence...with a $25 mic made in a guys house! Audio Technica should be ashamed, with their muti million dollar developement and manufacturing churning out such disappointing performers as the AT830mW lavs. Now, the Pro88W transmitter and reciever....good stuff, but the mics are not fit for use, in my opinion.

Daniel, the very mic that you are beating up on has helped me earn a couple Grammy's...so, I'd have to heavily dispute your comment that "the mics are not fit for use, in my opinion." I've also used the 831 as my main flute mic for 10 years, ever since it came out.

You can submit that the AT mic is older, and that there are perhaps better materials out there, I'd likely accept that. There is also a substance with AT, Shure, Shoeps, etc. They are not potentially fly by night companies that could go out of business tomorrow, nor are they only having to foot the bill for one guy.

Independent shops often make far better, or at least better products than the big boys. John Hardy hand makes each pre-amp he sells. I have a couple of them. IMO, they're the best sounding pre-amp in the world. And I can pick up the phone and call him.
But I'd never suggest that the Presonus or M-Audio, or other reasonably priced pre's are not fit for use.

Understood, DSE, but this is the 830mW, which is only available with the Pro88W VHF kit, so there must be a world of difference in the 831. If you heard the disapointing audio I got at the speaking engagement with it, I would sincerely hope you'd deem it unusable, as much of a professional ear as you would have! You have indeed heard the two clips above, and the quality difference is night and day (despite the fact that I cant figure out a way to make a proper stereo clip!).

If you would wish (though I'm sure you dont concern yourself enough with this) I'd be happy to send you both mics (the AT and GS) to test yourself and see what you think. The actual real world results mirror directly the first test clips I posted!

I do appreciate you taking time to interact, sir Spot!

Daniel

I've written to Darren, I'd like to test out his mics. I also don't know the 830mW mic, so can't comment much on it. The 831 is in the 830 series....

That said, the film that we placed in the Berlin Film fest a few years back used a 6.00 stick on mic from Walmart or CompUSA, I forget which.

In other words, a lot of the deal is knowing how to use the mic.

I'm not trying to bust your butt over this, it's just that I *try* (and often fail) to keep things in perspective. It happens when you get old. However, if you've tried them side by side in a real world situation, and the Squid is THAT much better, i've no reason to doubt you.
The sample you uploaded is clearly a better sound. Do keep in mind that the Squid is half the cost of the entire AT wireless system.

Cool, DSE! If you wish, I'll send you the AT's to test with em, and you wont even have to send em back!

I can completely understand trying to keep a perspective, no doubt I would not want people contributing to the abundance of bad info that flows in the world...but I am 100% positive of these results, and I really do hope people will get a useful chunk of info from it:

1) Giant Squid non-battery powered mono omni's rock.

2) Audio Technica 830mW lavs produce very disappointing results (in my opinion).

3) Audio Technica Pro88W VHF wireless kits (transmitter and reciever sans mic) are super fine dirt cheap wireless performers! WELL worth the $169, even if they came micless!

Again, thank you sir, for taking the time to interact...I have serious respect for you...especially your butt saving Vegas 5 Editing Workshop, that has enabled me to become a pretty dang decent editor!

Daniel

well, hurry, cause I posted this on RAMPS, and I'd like to know more about these lav's for dialogue usage on motion pictures and what they are comparable to. *smile*

I wouild need to wire TA5 connectors for wireless use and/or extended cables with XLR connectors on them for discreet plant mics.

- ShannonRawls.com

I'm grabbing a couple of these - thanks Daniel !
The iRiver mics are specially configured to operate the iRiver in mono, thus doubling the length of recording and higher highest quality -if I'm not mistaken. Nice!

You're quite welcome, and you're not mistaken! As it turns out, even though other mics were mono, they had stereo mini plugs and the iRiver was recognizing them as stereo...recording mono to two tracks no matter what you set the firmware to. According the Darren and others (over at VU) these new iRiver lavs from GS are recognized by the firmware as such and record to a single track.

You should repeat the test but run it in two phases.
Use the same setup as before and record one sequence. Then attach each mic to the opposite transmitter and record again without making any other changes. See if you get the same results.

Greets, Jay

Frankly, I'm done testing! I just did the test for my own benefit, but figured others could use the information, but after getting the real world results I have, I am no longer in a state of uncertainty!

What I am going to do (probably late tonight...it takes forever for me to upload over 56k coupled with old crappy phone lines) is upload a couple of contrasting real world examples of my subject being recorded with the AT and the GS. The real examples are far more pertinant, since we buy em to use...not to test!

I listened to the initial test (albeit on my iBook and not through the monitors attached to my G5) and I liked the AT better.

Why?

Well it's a subjective judgement on my part, but I thought the GS made the ice in the glass sound too bright and out of place. To my ear the AT rendered what I am guessing the space in which the test was recorded actually sounded like. Of course this is a matter of taste, not signal strength etc. -- and that's the point.

I've always considered mics to render various flavours of sound, some suited to one task, mood, setting, etc. and others differently. Hard to judge how "good" a mic is in the absence of knowing what the intended effect is supposed to be.

I agree with you that some mics are better suited to certain tasks, but this test really needs to be listened to on good speakers.

The GS is actually a bit too loud in this test, which causes distortion when the ice cubes hit the glass. On the voice part, however, I much prefer the sound of the GS.

I also find the live concert samples of the omni mics on the GS web site quite impressive for such small devices.

Agreed on the too loud....but thats what setting levels is for. I had both of them set to the exact same level (the DVX preamps at mid position) to make sure the test was under totally identical circumstance for each. So, the GS did clip from time to time, but if you were using it real world you would set your levels according to what type of sound you were recording.

Also, if you were recording, you would adjust the mic position to best capture your audio, listening to the difference in frequency pick up as you changed angle and so on....again, I had both of these at (as close to humanly possible without using micrometers or something) the exact same position and angle, so that each would be on a level playing ground. I had the mics pretty close to the glass (on my desk in front of me) and I was sitting in the chair about 1 1/2 feet away (to give you an idea of its voice pickup capabilities), but if I were trying to record ice going into a glass for its own sake, I would pull the mic back a bit, or push it in closer and lower the gain.

Now, I will most certainly agree that different mic's are good for different applications.....absolutely! But my purpose is recording voice, as I would guess that is the most widely used application of lav's, and specifically weddings. As a matter of fact, I really wanted to post this in the Wedding section for my fellow Weddingeers, but thought it would reach a wider peer group here....audio is for everyone!

In end, it's the real world results that count the most, and the real world audio I was getting from the AT was not only pretty bad by comparison, but was a struggle to get even that good....I was constantly having to fight two foes...clipping and weak signal, and there was no satisfactory middle ground. I would have to boost the audio in post and then EQ it to try to falsify the low end of the spectrum, as it had none of its own....the AT was a source of great frustration, and even some footage that will not see the light of day.....sadly.

Daniel, yes, of course, I understand why you set the volume this way for the test. I meant – rather clumsily – to explain why the sound of the ice cubes seemed strange.

Thanks for the tip,

I still say that until you've re-run the basic test twice and switched each mic to the opposite transmitter/receiver system in between, you can't be certain of your test results.
The wireless system has by far the greatest potential to influence the results as any other component in the system.
Perhaps you will get the same results, but until you've ruled out the huge potential influence of the wireless systems and their transmitter input gain settings, you can't be certain of the differences in the lav elements.
Perhaps you'll find that one of your wireless systems is not operating at full quality potential. You may also find that the most important controls of your wireless system, transmitter input gain, isn't set optimally for each lav element and their inherent sensitivity. You may also find that one system was operating on a frequency that was being hampered but not totally disrupted by outside interference.
It's also important when doing more advanced comparisons to take the extra step of using not just equal settings for each device, but optimum settings for each device. Again, you may get the same results as before, but you can't claim it to be true with authority until you've taken these steps.

Yes, test 'em without the wireless for any type of comparison!

I didn't catch that, though if they sound half decent, record in mono on the Iriver, and are built like a tank they are sweet!

I think a good test would be on 2 iRivers, side by side, with same bit rate (ie.double bit rate for the (adapterless) non-Squid :) Then perhaps normalize the 2 tracks for equal volume.

Sorry guys, but right now I just dont have time to be a test machine. I got em in the mail, tested em for my own benefit and shared the results. Have now used them twice in real world environs and the end results match exactly with the test results, so I am no longer in need of tests, as tests come from uncertainty... and I am no longer uncertain!

Maybe someone else that has them can do some testing to your satisfaction, and what I would really like to see are some tests between the GS and other mics (besides the AT830mW) and see how they hold up to a wider comparison. Maybe DSE will give us some worth while info if he gets ahold of some GS's

Not trying to be difficult, but I am very busy and just dont want to put so much time into what is in my own personal view....beating a dead horse!

I put together a quick comparsion of the 830 and the giant squid mic. I was quite surprised how the squid mic compared to the more exspensive 830
http://easylink.playstream.com/foleyproductions/mic_test.wax