I'm gearing up for a super low budget feature soon and want to make sure I'm set on audio (most important part of a movie). Everyone knowledgeable I've asked has pretty much said a mixer is a necessity for feature-quality audio.

I picked up a zoom h4n a while ago and I'm really liking the quality it can do for the money. The real question is whether or not this is going to cut it in a theater. (I don't know; I haven't played any of my audio in a theater)

It's my understanding that the MAIN asset with a mixer is that it increases the audio while keeping the noise down, ending with a large signal/noise ratio. But the zoom h4n has no line-input, meaning to go into it from a mixer i'd need to find a way to drop that signal back down to microphone level.
(Am I understanding that all correctly?)

So it seems like the only benefits of a mixer would be whatever features the mixer itself has, i.e. easier audio control, faders, extra channels, etc.
Which seems nice and all, but given that I'm on a super tight budget, that doesn't sound worth it to me. It may be a little harder, it may take more preparation and time... but it'll be cheaper, and that's key.

So the real question is: Am I going to be okay with just the zoom h4n? Should I get a mixer for it? Should I spend more for a better recording device? Of course there are many, many factors for these questions, and obviously better equipment is going to give me better audio... but what I'm looking for is the cheapest-- not easiest-- way to get acceptable audio. I'd really rather not buy a new recording device, but if the zoom h4n isn't going to cut it, i'd rather not shoot a whole movie that ends up unusable because i didn't get the scratch together for a recorder.

The zoom absolutely has line inputs. They are the 1/4" jacks inside the xlr's. The advantages of having an extra mixer would be easier control of levels and some eq that can be dialed in easily. And if you need to feed more than 2 channels of audio to your recorder.

You may be misinformed on the benefits of adding a mixer. The pre amps in decent mixers will sound better than the zoom. But the more electronics you add into your signal chain, the noiser it gets. You can absolutely get a good signal to noise ratio with just the zoom. There's plenty of other cheap recorders but none are a huge improvement. Tascam makes a few but if you already own the Zoom I wouldn't bother.

You don't mention what mics you have and that can make a huge difference noise-wise too.

If you're on a budget, your biggest issue will be finding a mixer that doesn't add noise to the signal. And that's gonna be a tall order as even Mackie and Allen and Heath (two of my fav inexpensive mixers) have a noticeable noise floor. Don't even utter the word "Behringer" as a 747 during takeoff is quieter! Ha ha!

If you can get away with 2 channels of record, stick with the H4n and record to WAV files at the highest rate. If you need more channels or finer control and EQ, then get a mixer and run the 1/4" cables to the H4n line ins and youre set.

Soundcraft, Allen and Heath, Mackie are decent budget mixers.

Shure, Sound Devices, Fostex, Wendt are the not so budget friendly but really nice mixers.

Consider renting a really good mixer that has battery power so your rig can be portable.

Thanks for the info! I'm sure you're right, I probably just misunderstood some things. I thought that yes, the zoom can accept line inputs but only if you take the signal down to a mic-level signal, which would negate the advantage of pre-amps on the mixer.

But it sounds like, so long as I do some homework, I'll be able to get quality sound without a mixer. Yeah?

Thanks again.

Yup! The H4n and others are popular for a reason. They are inexpensive solutions for getting decent audio.

Fantastic, just what I was hoping for. That's what I heard when I picked up the h4n, but I was getting a little worried constantly hearing "You need a mixer."
While we're on the subject, the mic i'm using is a rode ntg-2. To my ears, I really like what it gets from outside, but the indoors stuff often sounds relatively unacceptable. Am I going to need to put up some $, or is the ntg-2 capable of doing inside as well if I make sure the boom work is good? Of course, there are many factors, but again, can it be done?

I use the NTG-3 indoors quite often and it's fine. The NTG-2 is very similar. Sounds like you need to experiment with mic placement techniques. :)

While no you don't need a mixer, BUT..... in a short time you will find by adding a mixer you will be able to do things better, like riding levels, mixing multiple mics to 1 track, putting mics to different tracks and keeping the levels under control...easily.
I have a H4n and love it...
I recently did a job that was to be directly recorded to the camera but also did a back up to H4n it involved 5x radio mics and a boom pole. The 2 hosts were sent to [L] the 3 guests were sent to [R] and the pole was to cover FX of the walking. You can't do that without a mixer ;)

My final comment get a case for the H4n it saves the bumps and scratches...
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/494273-case-zoom-h4n.html

Ha! Like I can afford five mics!

But yeah, I totally understand what you're saying. That day will come.

5 mics.... give it time ;)
Just something to keep in mind probably 80-90 % of my freelance work records direct to the camera or is live and the H4n doesn't get used.
A good sound mixer will open up opportunities for you rather than being locked into one style of productions.

The minimum kit here is....
Mixer + H/Phones
Boom Pole
Sennheiser 416 or NTG 3 with blimp
2x Radio mics
Breakaway Cable for mixer- camera + return

Better mixers will have a switch on the main outs to take them down to mix level. I have a Mackie that does that.

-gb-

I use the H4n mainly as my digital recorder. I have gone straight into it with my Sennheiser ME-67 shotgun and boom with no worries. If you have just the one boom mic, try it without the mixer. Bring the audio into your system and see (listen to) what it sounds like.

I also have a SignVideo ENG-44 mixer. Not the best, but definitely not the worst. I've used it when recording from two wireless lavs and the boom. The mixer can definitely control levels and add phantom power where necessary and save on batteries for the boom! I also rent out the whole shebang from time to time which helps pay for it as well.

I guess what I'm saying is that a mixer is a good to have item... but depending on what you're doing, not a need to have item.

I actually have the Sign Video Eng44 mixer too. I adapt things a bit differently though. I shoot with the 5D. My boom operator in my narrative shoots uses a simple Tasca, DR07 or Zoom H 1 as recorder, fed line in from the Eng44. Either of the records is just velcroed to the mixer.
We adust levels into recorder using Eng 44 tone generator and then ride mic inputs, and mixer output as needed. Either of the recorders has a phone jack so boom operator can actually monitor what is being recorded. This set up is light and clean.

I'm gearing up for a super low budget feature soon and want to make sure I'm set on audio (most important part of a movie). Everyone knowledgeable I've asked has pretty much said a mixer is a necessity for feature-quality audio.

I picked up a zoom h4n a while ago and I'm really liking the quality it can do for the money. The real question is whether or not this is going to cut it in a theater. (I don't know; I haven't played any of my audio in a theater)

It's my understanding that the MAIN asset with a mixer is that it increases the audio while keeping the noise down, ending with a large signal/noise ratio. But the zoom h4n has no line-input, meaning to go into it from a mixer i'd need to find a way to drop that signal back down to microphone level.
(Am I understanding that all correctly?)


Just where are you getting your information from? A mixer does not guarantee anything except the mixing and the control of multiple signal sources in the field.

Simply, degradation of S/N Ratios can result at any point in your recording chain for a number of reasons. However, that established from the mic to preamp is where most consideration is needed. But if you want to do things "budget" then don't expect to do theatre.

:)

Here is my advice, take it or leave it... You admit that audio is the most important part of the movie, you are very green on the subject, but you want the audio to be theatre quality.

Why not involve someone in the production with practical audio experience and gear?

Because I've got a year to figure all this out, and I don't mind doing my homework to learn it on my own to save a few bucks. Coming here and asking questions is part of the homework! Also, if I don't have to, I'd rather not rely on someone else... but learn it on my own and make sure it's done right. I've gotten burned before, by trusting someone who, turns out, didn't know what they were doing.

edit: not that that isn't good advice. but it's also more impractical for me because the shooting schedule will be all over the place... it will be nearly impossible for me to find a professional who will be able to come and shoot at the drop of a hat, and i can't afford to just pay someone to be on retainer.

Note that virtually all equipment that has both mic-level inputs and line-level inputs simply have internal pads which knock the line-level signal down to mic-level, so it STILL goes through the mic preamp. Even $35,000 pro video cameras do this.

IMHO, using an external mic preamp as a universal panacea to "improve the sound" is vastly overblown in these indie circles.

Note that virtually all equipment that has both mic-level inputs and line-level inputs simply have internal pads which knock the line-level signal down to mic-level

Really?! You mean they don't change the amount of negative feedback around the input stage, to lower the gain? It would be interesting to look at the actual schematics for the cameras... but I'd think they'd be hard to come by.

Because I've got a year to figure all this out, and I don't mind doing my homework to learn it on my own to save a few bucks. Coming here and asking questions is part of the homework! Also, if I don't have to, I'd rather not rely on someone else... but learn it on my own and make sure it's done right. I've gotten burned before, by trusting someone who, turns out, didn't know what they were doing.

edit: not that that isn't good advice. but it's also more impractical for me because the shooting schedule will be all over the place... it will be nearly impossible for me to find a professional who will be able to come and shoot at the drop of a hat, and i can't afford to just pay someone to be on retainer. You're going to have to rely on someone else, actually several someone elses. There's no way you can handle sound recording AND working the camera AND setting the lighting AND focusing on the performance in order to direct the talent, all at the same time and do all the jobs properly. Film making is a team sport.

IMHO, using an external mic preamp as a universal panacea to "improve the sound" is vastly overblown in these indie circles.

It depends on the recorder. When recording into a top recorder, the need for an external preamp/mixer is overblown. When recording into a DSLR, an external preamp with gain is critically important.

And Steve nails it. When directing and/or operating a camera, you can't operate a boom, a recorder, and a mix at the same time.

The basic rules for audio are simple:

1) Use adequate equipment,
2) Make sure to start and stop the recordings at the right time,
3) Set the proper levels, and
4) Position the mic optimally.

That's it! The challenge is in...

1 )Knowing what the right equipment is for the specific situation at hand - and having the equipment at the ready,
2) Knowing the equipment well enough so that when you think you started the recording, you are actually recording in the desired format,
3) Not just knowing that you need to set the right levels, but being able to do it, and
4) Executing proper mic technique.

An amateur gets it right when they are lucky. A pro gets it right - and tells you when the conditions won't allow a good result before you start shooting.

Step 1: define the full range of the shooting conditions and the full set of requirements.

Really?! You mean they don't change the amount of negative feedback around the input stage, to lower the gain? It would be interesting to look at the actual schematics for the cameras... but I'd think they'd be hard to come by.

I have examined the schematics of several medium ($10-15K) and high-end ($20-30K) cameras and only a few of them change the gain. Remember that the higher-end camera (where they could afford the more complex circuit switching) the less likely they are to make audio a priority because it is assumed that higher-end productions ALWAYS use double-system sound recording. The highest-end cameras have no audio at all. Although that is not as prevalent now that film is dead.

Visit the discussion forums of some of the high-end "boutique" cameras (RED, et.al.) and see the frustration of using audio systems that are quite obviously never a design priority of the developers. And seemingly designed by video engineers who apparently know almost nothing about audio.

... When recording into a DSLR, an external preamp with gain is critically important...

When recording on a gadget with auto-level, you would be FAR better off spending the same $$$ on even a modest separate recorder with manual level control vs. a gold-plated preamp/mixer into a sow's-ear recorder (DSLR). Any chain, including (perhaps ESPECIALLY) audio, is only a strong as its weakest link.

You're going to have to rely on someone else, actually several someone elses. There's no way you can handle sound recording AND working the camera AND setting the lighting AND focusing on the performance in order to direct the talent, all at the same time and do all the jobs properly. Film making is a team sport.

Absolutely, and let me clarify... I don't mean that I'll be running the audio myself, but when I say I don't want to rely on someone, what I meant was (and excuse me for speaking poorly) I don't want to rely on someone I don't know. I'm not at the level where personal recommendations mean anything, and IMO anyone can come up with enough good clips to put on a sound reel, even if they came across them by accident. The people I'll be relying on will be friends and other film students I've worked with before, with whom I KNOW know how to do things, AND will work for free... caveat being, I know they don't have any gear, so they'll be using mine, and indeed I figure I may need to teach them some of my skills (once I've developed them) to make sure things are getting done properly, to my liking. I guess what I mean is I plan on relying not on reliable sound people, but on reliable people.... who may or may not (but probably don't) have the gear knowledge AND the gear to be able to operate entirely independently. That may seem a little silly to a lot of you, but it's the best bet for me right now.

Furthermore, I need to know if my gear is even capable of producing the level of quality I need or if I'll need to upgrade.

Which brings us to...

It depends on the recorder. When recording into a top recorder, the need for an external preamp/mixer is overblown. When recording into a DSLR, an external preamp with gain is critically important.

And Steve nails it. When directing and/or operating a camera, you can't operate a boom, a recorder, and a mix at the same time.

The basic rules for audio are simple:

1) Use adequate equipment,
2) Make sure to start and stop the recordings at the right time,
3) Set the proper levels, and
4) Position the mic optimally.

That's it! The challenge is in...

1 )Knowing what the right equipment is for the specific situation at hand - and having the equipment at the ready,
2) Knowing the equipment well enough so that when you think you started the recording, you are actually recording in the desired format,
3) Not just knowing that you need to set the right levels, but being able to do it, and
4) Executing proper mic technique.

An amateur gets it right when they are lucky. A pro gets it right - and tells you when the conditions won't allow a good result before you start shooting.

Step 1: define the full range of the shooting conditions and the full set of requirements.

And that's what I'm seeking here. So thanks for all the info once again, guys.

I have examined the schematics of several medium ($10-15K) and high-end ($20-30K) cameras and only a few of them change the gain.

How incredibly stupid! Building a pad requires a few resistors and a switch. Changing the gain requires a few resistors and a switch. Same amount of hardware, same price. Reducing the gain lowers the noise and distortion. Using a pad does neither.

Sounds as if there are too many bit-jockeys, and not enough knowledgeable analog people designing this stuff.

How incredibly stupid! Building a pad requires a few resistors and a switch. Changing the gain requires a few resistors and a switch. Same amount of hardware, same price. Reducing the gain lowers the noise and distortion. Using a pad does neither.

Sounds as if there are too many bit-jockeys, and not enough knowledgeable analog people designing this stuff.

Yep, even with many of the high-end pro cameras, audio is often an afterthought on the part of the designers. Done right, switching the input to line level would re-route the signal path to go around the mic preamp to go direct to the main recording amp, completely bypassing the preamp circuits. Alas, that's not what they do. Doing so would require two stages in series or two separate input stages with different sensitivities. Always routing the signal through the mic preamp and simply putting a pad in front of it to avoid overload when the input is set to line level reduces the cost significantly. It just seems wrong to me to pad a signal down in level only so you can immediately raise it back up again in the very next stage but that's what they do. Apparently $5 in parts can affect the total manufacturing costs by hundreds of dollars.

Directors, DPs, and camera designers all seem to think of sound as the black sheep of the on-set family - no wonder so many mixers get cranky now and then.

It was my understanding that once you got to that level, it was assumed you were serious enough that you pretty much always had a dedicated sound system, so why even bother with sound in a camera... sort of a "Cameras are for shooting video, make them really good at shooting video and nothing else... sound recorders are for recording sound, make them really good at that and nothing else," mentality.

Interesting to see that that's not quite the case.

Steve:
It's not even that complicated. If you use a switch and a resistor to change the gain of the input IC, you change it from being a mic-level input to a line-level input. Changing the feedback of that one IC will reduce its noise, and will raise its input threshold so it won't clip as readily. You effectively make it a line-level input. That would be much better than adding a pad, and would take exactly the same parts count. So apparently the designers just don't understand audio.

Alex:
By the same token, why put a cigar lighter in a Mercedes? Your personal valet should be there to light your cigar for you.

I think they put the audio input there because they can. Most high-end users will shoot double system, but someone might occasionally use the cam for run-and-gun; or someone might just record a backup track. My point is that, given that they're including an audio input, why not do it right, for the same manufacturing cost? The only answer I can think of is: they're clueless about audio design.

Alex, I'm not trying to dump on you, I'm just being realistic!

If I understand correctly... You, who has such a limited understanding of audio for film that you have to come to a forum to have a basic question answered, are going to teach your friends the craft of location sound so you know it will be done right and be of quality to play in theaters?

Rather than worry about gear purchases and theater runs, why not just have fun making your film.

All the Best!

Dave

Always trying to learn more. Thanks for the advice, guys!

My H4n went out on a job the other day to do a record, the people were running a Rode NTG3 shotgun mic to track 1 and a Lectro VHF radio mic to channel 2, reports there was hum and distortion on the radio mic feed... it turns out the radio mic RX doesn't like phantom power fed back into it.

As I said when they picked up the gear "Take the MixPre" as an input mixer.....but no they didn't want to!!!

How's the quality of a Rolls mixer?

I bought my mixer (SD Mixpre) because I thought it was needed for preamp audio quality. But I find it's much more useful for the practical stuff: easy to adjust dials, easy to read meters, switches for all controls (no menus).

I just don't think it's practical to ride the levels with equipment that doesn't have real dials; the level up/down buttons on the side of the h4n are simply not up to the task.

The preamp audio quality only comes into play at the fringes; most of the time you are able to get your mic close enough and the sound is relatively consistent, so the signal is way above the preamp noise. But sometimes you can't get a mic close enough or you don't have spare eyes/hands to keep the levels adjusted. Then you find yourself in the trudging through the mud, and a good preamp is important.

Estimating how often you will play in the mud is really what you need to figure out. Given that you will be working with untrained sound people it might be often enough that a standalone mixer with a good preamp would be useful. It sounds like you have experience, so evaluating your past sound work is a good place to start. If you find background noise in your recordings then you might need a better preamp. But if you have the more common issues from the mic not being close enough like room echo, background noise, or unintelligible dialog a preamp will do nothing for you.

I finally decided to pay more and get the tascam DR-680 8-Track Portable Field Audio Recorder. it's close to $800 - but it will do everything I need it to.

I finally decided to pay more and get the tascam DR-680 8-Track Portable Field Audio Recorder. it's close to $800 - but it will do everything I need it to.

How do you mix multiple mics on it? Are you using it just as a recorder or as a mixer as well?

I'm buying it as a recorder - so I can record 4 XLR mics at one time. I'll then be able to bring them all into my editing timeline and sort out the levels in post.
I'm usually working on my own, so I'm too preoccupied with videotaping to try to adjust levels live during the event.

So I've begun doing a series of fun youtube shorts with friends... nothing serious, more like every month or so when we all have a free weekend we record some stuff. We're using this mostly to increase our experience and knowledge (and oh yeah, have some fun) so the next time we go out we're going to rent a mixpre and see how it goes (I assume I'll also need some pads, but our original signal might just be low enough to get away with it... anyone able to chime in about this?). Tom was great enough to give us his experience with the mixpre, I'll definitely share mine. I'm excited to see how it helps...

On another note, I'm a film student and over the past month I've been wrecked with final projects... and the equipment room at school has been equally as wrecked with too many students trying to get equipment at once, meaning my sound kit got a LOT of use from my friends (and myself) who found themselves in a jam when the equipment room ran short. In those scenarios I've found with a boom op who takes the job seriously, they've been getting really fantastic crisp sound with just the h4n and microphone (no mixer), but those were also in more controlled situations... all of them inside, all of them with professional actors who could hit their marks and respond to speaking parameters (speak louder, turn your head towards the microphone on this line, etc.). Note that we didn't do any sound design for any of the rooms.

So for anyone reading, from my experience it seems like if you can get experienced actors and experienced sound operators, you can get some great audio in a very controlled environment. I'll let everyone know how the mixpre helps in a slightly less controlled environment with my shorts (not that it's documentary-style filmmaking, but more like... hey guys let's go make a movie! We can totally shoot in this parking lot!)
If anyone reading this thread is interested I'll post some sound clips as well from what we've been getting, both in the controlled environments and non-controlled.

All in all, I've decided once again that the zoom h4n is no all-purpose amazing professional sound recorder (does an all-purpose device for ANYTHING in film actually exist? I haven't found one yet). But... for $300, it gives you amazing audio that's way beyond its price range.
Now, will it be useful for my feature, assuming I can rent a few things to help it out when necessary? That remains to be seen, but I'm hoping that yes, we can get it there if we really do our homework and prep to know what we'll need and how to use it.