Question for You Audio People

Anonymous

Yes, as long as the female sides of the splitter are mono. Also, I’d recommend merging the channels in post production because it can be irritating listening to different streams of audio in two channels.

http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

I would definitely merge the channels. Thanks.

Anonymous

I would not recommend it. One mic may over power the other and you won’t be able to adjust them independently. You really need a mixer or even more ideally, a multi-track recorder. I would do it all on a computer with recording software. The most inexpensive is probably Garage Band on a Mac. It will record multiple channels of audio and allow you to fix them afterward. Pro Tools LE is pretty inexpensive for a Windows PC. You can get an inexpensive converter to take the microphones into a USB port. This one costs a little more but is great quality: http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Quartet/ You could probably find something similar for an iPad and use Garage Band on that too.

http://twitter.com/LA_Liberty LA Liberty

But, considering tolerances to both the mics and channels may be different, make sure to merge *after* you adjust volume accordingly.

Anonymous

You can also use multiple USB microphones directly. I like the Blue Yeti or Yeti Pro. http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/YetiPro/ or http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Yeti/

JT

I concur. A small mixer setup will run you <$200 and is very easy to operate. Above, Tom P. is pointing out that the two mics cannot be independently controlled. Guaranteed, you'll be very frustrated (as will your viewers) because one mic will blow the other out. Email me and I'll be happy to send links to purchase what you need as well as show you exactly how to use it. My bachelor's is in music engineering. Justintroutmusic@gmail.com

Anonymous

You can, but the result will be that one mic will be panned hard right and the other will be panned hard left. Keep in mind that when the signal is printed to disk it will be printed as a single stereo channel. So, in order to fix this in post-production you would have to split that stereo channel into two separate mono channels, and then pan them to your liking.

Another issue that you’ll find is that the impedance will be different, so the recording might be quieter than usual, and some hum/buzz might be induced into the signal (this all depends upon the impedance of the input vs the impedance of the mics). It’s not a certainty that this will happen, but it’s possible depending upon what kind of impedance values you’re dealing with.

This isn’t the optimal way to record two mics, but it can be done. Just out of curiosity, don’t you have an audio interface for your radio gig?

http://twitter.com/RaymondGross Raymond Gross

This is a sort of mickey-mouse solution. That’s not to say it won’t work. Make sure the insert to the recorder is stereo, as opposed to balanced mono. That way you have 2 discreet channels being recorded. Also, make life easier and use identical lapel mics. This will eliminate any potential impedance/tolerance issues. Test it all out before you need it. Good luck!

http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

Maybe it is, but doesn’t it seem odd that I would need to buy a mixer setup just to interview one guy?

http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

Thank you very much!

Anonymous

JT, please tell me that you didn’t go to Full Sail.

JT

Haha, I’m a Berklee guy.

Anonymous

Oh, thank goodness. I have yet to have met a good engineer from Full Sail. Even worse, they’re EVERYWHERE!

Anonymous

Remembering a couple months ago when you posted a similar inquiry, you have mono mics, a stereo jack on your camera, and you wish to keep things as simple as possible…

This comment string is the most useful of the lot. The adapter you have pictured is [probably] perfect. Keep in mind as Jordan pointed out to read the label and purchase a stereo adapter with MONO female jacks. Stereo to stereo adapters do exist, and THEY LOOK IDENTICAL.

Don’t be cheap. Buy a backup. Consider extra mics too. Nothing is worse than sitting down for an interview with someone who doesn’t have excess time and discovering a small item missing or broken(i.e. stepped on). The only expensive piece of your setup is your camera. You won’t regret going redundant with the smaller pieces.

Bryan

This guy is spot on. IMHO The impedance issue is probably one of the more important problems; anyone that has used a headphone splitter knows what I am talking about.

In my opinion I’d suggest an audio recorder that has microphone input. It is easier to use and cheaper than a mixing board, and gives you two separate tracks when you’re done. A sound recorder doesn’t keep you tethered to anything since it runs on batteries. And after your interview it is still useful.

There is one down side. Since it will be in someone’s pocket while it is recording you won’t know if it turns off or the batteries die. Just make sure you know how to use it, have fresh batteries, and have disabled any auto-off features.

http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

But this means I’ll have to sync it manually with the video, right? That would drive me crazy.

Anonymous

I’ve been working with audio since 1993 when I built my first 4 track recorder using the parts from two consumer-level karaoke machines. Later I upgraded to a Tascam reel-to-reel 8-track with outboard gear, then I moved to DAT. I didn’t move to a full computer-based system until about 2004 (I was a late adopter). Basically, I’ve been through the whole gamut. Most engineers these days don’t know how awesome it was to put a really hot signal to tape, nor do they know how hard it was to even get a decent signal on the old 16 bit DAT systems. Ah, the good ‘ol days.

Anonymous

Yes, Tom. You would need to sync the audio to video. However, that isn’t as hard as it seems. Usually when I work with audio for film I use the SMPTE time code, so it syncs itself (you can also encode WAV files with timecode). Unfortunately, consumer level video equipment doesn’t have this capability, so in that case you can use what is called “clap sync”.

Essentially, you turn on all of your equipment, get all of your levels set, and then begin recording (I prefer to just let the equipment record continuously, but you don’t need to). Then at the beginning of each take you make a loud clap noise. Now to do this correctly you need to not only hear the clap in the audio, but you must also see it on the video (this is what those clapperboards are used for that you see in the movies). I personally use two short 2x4s connected to each other by a simple door hinge, but you can just as easily use your hands, you just want to make sure that it is loud enough to make a single, large spike in the audio and that you can clearly see that action in the video.

Then, in post-production you match that spike in the audio with the visual clap in the video, and you’re synced (this is even easier if you can actually view the audio waveform so that you can see the spike, which most modern software allows you to do). You might have to make little fine-tuning adjustments, but this at least gets you in the pocket.

For what you’re doing this is super easy. To give you some comparison, I once had a project that was not time-coded in which I had to sync over 500 separate shots with audio using just clap sync. Talk about a nightmare. And that is not even including the thousand or so foley tracks that I had to edit into the film, as well. Most people don’t realize that all of the sounds you hear in a movie weren’t present during shooting, instead they are all added in during post-production by some schlub like me sitting behind a computer for weeks on end. Ah, fun times.

Clay

I know nothing about this topic but enjoyed reading the string. What a great community effort! I can’t wait to see Tom’s video/interview

Anonymous

Tom, what are you using for the front end of your radio rig? Aren’t you using an audio interface for that? If you are, it would be far easier to just use that to record the mic’d signals straight to your hard drive and then just sync it to the video using clap sync (explained in my other reply). Plus, none of the problems that I mentioned below would present themselves.

Bryan

Yes, again, this guy is spot on. If you’re doing it all in one take you should only have to sync it once.

You could always scream abruptly, it should startle your guest and give you a good a good laugh, all while being a mark to sync your audio and video.

http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

I’ll be on the road for this, though. And I don’t use lapel microphones with that setup.

Anonymous

Well, couldn’t you just take the AI with you and use it with your laptop? All you need is the AI, laptop (with drivers installed), and 1/8″ female to 1/4″ male mono adapters ( http://www.cablesforless.com/Adapter-14-Inch-M-To-18-Inch-Female-Mono-P4944.aspx ) for each mic so that you can plug them into the inputs of the AI. Then when you get back home you can just hook the AI back up to your radio rig.

I mean shoot, as long as you get good video and good audio you can just Dropbox the files to me and I’ll sync them for you (or we could use my FTP server if you’re sketchy about Dropbox, but this requires you to install Cyberduck). It’s a very easy job, so I wouldn’t charge you anything. Plus, I can do any color correction that is needed on the video, as well as master the audio. It would only take me about 20 minutes assuming that it’s a single shot. The result would be far better than what you’d get with the split adapter, which I don’t think is going to turn out very well at all.

What kind of AI are you using, just out of curiosity?

*AI= audio interface

Guest

To be honest, I wish you were closer, because I would actually offer to meet you and produce the whole thing with my own equipment.

Anonymous

To be honest, I wish that you were closer by, because I would actually offer to produce the whole thing with my equipment. Maybe some day.

Anonymous

Hey, what the hey? That’s verbatim what I said (I deleted it, and then reposted in a different spot with different language). What are you up to, guest?

http://www.facebook.com/people/Zebram-Zee/100002539017006 Zebram Zee

Here’s what you do. Take the lapel mic and split the internal ramifier in two, making sure to separate out the red from the black copper mono filament. Make sure you plug them in separately into two audio encapsulator jacks. As you film, divide the two channels into mono and duo, making sure to record in separate filter channels. Only combine the filters once you have adequately debriefed the cipher channel. Combine them and render them using the wave syncing tool, and the IR channel debuzzer. Or you could use this fantabulous contraptionator:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLDgQg6bq7o

Anonymous

Yes, with single shot material the screaming trick can work well, but you’ll still have to do a lot of fine-tuning to get it synced. However, with multiple shots it isn’t accurate enough for a good workflow. The great advantage of a clapperboard or a hand clap is that you can freeze the video on the exact frame where the clapper shuts (I actually usually pick a few frames beyond this point due to the speed of sound vs light), and then align the audio spike right to that frame, and if you do it right then 9 times out of 10 there is no fine-tuning needed. You can’t do that with a scream. But it does at least give you a reference to get you close so that you aren’t shooting in the dark.

Bryan

Joseph, I was kidding, but yes clap is much more precise.

Anonymous

No, no. It’s not a bad suggestion. Whatever you need to do to get a reference point is all that really matters. It sure beats moving your audio back and forth forever trying to match mouth movements to words (which is not fun at all).

I once had a shot that I had to sync that didn’t have any time-code or clapperboards (they rolled tape a bit too late). Before the scene there was complete silence until the actor made a grimace and farted. That’s what I used to sync the audio. Hey, whatever works, right?

Bryan

Hahaha, I love it!

anon

As others have said, get a mixer. Even a cheap mixer will be better. If you used the adapter and it did work you’d have the panning issues which you’ll always have to fix by hand. Also, if the mics don’t come through at proper levels or at even levels you may have quality issues. Mixers are designed to handle this. You can plug as many mics (and other audio sources) into a mixer as you need (and have inputs for.) Then you can set the volume levels properly for each as well as the eq and panning. It is much more professional and will give you consistently much higher quality audio. A cheap but decent mixer could be gotten for less than $200, and if you were going really budget there are $100 or less options that could work (but aren’t of the same quality.) Make sure you do a lot of research on microphones as well. The quality of sound can vary immensely with different microphones.

Anonymous

That’s comforting.. I went there a couple of years on an open house tour and was pretty impressed. Glad I decided not to go, just didn’t make sense why you would spend $80-100k on an education for job that, starting out, only offers about $25k per year.. you can work at McDonalds and make that much.

Anonymous

Starting at $25k a year? You must be joking. You’ll be lucky to get any pay when you start out. More than likely you’ll intern, work on spec, or simply won’t be able to find a job. That’s the reality of it. And that was true even in good times.