Topic: A cheap hand held 'wireless' interview mic...

[rogs]

We have a young family friend, who wanted to make some short outdoor interview type videos, so needed one of those "cordless hand held mics, like they use on TV" as he put it.
I explained that the broadcasters use pro radio mics which - by the time you add the cost of the mic, transmitter, receiver and an external audio recorder - was likely to cost several hundred pounds.
As he wanted to spend as little money as possible, I suggested he might use a hand held portable audio recorder instead - Maybe a Zoom H1?....
"No good" he said " that doesn't look right"...

So I suggested fitting a cheap small audio recorder into a 'fake' microphone tube ... That allows the microphone to 'look' right, and also solves the problem of the handling and wind noise that can occur when using portable audio recorders on their own.
And by selecting one of the Sony ICD PX type recorders, you can keep the cost right down. Those little recorders are better than you might think at first glance ----even though they only record in MP3. Not perfect of course, but not bad...certainly good enough for his 'vox pop' style audio on You Tube.....

I made some notes on the project -- see HERE

[John Willett]

Gefell have just announced a new professional reporter mic. that connects directly into a smart-phone.

The SRM 100

Maybe this will do the job?

[Gutbucket]

^ Gefell, so it's very likely to be good quality and well made, yet not likely to be inexpensive.  Also requires a phone to record to and the connecting wire.

My first thought was one of those interview mics which has the recorder built directly into the body of the microphone itself.  Not sure who makes them or the cost, Sennheiser and HHB among others I think.  I'd imagine someone makes an inexpensive one.  The memory card plugs directly into the mic body.

Second thought is something equivalent to the Tascam DR-10X, which is a small recorder that plugs directly into a dynamic microphone, forming one unit with no separate wire connection between the two.  I think those go for around $170.  You'd then add whatever dynamic mic, a battery and memory card.

Checking your project notes, it seems you are already aware of the DR-10X.

[rogs]

.

My first thought was one of those interview mics which has the recorder built directly into the body of the microphone itself.  Not sure who makes them or the cost, Sennheiser and HHB among others I think.  I'd imagine someone makes an inexpensive one.

I think you maybe thinking of the Flashmic (or rather it's replacement). Looks to be an excellent product - sadly, too expensive for this project.   The Gefell that John describes is almost certainly excellent quality  - but again, expensive.
This project was on a really low budget - and needed to 'simulate'  a radio mic - so no wires!

As I say, I didn't think the quality from the Sony units was too bad for the task required. Those little recorders only record to MP3, so even on the highest (192kbps) setting you can still get some encoding artifacts... which is to be expected.

I think the DR 10x should do very well for this kind of task - although some reviews have reported that the background noise level is a bit high? -- But again, by the time you've added the cost of a decent dynamic mic, the cost soon rises.

I do have a Sony M10 here, and a couple of dynmic mics (A Shure SM58 and an old AKG D202 'sound rocket') I must make some simultaneous recordings, to compare the little Sony in my project with a decent linear PCM recording.....

[Bruce Watson]

We have a young family friend, who wanted to make some short outdoor interview type videos, so needed one of those "cordless hand held mics, like they use on TV" as he put it.

On my side of the pond they only use radios on the mics if they have to. Most interviews by my local broadcast stations are made with a standard reporters mic (in this case, all my local stations are using Electro-Voice RE50N/D-B mics, I imagine that on your side of the pond they are mostly using Sennheiser MD-42) using a short XLR cable going back to camera.

The pros tend to use radios only as a last resort. That's because they know that nothing beats a $20 USD XLR cable. Radios are orders of magnitude more expensive, much less reliable, more difficult to setup and maintain, and the biggie -- radios sound worse. Even the most expensive radios don't sound as good as a $20 cable.

Save the radios for those occasions when there's no other way to get the job done. That's what the pros actually do.

If your young friend is adamant (and what teen doesn't know more than any adult?), the Sennheiser SKP 100 G3 Plug-On Transmitter is the cheapest I'm willing to use myself. Note that this transmitter does not supply phantom power, so it's only good for dynamic mics (like the two I've already mentioned). If you need phantom, you need the SKP 300 G3.

EDIT: And you'll need a receiver too. Either transmitter will work with an EK 100 G3 receiver (as long as transmitter and receiver use the same frequency bands).

That said, there are a couple of new systems that are basically cordless telephones. Audio Technica System 10 comes to mind. Rode makes something similar. Both use the 2.4 GHz band and frequency hop like a cordless phone. The AT system 10 has gotten some good reviews, but I've got no experience with it, nor does anyone I know.

[lsd2525]

Hey babe, we'll be back to pick you up later........

[rogs]

On my side of the pond they only use radios on the mics if they have to. Most interviews by my local broadcast stations are made with a standard reporters mic (in this case, all my local stations are using Electro-Voice RE50N/D-B mics, I imagine that on your side of the pond they are mostly using Sennheiser MD-42) using a short XLR cable going back to camera.......
The pros tend to use radios only as a last resort.

I'm not sure how much of my project notes you had a chance to glance through? - Once I had explained the cost of a radio mic +tramsitter + receiver + recorder (his camera has no mic input) it was immediately obvious that this would all cost too much. So the radio mic idea was ditched for cost reasons as much as technical ones.

This is very much an 'amateur' project - a youngster looking to make simple 'vox pop' video clips - using a camera without a mic input. So the XLR cable back to camera is a non starter too.

This project was to try and find a really cheap way of 'simulating' a radio mic (i.e no cables). Only a bit of fun really.....
What did surprise me was just how good the little Sony recorders can sound for this task, given their price.
Once you get involved with pro gear, the ' law of diminishing returns' starts to apply -  Lots of extra cash for (relatively) little improvement -- Improvements probably not really appreciated by a youngster just making fun clips for You Tube ....

[Gutbucket]

Maybe simply hold a "dummy mic" as a visual prop, and record sound using the built-in mic on the camera/camcorder.

[John Willett]

^ Gefell, so it's very likely to be good quality and well made, yet not likely to be inexpensive.  Also requires a phone to record to and the connecting wire.

Well, most people alraedy have the phone - the cable comes with the mic. - and it's about the same price as a handheld recorder, I understand (announced, but no release date yet, but not too far away).

[John Willett]

My first thought was one of those interview mics which has the recorder built directly into the body of the microphone itself.  Not sure who makes them or the cost, Sennheiser and HHB among others I think.  I'd imagine someone makes an inexpensive one.  The memory card plugs directly into the mic body.

Sennheiser never made such a mic.  The HHB FlashMic (now discontinued) used the body of a Sennheiser G2 handheld mic., but was an HHB product.

HHB now sell the Yellowtec.

[rogs]

Maybe simply hold a "dummy mic" as a visual prop, and record sound using the built-in mic on the camera/camcorder.

Using the internal camera mics is one of the main problems when making 'vox pop'  style interviews. You need the audio to be recorded near to the source (the person speaking) The camera mics may well be too far away to record good quality dialogue.
You sometimes hear this when a broadcaster 'loses' his radio mic signal, and the audio falls back to the camera mic. Usually sounds petty bad - especially if the camera is at any distance.
Obviously you need to use the camera mic audio as a 'sync' track, to match your remotely recorded audio - but ideally that's all you should need it for...

[rogs]

I must make some simultaneous recordings, to compare the little Sony in my project with a decent linear PCM recording.....

OK - I've made a (very) short simultaneous recording using Panasonic WM61a capsules plugged into both my Sony M10 recorder, and to the Sony ICDPX333.

Both files are .wav files, to prevent any further encoding from modifying the sound. Both are about 5MB, so are too large to attach directly here:

http://www.recmic.jp137.com/Sony.M10.WAV

http://www.recmic.jp137.com/Sony.ICD.PX333.WAV

Both files are 'raw' - (no processing at all). Obviously, the M10 makes a better recording, but the little PX333 doesn't do a bad job for a £35 (c.$50) recorder, IMHO.

(P.S. sorry about the British accent! )

[John Willett]

(P.S. sorry about the British accent! )

Brit's don't have an accent - Americans do     

[rogs]

(P.S. sorry about the British accent! )

Brit's don't have an accent - Americans do     

Uh-oh -- now we're in trouble!    .... it wasn't me who wrote that - it was him - it's all his fault...