I am in pre on my first big (feature-length) project, a documentary on the social, economic and educational realities of Richmond California (a gross oversimplification of the focus, but hey). The over-whelming majority will obviously be one-person interview, so I want to get the set-up right. We are looking to give this as high production value as we can with our budget, and are purchasing either a JVC HD110U or a Cannon XLH1, and an M2 or Brevis adapter.

Basically, I am trying to decide between a simple lav setup for my interviewees and a cardioid (like the Rode NT3) on a boom.
I watched Ty Ford's excellent tutorial http://homepage.mac.com/tyreeford/.Public/Video/Ty%20Ford%20Mic%20Tutorial%20VIdeo.mp4 and was disappointed with the vague presence of the lav mic. I am much more interested in the punchy and rich sound of the cardioid and shotgun (though I understand the latter's unsuitability indoors).

My question is, essentially, whether or not operating a RODE NT3 cardioid on a boom (or some alternative) is too difficult and full of possible complications for a crew with no previous experience with boom operation. Of course we are going to do a lot of dry-running with our equipment so we could practice if it is worth it. Is it to hard to get good at operating a boom quickly?

Basically, given the pros and cons of both setups, which would be best for our situation? Difficult question, and I'm more fishing for anything you can impart than full-on answers. Sorry for the long post. Thanks a lot in advance.

Brian

Hi Brian,

Wow, an audio engineer could make a full course on this topic. Yes, there's a world of difference between a skilled and novice boom operator. Of course, getting the right equipment for a given shoot (environment) is critical. And when it's all said and done, you'll find this is all an iterative process - the more you know about equipment tradeoffs, environmental conditions, types of shoots, audience perceptions and expectations, size and expertise of the team, post-production editing tradeoffs, etc, and all the interactions of the above, the easier you'll find it to pick you particular "sweet spot".

Not knowing all the particulars of your shoot, it would be hard for some to make more than an off-the-cuff response to your question. I assume you're familiar with the inverse-square law of sound propogation but if not, that's a good area to start your search on the internet.

Good luck, Michael

Michael,

Thanks for your response.

I wish an audio engineer would give me a full course on this topic. ;) As far as the inverse-square law (with which I am familiar), I assume you're asking in regards to the boom operation? If so, then yes I do understand.

What more would you need to know about my shoot to give me a more informed answer? I thought I was fairly specific. Please tell me, and I can include any info that might help.

Thanks,
Brian

I too prefer the sound of a hyper condenser mic instead of the lav for indoor shoots. I just bought the NT3 along with my new XH-A1, but haven't used either one in an interview yet.

I also bought a little preamp/ USB interface with limiter for cleaner dialogue and VO work.

I'm curious if you're doing a one-person interview why you'd need a boom op. Unless the interviewer is also on camera (which complicates your camera AND lighting setups). Otherwise, just set the NT3 on a stand below frame, or on a fixed boom above frame. If the mic can't capture the interviewer's voice (You??) with equal quality... just loop it in post.

I bought Ty Ford's book and it was very helpful for location sound.

HTH,
Brian Brown

While the NT3 is a good mic, and works well on the boom arm of a fixed mic stand, you might find it a bit heavy to hang out there at the end of a 10 or 12-foot hand-held boom pole. Take a look at the AKG blueline SE300/ck93 hyper combo or the AT4053a hyper. (The film industry standard arguably the Schoeps CMC641 but that's three times the price.) Your boom operator will thank you for it.

Why not just record both ways? Most cameras have 2 channels of audio. You don't need a stereo signal for talking. Record the lav to one side and the shotgun to the other, then you can duplicate the left or right channel depending on what sounds better in post.

I've been an audio engineer for 18 years. I have found that most of the time, when you hear "bad" audio, it's just because it was set up all wrong. There are gain settings on lavs, as well as receivers, and then again on the camera. Some people think they can just put it in Auto mode and everything will be fine, but that's not always the case. I would also suggest recording everything to an external recorder. you can get 2 and 4 track recorders that will typically give you alot more user adjustable features that may come in handy for better sound quality.

People underestimate how important sound is. We just got a call this morning to do a re-shoot of a project, and although the client had issues on their side, not the audio, it gives us a chance to change some things we could have done differently. With shotgun's (or most condenser mics for that matter), you have to be very careful of your audio surroundings. Noise from cameras, people shuffling, fans, dimmers, even people talking outside will be picked up in your audio. Just take that into consideration.

I'm no pro, but I do have an interest in sound and have helped run sound for several 1 person interview shoots. This is assuming that the lav and booms are positioned correctly and gains are set correctly: Do both. Personally I think a boom almost always sounds more natural, but for 1 person interviews, the slightly in-your-face sound of a lav can work better.

Regardless of this issue, sometimes the lav works better, sometimes the boom works better. Maybe the boom is picking up some background sound too much. Maybe the lav is picking up clothes rustling, etc. If you have both, you can take your pick.

For most seated interviews, I've had no problem stringing up a hyper on a stationary boom.

Michael,
<clip>
What more would you need to know about my shoot to give me a more informed answer? <clip>
Thanks,
Brian

I know you're not trying to play 20 questions, but without a lot more specifics posting back and forth on this forum isn't particularly efficient. Heck, we don't even know if it's inside/outside, ambient noise including acoustics/wind/business/vehicles, if talent is man on the street/hired talent, stationary/walking interviews, whether it's one-time shots or talent will do retakes, post-production editing environment, amplitude variances in talent, etc. I see others have made some assumptions in some of these areas but all to often the story unfolds after 10 posts.

Regardless - good luck and congratuations on your big shoot.

Michael

I know you're not trying to play 20 questions, but without a lot more specifics posting back and forth on this forum isn't particularly efficient. Heck, we don't even know if it's inside/outside, ambient noise including acoustics/wind/business/vehicles, if talent is man on the street/hired talent, stationary/walking interviews, whether it's one-time shots or talent will do retakes, post-production editing environment, amplitude variances in talent, etc. I see others have made some assumptions in some of these areas but all to often the story unfolds after 10 posts.

Regardless - good luck and congratuations on your big shoot.

Michael

Yeah, but what else is he going to use regardless of where he is filming? If he is filming outside versus inside, do you think there is some other magic technique other than using a lav or boom to get the sound? Doubtful, other than smacking some windscreens on.

He did make this statement: "I am much more interested in the punchy and rich sound of the cardioid and shotgun (though I understand the latter's unsuitability indoors)." This leads us to believe that he is in fact doing some shooting indoors, and probably where original "assumptions" are coming from.

Thank you all. Very good info here. I had (stupidly) never considered the coverage of micing both ways. It seems an excellent idea and I will certainly propose that to my crew.

Brian: Thank you. I was under the impression that, due to sound propagation laws, one must stay with the interviewer when using a boom. i.e. you have to follow their head even if they just move a few inches, as sound intensity drops so quickly with distance change. Is this true? I'll also check out Ty Ford's book.

Steve: Good point, especially considering the fact that whoever is going to operate it won't be an expert. I'll check those out. Thank you.

Kit: Once again, thank you for the excellent idea of using both techniques. I keep hearing that about the importance of sound, and am newly sensitized to it while watching/working. I was already planning on recording to an external, but also sending to my camera (xlr) so as to be able to easily sync, and as a backup. Is that a good idea?

Tim: Thank you too, for the idea of using both methods. I am planning on adopting it. As far as using a fixed boom, I repeat an earlier question: I was under the impression that, due to sound propagation laws, one must stay with the interviewer when using a boom. i.e. you have to follow their head even if they just move a few inches, as sound intensity drops so quickly with distance change. Is this true?

Michael: I apologize for not making some of that clear. I will be mainly indoors (thus the hypercardioid over shotgun choice), with almost all one-time interviews. In post, I have access to any software I might need, and some access to hardware.

Thank you everyone. Keep em coming, please. This is really helping.

Kit: Once again, thank you for the excellent idea of using both techniques. I keep hearing that about the importance of sound, and am newly sensitized to it while watching/working. I was already planning on recording to an external, but also sending to my camera (xlr) so as to be able to easily sync, and as a backup. Is that a good idea?



YES! Please, if at all possible, record to as many sources as you can. You can always mute them in post if you won't be using them. It also helps for syncing everything up. All you have to do is match the peaks in the audio. If it's all a continuous shot without stopping the camera/other audio sources, you can line it up once and like magic...everything is synced.

Great. Thanks Kit. That's the plan. Can you recommend an external recorder? Give me different price ranges if you can. Thanks a lot. :)

There are a number of good stand-alone audio recorders you might consider, at various budget points. A file-based recorder is the norm these days, recording in WAV or BWF either to an internal hard drive, a flash card, or both. Examples of some to consider, with their prices on B&H...

Tascam HD-P2 ~$1000 (stereo, timecode)
Sound Devices 702 ~$1900 (stereo)
Sound Devices 702T ~$2500 (702 with timecode)
Sound Devices 744T ~$4100 (4-channels, timecode)

Whether you record to a separate recorder (double system) or in-camera (single system) don't forget to include a field mixer so the sound person can control levels, monitor, etc. (See Ty's post on 'Why a Mixer?' that he put up just today!)

Rehi Brian,

Okay, it sounds like your environment is "mostly" controlled (indoor) and with a fairly hefty budget, go for it. The Tascam HD-P2 recorder is rugged with time-code generation and is a step up above the Marantz PMD-670 (however another company does offer a mod on it to reduce its pre-amp noise).

For my meger needs, I get by with Countryman E6 lavalier and Octava MK012 hyper-cardiod (although it's REALLY sensitive, requiring a Rycote BBG and Windjammer even inside to do its best).

But if you'd like the good stuff, in addition to Rode NT3 consider something like the AKG CK63 hyper-cardiod and C480B ultra linear module (about $1K). If you're really feeling flush, you could splurge for the Schoeps MK41 super-cardioid and CMC6 ($1.5K). Regardless, you're still probably going to end up getting a shotgun and lavalier for some of your outside shoots, if only as a backup device. And obviously you'll need to deal with different mics and associated gear for the issues we discussed previously (seems like you know the issues). BTW, I thought Ty gave a fairly good overview of the Countryman E6 - did you have a specific concern?

However, I haven't heard you discuss mixers (with critical headphone monitoring) for the boom operator yet. A high-end portable powered mixer (to also handle your outside shoots) would be something like the Sound Devices 302 (almost $2K) but you could settle for the SD MixPre ($700). And I'm sure you won't skimp on a so-so boom pole. I'm not far from Richmond - maybe I can drop in on you and say hi sometime between your interviews. On a side-note, I highly recommend Ken Metzler's "Creative Interviewing" if you haven't already read it - great book!

Good luck, Michael

From what I have read I'm afraid the simplest advice is to just go and practice EVERYTHING, it sounds like you have a total novice who has to learn a skilled job as a boom op to total novices who have to learn how to set up EVERYTHING , there is only so much you can learn asking questions, far more is to be gained from getting some practice, then ask about what went wrong, then try again and so on.

Fair enough you need to ask what equipment people suggest but do not underestimate the learning curve you face, only time doing it will help you.


As for gear, well if the majority is inside then recorder wise save yourself some money and head for the edirol 4 channel recorder, the pro version with timecode, great little unit for static or trolley based work, boom work that involves proper swinging then get yourself the AT 835, static inside work you won't go wrong with the Blueline, gives you options and is a great way to learn what different capsules do, for personal mics well in terms of packs the lower priced sennys are great for the money, you'll not go far wrong with them, mic's, well head yaself towards some Trams or Sanken Cos-11's but also despite them not being cheap the dpa mic (4071) is nice, with the benefit of being able to easily change the plug if you change pack manufacturer etc, means you don't waste any money in the long run.

Tim: Thank you too, for the idea of using both methods. I am planning on adopting it. As far as using a fixed boom, I repeat an earlier question: I was under the impression that, due to sound propagation laws, one must stay with the interviewer when using a boom. i.e. you have to follow their head even if they just move a few inches, as sound intensity drops so quickly with distance change. Is this true?

In my experience, unless you are interviewing a VERY active person, people just tend to sit in a chair, heads not moving too much. Especially if you as the interviewer are reasonably still since your interviewee will most likely be talking towards you (or the camera), not moving much, and a fixed boom will cover you in most situations.

This is an area that can separate the men from the boys in terms of mics. I would look for a good hyper (schoeps MK41, sennheiser MKH50, AKG 480 with hyper head, probably the oktava mic) that have very nice polar plots. If you have a mic that doesn't have a smooth off axis response (like most shotguns) when the source moves from directly beneath the mic, you will hear the tone of the source changing. If you've got one of the above mentioned mics, the tone of the source won't change, just the volume (a little). You could go with a cardioid which would give you a broader pattern which would help compensate for subject movement, but it's a broader pattern and won't reject other sounds as well (depending on the source of the sound).

As far as the laws of sound propagation and moving sources, the intensity of sound obeys the inverse square law. So, change the distance, and the intensity will drop like the square of the distance. With that in mind, picture your standard interviewing setup. Mic pointed towards the face/mouth region of your subject about 1 feet above their mouth (depending on framing). Person now looks to their side and says some lines, their mouth displaced about 3 inches from before. While the distance to the mic did change (sqrt(12^2 + 3^2) = 12.4 inches as opposed to 12 inches), it actually doesn't change that much and you won't get that much of a drop in volume due to mic placement. You are more likely to get a nasty sound in the case of a mic with bad off axis response (mentioned above) and/or a slight reduction in volume due to the polar pattern of the mic.

That being said, if the person all the sudden lies on the floor and is now 4-5 ft away from the mic, yes, you will have some problems. Try not to let your subjects do that.

Lastly, with respect to lavs, I actually have had more issues to due subject movement (in a seated interview situation) with them than with a boom. Say you clip the lav on the subject's chest on one side of their jacket. Now, when the subject looks to the side (away from the lab) and says something, you've seriously changed the distance and the person is now speaking AWAY from the mic. That is always noticeable to me. I also have issues with people scratching their face/arms/body, things brushing up against the lav, stomach noises, etc. Remember the inverse square law - while the lav is close to the subject's mouth, it is also pretty close to their lap (fidgetting with tissues, etc.), their arms and chest (clothes noises), their stomachs (indigestion) and so on.

Again, this is my experience.

...
Lastly, with respect to lavs, I actually have had more issues to due subject movement (in a seated interview situation) with them than with a boom. ...

A good argument for using omni lavs instead of cardioids whenever possible.

Excellent info again. Thank you. I do have a question about the timecode on the recorders. I'm confused as to its usefulness - unless it's synced with the video timecode, I don't see how it will reference anything useful - unless of course the recorder and camera start rolling exactly simultaneously. I'm obviously missing something. Sorry. Whats the answer here...?

Steve: Thank you for the suggestions. I will look at those recorders. As far as a mixer, I was already planning on it, but am checking out Ty's post right after this. Thanks.

Michael: I will surely check out the Tascam. About the Countryman: if youre referring the mic Ty had on his face in the tutorial, I can't use that for obvious visual reasons, though I do think it gave some of the best sound. I'll see if I can get that Schoeps that everyone keeps mentioning - keep in mind I probably won't be buying most of this, but borrowing it from a professionals friends of mine, so I might not be able to get it. But I'll sure try. I am certainly planning on having a mixer and obviously monitoring the sound. Thanks for the tip on the preMix - I'll probably go for that.
I would be honored if you dropped by. If you like I'll keep you posted on our shoots up there. :)
I will certainly check out that book; I need advice on that as these subjects won't be easy ones.

Ian: As soon as I'm done with this phase and have gotten my gear we're going to do dozens of dry-runs on the lighting/sound/camera setup. I'll also check out the Edirol, and the rest of your suggestions. Thank you.

Tim: Thank you for the assurance. It will be very nice to settle for a fixed boom. The issue of lavalier rustle is precisely why we're using both grabbing methods (lav and boom hypercardioid) for coverage. I understand the insignificance of the movement of the interviewee. However, just out of curiosity (and in case it happens), if the person were to shift positions (cross legs etc) significantly, would one move the boom mid-interview, or wait till they finished their sentence, or interrupt them, or what? I can see that being a problem, though I will try to restrain them from lying down ;). Thank you for your help.

Steve: I'm confused - wouldn't that be a good argument for the opposite? Or do you mean omni lavs vs cardioid lavs?

Yes, meant omni lavs instead of cardioid lavs when using lavs <grin> Cardioid lavs are most useful when their directivity is needed on a sound-reinforcement application where feedback from the house speakers can be a problem. But the downside of their directivity is that relatively minor movement from the talent or variations in the orientation of the mic clip can take them off-mic, with noticable changes in both level and tone. Because omnis pick up evenly from all directions, such movements are not as much a problem.

With inexperienced crew, you may find they don't take proper steps to minimize handling of the boom (both in mic holder and in technique), resulting in noise. It can be tiring holding a boom arm still. Noise can come right thru if not properly isolated. While the boom will give better sound IMO, I'd backup with a lav.

That is a very good point, especially handling noise, it's one thing it takes people a long time to learn, it may be worth considering buying an Ambient Floater, hell it's a handy thing for any boom op actually but for a beginner it can certainly make sure handling noise is kept to a minimum.

A good argument for using omni lavs instead of cardioids whenever possible.

Absolutely. Even with omni's though, you can still almost double the distance from mouth to mic with a simple shift of the head. Inverse square law (and indirect path from mouth to mic) are going to have a noticeable effect even with an omni - in my opinion and experience. Not that I've ever used cardiod lavs...

About the subject moving and when should you interrupt for repositioning. It depends on the situation, but my rule of thumb is if there is something going on on camera/set that is ruining a take, fix it as soon as possible. If you can stop the interview, do it and fix it; don't sit there sweating bullets. If you need to make a change that might result in the loss of some footage, do it as soon as you can, since you don't want to miss something REALLY important. Just my philosophy.

That being said, the times I've rigged up a hyper (MKH50) on a boom stand and done interviews, I've never really had to move the mic. Maybe the subjects were unusually sedate :)

Rehi Brian,

The Countryman E6 comes with a mini alligator clip that attaches to the respondent's clothing and the microphone tube, although you could get the B6 which is specifically designed to accomodate interviews (no long tube to the singer/speakers mouth). And if you're looking for a high-end lav, there's others that I'm sure will chime in here touting the Sanken COS-II http://www.sanken-mic.com/english/index.html

Enjoy, Michael

Thank you guys again.

Steve: I understand. Gotcha.. :)

James: What is the source of this noise that you speak with poor boom operation? Also, what do you think of the third option of a fixed boom? Will it work, or will the sound intensity vary too much?

Tim: Though I am loath to interrupt people, your logic makes perfect sense. I'll keep that in mind. Thank you

Michael: Ok. Gotcha. I will certainly check out the Sanken. Thanks.