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 :)

Investing in new mics and mixer, any recommendation?

M

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Messages
110
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hi all,

Have been renting the sound equipment all this while, and is planning to invest in our own boom mic and mixer. What's the best cost effective to get ? Should I still consider getting the MKH416 mic or get something newer with more value for money? We want to use the mics mainly for narrative work especially features.

Hope to get some advice.
 
I think the best advice is to hire an experienced sound mixer and go with their selection and choice of equipment. Generally, that will be far less expensive (and more productive) than to buy your own equipment and try to do it yourself.

I find the results are often more a case of where you put the microphone rather than which​ microphone is used.
 
Mixer

The Sound Devices 633 is a mixer and recorder that's the best of both worlds (I think).
Or Sound Devices (SD) 702 Recorder and SD 302 Mixer is a common setup.

Mic - Dialogue

For dialogue I would go with the Miktek C5's, their new and are amazing for sound accuracy.
or Schoeps Collette Series Mics, they cost more and are well known but I still like the Mikteks.


Mic - Shotgun

http://www.hdvideopro.com/cinesoundpro/the-best-approach-to-shotgun-mics.html?start=2

Check out this link ^^ Great Advice For shotgun mics and more.

1) DPA 4017B
2) Shure VP89S
3)Sennheiser ME 66
 
I did a shoot recently with the sound Devices 633 and a Miktek C5 matched pair. It was a dialog on a restaurant. Also had some Lavaliers on the talent, but surprisingly in post we ended up mainly using the Miktek's files. They were very natural, organic, and clear, and in stereo. They're great mics!
 
Look out for an SQN 4 mk2 E Mixer or SQN 5 series. They are better mixers than some of the new options. They will last a life time and a very well built.

Id select with the Sennheiser MKH60 and MKH30 pair or Schoeps CMIT and CCM8 MS stereo pair or you may favour Sennheiser 8000 series perhaps an 8050 or 8060 if your working mono only.

I would not purchase any of the value mic's, best quality mice will last very many years and not loose value.
 
I would explore Zaxcom as well. Their "NEVERCLIP" technology can be of value, especially when starting out. Can't fault the SENN 50 & 60 choices, either.

Thank you very much

Fury
 
i use mkh 416 for booms(it is more forgiving of inexperienced boom operators), mkh 20 for remote sound design (the 8020 is nice but then u need to get the attenuators depending on the situation), tlm67 and u67 for indoors sound design, m149 for adr and controlled area sound design, a bunch sennheisser lav mics. for remote mixing a sound design 744t ( i should have gone with a 788t, but if i had to do it again i would have gone with a nagra vi), and for non field mixing protools hd on a mac , which can do around 500 tracks(i have a bunch of tube gear in a rack also). it has taken me 4 years to use this gear to the point where the audience cant tell in 15 seconds the film is low budget.
 
PatrickFaith said:
i use mkh 416 for booms(it is more forgiving of inexperienced boom operators), mkh 20 for remote sound design (the 8020 is nice but then u need to get the attenuators depending on the situation), tlm67 and u67 for indoors sound design, m149 for adr and controlled area sound design, a bunch sennheisser lav mics. for remote mixing a sound design 744t ( i should have gone with a 788t, but if i had to do it again i would have gone with a nagra vi), and for non field mixing protools hd on a mac , which can do around 500 tracks(i have a bunch of tube gear in a rack also). it has taken me 4 years to use this gear to the point where the audience cant tell in 15 seconds the film is low budget.
Click to expand...


Hi Patrick,

That gear is still a bit'a jing, transmitters, etc.. Not the highest of price points, but you have quality choices, that are not truly inexpensive. Could you expand a bit on the "...non field mixing protocols hd on a mac." please?

Thank you very much

Fury
 
Marc Wielage said:
I think the best advice is to hire an experienced sound mixer and go with their selection and choice of equipment. Generally, that will be far less expensive (and more productive) than to buy your own equipment and try to do it yourself.

I find the results are often more a case of where you put the microphone rather than which​ microphone is used.
Click to expand...

Big +1 on the relative importance of where the mics are placed, rather than which microphone is being used. Not unlike knowing where to put/how to cut a light.
 
Nick Fury said:
Hi Patrick,

That gear is still a bit'a jing, transmitters, etc.. Not the highest of price points, but you have quality choices, that are not truly inexpensive. Could you expand a bit on the "...non field mixing protocols hd on a mac." please?

Thank you very much

Fury
Click to expand...

lmao .... That should have been protools (auto spelling checker flipped the words) so u probably know all this ....

any way from low budget, i like to use protools on a mac laptop a lot. it is really cost effective and can be used on location for "TEMP" mixes, as well as back in the office. for people like me, i am heavy on the finance side but have had minimal involvement on the creative side, it is real hard to tell if what was done in "production" worked. the temp mix helps me know if i have good sound, also if the balance between what was shot and the sound hit the mark as far as the story goes. i also think the temp sound mixes really help the exec producers know if they have something or that money is being flushed.

from a learning viewpoint i really like doing the temp mix in protools, its basically a throw away mix, does a quick QA of the recording, makes sure u didnt forget something before u leave the location, helps me understand the relationship between sound and visual cuts, u get more time with the director/producer/crew to learn. plus again, it is thrown away so u dont get all hanged up on the micro details and forget the basics on mic positioning. another nice thing is the temp mix in protools can be a starting point for the post production mix, which can give me an opportunity to learn from the major league post guys which are often used in the end if the film story turned out ok.

i btw like protools hd, since i find the track count starts climbing even for a temp mix ( every pro i have gone into their workspace -about 20 which is not everyone but is a decent sample - has had either protools hd or hdx in their office). for location temp mixing with directors that understand sound (probably under 50%), its just a normal protools setup.
 
Last edited:
SoundDevices 633 w/o a doubt. I have a 744T with a 302, but for the life of me I can't see how the 633 isn't a better choice. As for mics, I love the sound of the 416, but it is a little dirty so if you are going to be boosting levels in post you might run into noise. For that reason, I really like the 60, it is bassier sounding but also very clean. That said it doesn't have the inherent open warmth of a 416 or Scheops. But overall, I love the 60. It has great reach, natural falloff and doesn't reflect like crazy in rooms w/ normal ceilings. W/ wind protection, it's also good for outside. It's closest I've found to one mic for all situations.

The 8060 is smaller and brighter. It does not come w/ a highpass filter, but your mixer and/or recorder should have one anyway. Or you can buy the lowcut filter attachment. Also, you can add additional capsules that run a bit less than another complete mic. So I'd definitely have a look at the 8060 as well.

There are other good makers of mics of course. I'm partial to the newer Senn's not b/c they sound the best, I think the old Neumanns and current Schoeps do, but b/c they are so darn clean I can set the level a tad lower than I normally would (for extra headroom) and still get a very good sounding signal. They are also built like tanks.

And like said already, whatever you get, don't go cheap unless you HAVE to.
 
I would start with what you have been renting.

Has it been effective for your needs?

Where has it fallen short?
 
Plan to invest in our own equipment as it is more convenient for us to own the basic stuff without resorting to renting.

Among the MKH416, 60, and the new MKH8060, which is the best bang for money?

and regarding sound device 633, it's much more costly than the 302, how does 302 compare to 633?
 
Mike said:
Among the MKH416, 60, and the new MKH8060, which is the best bang for money?
Click to expand...
It depends what you need. Any of those will work as a boom mic, but they're not ideal in a reverberant interior. Good outside, sometimes. I would also add a couple of good wireless mics (and lavs) to that kit.

and regarding sound device 633, it's much more costly than the 302, how does 302 compare to 633?
Click to expand...
The 302 does not record, and that's a significant difference. The 633 is a very, very good machine in this price range (under $3100).
 
The 302 is only a mixer, it doesn't record, and it can only give two unique outputs. I'd say the 8060 is the best bang for your buck. But there are a lot of good mics out there besides Sennheisers.
 
We love our 788T and can't imagine owning anything else. Our mics are two CMC641s and a CMIT5-U. Love it all and get consistently great results.

Stephen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top