Cheap PreAmp Test

W

wheatgrinder

Hi,
I bought a Nady DMP-2 in hopes of using it as a cheap alternative to a juicedlink.

I have no experience with audio for video so my review\ comments should be taken as, well just plain ignorant:blush:


In this video http://www.vimeo.com/10276764 I'm using a couple different mics, connected to the DMP-2, the DMP-2 is connected to the mic input of the Canon HFS100 camera using an XLR to 3.5mm adapter (stereo) there is nothing else, the adapter is just wire, no circuity etc.

Setting the levels with this setup is a bit difficult. The Canon HFS100 seems to expect a much lower input signal, however, there is a built in attenuator option. Im not sure if its JUST an attenuator or if its also providing some automated gain\leveling.. I kinda think it is.. Ill have to check with Canon directly.

To get ANY useful signal I had to engage this feature of the camera. When setting the levels, the camera has audio input metering, though this seems to be misleading, or maybe its PRE Attenuator.. I don't know... What I noticed that when setting the input levels I had it plenty low, barely hitting the 50% of the range.. but when I imported on to the PC it was much hotter, getting close to 0DB. ..

Any quesitons?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
The worst thing about the unit is its SHAPE.
Its nice and heavy, feels pretty road worthy, but the shape! Argh, I wanted to just drill and tap a hole to attach it to the bottom of the cam.. like the juciedlink, but with that shape... no way.

I have been looking at some extruded aluminum Chanel that might provide a cheap alternative housing for the guts.. but what a pain..

For now its bungeid (new verb for ya!) to the tripod!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Another thing with the cam and preamp setup, I found it impossible to get a decent headphone level for monitoring out of the camera. With the built in mic, the headphone level can be nice and loud.. but with this setup, I cant seem to get any volume to speak of..

This might be because of some voltage\impedance mismatch between the LOWz out of the preamp and the HIz in of the cam.. that might also explain the metering strangeness and the need to engage the attenuator to lower the input enough to make it usable. As it was the cameras mic input level was very near the bottom of its range..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It sounds great to me. I feel like it's not 100%, but I could be wrong because I couldn't tell you why it doesn't seem like 100% (maybe that means I shouldn't comment, lol).

I think it's improved a lot since 'Bad Dream,' definitely a lot more present.

I haven't run into that Nady before, I've been looking into getting a beachtek (hoping I don't really need to invest in that kind of device now, hence the audio tests with found equipment), is the Nady comparable to that device? You can't beat that price :yes:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That was my hope, that it would be a cheap alternative to a beachtek or juiced link with Phantom Power.

The phantom power feature cost about $100 more for beachtek and juicedlink products.

Im starting to think that I should have just looked into a BATTERY PACK for my existing Art TubeMP. Seems that this is more the PRO way to go (not the tube mp, but a nice preamp run of an external 12v power pack)

You might check around and see if your equipment runs off a wallwart. The idea is that generally a walwart CAN be replaced with an external battery, it just has to be the right size..


I think a preamp with "battery powered" feature drives the price up and limits your choices.. Im hoping to snipe a beachtek for less than $100...


Oh, I did not process the audio, just adjusted the level. I could make this sound BETTER, but for the test I thought I should leave it as recorded.

Pleas go on with a random stream of conciseness with what you think it missing.. i feel it too..

THanks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hey wheat,

That preamp used with the first mic is good. Much better than your first video.

Something seems wrong with the other 2 mics like the battery ran out for phantom power or something.

The third mic I could barely hear you talk..

First mic sounds good tho.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ROC,
I made no adjustments for the different mics between tests.. The 2nd one was a smaller condenser and normally puts out less signal than the first one. The 3rd MIC a dynamic mic, hence its even LOWER output\sensitivity..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Follow up on the BeachTek

Hands down it wins. Not so much for sound, but for simplicity of design and ease of use. Being able to screw it underneath the camera, or between the tripod head, having the right cable hanging off the end, combined with manageable output levels (the Nady was too hot on the output, requiring turning on the Canons Mic Attenuator) makes the beachtek a breeze to use. However, I would have not bothered at full retail price, its convenient, but is it $300 worth of convenient?

I do note that neither device allows me to have a decent output level in the headphones I was using.. that said both might work better with some smaller, less pro, headphones..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yeah, good idea, though I had no real way to monitor gain with this setup, so I figured no changes was at least understandable as a testing philosophy.. if I had tried to adjust the gain for each take, Im not sure WHAT I would have ended up with :)

Thanks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top