Least expensive way to record audio input?

[ChristopherArter]

Alright,

I've gotten my camera set up squared away, now I need to get my audio up to par.

I'm looking for a cheap way to record my audio (separately from camera) via a AT897 shotgun mic. I've seen digital audio recorders, but their price is higher seemingly due to the fact that they have pretty complex compact microphones built into them. Really, all I need is the signal itself to be recorded onto, say, and SD card. It'd also need to provide phantom power as well.

Is there any sort of inexpensive digital recorder without the onboard mic, that simply records what's plugged into it directly onto an SD card?

 

[Alcove Audio]

Most budget recorders like the DR-40 ($200) or DR-100 ($330) will have internal mics. Just don't use them. If you want a recorder without mics the PMD-661 ($660) is probably the least expensive that has XLR inputs and can provide phantom power.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

Is there any sort of inexpensive digital recorder without the onboard mic, that simply records what's plugged into it directly onto an SD card?

Alcove's info/advice probably sounds a little bizarre. Effectively: A recorder with a mic costs less than a recorder without a mic. The info/advice which alcove gave is correct and it's not bizarre because you are in fact comparing two different products. The Zoom H4N, Tascam DR100 and other similar products are effectively designed to be high end dictaphones while the PDM661 is an audio recorder. The dictaphones are all designed with relatively low quality components to record something which is at least audible when played back. An audio recorder on the other hand is designed to record audio of commercial quality and therefore has much higher quality components, hence why they appear to cost more for less but in reality this is not the case. It is possible these days to get commercial quality audio (or close to it) from one of these high end dictaphones, it's just more difficult. Obviously though, a dictaphone without a built in mic isn't really a dictaphone, so you're not likley to find one without a built in mic. So, you're stuck with either a more expensive real audio recorder without a built in mic or a dictaphone with a a mic.

G

 

[IndiePaul]

Low budget solution. Yep (as Alcove Audio has also suggested) I'd go with a:

Tascam DR-40 4-Track Handheld Digital Audio Recorder
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/821259-REG/Tascam_DR_40_DR_40_4_Track_Handheld_Digital.html

Connect your AT897 shotgun mic to the DR-40 using XLR cables and you've got your budget audio recording system sorted.

As AudioPostExpert explained, you're just using the DR-40 for recording - you won't be using its mics since they're much inferior to your AT897 shotgun mic.

 

[LordxxAnonymous]

Low budget solution. Yep (as Alcove Audio has also suggested) I'd go with a:

Tascam DR-40 4-Track Handheld Digital Audio Recorder
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/821259-REG/Tascam_DR_40_DR_40_4_Track_Handheld_Digital.html

Connect your AT897 shotgun mic to the DR-40 using XLR cables and you've got your budget audio recording system sorted.

As AudioPostExpert explained, you're just using the DR-40 for recording - you won't be using its mics since they're much inferior to your AT897 shotgun mic.

great thread to the OP and great advice and info from all of you. just solved my issue! I know I'm going to be getting the AT897 without a doubt, I just couldn't decide between the H4N or the DR-40. even the DR-100 looks nice, but it seems the DR-40 is a filmmaker favorite.
just one question: how well does the AT897 perform as a vocal mic for hip hop. I use condenser mics, I want something more raw, gritty and reminiscent of Wu Tang Clan, circa Enter The 36 Chambers.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

just one question: how well does the AT897 perform as a vocal mic for hip hop. I use condenser mics, I want something more raw, gritty and reminiscent of Wu Tang Clan, circa Enter The 36 Chambers.

I can't answer directly as I've never used an AT897. Generally though the mics used in the TV/film industry are quite different to the mics used in the music industry. In audio post we may sometimes own some music mics, the reverse is almost never true, music studios don't generally own shotguns or the very tight hyper-cardioids we use in film/TV. Pure sonic quality is of less or of equal importance to rejecting environmental noise in the TV/film industry whereas in the music industry recording environments are custom constructed to eliminate unwanted environment noise and the mics can be perfectly positioned. So mics are designed for the music industry which are not compromised by the need to reject environmental noise.

You might get what you are looking for out of the AT897, it's worth experimenting, but a cheap dynamic mic like a Shure SM58 might get you closer to what you're after.

G

 

[Alcove Audio]

I know I'm going to be getting the AT897 without a doubt,

Mics that use an internal battery scheme to supply phantom power (i.e. AT897, NTG-2) tend to have lower volume output levels than other mics; as much as -4dB. Consider the AT875 or the NTG-1. However, when budget recorders the supply phantom power to the mic the batteries of those recorders are depleted at a much faster rate, so battery packs (or a large sleeve of batteries) for the recorder are recommended.

I just couldn't decide between the H4N or the DR-40. even the DR-100 looks nice, but it seems the DR-40 is a filmmaker favorite.

The DR-40 is favorite because it's cheap, NOT because it's better. The DR-100 is a better choice if you have the budget.

just one question: how well does the AT897 perform as a vocal mic for hip hop. I use condenser mics, I want something more raw, gritty and reminiscent of Wu Tang Clan, circa Enter The 36 Chambers.

As APE mentioned, a Shure SM-58 might be an old school choice, or perhaps a cheap LDC (Large Diaphragm Condenser) mic. Also keep in mind that the mic preamp will also have a large impact on the sound.

Production sound and music recording have very different priorities. When doing production sound mics and preamps that do not color the sound (that have a very flat frequency response) are preferred. When recording music mics and preamps are chosen for their "color;" they impart the tonal quality wanted by the music producer.

One more thing; recording techniques and equipment were very, very different "back in the day."

 

[LordxxAnonymous]

Mics that use an internal battery scheme to supply phantom power (i.e. AT897, NTG-2) tend to have lower volume output levels than other mics; as much as -4dB. Consider the AT875 or the NTG-1. However, when budget recorders the supply phantom power to the mic the batteries of those recorders are depleted at a much faster rate, so battery packs (or a large sleeve of batteries) for the recorder are recommended.



The DR-40 is favorite because it's cheap, NOT because it's better. The DR-100 is a better choice if you have the budget.




As APE mentioned, a Shure SM-58 might be an old school choice, or perhaps a cheap LDC (Large Diaphragm Condenser) mic. Also keep in mind that the mic preamp will also have a large impact on the sound.

Production sound and music recording have very different priorities. When doing production sound mics and preamps that do not color the sound (that have a very flat frequency response) are preferred. When recording music mics and preamps are chosen for their "color;" they impart the tonal quality wanted by the music producer.

One more thing; recording techniques and equipment were very, very different "back in the day."

awesome info! been making music and doing audio production for 12 years and run a pretty decent studio. just never really thought to use a dynamic mic in my arsenal until some buddies told me it'd be worth checking out.

 

[MPRR]

Check this Short a friend of mine made .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Nu2Qy31pw0

Audio was recorded using an Iphone.It sounds pretty decent to me.

 

[ChristopherArter]

Alcove's info/advice probably sounds a little bizarre. Effectively: A recorder with a mic costs less than a recorder without a mic. The info/advice which alcove gave is correct and it's not bizarre because you are in fact comparing two different products. The Zoom H4N, Tascam DR100 and other similar products are effectively designed to be high end dictaphones while the PDM661 is an audio recorder. The dictaphones are all designed with relatively low quality components to record something which is at least audible when played back. An audio recorder on the other hand is designed to record audio of commercial quality and therefore has much higher quality components, hence why they appear to cost more for less but in reality this is not the case. It is possible these days to get commercial quality audio (or close to it) from one of these high end dictaphones, it's just more difficult. Obviously though, a dictaphone without a built in mic isn't really a dictaphone, so you're not likley to find one without a built in mic. So, you're stuck with either a more expensive real audio recorder without a built in mic or a dictaphone with a a mic.

G

Mind = blown. Thank you so much, you and Alcove. I may shift funds around and expand my audio budget simply for this, it seems worth it. I'm working on my very first short, and feature length right after, and I'm a really really picky guy (I come from high-detail photo editing / digital art background), so detail is everything. I'd really like my audio to be on par with the type of footage I'll be getting from my 4k hacked GH2 to really complete the experience.

Thank you again!

 

[Alcove Audio]

I'd really like my audio to be on par with the type of footage I'll be getting from my 4k hacked GH2 to really complete the experience.

Then you should really hook up with someone who knows what they are doing when it comes to production sound. Think about how much time and education to perfect your visual skills; if you want your audio to be as good you need someone who has put as much time and effort into honing their production sound skills. This will be especially helpful when you dive into your feature.

 

[IndiePaul]

The DR-40 is favorite because it's cheap, NOT because it's better. The DR-100 is a better choice if you have the budget.

For me the DR-40 was actually the better choice.

I could have afforded the DR-100 but went for the DR-40 because I needed a 4-track recorder.

You would expect the DR-100 to be better than the DR-40 in most core respects but the DR-100 can only record 2 tracks whereas the DR-40 can record 4, hence I went with the DR-40.

Why Tascam limited their more expensive unit in this way is beyond me. If not for this, I would have purchased the DR-100.

DR-40 specs
http://tascam.com/product/dr-40/

DR-100 specs
http://tascam.com/product/dr-100/

 

[ChristopherArter]

Then you should really hook up with someone who knows what they are doing when it comes to production sound. Think about how much time and education to perfect your visual skills; if you want your audio to be as good you need someone who has put as much time and effort into honing their production sound skills. This will be especially helpful when you dive into your feature.

Couldn't agree more; a long time friend of mine is an outstanding sound editor for a lot of small-medium sized productions in LA, so he's on board to do some post production on the audio. Is the main skill in the post production would you say? or capturing it itself? I've done a few years of audio production in a recording studio, so I'm hoping that experience will at least give me SOME kind of hope at getting decent audio on set for my friend to work with once it goes into post.

 

[Alcove Audio]

Is the main skill in the post production would you say? or capturing it itself? I've done a few years of audio production in a recording studio, so I'm hoping that experience will at least give me SOME kind of hope at getting decent audio on set for my friend to work with once it goes into post.

GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out.

When it comes to sound at the low/no/mini/micro budget level I would say that capturing solid production sound is more important than the audio post (by .0000000001%). Actually, all elements are equally important - a chain is only as strong a its weakest link, right? If your production sound quality is poor (Garbage In) your experienced audio post friend will spend his time polishing turds (Garbage Out) instead of enhancing the beauty of gems.

The most cost efficient thing to do is to capture solid production sound. It takes less time to clean it up, you will avoid extensive ADR, you may be able to get away with WIFO (Wild Foley), you may get lucky with some sound effects, and many other benefits, the greatest of which is you have artistic options instead of settling for "that's the best we have." It is worth the extra time to follow the advice of your experienced, qualified PSM/sound team, and the expense of hiring them. Every minute/dollar you spend on production sound will save you ten in audio post.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

Is the main skill in the post production would you say? or capturing it itself?

I would say in film that audio post generally takes considerably more skills and more time (man hours) than production sound. I used the word "skills" rather than "skill" deliberately because there are more audio post roles than production sound roles. All the audio roles require skill but certainly production sound recording is one of the most challenging. The film audio role which requires the most knowledge/experience is the position of Sound Designer but I don't know if knowledge/experience is the same as skill, maybe. It's a bit like asking what is more important, the skill of the formula 1 racing driver or the skill of the formula 1 racing car designer? One without the other is never going to get you on the podium.

I've done a few years of audio production in a recording studio, so I'm hoping that experience will at least give me SOME kind of hope at getting decent audio on set for my friend to work with once it goes into post.

There are some fundamental principles which apply to all audio production and that knowledge will certainly help. But, there are many specific differences which require different equipment, processes and priorities and therefore require different skills and this is where you will likely struggle. For example, a music studio recording engineer's main skill lies in understanding the acoustic of the live room and choosing the right mic/s and mic positioning to capture the sonic characteristics of the musician/s. This is quite different to production sound, where you are dealing with hugely differing acoustic spaces, mic choice is extremely limited, you can rarely if ever place the mic in the best position and frequently what you are trying to record is a moving target. By definition, in a recording studio everything revolves around the recording, so the recording engineer has complete control over pretty much everything during a recording session. During a film shoot however, pretty much everything revolves around the filming, so in practise, the sound recordist has complete control over pretty much nothing! IMHO, a great deal of practise with a boom and shotgun is going to be required, regardless of your prior experience in other areas of the audio industry.

G