Posted by nappy on 12/03/07 18:25

"Pre-Meltdown" <entropic3.14decay@optonline2.718.net> wrote in message
news:eaV4j.48$g26.12@newsfe08.lga...
> "nappy" <n@n.n> wrote in message
> news:yUO4j.79106$Um6.36574@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "Jacques E. Bouchard" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:Xns99FB76656B3Cjebouchard451yahooca@204.153.245.131...
>>> "nappy" <n@n.n> wrote in news:J9G4j.79021$Um6.38224
>>> @newssvr12.news.prodigy.net:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Jacques E. Bouchard" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns99FA8190D16E8jebouchard451yahooca@204.153.245.131...
>>>>
>>>>>>The sound is
>>>>>> still better than an expensive camera-mounted shotgun mic,
>>>>
>>>> I hear the music from the Twilight Zone for some reason. Or is it
>>>> Outer
>>>> Limits?
>>>
>>> Does it have horrible room echo, nappy? Because if it does maybe you
>>> need
>>> to mount your mic closer to your subject. Or use a $10 wireless lav mic.
>>
>> If I were recording someon in a live room I wouldn't attempt it with a
>> boom. I would run both a lav and a boom though. Always do. It isn't
>> something I have to study and make a decision about. It's just common
>> sense.
>
> Why the lav *and* a boom?
>
> If I were to guess, is it because the boom gives the lav some
> "atmosphere", maybe preventing the sound from being like that in a soap
> opera studio? I 'd guess you'd want separate volume controls on both.

Actually it is because sometimes, the Lav will be rubbed on clothing or be
noisy or overloaded or whatever and the boom is a backup.
I rarely mix the two together.

[Back to original message]