Field Recorder xlr out to Juicedlink CX 231 good idea or not?

K

klbasey

I bought a juicedlink CX231 for an upcoming film I need for class to use with my Canon HFS100 which has the 1/8" input on the side of it. My partner in the class will be running the boom mic which is an Rode ntg-1 which is phantom powered. I started thinking after I purchased the juicedlink that I want my partner to hear what he's recording so I found a marantz pmd650u that's phantom powered and has an xlr out that I could run back to the juiced link (and it's cheap). My worry here is that the Marantz possibly might degrade the signal as compared to just running the mic straight to the juiced link. At the same time, though, I'm wondering if the sound captured on the marantz would be better than anything I could capture with the juicedlink and my camera (this particular marantz was priced at $1000+ in the days before cf and sd).
I've heard of things called headphone monitors which might be what I'm looking for as far as my partner being able to hear the audio, but with the price of the marantz minidisc soo low it seems like it would be like killing two birds with one stone (having a second backup soundtrack and a reference for the sound guy).
Also, if the Marantz and Juicedlink setup would be desirable then I really wouldn't have had to spring for the more expensive phantom powered CX231 since the Marantz would be supplying the needed 48v phantom power?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Hum, I have the HFS100 and a similar device to the juiced link. Frankly its sounds OK, but still not that great. Miles better then the on camera mic.

Setting levels to get clean signal without noise is a big pain and the headphone out from the camera is so week that when you do have it recording nicely, you cant really HEAR it on the headphones. So headphone amp is a must.

What I do is I hook up a headphone amp to the AV output of the camera. Doing it like this you can plug the AV OUTPUT from the camera into the RCA LINE INPUTS of the marantz and just use the martanz as a headphone amp. That said, the marantz might have better preamps then the Juiced Link so you might want to try going from the LINE OUT of the marantz to the mic in on the camera. From what I read the XLR out is DIGITAL so connecting though the JuciedLink (analog) is right out. Now, the risk with connecting the marantz line out to the camera MIC in (no LINE IN on the camera BASTARDS!) that is that the line out is not hot enough, or too hot for the mic input of the camera. 1/8 jack to RCA is common so physical connections should be easy enough.


Something else to consider, don't forget that HDMI includes audio output. IF you have a little HD monitor it might have a headphone output on it.. and wala.. instant headphone amp WITH VIDEO :-)


Other alternative battery powered headphone amps are those "personal guitar amps" with line in.. etc..

Using the marantz as a recorder seems to be the better option to me.. .. except how do you get the DATA from the MD recorder into the PC without just going into the line in on the sound card?

Is there such a thing as a mini disk reader that I can hook up to my USB port? That will read the MD's from the martantz? If so, then Id get that and try it out! The martantz is technilay going to be a much higher end piece of equipment.

Tanks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The PMD-650u does not - repeat, DOES NOT - have an XLR audio output, it is a digital XLR link, so will not work as you intended. It has RCA outputs which are high impedance, so will will be very prone to RF and other types of interference. So no, the PMD-650u will not work well as a headphone amp/preamp.

What you are looking for is something similar to the Sound Devices MM-1. Yup, fairly pricey, but exactly what you need. In a pinch, since you are only using one mic, you could return the CX-231 and use the MM-1 with a low-to-high impedance adapter like the Pearstone LMT-100. OR... you could return the CX-231 and get the -211 and the MM-1, although the downside is the -211 does not have phantom power which could be a disadvantage in the future. OR... return the -231 and get a dedicated recorder such as the Zoom H4n, Tascam DR-100, Marantz PMD-661 or Fostex FR-2LE
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Think alcove and I were typing at the same time..

I think using the LINE OUT from the camera to drive the line in of the martanz WOULD let you use the marantz as a dedicated headphone amp.. you certainly SHOULD not use it as a mic preamp into the camera.. duck tape it to the bottom of you camera! Plug the AV OUT from the camera INTO the marantz, hook up your head phones to the marantz.. etc.. make sense.. but its prety gheto so.. youll look like a fool, or like me.. which is about the same thing..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
right.. that..

but at least is not a signal critical cable... any headphone monitoring from the camera will have this issue.. even if you have the nicer juicedlink with headphone out built in, you still need to get sound to the ears to the boom op..

I bought a 25' headphone extension cable and Velcro that to its companion XLR for the mic input. not optimal, but keeps the cables together and reduces tangles..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alcove,
I did want your opinion on using the Marantz MD recorder as the field recorder..

Seems that but for the outmoded tech, thats a prety nice rig. If you had the requisite gear, like an AES/EBU connection on your PC, (or an aes/ebu to SPDIF) you could get better quality recordings. You know me and my continuum theory.. this would seem a step UP from the "recording good mic INTO the camera".. . and perhaps the quality of a higher end piece of OLD gear would be better than say a ZOOM or other lower end but current piece of kit.

I can definitely see it being much more complex post process, for example you will have to capture the audio from the recorder on your PC in real time.. slow.. but again, many of us have more time than money.. so..

comments?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So it looks like I'll need a 1/8" to xlr to make the Marantz my headphone amp then, right? With the 1/8" being connected to the av output on the HFS100 and the xlr end being plugged into the xlr LINE IN and my headphones going into the marantz's headphone jack. I guess I'll just carry the marantz strapped to my side while manning the camera.
Hey wheatgrinder, when I was doing my research on the juicedlink I don't recall anyone saying they needed headphone amplification, is this issue with low headphone amplification just native to the canon hfs100 you think or more cameras?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If I'm gonna go with an antiquated MD I may as well go with an antiquated DAT with TC. :D

To be honest, once you start reaching back like that it doesn't really matter too much. I still use my MD when out in the field collecting sound FX - it's two more tracks of audio and sometimes the low-fi lo-tech thing is exactly the right sound. My current wish list purchase is the Edirol R44 with the Oade Brothers Super Mod and a new stereo mic or matched pair. (Lot's of other things come first :()
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
klbasey said:
So it looks like I'll need a 1/8" to xlr to make the Marantz my headphone amp then, right? With the 1/8" being connected to the av output on the HFS100 and the xlr end being plugged into the xlr LINE IN and my headphones going into the marantz's headphone jack. I guess I'll just carry the marantz strapped to my side while manning the camera.
Hey wheatgrinder, when I was doing my research on the juicedlink I don't recall anyone saying they needed headphone amplification, is this issue with low headphone amplification just native to the canon hfs100 you think or more cameras?
Click to expand...




You need the RCA AV cable from the camera accessories kit.. AV connector.. its has 1/8" on one end and three RCA on the other. Plug the 1/8" into the HEADPHONE\AV output (shared) then connect the RCA (RED and WHITE) into the LINE IN on your marantz.

AND HERE IS WHERE WE FAIL...
Hmm, more complicated.. I thought the line in on the martanz was RCA, but I see its XLR.. you have a toggle switch that changes its impedance.. .. very tough.. you'll need a pin-out to figure out which wires go were and make your own RCA-> XLR adapters. (might be standards but how can you know.. )


The RCA AV cable is a standard cable I picked one Off the shelf at radio shack and it worked fine.. but your camera came with one so you should be OK.


Some of the JuciedLink devices have BUILT IN Headphone jacks.. .

the problem with the canon is that to get the external microphone to NOT distort you turn off Automatic Gain, and lower the input level by the on screen meters. at least they gave us meters.. anyway.. this results in the OUTPUT volume dropping a lot.. even cranking up the headphone output its still way to quite to be useful. Interestingly on the BUILT IN MIC, its plenty loud.. your millage may vary..

I have one of these..
SVU2.jpg


and I can crank up the volume on the headphones independently of the camera.. and.. it passes composite video too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alcove
DAT and MD arent lo-fi.. are they? ATRAC 4.0 is CD quality .. or a bit better, or so I think ..

More importantly, Im wondering if the sound quality of an older, but high end piece of gear stands up against newer low end gear that on paper has better "specs"

So what would Alcove do?
deserted island, you have the martantz and a good shotgun. You have the juciedlink and you have the hfs100..... and the directors waiting.. time in POST is not a factor.. (you also have a soldering iron and various ends and the will to use them!)

Thanks
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
wheatgrinder said:
DAT and MD arent lo-fi.. are they? ATRAC 4.0 is CD quality .. or a bit better, or so I think ..
Click to expand...

It's that new fangled thinkin' gosh darn it; 16bit/44.1kHz is so yesterday when 24bit/192kHz is available.

wheatgrinder said:
More importantly, I'm wondering if the sound quality of an older, but high end piece of gear stands up against newer low end gear that on paper has better "specs"
Click to expand...

As far as specs and the quality of components (mic pres) are concerned an old Sony DAT is probably a much better choice than, say, an H4n or DR-100. My biggest concern, however, is that usually older gear like that is beat to a pulp, and once you have spent the money to return it to spec you may as well have purchased a new piece of gear. A perfect example is an acquaintance of mine who picked up said Sony DAT machine for $125 - Portabrace case, 7506 cans, charger and extra battery included. One channel had some crackle & hiss, and after about two weeks of use the tapes wouldn't turn any more. The DAT Doctor (yes, that's a real repair service) wants $285 plus shipping ($23 + insurance x 2) for repairs. So if Dan gets it repaired he will have spent $125 + $285 + $46 = $465; for another $135 he could have bought a brand new PMD-661 or an FR2-LE.

wheatgrinder said:
So what would Alcove do?
deserted island, you have the martantz and a good shotgun. You have the juciedlink and you have the hfs100..... and the directors waiting.. time in POST is not a factor.. (you also have a soldering iron and various ends and the will to use them!)
Click to expand...

If the -231 will drive the cans over 40 or 50 feet I would build a breakaway cable - no need for the Marantz at all. Use 10 strand cable for 3-pin XLR and stereo 1/8" minipin.

If the -231 won't drive the cans I won't be able to split the mic signal with a Y cable (which was my first impulse). The problem is the phantom power - both units supply phantom, but using both will probably create ground loops and may damage the mic. So I would ignore the -231 and make a 40' or 50' cable to send the RCA outs of the PMD-650 to the 1/8" minipin if the camera; I would record to the PMD-650 and the camera is the safety and sync reference. The sound quality won't be optimum (MD is 16bit/44.1kHz), there may a be problem with driving the audio 40' or more, and there will probably be some sync drift, but it would be far better than nothing.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks brother for indulging me.. when I hear lofi, I think analog 1970's tubes and tape machines under 1/4" wide.. Would a NAGRA tape fall under that? Find one ebay for $3K! So its all kinda moot..


I think MD would be preferable to DAT tape.. less moving parts etc..

The -231 doesnt offer headphone out..
The captured sound quality on the Canon is less than optimal, Id say less optimal then 16bit 41.4.. Sure its encoding AAC3 but the audio circuitry is just plain weak compare to a purpose built system..
Heck, even with DA->AD cycle by using a line out of the MD recorder into your ANALOG LINE IN on a typical sound card might still sound better, cleaner.. if I had the marantz Id try it out.. run it through the work flow see how it holds up..

so ... anyway.. its just fun chat now.. you answered my questions. Like you said.. I have other problems to worry about..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alcove Audio said:
I don't know crap about cameras except that most cameras sound like crap...

And don't knock '70s tubes; some of those preamps are freakin' GOLD! They're definitely too noisy for film sound but for pounding drums, screamin' vox and blaring guitars they're the BOMB!
Click to expand...

Totally agree, when it comes to guitars, tubes rule.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top