Audio options roundup

[xbourque]

I am still trying to figure out the better audio options for the HV20... here's a summary of what I have found so far.

From what I read around here, the preamp in the HV20/HV30 is a bit crap, so you want to dial it down to about 25% to minimize noise (hiss). However, most microphones aren't loud enough out of the box when the level is set that low on the camera.

This is why you need a good quality preamp to cleanly raise the levels before reaching the 1/8" minijack of the HV20.

Also, noise and interference can be picked up by long unbalanced cable runs. This is why you probably want to have balanced XLR connections for most of the distance, and convert to unbalanced 1/8" just before connecting to the camera.

Here are the options I have gathered by looking around here:

Juicedlink CX231. 269$ link
2 x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: Built-in preamp. 48V phantom. Compact, battery operated and can be screwed to the camera via tripod mount. Battery indicator.
Cons: No level metering. Pricey compared to non-mountable mixers.

Juicedlink CX211 173$ link
2 x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: Built-in preamp. Compact, battery operated and can be screwed to the camera via tripod mount. Battery indicator.
Cons: No phantom power (self-powered mics only). No level metering.


Behringer EURORACK UBB1002 99$ link
5 x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: Built-in preamp. Phantom. Lots of goodies that aren't found on compact mixers like EQ, etc... Can be battery operated. Headphones output for no-delay monitoring.
Cons: Largest of the bunch. Cannot be screwed to camera. "Only" 18V Phantom when running on batteries.

Rolls MX34 LiveMix 97$ link
2 x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: Built-in preamp. Phantom. Compact. Battery operated. Headphones output for no-delay monitoring. Power indicator.
Cons: No tripod screw mount. "Only" 18V Phantom. Line level output (the HV20 expects "mic" levels, but if you dial things down on the mixer and the camera, it _should_ work... anybody tried this mixer for real?).

Beachtek DXA-2S 179$ link
2x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: Compact and can be screwed to tripod mount. No batteries to change. Widely used by lots of people.
Cons: No preamp. No phantom. No level metering.

Beachtek DXA-6VU 359$ link
2x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: 48V Phantom. Compact and can be screwed to tripod mount. Battery operated. Level metering. Power indicator.
Cons: No preamp. Priciest of the bunch.

Hosa MIT-156 impedance transformer. 19$ link
1 x (Balanced???) XLR input.
Pros: Dirt cheap.
Cons: Only 1 mic. No preamp. No phantom. No level control (except within the camera, of course).

Am I leaving anything out?

Seems to me that if you want a preamp, that would exclude the Beachteks.

If you don't care about extreme portability, the Behringer seems like the best bang for the buck.

If you need to screw the thing to your camera, seems like the Juicedlinks are the best value. Just choose the model with or without phantom depending on the needs of your mics. Also the owner seems to be lurking around here and they have a great return policy.

The Rolls is intriguing because of the low price... but the line/mic level mismatch sounds like trouble. I know you could pad the line output down to mic level, but amplifying uselessly sounds like a good way to introduce noise or distortion in the line... again... real world users, please chime in!

-- Xavier

[CanonA1]

I have successfully used my Shure FP11 (another model available used but limited to one channel) without any padding and using the HV20's atenuating mode for decent hiss free recordings but adding a 40db pad allowed even less noise. The reasoning is that the atenuator setting may reduce the input by 20db but the actual noise reduction is only 10db so you're giving up 10db in noise reduction over a non atenuator setting. In other words, by using the aten setting you reduce the incoming signal 20db but only reduce the noise by 10 db so you crank up the gain on the input by 20db. By not using the aten. setting you reduce the noise by perhaps 20db. One could measure it pretty easy in an audio program if you want to know the actual db's.

My Telex wireless worked better not using the aten. setting and just running the camera's volume to 1/4th or so.

I'll let Robert from juicedlink chime in here if he wants to but many products "pad" their output to lower levels without any consequence. It sounds counterproductive but there's reason for this happening. The Rolls MX54s can run from mic output to line output by simply padding the output via a screwdriver adjustable poteniometer in the output stages of preamp.

[xbourque]

CanonA1,

Wow, thanks for the details. So if I follow your thinking, even though I'd be tempted to crank up the preamp super high and then turn on the "ATT" in the camera, it seems like the "ATT" is decreasing the signal more than the noise. So I guess the moral of the story is to keep the "ATT" turned off and attenuate outside the camera if necessary. Right?

Seems like the Shure FP11 has been replaced by the FP23, right?

I'm certain the Shure FP11 worked great for you, but at 420$ for a single channel preamp... a bit pricey considering I paid 650$ for my HV20. :-)

Did you ever use the Rolls MX34 yourself?
I'm looking at the user guide PDF and I can't find any information about a user adjustable attenuation for the output. It even says on page 2:

"STEREO OUT: Tip-Ring-Sleeve stereo 1/8" (3.5mm) jack for connection to a camera or other stereo input (Line-level only)."

Is the screw you are talking about inside the unit or is the documentation incomplete?

Anyways, I guess one could always pair the MX34 with something like this. (Or is 50db too much attenuation?)

Is Rolls a common brand in production? I've never heard of them before browsing this forum.

-- Xavier

[CanonA1]

I was referring to the MX54s and not the MX34. The MX54s is a 3 channel mixer with some added features. Jay Rose tested this unit for a publication and can be found online. I couldn't decide on the noise level of the units and I've never tested one. The controls are on the wrong side of unit to mount on camera. One is really restricted to hanging it off a shoulder pad. My Shure FP11 could be mounted on a bracket on an L frame attached tocamera or could be modified to mount under camera but unit is pretty robust and a bit heavier than the CX231 juicedlink. The FP23 is pricey but the FP11 retailed for over $300 in it's day. I believe they say in that literature that the noise level of the FP23 is 20db quieter than the FP11 but if you look at the specs they're identical or nearly so. The juicedlink site has some good info on it's techsite regarding noise specs. Be sure and check it out. I went with the CX231 with phantom power because I wanted the phantom option. If you're sure you don't need phantom the lower priced unit would suit your needs just fine but there are many lower priced condenser mics that could use the 48 volts. I just purchased some AT2021's for recording school concerts but some at813's that I have would've worked ok also and they are powered by AA batteries and can be had for $20 or so on ebay. The FP11 has 84 db gain and with a 40db attenuator I usually run it 24 b down from full output. On the CX231 I run my Sennheiser ME80 on high gain and volume control almost on high setting and camera at 1/4th volume for good conversation levels. (the me80 is rated at 5.6mv sensitivity)

[xbourque]

Oops... my bad. I misread about the MX54 vs. MX34.

I wish to record sit down talking head interviews with my HV20.

I probably will be a one man crew, so condenser lavalier microphones are in order. This means either phantom power from the mixer/preamp or a power source for the mic (and yet another set of batteries I need to keep track of).

Looks like my choice is between the Juicedlink CX231 and Rolls MX34 + line to mic attenuator. The Juicedlink is much more expensive, but I am under the impression that it enjoys a better reputation. (?)

I am still not sure what model of mic to choose.

Since I plan on recording speech, I don't need crazy frequency response or dynamic range. Just good clear as noise-free as possible sound.

Omni or cardioid? Suggestions?

-- Xavier

[CanonA1]

Omni lapel mics are always preferred in video applications. Cardiod only if in pa situation and feedback is problem. Do you need the capability for more than 2 mics?

[xbourque]

Thanks for the tip. I'm starting to look at my options for omni condenser lavaliers. Skimming the lavaliers section on the B&H site, I guess I should end up with something like the Audio Technica AT803b or the Sony ECM44B



No, I don't think I will need more than 2 mics.

-- Xavier

[nolonemo]

Looks like my choice is between the Juicedlink CX231 and Rolls MX34 + line to mic attenuator. The Juicedlink is much more expensive, but I am under the impression that it enjoys a better reputation. (?)

You could get both, test them, return one (B&H and Juicedlink have 30 day return policies, AFAIK), and post the results for us

[nolonemo]

Rolls MX34 LiveMix 97$ link
2 x Balanced XLR inputs.
Pros: Built-in preamp. Phantom. Compact. Battery operated. Headphones output for no-delay monitoring. Power indicator.
Cons: No tripod screw mount. "Only" 18V Phantom. Line level output (the HV20 expects "mic" levels, but if you dial things down on the mixer and the camera, it _should_ work... anybody tried this mixer for real?).

I own this, and I can report that I have run my AT-822 mic into both the Panasonic GS-500 and the HV-20 using it (I run the AT-822 into the XLR mic inputs using a 1/8" stereo minijack to dual male XLR adapter). I have not done any detailed comparisons of the mic straight into the HV-20 versus the HV-20 dialed down and gain provided by the Rolls. One of the these weekends....

[docop]

I'm a bit uncertain about that over the mixer.. The tech at Beachtek told me they recommand only the DXA-2s , because it don't have a preamp.. Like the dxa-4.. will not work and cause interference.. So, myself i'm looking about hte juicedlink and or the mx34.. but does it will result into the same situation ? like some hiss or the internal att will go on ?
And maybe it's better to let the internal circuit of the camera to be on.

Also, there's almost no other option than buying something.. to got 2 good transfo and the rest of the circuit, debug time, xlr connector, fine tuning.. it will result at about a little higher than buying a juicedlink or a Rolls. Right now, i'm more favorable for the Rolls.. but what, which.. humm ?

[nolonemo]

Let's step back a minute here. I think whether you are going to want to go with external pre-amps is going to depend on two things - (1) how "hot" your mic is and (2) what you are recording.

I found that for recording music - rock and big band jazz - with an AT-822 mic - not particularly "hot" - into my Panny GS-500, I didn't need a pre-amp, because I had to lower the camera gain almost all the way down. I'm assuming that the HV-20 preamps are similar in sensitivity to the GS-500's.

Now if you are recording quieter sounds - dialog comes to mind - and you can't get your mic close enough to the talent, you may well want to go with a pre-amp.

One other thing, as far as I know, the HV-20 has an internal attenuator that can be switched on - I am not sure if this is a "pad" before the preamp, but I expect it is. AFAIK, this is manually switched on or off. I don't see any advantage to using the pad with a pre-amp, because, if I'm understanding it correct, all you are doing is cutting the signal coming in from the pre-amp. You'd be better off turning down the pre-amp instead.

[wrlds_apart]

I work at DPA Microphones and obviously use the mics also. For shorts and weddings. If you can shell out the money, you won't find better mics.

DPA 4061 or 4071 (presence boost) are awesome! (Omni's)
The same capsule is used by Jay Leno among other talk show hosts, Cirque de sole, 90% of broadway to the sound capture of $5 million violins. You can hide them really well and they are tough as nails.

DPA 4080 Cardioid is the best mini Cardioid out there as far as construction, sound quality, and handling noise but would be visible because you have to mount fairly precisely.

DPA 4017 Shotgun is gaining amazing reviews. 2.6 Ounces and no off-axis coloration is making this the best choice for reality type shows or documentaries and even live sound reinforcement of orchestras/bans/choirs.

Im not trying to be a salesman, I just design their magazine ads. I'll be at NAB with the company in Vegas if anyone on here will be there, stop by. It would be cool to meet someone from this site!

[xbourque]

Let's step back a minute here. I think whether you are going to want to go with external pre-amps is going to depend on two things - (1) how "hot" your mic is and (2) what you are recording.

This is a very true statement. I'm sure you would dial down the internal preamp of the HV20 to 1/4 or less while recording a live rock concert with any decent mic. In that case, a DXA2s would do the trick just fine I am sure.

However, my intent is to record interviews in a "quiet" room, so hiss free operation is very high in my list of priorities.

I'm assuming that the HV-20 preamps are similar in sensitivity to the GS-500's.

Hmm... a leap of faith. Have you compared the 2 cameras or are you just guessing?

One other thing, as far as I know, the HV-20 has an internal attenuator that can be switched on - I am not sure if this is a "pad" before the preamp, but I expect it is. AFAIK, this is manually switched on or off. I don't see any advantage to using the pad with a pre-amp, because, if I'm understanding it correct, all you are doing is cutting the signal coming in from the pre-amp. You'd be better off turning down the pre-amp instead.

This was discussed earlier in this thread. The HV20 attenuator while useful for padding a signal that is too hot is useless to manage hiss. It actually creates more hiss because it decreases the signal more than the noise, actually making the signal to noise ratio worse.

The "best practice" that seems to be emerging for the HV20 is to use a "good" preamp, don't turn on the attenuator in the camera, dial down the camera preamp to 1/4, turn up the external preamp until you have good levels. This seems to be the best way to manage hiss.

-- Xavier

[xbourque]

I own this, and I can report that I have run my AT-822 mic into both the Panasonic GS-500 and the HV-20 using it (I run the AT-822 into the XLR mic inputs using a 1/8" stereo minijack to dual male XLR adapter). I have not done any detailed comparisons of the mic straight into the HV-20 versus the HV-20 dialed down and gain provided by the Rolls. One of the these weekends....

Would be awesome if you posted a sample audio clip. Ideally someone speaking "normally". Would be *super* awesome if you had 2 clips, one with the Rolls and the camera with "ATT" off and volume dialed down to 1/4 and the other without the Rolls (and volume dialed wherever it needs to be to have good levels).

Also, just curious, since that mic is unbalanced and comes with a 1/8" connector, why didn't you just plug the mic straight in the camera?

--Xavier

[xbourque]

DPA 4017 Shotgun is gaining amazing reviews. 2.6 Ounces and no off-axis coloration is making this the best choice for reality type shows or documentaries and even live sound reinforcement of orchestras/bans/choirs.

Hmm... 1999$ for a shotgun mic on a 650$ camera... Assuming the quality is proportional to the price, I don't think that the "humble" unbalanced audio circuitry of our little HV20s can do that mic justice. Even with a preamp. :-)

-- Xavier

[wrlds_apart]

Yeah, I know...even with working there I can't afford one. I wouldn't suggest buying a $2000 mic for the HV20, should have left that mic out of it Just stuck it in there because I love the thing and I can take it out on loan. I run it into a separate recorder anyway...

I guess my main point that is somewhat practical is that the lavs are amazing.

[nolonemo]

Would be awesome if you posted a sample audio clip. Ideally someone speaking "normally". Would be *super* awesome if you had 2 clips, one with the Rolls and the camera with "ATT" off and volume dialed down to 1/4 and the other without the Rolls (and volume dialed wherever it needs to be to have good levels).

Also, just curious, since that mic is unbalanced and comes with a 1/8" connector, why didn't you just plug the mic straight in the camera?

--Xavier

Re: some of the posts above: I've owned both the GS-500 and the HV-20, and though I haven't done a head to head, I'm pretty sure they're comparable. Last night I recorded a chamber orchestra (approx. 50 players) concert in a small true concert hall in a conservatory with the AT-822 straight into the HV-20, mic & camera about 50' from the front of the stage, and had the HV-20 gain set about 1/3 of the way up. I haven't captured the tape so I don' t know what the actual peaks were, but I'm guessing they are kissing 6dB in the tutti sections. I think this is pretty close to the GS-500, if recollection serves.

I actually got the Rolls so I could use the AT-822 with the Zoom H2, which has totally crap mic pre-amps, and so far have always used the AT-822 straight into the camera. I've been meaning to do the comparison with the AT-822 straight into the HV-20 vs. via the Rolls, I may try to get it done this weekend, I'm planning to do one with concert-type sound levels, and one with spoke word levels. Stay tuned....

I'd like to test the Rolls against the Juicedlink, but even if it was better, I've got other spending priorities than upgrading video audio right now.

[xbourque]

Nolonemo,

As we discussed earlier, if the mic straight to the HV20 only needs the camera preamp to be at around 1/3, and the fact that the mic is unbalanced doesn't cause problems in your applications, then by all means stick with it!

In the scenario you described, an external preamp wouldn't show a dramatic difference. When recording quieter stuff however...

Can't wait to hear your head to head.

-- X

[Erik Bien]

I'll be at NAB with the company in Vegas if anyone on here will be there, stop by. It would be cool to meet someone from this site!

Assuming our feet hold out, we'll be sure to stop by booth N3537 so perhaps you guys can convince my producer friend that it's worth replacing the lavs that came with his Azden two-channel wireless rig with something better (where I have previously failed).

[guy]

Oops... my bad. I misread about the MX54 vs. MX34.

I wish to record sit down talking head interviews with my HV20. Omni or cardioid? Suggestions? -- Xavier

Check out the Audio Technica Pro70 cardioid lav (~$120). It picks up well from 3' and is silent -- no hiss -- when connected directly to the camera. Sound quality is very good. I recorded a folk music performance this past Saturday, and the audio turned out really well.

I did a sound check before the performance, and the Pro70 bested my AT 835a shotgun, Sennheiser omni lav, MKE300, Sennheiser handheld dynamic, Zoom H4, and Oktava MC012. Trying the Pro70 was merely an afterthought; it'smy least expensive mic and frankly I didn't expect it to perform well compared to the others.

In terms of noise, there are two factors that determine the level of hiss you'll get with a mixer or mic connected to the HV20's preamps:

1) Impedance
2) Output level (sensitivity, expressed in mV, for mics)

I've tested a a lot of mics and external mixer/preamps with my HV20 and have discovered that impedance has the greatest effect.

My At Pro70 has an output level of ~6mV, whereas my AT 835a shotgun has an output level of ~11.5mV. In comparison tests, however, the Pro70 produced a higher recording level and with zero hiss. Not only was the shotgun's level lower, but it sounded like you were frying eggs in the background. The 835a's impedance is 600 ohms vs. 200 for the Pro70.

I've tried a Azden and Rolls mixers; the Azden was unusable, the Rolls was quieter, but still not very good. The Azden has an output impedance of 600 - 1000 ohms.

I asked one of our EE's about this and he said that if there were capacitive coupling on the mic input, then a low impedance source would indeed be less noisy.

[xbourque]

Guy,

Wow, thanks. Lots of good info in your post.

So, what kind of adapter were you using to plug the XLR output of the Pro 70 in the HV20?

Something like this?
Or maybe like that (no impedance matching).
Homemade XLR to 1/8" adapter?

-- Xavier

[nolonemo]

I've tried a Azden and Rolls mixers; the Azden was unusable, the Rolls was quieter, but still not very good. The Azden has an output impedance of 600 - 1000 ohms.

That sort of matches up with your mic experience - the Rolls output is listed as 50 Ohm.

[guy]

So, what kind of adapter were you using to plug the XLR output of the Pro 70 in the HV20? -- Xavier

On Saturday I had it connected via my Sennheiser wireless system because it was more convenient. All my tests, however, were performed with the mic plugged directly into the camera.

You can use a Hosa cable or make your own.

[guy]

Here's a quick sample of what the mic can do: http://hv20.info/yopu/AndrewC_Test.wmv

[docop]

Guy : The pro70 was very different from the 835.. The patern was not as a shotgun is. Of course, your sample look good, but is the mic are directly on the signer ? it seem to be.. Just to know.
And by the impedance, and the level.. that equal by the difference level.. I'm not sure, but i what i know is when you step into a matching transformer into any dxa-xxx or anaything.. you got a loss of your signal, but by inputing a 200ohms into a 600, it change the value.
I had a at815a and i had build a matching 2 ch box for bal to unbal. It's not big one, but some time i got hiss sound in some situation. I will try to got the impedance of that..

* Also, for the test of the at822 with and without the Rolls, it will be pretty interesting.