MKII phantom power..?

Dan Chung · April 28th, 2009, 07:40 PM

Jon,

Yes I know I can remove tone bleed. Hiss didn't seem to be a problem when I fed 1khz into my Beachtek DXA-6 then into my 5dmkII, I hoping therefore that the DXA-5D is better. Time will tell.

Also it was kind of interesting to see on the videos that Canon were showing the DXA-5D on their stand at NAB, a bit rich seeing as they could have added this functionality themselves without all the work arounds!

Dan

Greg Joyce · April 28th, 2009, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Brockett

Hi Dan:

I suspect that the Sony will sound better but to equip it with XLRs costs a LOT more. I think that the Zoom sounds pretty great for the money and the ability to record four tracks in a small hand held recorder for less than U.S. $349.00 is pretty impressive. The mic preamps on the original H4 weren't very good and they did improve them immensely on the H4N.

Dan

Dan,

I, too, recently got the Zoom H4N. I know bupkus about the finer points of audio, but the sound IS pretty great, for the money and for the size. I'm particularly impressed by the built-in XY stereo mics. They sound better to me than my Oktava 102 connected to it via XLR. Which is ironic since I wanted the H4N because of the XLR inputs.

Agree with you too about double system recording. I made a feature using 16mm film and DAT tapes a few years ago when that was state of the art. That setup required a small crew just to move it. Today I can fit the MKII and accessories in a little camera bag, the Zoom H4N in my pocket, add a couple of mics and for a fraction of the size, cost, and hassle, I can make a better looking and sounding movie.

Not to mention no more lab bills!

Dan Brockett · April 28th, 2009, 09:37 PM

A lot of it depends on what kind of material you are shooting and on what sorts of sound systems your material will be reproduced. I know that Dan shoots on the streets of the world and you are shooting interviews in real places, not quiet rooms all of the time. I also understand that much of your material ends up on the web.

Most people listen to web material on no-fi computer speakers (built-in or the $79.00 specials at Best Buy, take your pick) or at most on a lower end bookshelf sort of low-fi setup. In these venues, low hiss and low dynamic range may not be a problem or even noticeable. If the material is halfway legible, that may be good enough for the web. Only gamers usually have a little better quality sound reproduction, it is usually still low fi, but it is loud and can reproduce dynamic range, granted with a high level of distortion most of the time. People who wear headphones while web browsing through the rule all off though, you can hear a LOT of the content, even through the cheapest headphones.

But if your material is ever shown on broadcast, many more people now have at least halfway decent 5.1/7.1 fairly higher powered systems and a few even have true high fidelity playback.

Of course, we all know that theatrical sound reproduction is the ultimate because there are Dolby and THX standards (thank goodness) so in many theaters, the sound is reproduced at a high volume level and tremendous dynamic range is apparent.

The quality of the audio needed for each exhibition venue varies widely. I used to own an audio post facility and believe me, when you mix a feature film on near fields and mid field monitors, you think you are hearing what is there. But you don't. The first time you hear it on a mixing stage is the real ear opener. You hear all kinds of things that you never even new existed, both good and bad.

I would say that the level you need to be concerned about audio is somewhat commensurate with who will be listening to your show on what kind of playback system. The better your audience can hear your material, the better you had better make the recording.

Dan

Jon Fairhurst · April 28th, 2009, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Chung

Yes I know I can remove tone bleed.

I figured that you knew that. My comment was more for others who might read that and assume that it was unacceptable.

Peer Landa · May 5th, 2009, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peer Landa

Anyone knows if the MKII's mic-input delivers 3v phantom power? I got a snazzy shotgun mic for video cameras that needs the 3 volts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ray Bell

No Sir it doesn't....

Here's what I got back from Ambient (the microphone manufacturer) today:

"I talked to Canon a few weeks ago and they said that this Camera does provide 3 Volts power on the Mic jack. I had a different Canon here (with a customer) yesterday though and this one - I think it read MX or similar - did not have it.
I got a adapter cable with a small battery compartment for a 3V photo battery, that could eventually work.
Regarding the connectors: we do have those in stock."

-- peer

Ray Bell · May 5th, 2009, 08:55 PM

Let us know how it works when you get the hardware....

Robert Esmonde · May 6th, 2009, 07:25 AM

The Zoom H4n sounds like the way to go for me. But I wondered if it's possible to e.g. feed two XLR mics into the Zoom and carry the audio from the Zoom on to the 3.5mm input of the Canon 5D Mark II? I like the security of a 'belt and braces' approach. Is there a way to do this while retaining headphone monitoring on the Zoom?

Chris Barcellos · May 6th, 2009, 01:35 PM

I conducted a similar approach in a recent shoot, using the 5D. I was recording to a HiMD as well as direct to the camera through an ENG44 mixer. Problem is, you don't know what you are getting in camera. In this case, I had a constant whine on the camera track because I was able to monitor and correct.

April 28th, 2009, 07:40 PM	#16
Dan Chung Major Player Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Beijing Posts: 665	Jon, Yes I know I can remove tone bleed. Hiss didn't seem to be a problem when I fed 1khz into my Beachtek DXA-6 then into my 5dmkII, I hoping therefore that the DXA-5D is better. Time will tell. Also it was kind of interesting to see on the videos that Canon were showing the DXA-5D on their stand at NAB, a bit rich seeing as they could have added this functionality themselves without all the work arounds! Dan Last edited by Dan Chung; April 29th, 2009 at 12:30 AM.

May 6th, 2009, 01:35 PM	#23
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	I conducted a similar approach in a recent shoot, using the 5D. I was recording to a HiMD as well as direct to the camera through an ENG44 mixer. Problem is, you don't know what you are getting in camera. In this case, I had a constant whine on the camera track because I was able to monitor and correct. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

April 28th, 2009, 09:37 PM	#18
Dan Brockett Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 2,109	A lot of it depends on what kind of material you are shooting and on what sorts of sound systems your material will be reproduced. I know that Dan shoots on the streets of the world and you are shooting interviews in real places, not quiet rooms all of the time. I also understand that much of your material ends up on the web. Most people listen to web material on no-fi computer speakers (built-in or the $79.00 specials at Best Buy, take your pick) or at most on a lower end bookshelf sort of low-fi setup. In these venues, low hiss and low dynamic range may not be a problem or even noticeable. If the material is halfway legible, that may be good enough for the web. Only gamers usually have a little better quality sound reproduction, it is usually still low fi, but it is loud and can reproduce dynamic range, granted with a high level of distortion most of the time. People who wear headphones while web browsing through the rule all off though, you can hear a LOT of the content, even through the cheapest headphones. But if your material is ever shown on broadcast, many more people now have at least halfway decent 5.1/7.1 fairly higher powered systems and a few even have true high fidelity playback. Of course, we all know that theatrical sound reproduction is the ultimate because there are Dolby and THX standards (thank goodness) so in many theaters, the sound is reproduced at a high volume level and tremendous dynamic range is apparent. The quality of the audio needed for each exhibition venue varies widely. I used to own an audio post facility and believe me, when you mix a feature film on near fields and mid field monitors, you think you are hearing what is there. But you don't. The first time you hear it on a mixing stage is the real ear opener. You hear all kinds of things that you never even new existed, both good and bad. I would say that the level you need to be concerned about audio is somewhat commensurate with who will be listening to your show on what kind of playback system. The better your audience can hear your material, the better you had better make the recording. Dan

May 5th, 2009, 08:55 PM	#21
Ray Bell Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,414	Let us know how it works when you get the hardware....

May 6th, 2009, 07:25 AM	#22
Robert Esmonde Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 51	The Zoom H4n sounds like the way to go for me. But I wondered if it's possible to e.g. feed two XLR mics into the Zoom and carry the audio from the Zoom on to the 3.5mm input of the Canon 5D Mark II? I like the security of a 'belt and braces' approach. Is there a way to do this while retaining headphone monitoring on the Zoom?