Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Audio. Heston Rode.

W

Wayne Morellini

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
6,157
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi, I would normally post in off topic, but as there is a forum for this I'll post here. I don't know too much about audio but a little.

I'm watching the new Heston food show on SBS Australia where he transfers his restaurant "The Fat Duck" to Melbourne Australia for six months while they renovate the old Fat Duck in England (if only I knew I could have put in for a ticket to go).

Anyway they appear to be using a Rode video microphone for some the live footage and it sounds exactly like I expected when I read it's specs years ago. Very hard for me to understand as an older person with hard hearing. The problem is that I want to buy Rode, but so many of the specs are similar with frequency constriction on the frequency response. I actually wanted a microphone I could dual use in a large recording room. The microphone might be good for reducing outside noise issues but for internal use it seems flat. I can barely understand what they are saying at times.

I actually want to buy a microphone with ultrasonic range, for experimentation and studio recording. Some people in the music industry think I'm crazy. But I can hear ultrasonic barely with some other ranges very poor, know good sound when well, and know that scientific testing in the 1980's revealed that people can appreciate the ultrasonic component, it enhanced music. The reality seems that most screen and voice recordings just limit this high end definition as an enhancement. My existing Rode seems to just reveal the issues in voice recording with fuller width frequencies. I'm really going to have to set my room up for audio blogging first. But as far as a basic studio room I'm going to have to do a lot.

Maybe I should just get a valve microphone and throw out accuracy, that one Madonna used on the time single looked good. Just looks like multi mike types to cover everything. Fortunately I'm giving up on the music recording idea (we have had some really low quality back room type setups a decade ago when I was interested in that and figured I could repurposed a video recording for music as well, as a lot of the expense was already paid for in the setup for video).

So just thoughts?
 
My thoughts..... Microphone placement is everything!

I would rather have a crap mic properly placed, than a bazillion dollar mic placed in the wrong position.
 
Once I get the room right, isn't microphone placement patterns and distances fairly simple, or am I missing something David?
 
Wayne Morellini said:
Anyway they appear to be using a Rode video microphone for some the live footage and it sounds exactly like I expected when I read it's specs years ago. Very hard for me to understand as an older person with hard hearing. The problem is that I want to buy Rode, but so many of the specs are similar with frequency constriction on the frequency response.
Click to expand...
I agree entirely with Mr. Jones above. A crap mic placed in an optimum position will sound better than a great mic in a bad position.

To me, Rode is not even in the Top 5 of great mics out there. To me, they're OK as a "student film" mic, but not much more than that. Countryman, DPA, Sanken, Sennheiser, Tram, heck, even Shure and Sony will often give you better performance. There's some Audio-Technica mics that are affordable and not too bad. The Sanken COS-11 is pretty much the standard for every feature and network series I know of, though there are some sound people that prefer the Countryman mics because they're smaller.

Response will vary wildly due to placement and clothing, and sound mixers are always fighting both problems with wireless lavs. There's a lot of reasons why boom mics will often sound better, mainly because the boom mic costs about four or five times more and is significantly larger. In general, I think casual filmmakers are better off renting mics rather than buying them unless you're able to buy a fairly substantial kit and justify it by staying fairly busy.
 
I don't think the location was the problem in the show.

So a good mic in the right position will sound even better then. I just think there is no low cost short cut with that setup they used, just have to spend and do it right with what you bought.
 
I pulled up a couple of clips of The Fat Duck to see what you were talking about. Restaurants like this are always a sound nightmare in high traffic kitchens. It's hard to judge other's work not knowing budget, crew, experience and the like. But if it were me, I might have gone with hidden DPA 4071 lavs on the talent, and a Schoeps CMC6-MK41 boom overhead. Then a Sennheiser MKH 50 to capture B-roll sizzle, such as stove work.
 
This is all prior to opening, office and meeting rooms, all the same except the voice over which is clear and crisp. Have a look where he is cold calling ticket winners in the second episode. The Rode microphone is visible right in front of him as he's calling. budget, they are moving for 6 months around the world, equipmet, staff, refit, into Australians largest casino, the millions just to do that must be staggering. So a descent setup should not be an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top