spoke digital films

(As stated in Part I, I am not claiming to be a technical expert with respect to film and video equipment. I’m simply offering what I use and why. You can watch some of my video clips to judge for yourself how things look and sound. I should also thank the folks at DVXuser.com for helping me gain what knowledge I do have with regard to sound for video. Check out their “Audio” forum for excellent advice and knowledge. - but use the “search” function before asking any questions like “what mic should I buy for documentary?” Most of your questions have likely been answered numerous times over.)

In my Part I post about equipment, I discussed the camera I’m using and why. I forgot to mention in my introduction that many people new to filmmaking (myself included) tend to obsess over and festishize equipment. I think this is in part because those of us new to the endeavor are insecure about our abilities and feel that the right equipment will either validate us or at least make sure our work looks and sounds “professional”. Of course, one must be concerned that the tools they use can get the job done, but the fact of the matter is that knowledge and technique account for much more than equipment. A seasoned pro who really knows how to manipulate lighting and sound can make footage from a prosumer video camera look and sound much better than footage from a 35mm Panavision camera in the hands of a novice.

Let’s face it, though. If you’re interested in filmmaking, you probably find much of the equipment involved damn sexy - in part because much of it is gorgeous but, more importantly, because of what it can or cannot allow you to do. If legendary documentary filmmaker DA Pennebaker had not been an engineer and equipment geek, the modern documentary might look much different. Pennebaker kept tinkering until he developed a small, light, camera that could capture sound as it captured images, allowing for the birth of verite cinema. So, obsessing over equipment has its value, so long as one remembers 1) that knowledge and technique are much more important than equipment, and 2) that one’s obsessing is of greatest value when it’s focused on what tools can achieve what results as opposed to what tools make one look or feel more “professional.”

Even though most newcomers to film spend a great deal of time worrying about what camera to use, they might be better-served worrying more about sound and lights. Sound is probably most important for the purpose of documentary (some great docs - especially verite style docs - never use film lights at all). There’s an old adage that sound is 90% of the viewing experience with respect to film. People can sit through a film that looks poor, but an audience cannot tolerate poor or annoying sound. So here are the mics I’m currently using.

Shotgun (Supercardioid)

This is a very important mic if you’re going to be doing a lot of filmming outdoors. Shotguns were designed to be very directional mics. They isolate sound by primarily picking up the sounds coming from where they’re directly pointing, while rejecting the sounds from their periphery. I use the Rode NTG-2:

This is a very affordable mic (I only paid $250 for mine brand new) that I think competes VERY well against competitors costing much more. I like the NTG-2 because it runs hot and loud, has a nice warm tone, is built very well, and has a looser pick-up pattern than other shotguns (is less directional). That last point, a looser pattern, would be a detriment to many. I like it because I often have to use this mic mounted on camera and it allows me a little more leeway - if the mic’s not pointed absolutely directly at a speaker’s mouth, I can still get good sound.

The Rode is probably the cheapest entry-level mic you can find. The Audio Technica 897 ($280-300) is priced comparably and is also a good mic. I owned that mic and liked it. I prefer the Rode because it runs a little hotter (louder), and I think it sounds a little warmer and richer in tone. If you’ve got a little more money to spend, the Audio Technica 4073A ($550) gets rave reviews for its price point. And if you’ve got a lot more money to spend, the Sennheiser MKH 416 ($1,100) or MKH 60 ($1,550) are excellent microphones widely used in the industry. The Sennheiser ME 66 ($550) was widely used in news and documentary for a long time, but many people seem to think the cheaper Rode and the at897 actually give a nicer, warmer sound for hundreds less. All I know is I’ve been very happy with my Rode mic and also found the at897 to be great performer at its price.

Of course, when pricing mics, you should also factor in the cost of a decent shockmount and wind protection. Shockmounts range in price from $40 - 120, and wind protection starts around $100 and goes up. A full blimp system can be pretty pricey, but a simple Rycote Softie offers pretty good protection in most (but definitely not all) conditions for $100. That’s all I use right now. Rycote Softie:

Hypercardioid

Hypercardioid mics are used primarily for indoor dialogue and voice work. They are directional mics, but less so than shotguns. Shotguns typically sound bad indoors because they pick up distorted noise from sound bouncing off walls. They can do a decent job in large spaces such as auditoriums or soundstages. For most spaces, though, you want to use a hypercardioid mic or a lavalier mic (if applicable.) No microphone is going to sound as good mounted on a camera as it would being used by a decent boom mic operator who can follow the subject around keeping the mic close and in-line with the speaker’s mouth. This is especially true of hypercardioids which have a much shorter pick-up pattern (less “reach”) than shotguns. I would only use a hyper if you’ve got a boom operator or if you’re mounting the mic on a stand for an interview. I would only try to use camera mounted if you’re going to get REALLY close (like within 3 ft.) of your subject.

The hypercardioid mic I use is probably the best deal in audio - but that deal does not come without compromises. I use an Oktava MK-012:

This mic only cost about $160 and sounds GREAT! If interested, I suggest you only buy from the soundroom. Oktava is a Russian company, but there are some lesser quality knock-offs made in China with much lower quality control standards. If you buy from The Sound Room you know you are getting the real deal. DVXuser.com members (a filmmaking forum free to join - and a wealth of information) used to get a discount from the Sound Room by typing “DV” into the coupon code when checking out (if that doesn’t work, call the Sound Room and ask).

But back to the mic itself. As I said, it sounds great, but not without compromise. It’s main flaw is its extreme sensitivity to handling noise. You MUST use a good shockmount with this mic to avoid the rumblings and so forth you get from moving the mic around. It is also very sensitive to wind rumble (even from air conditioning vents or ceiling fans). As a result, I wouldn’t use it without using a Baby Ball Gag from Rycote. It costs about $100 bucks and is basically a mini-blimp system. It’s huge and looks a little awkward on the mic, but saves you from from wind rumble. If you think you might use it outdoors, you can also buy a Windjammer for another $70. I don’t have a windjammer because I only use mine indoors.

Baby Ball Gag with and without Windjammer:

This is a great mic for it’s price, but really is a compromise. If you want a mic this isn’t such a hassle to deal with (but costs a lot more), the next step up would be the Audio Technica 4053a ($500) or the AKG C93 (about $500 with the SE300B power module). I’ve heard good things about each of these and am considering the AKG in the future. If you really have a solid budget and want to use what the big boys use, you can check out hypers by Schoeps or Neumann or Sennheiser. Good models start around $1000 and go up quickly.

Lavaliers

Lavaliers or clip mics are the best friend of inexperienced filmmakers in my opinion. They are small, portable, and easy to use. I think they are more “dummy-proof” than other mics. If used with a cable (rather than wireless), they are limited to interviews, however. If you make sure that you’re not getting clothing rumble or than you’re not placing the mic so close to the speakers mouth that you get wind rumble form their exhaling, you can get top-notch audio for a very reasonable price. I prefer lavs for my interviews over using a hypercardioid mounted on a stand for a few reasons. First and foremost - convenience! Thus far, all of my interviews have involved me traveling to the interview subject’s office or home by myself with no crew. It’s a lot easier to take a tiny lavalier than lug a c-stand with a boom arm. Secondly, the mic is literally attached to the person, so you don’t have to worry about a fidgety, squirmy person rocking in and out of the microphone’s pick-up pattern. Last of all, I think using lavaliers makes the person being interviewed more comfortable than having a big microphone apparatus dangling above their head.

I use the following lavalier mics, which are wired to be plugged directly into XLR inputs with phantom power. I have two Countryman EMW mics:

I cannot say enough good things about these mics. They sound great and are used widely within the industry by professionals and amateurs alike. I paid $150 for each from Northern Sound and Light - the cheapest retailer I’ve found for this product. I wouldn’t recommend using anything cheaper than these because they sound so good at such a reasonable price. Countryman makes other great lavs including the tiny B6 which is very popular, but more expensive. It is about the size of a matchstick and is easily hidden if that is a concern. Other major audio companies make great mics, too, but I’ve been so happy with my EMW’s that I’ve never bothered to research too heavily.

Wireless

I don’t have a great deal to say about wireless because I haven’t used a wireless system in my doc as of yet. Another saying in the audio world is “your $3000 wireless system sounds almost as good as my $30 cable.” In other words, if wireless isn’t necessary - don’t bother. Cables will always sound better, all other factors being equal. However, documentary is one place where wireless mics can be incredibly valuable and I look forward to getting a system in the future (come on, grant-lenders, take pity on me!) This is not an area of equipment where you want to go super-cheap I’ve heard. Many feel that the only entry-level equipment worth using is the Sennheiser G2 series. Even then, I’ve heard that the mics that come with these aren’t so hot- it’s the transmitter and receivers that work well for the price. If I bought this, I’d probably have my EMW lavs rewired so they could be used with the system. The G2 is only advised as an entry-level system, much better systems can be had for more money.

Concluding Thoughts

So, those are my thoughts on entry-level sound. Notice I did not talk about using a location mixer or using a sound guy. That’s certainly not because those things aren’t valuable - they definitely are! In fact, using a professional sound person with their own equipment is most preferable, especially as opposed to doing sound yourself with you mics plugged directly into the camera (as I’ve had to do thus far.) A professional sound person should be your ideal and is certainly written into my grant proposal budgets. Having said that, though, it’s definitely not impossible to get good sound with relatively inexpensive equipment while you’re waiting for a bigger budget.