# Cardioid or a Shotgun mic?



## Kirill

Hello Shacksters. 

My name is Kirill. I've been recording dialogue on movie/ TV sets for about 6 years. I was wondering if anybody else in here also does what I do for living. As a sound engineer I have my own preferences for the mics as well as my own recording tricks and techniques. 

For example I personally always trust to a boom mic way more then I'd trust any type of Lapel or Lavalier wireless system, no matter how much money it costs. Even though I love to have a backup of same Wireless system for safety. There are many different factors that affect usage of certain type of mic in a different situation. For obvious reasons, I'd use a short or long *Shotgun* mic or sometimes other mics with quite different *polar pattern* known as a 

*Super Cardioid*










or similar to the one above

*Hyper Cardioid*










I prefer to use Shotgun mic usually outside of the street or windy weather, or more noisy situations when noise resistance is needed. Shotgun mic give that perfect golden middle, between not losing the recording because of strong air movements (wind and etc.) as well as actually get a better results due to a specialized functionality of the Polar pattern. 

Indoor I'd use a Cardioid Condenser mic, such as *Neumann KM-184*








as a great sounding mic and perfect for the purpose. In fact I love it so much that in the past 8-9 projects I only used pretty much only that mic for recording of a dialogues. Taking in to an attention that I have a boom mic and a pair of Lavalier (Lapel) mics as well. 

Main reason for that was that the natural reverberation of the room will be applied to a recording accordingly, so when you are in post a sound mixer pretty much won't have to apply any artificial reverberation effects. Thus simplifying the work flow and in fact making the movie or a programm sounding more natural.

Also very important moment in recording audio for any kind of show is a continuity of the mics that had been used while the production period. You can easily notice a difference in the mics when even watching some big movies. As an example, watch "Gangs of New York". There are quite a few moments when for some reason they used a different microphone in a few scenes. That totally throws away from the whole story, when you notice that difference. That's a little amount of the things that I can personally share here for now. If you have any ideas and suggestions, please feel free to write a reply. 
If you have questions about Lavalier (Lapel) mics or any other things please ask a question. 

Sincerely.
Kirill B.
:T


----------



## chonc

I have done some dialogue recording mostly in location (very noisy locations), although my main job is at the other end, editing in post.

I work mostly in Mexico, where I value and appreciate a well recorded production sound because most mexican films have very little (if any) ADR.

Actually right now I'm working in a student short with dialogue poorly recorded. They only used a single shotgun and recorded with multiple cameras... hence most of the dialogue sounds far far away! This would be a case in which I would have appreciated lavalier mics.

I agree shotgun/cardioid sound the best (I love the KM184 use it of ADR and foley), but the use of such mics is only useful if it was done properly by a skilled boom operator and recordist. If a student crew ask me my opinion I always tell them to get an experienced sound crew (you can always tell beginner filmakers from seasoned ones by their audio). If that's not possible then I tell them to record with shotguns and lavaliers to as much separate tracks as they can!

To the topic of reverberation... I agree that you get more natural sounding dialogue with shotguns/cardioids, but the reverberation you get on a set is not always the one you need for the scene... and like I told before, in Mexico filming in a soundstage is more of a luxury so most of the sound will come off noisy and over reverberated.

As an editor I always prefer having the choice of source.


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> I have done some dialogue recording mostly in location (very noisy locations), although my main job is at the other end, editing in post.
> 
> I agree shotgun/cardioid sound the best (I love the KM184 use it of ADR and foley), but the use of such mics is only useful if it was done properly by a skilled boom operator and recordist.


Chonc, As I said before the Boom Mic Shotgun or a Cardioid is my own preference, but I stronlgy agree with you that for a student projects, they should use Lavs and a Shotgun mic. But even with shotgun mic you have to "travel around the frame" to get the best result, that what student don't know how to do, it comes with experience for sure. Mostly student's film audio is garbage, mainly for a reason of the person who does the recording, got absolutely no clue of what he/ she doing. Thus can cause multiple problems: off-axis or proximity effect, phasing of the dialogue, over reverberated dialogue, too much of a distance between the source and the mic, and so on...



chonc said:


> To the topic of reverberation... I agree that you get more natural sounding dialogue with shotguns/cardioids, but the reverberation you get on a set is not always the one you need for the scene...


Once again a agree with you. Maybe it was my own little typo, I should've said an Interior Set such as a room of some type, but not sound stage. My bad. 



chonc said:


> As an editor I always prefer having the choice of source.


Yes, as an editor it's always a huge plus to have more choice. Absolutely not argument here at all. What I meant before is that my own preference for audio post production is 99.9% boom mic. 
One thing though, not all Lav mic pickups sound great, you have to spend quite a bunch of money to get a good sounding mics... 

Kirill.


----------



## chonc

Kirill said:


> ...my own preference for audio post production is 99.9% boom mic.
> One thing though, not all Lav mic pickups sound great, you have to spend quite a bunch of money to get a good sounding mics...


my own preference would be 99.9% of boom... if only there were enough skilled boom operators to make that stand!!

and yes, a professional sound mixer/recordist should invest a lot in their equipment. They should always remember that the shots are chosen for their image/performance. The sound should always be perfect!! (no second takes there)


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> The sound should always be perfect!(no second takes there)


Well should be but it's not always possible sadly. So never say never. Say if the location is garbage recordists can only do that much. 

Kirill


----------



## chonc

Kirill said:


> Well should be but it's not always possible sadly. So never say never. Say if the location is garbage recordists can only do that much.
> 
> Kirill


true:T

and a bit off topic, what would you say is the percentage of production dialogue that ends up in the final mix in a Canadian film?


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> What would you say is the percentage of production dialogue that ends up in the final mix in a Canadian film?


I can't speak for everyone, but only for my own recordings. As an example. Previous feature film that is in post right now I was mixing it for 26 days, out of all those day, I only had to ADR 2 short outdoor scenes, 1 for the reason of bad location and the second for the ending of the shooting budget, when we had to shoot in a huge bar, and they didn't have more money to spend to rent it, so we had to shoot one scene while there was a bottle collectors loading truck, thus messing all audio track. But as a quite experienced Sound guy I told the 1st AD right away that this has to be ADR because we can't do anything physically about all that excessive noise, and they agreed with me. And we were at peace. Thus out the whole movie I had to ADR about 1-2% out of the whole movie. Which was quick and painless. Also recorded all the Narrations and VOs in studio. Sounded sexy from what I remember. By the way, if you are interested to hear some staff, check my site as well.

*http://www.specsound.com/Portfolio.html*

There is a little sampler in there, you won't miss it. There are also some Canadian TV shows that I've recorded there as well. Check it out. 

Thus From my point of view the percentage is quite large for my audio at least. I did quite a few things, you get used to not mess up the audio. And not get into the shot either. You know.  

Now I'm working on a post production for other feature movie. And all the audio was good I didn't have to ADR nothing at all. So I think it means something. 

Hope that answers your question friend Chonc.

Kirill


----------



## Darnstrat

I have a guy who works for me - does a lot of video. He's not bad with the video, but insists on using lavs on everything. I have explained to him a number of times that a shotgun mic is far superior for a variety of reasons and yet unless I threaten to fire him, he still uses the lav and has the ensuing problems that doing so creates.
SHEESH!


----------



## chonc

Darnstrat said:


> I have a guy who works for me - does a lot of video. He's not bad with the video, but insists on using lavs on everything. I have explained to him a number of times that a shotgun mic is far superior for a variety of reasons and yet unless I threaten to fire him, he still uses the lav and has the ensuing problems that doing so creates.
> SHEESH!


Maybe he has to do all the work... a shotgun mic is no good unless you have a boom operator that can get the mic as close as possible to the source. If the camera operator has to do the sound, maybe the lav is the best way to go after all.


----------



## Darnstrat

chonc said:


> Maybe he has to do all the work... a shotgun mic is no good unless you have a boom operator that can get the mic as close as possible to the source. If the camera operator has to do the sound, maybe the lav is the best way to go after all.


As I said, he works for me.. I have a number of other staff/tech folks that help him....


----------



## chonc

Darnstrat said:


> As I said, he works for me.. I have a number of other staff/tech folks that help him....


mmmm... maybe then is just a matter of proper training one guy to do a great job as a boom operator. Believe me, as an audio editor I prefer a mediocre lav source than a shotgun poorly operated (I have to deal with one of those as we speak:crying.


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> If the camera operator has to do the sound, maybe the lav is the best way to go after all.


Yeah, I agree. I don't really like the lavs, at least not the cheap ones, but it's useful in many situations.
Also if the budget allows me to bring in the lavs, it's always good to have as a back up plan. Say if you use something like Countryman B6 or even better Sanken COS-11 I totally don't mind the quality of those lavaliers. But not every production can afford renting those so... lol Many of the times for small productions it'll be just boom. But "a boom pole in a hand of a knowing person - is like a magic wand".

:T

Kirill


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> I have to deal with one of those as we speak...


Sux for you Chonc... My condolences lol

Kirill


----------



## fractile

What effect would using an overhead omni-directional mic have on the sound quality. Is the "presence" lost?


----------



## chonc

fractile said:


> What effect would using an overhead omni-directional mic have on the sound quality. Is the "presence" lost?


The first thing you'll notice is that you will have a lot more room reverberation. If the room you're recording is particularly live, you will end up with a "muddy" recording with the actual signal "buried" in reverb.

It won't help also if the room is noisy (e.g. with air conditioners, or outside traffic) you will have more of that too.

On the other hand, if you're in a very controlled space with no foreign noise with a nice acoustic (which is rare in a filming situation) you can take advantage of the omnidirectional pickup that will record all of your sources more evenly emphasizing a nice sounding room. That is why this type of pickup pattern is way more useful in a recording studio environment.


----------



## Kirill

fractile said:


> What effect would using an overhead omni-directional mic have on the sound quality. Is the "presence" lost?


Well depending on what you going to record of course. Say if you using the OH omni mic for the Over heads you'll pick up pretty much all the surrounding sources, especially if you'd use a condenser omni-directional mics. Of course depending on amount of gain you'll apply as well as the distance from the source will make a huge difference even with the omni mic. Say if you would record an interview (I wouldn't recommend that) with it inside some interior place you could get a descent result, but I'd recommend you to use at the least a Hyper Cardioid or a Cardioid mic. The reason is you'll get a bit less leakage from the surrounding BG noises at least somewhat. With Cardioid even more. But I'd personally use a Shotgun mic in Exterior and in some interior & a Cardiod in a small places like a little room, it'll give you a nice natural room ambiance. 

As I said earlier you could use an omni mic. You shouldn't lose that much of presence, but it depends on a distance from the source. Closer the better, since the main closest source might over power the unwanted noises to some extent. But still I rather not use this type of microphone, at least not for dialogue recording.

Hope that helped.

Kirill :T


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> The first thing you'll notice is that you will have a lot more room reverberation. If the room you're recording is particularly live, you will end up with a "muddy" recording with the actual signal "buried" in reverb. It won't help also if the room is noisy (e.g. with air conditioners, or outside traffic) you will have more of that too. On the other hand, if you're in a very controlled space with no foreign noise with a nice acoustic (which is rare in a filming situation) you can take advantage of the omnidirectional pickup that will record all of your sources more evenly emphasizing a nice sounding room. That is why this type of pickup pattern is way more useful in a recording studio environment.


Agreed with most of the points, but I'd still use a cardioid or a shotgun mic instead. Depending on a situation and location.

Kirill


----------



## chonc

Kirill said:


> Agreed with most of the points, but I'd still use a cardioid or a shotgun mic instead. Depending on a situation and location.
> 
> Kirill


You're right, try a cardioid before moving to the shotgun. If the cardioid can handle the room or exterior it will sound lot better!:T


----------



## fractile

Ok, thanks for the thoughts. It all sounds naturally logical. My main interest in the question in using an omni is the possibility of recording dialog in a room without having to "work" the mic around. I guess the only thing for me to do is experiment and gain more experience, even trying a figure-8 mic pattern, or putting a baffle above the mic to control the room sound.


----------



## Kirill

fractile said:


> ... trying a figure-8 mic pattern, or putting a baffle above the mic to control the room sound.


Well instead of trying using a figure-8 pattern try a M/S aka Mid or Middle Side technique (combo of Cardioid and Figure-8 mics). It's very effective. Here is the link to read more about it. 

Read more *HERE*

I think this might help you a lot.

Kirill.


----------



## chonc

Kirill said:


> Well instead of trying using a figure-8 pattern try a M/S aka Mid or Middle Side technique (combo of Cardioid and Figure-8 mics). It's very effective. Here is the link to read more about it.
> 
> Read more *HERE*
> 
> I think this might help you a lot.
> 
> Kirill.


Mmmhh... M/S for dialogue recording? ...never tried that before. That's interesting! Have you used it for that Kirill? can you elaborate on that?

I've used it extensively for fx gathering though...


----------



## Kirill

chonc said:


> Have you used it for that Kirill? Can you elaborate on that?I've used it extensively for fx gathering though...


I haven't tried it before for dialogue myself , I just use Neumann 184, that's was really an idea, you know rather then just use figure-8 why not try that. I'd think this particular way could have perhaps less problems with phasing on the off axis side of the cardioid. At least all location mixers that I've used had a MS option with Link and P-reverse, plus my techer was saying long time ago that many recordists use it, thus I considered it as a fact. Or perhaps it'll give some more Air in the recording I'd guess. I used it before for recording SFX and drums, haven't had a chance to do that for dialogue. Even though, in studio situation I could totally see the usage of that technique. I just don't see much point personally to perform M/S if you have a 184 lol Plus thinking from the point of view that you have all that staff dangling on a 18ft. boom pole Mmmmmm...

But I'll definitely try the recording of the voice in the studio just for fun. It's an interesting test to hmmm test? I'll post it here when I'll have a chance. As an extra reply.

Kirill :wave:


----------



## Kirill

The problem is Chonc also, I'm not too sure what exactly Fractile was planning to record, thus it's very hard to define or judge...

Kirill


----------



## Darnstrat

Kirill said:


> Hello Shacksters.
> 
> My name is Kirill. I've been recording dialogue on movie/ TV sets for about 6 years. I was wondering if anybody else in here also does what I do for living. As a sound engineer I have my own preferences for the mics as well as my own recording tricks and techniques.
> 
> For example I personally always trust to a boom mic way more then I'd trust any type of Lapel or Lavalier wireless system, or any other things please ask a question. ....
> 
> Sincerely.
> Kirill B.
> :T


How about BOTH a cardioid and a shotgun? 
Here's a takeaway video I shot last summer using both. Occasionally, you'll see the cardioid on the left side of the screen, which I used as a general coverage mic... the boom captured the lead vocal and guitars..


----------



## Kirill

It's sound very nice. I'd perform perhaps a double Cardioid though. one on the left how it is, another on the right for the Lead vocalist guitar, and a boom like you did for him as well. I think double double cardioid, sort of like spaced XY would make a balance of the recording a bit better. I like it though. Just a thoughts.


----------



## fractile

Thanks for that M/S link; I've read about it before but that helps clarify the concept better. I have an Audio-Technica BM-4029 shotgun with a M/S switch. I got it for my video camera but haven't had a chance to experiment.

This particular application is for mic'ing a small video studio, like a Tonite Show set in an 11x11 foot room. This would be primarily for vocal dialog. For musical instruments and singing, individual mic's can be brought in as needed.


----------



## Darnstrat

Kirill said:


> It's sound very nice. I'd perform perhaps a double Cardioid though. one on the left how it is, another on the right for the Lead vocalist guitar, and a boom like you did for him as well. I think double double cardioid, sort of like spaced XY would make a balance of the recording a bit better. I like it though. Just a thoughts.


Yeah, in an ideal situation, that's what I'd do... but I just used the two inputs on the Canon XL-1... then a mono mix essentially from the two tracks.


----------

