Shoutguns are that good that they will pick up the reflected sound from a brick wall 2 metres behind your speaker from a sound some 100 metres behind YOU - hah! Now that is gonna bite some one in the buttocks soon! And no mistake!

Often, when I do interviews, I really hanker after a mic that will only record from 1 meter to only 2.5 metres in front of me - and nothing beyond the subject - and with nothing, or very little from the sides - a kinda proximity mic but facing forward. Asking too much aren't I? Yeah .. guess so. I got me Senni66 . . but I am open to suggs.

Grazie

Shoutguns are that good that they will pick up the reflected sound from a brick wall 2 metres behind your speaker from a sound some 100 metres behind YOU - hah! Now that is gonna bite some one in the buttocks soon! And no mistake!

Actually, this is a myth. Shotguns cannot do this. A good shotgun has a decent "reach" out to around 10-15 feet, and that's it. Anything beyond that is only going to be noise in the air, and the louder you crank your pre, the more noise there will be. A good shotgun requires critical aiming. Shotguns are no good indoors most of the time because of the air pressure and impact on the barrel, and because s'guns are very omnidirectional down in the lower frequencies, creating mud derived from the oft-over reflective low and low midrange sounds.
Nothing but a parabolic can reach 100 metres and even a parabolic won't do that with any decency. No human and few but very expensive devices could hold a s'gun or a parabolic on station for a distance greater than about 20 feet. Depending on the model of s'gun, the pickup pattern is just too narrow at those distances.
Remember "Airwolf" where Roy Scheider (who was in a helicopter) was recording drug deals from a quarter mile away?
That's PURE Hollywood.

Confusion (again)?
when I said "shotgun", I meant these "shotguns" you buy for your cam like the Rode we're talking about, the sennheiser 300, etc...
NOT the "pro" shotguns like the Sennheiser 416 or 60 or Neumann 81.
And when I said that to balance the audio between cameraman and subject one must be wearing phones and set the distance between two of them, I considered a cam with such a consumer "shotgun" mounted ontop of the cam and I didn't mean 100 feet away one from the other. Probably more like 6 feet max. depending of location noise.
Just trying to help considering a $0-$150 budget here.
Yes, you could find an old walkman that records, a voice recorder, an mp3 player with such a "voice recording" feature and have the subject wear it in his shirt pocket ; if he's 100 feet away from the cam, it will always sound better than this "shotgun" mounted on the cam.

"Actually, this is a myth." . . Yes what you state is correct and I agree with you. But what I did wasn't that. I couldn't work out where the noise was coming from. Behind me was a car park with motor noise - Myth? My boss didn't think so.

SPOT I'm talking about reflected BACK from the brick wall, I'm not talking about recording from 100 metres away, with a parabolic, did that in the Game Parks in South Africa - but that's another story - I'm talking about getting "reflected" back sound from BEHIND your speaker. NOT RECORDING in direct line TO a source 100 metres away IN FORNT of you - yeah? My senni66 can't do that, and Spot, with the greatest of respect, I didn't say that either. I'm saying that at the distance I said the Senni is THAT sensitive, you have to careful where you site your speaker/talker/interviewee. And that which you thought would NOT be heard would pick up a sound from actually BEHIND you, being bounced OFF the brick or hard wall. Soft drapes or foliage is good.

Thanks for sharing knowledge on myths - but I wasn't adding to it. I was talking about something else/different/other.

Best regards,

Grazie

In fact, Spot, isn't it necessary to point a mic into the centre at the "focus" of a para - that is pointing away from the source - to be effective? This is what I built in Africa from a plastic washing up bowl and a mic suspended and apparent at the geometric focus of the bowl. Worked well! Oh, and that would account for the sound I too got from my Senni pointing away from the source BUT at the brick wall - the wall acting like a para? Great stuff physics!

Grazie

I don't know, Lawrence, if you're going to use this shotgun mic either on a stand or along with the boom guy who comes with the mic (usually put in some case or in the van).

If you already made a decision concerning the use of a shotgun and you're fixed with it, here's my comments.
I won't get into the "which mic is more useful than the other" here, hear me well. Ok?

So here it goes:
the 66 mic is interesting in that it's a system that can be transformed into different mics, depending of the capsule you screw at the end of the main unit. Good, you can have a decent "array" of mics for a fairly reasonable price over time by buying different capsules. A few different companies have such systems.
Now, shotgun for shotgun:
66 pros: different mics "all in one" system. You can even have a lavallier capsule (with wire of course) mounted on the system.
That's it.

416 now:
LOT better mechanical insulation, wich means that if you plan on *manipulating* the mic (ie *boom man included* NOT some mic stand), it's gonna be easier to manipulate without causing some noise from hands on the boom, sudden position changing... you get the idea. So if your boom man (or girl) is on his (her ) first assignment, you get more latitude to compensate for small mistakes.
Secondly: the 416 is less prone to saturate, I mean if, all of a sudden, a dog starts to bark just behind you during the interview, the shot is easier to save with the 416 in that it's not clipping at the same ( lower) level as with the 66.
OK, when it saturates, it saturates you'll say. But sometimes, the tiny difference (which is not so tiny) will save the day.
Bottom line: you'll have great sound using the 66 in controlled and/or "mild" conditions. No doubt about that.
For "wilder" situations, go with the 416. For the difference in price, you'll be more than glad you did. I insist: more than glad.

Even better alternatives, but now it's purely a question of taste: the MKH60 or the Neumann 81. Both sound a little bit "warmer", "rounder" than the 416. In fact, they can be matched easily with fairly good results. Don't get me wrong, the 416 sounds very good too and is still employed by lots of audio on-location people. A question of personnal taste, I said.
Oh, last advice, if you go the MKH60 way, everything's heavier when it comes to additionnal equipment: windjammer, etc... That makes a difference for the person holding the boom after a few hours. And go with Rycote, not with Sennheiser for windjamming equipment : a lot lighter because of the suspension used by the systems.

Compare them side by side if you can before buying.

Ok, Spot tell em to send you a commission check, i recently bought this mic
just got it this morning and tried it out and this mic is GREAT! For the money
it's a good buy. I have bought other rode mic's and never been disappointed.

Futz

Thanks for taking the time to offer some solutions.

I tried the links, checked the yellow pages, made a few phone calls and I'm back to square 1.

Either they sell hi end stuff or they refer me to Sonystore. Nobody has heard of the Rode Videomic.

The internal mic is inside the front so no windjammers or anything other than attaching some foam.

So I decided to try the Sony 908C for 30 days to see if it works. I'm obviously not looking for perfection. Then by that time the Rode should be available so if I don't like the Sony I'll buy the Rode.

It's funny though, I love the image quality of my camera. I haven't seen anything on my T.V. that looks any better than my home-made DVDs. I'm not even tempted to get a better camera.

But the sound looks like a $1500 minimum investment with booms and wireless lavs and mixers and fuzzy slippers just to TRY to get good sound.

The Rode looks like it's about 4x the size of my camera.

It reminds me of my Sony Beta camera on one shoulder and the tape unit hanging off the other shoulder with cables in between and trying to be inconspicuous but looking like a 1 man news crew.

Hey nickle, did you check this link (I don't know about the model# of your cam but maybe they got something)?
http://www.rycote.com/products/miniwindjammer/gustbuster/default.asp

And I don't know about the price of this "fur patch" but if I were you, I'd try the foam trick before buying if the price seems to be over the top. The buit-in mic on a cam will never do miracles anyway...

Already tried the gustbuster page. They don't have it. It's no wonder though because anything attached horizontally would block the IR window. And attached vertically would have to wrap around the entire camera. The camera is a DCR TRV33 and really small.

My manual says the mic jack also accept "plugin power" microphones. Any idea what that means?

"Plugin power" mikes pull DC power from the mic jack itself.

Some pro equipment doesn't appreciate getting 6V DC on that mic input btw, so check first.

Thanks Coursedesign.

The nearer the destination the more we're slip slidin away.

If you think about sound in terms of wavelength instead of frequency many things become much cleaer. Then consider that unlike radio waves sound travels through a medium and the picture is closer to reality. Thow into that the idea that sound is reflected by most objects and your picture is close to complete except don't forget that the medium that sound travels in moves itself and also affects different wavelengths in different way.

Thow all this together and you'll understand why shotguns at 100 feet is a not very practical.

Bob.

lol !
Not very much mics are helpful at a hundread feet with that in mind. In fact, at this point, you're just looking for the "least worse" ¦..D

Well it's a bit more than that. If you consider that the audible spectrum covers wavelength from around 50 feet to a few inches you get a better grasp of the issues. When you think of frequency we start thinking of electronics and lets face it 20KHz isn't that much bandwidth to deal with.
But try designing an aerial that works over 10 octaves and you get a better idea of the problem. I guess where I'm coming from is just highlighting why its better to have a cheap mic up close than a good one far away (if you can that is).
Bob.

I have used a couple of MS-908C mics for my video projects in surround sound (one pointing forward, the other rearward--duh) and they work fine. The background noise level is not as good as a $1,000 studio microphone, but for on-the-move videography, they work great. The stereo angle can be 90 or 120 degrees. At 90 you have pretty good rear rejection, so that's what I use. At 120 the mic sounds similar to the stock microphone built into the handle of my VX2000.

For the Austria choir tour last summer, I used the included foam windscreens constantly, and they cut down the wind rumble moderately. You can see a photo of Yours Truly with the surround-sound setup here. The mics are mounted in simple shockmounts of my own design. Pretty simple, but it works, and completely eliminates the 110Hz mechanical hum picked up by the regular mounts.

I later bought two of the mini-windjammer socks last fall ($50 each!) and with the combination of foam and windjammer the wind is much less intrusive. The literature says the furry covers knock a bit off the highs, but that's an acceptable tradeoff for exterior shots. Only problem is that the choir kids want to pet them--they look like Furbies, but with less personality.

SOLD

Thanks Riredale

I got my Rode Videomic today. I tried it following my kids around with my camera and headphones and while that isn't the most professional of tests, what I heard sounded really good. Any ideas for the best fuzzy cover? I found these links:

http://www.rycote.com/products/miniwindjammer/default.asp
http://www.studio1productions.com/mic_muff.htm

I have a Mic-Muff on the built-in VX-2000 mic which I like. What would work best on the Videomic?

Rode seem to be on a roll, they have also released two higher end Shotguns.

The specs don't mean much to me but they seem impressive.

http://www.illusionmediagroup.com/ftp/NTG-2_WitPpr_v1_prnt.pdf

http://www.illusionmediagroup.com/ftp/NTG-1_WitPpr_v1_prnt.pdf

Here is another useful review with some great closeup pictures of this mike's controls, etc. It is mounted on one of Panasonic's tiny 3CCD camcorders (PV-GS400, PV-GS120, etc).

John

John, thanks for posting. I don't see the pics within the review? . . hmmm ?

Grazie

By the way, I got a Rycote Mini Windjammer Special 160 for my Rode Videomic. It fits quite well and makes it much more usable outdoors.