QUESTION ABOUT WIRELESS MICROPHONES

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

when performing live... (or anything in the early 90s), and using a
wireless mic, would using that be able to let this happen:

"a singer was singing live with a wireless mic, and had the mic a good
distance from his mouth but still in front of him... maybe at arms
length or a little less, and it still sounded as if his mouth was right
up next to mic... and not further off. when using the regular mic, it
wasnt like that, you could tell it was at a distance."

could a wireless mic cause it to sound as if his mouth was right up
against it as opposed to further away?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

normaloil@aol.com wrote:

> when performing live... (or anything in the early 90s), and using a
> wireless mic, would using that be able to let this happen:
>
> "a singer was singing live with a wireless mic, and had the mic a good
> distance from his mouth but still in front of him... maybe at arms
> length or a little less, and it still sounded as if his mouth was right
> up next to mic... and not further off. when using the regular mic, it
> wasnt like that, you could tell it was at a distance."

How do you know that the one he was holding was actually the mic in use?

I have solved problems with poor mic technique before now by fitting a
separate lapel and bodypack "as a backup", then using that rather then the
"main" mic.

Not something I would do to well trained talent, but sometimes it makes for
a better show all round. This is especially true of acts that use the mic
as a prop!

There is nothing particularly special about the fact that a mic has a radio
connected to it, except that it costs you reliability & noise performance.

Radio mics are a fallback of last resort unless you have a LOT of money to
spend, good wireless is NOT cheap and cheap wireless (say sub £1500 each)
is not normally good), and even then you are better off with a £15 cable!

HTH.

Regards, Dan.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

normaloil@aol.com wrote:

>
>
> Dan Mills wrote:
>> normaloil@aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>> How do you know that the one he was holding was actually the mic in use?
>
> What do you mean? I saw it.. he was singing into it. well towards it at
> that point. He was leaving the mainstage by himself.. and headed
> towards the B stage way out in the middle of the audience.

You saw a mic, but it was possibly not the only one! There are very small
mics made for theatre/film/TV use which are installed in the hairline/over
the ear/in clothing and can be almost invisible.

For a gig like that, especially for the film sound, I could well see a lapel
being used.

Look at the countryman B6 or some of the DPA products for modern examples of
the kind of thing I am talking about.

> This is a professional band. u2 to be precise in their live concert
> movie "Zoo TV Live in Sydney".

One other thing which is very common on "Live" albums and I assume also on
film is to multitrack the gig then go back to the studio and overdub almost
everything except the crowd noise! Just another possibility. I would not be
at all surprised if at least some overdubs were done for something like
this.

> So, I dont know what they do/use.

Plenty of possibilities for turning this trick.

Regards, Dan.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1117363913.648106.178010@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
<normaloil@aol.com> wrote:
>this was regarding a live concert movie. not a bootleg.. but an
>official release and nothing else really seemed to be questionable.

What movie?

Retracking vocals on live concert recording is very common, and always has been.
mostly because there is so much leakage into a typical vocal mike with crazy
backline levels.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

also, can a mic be able to pick up an OK amount of vocals at that
length/distance? not where it sounds so close, but a good amount other
than distance vocals?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 29 May 2005 12:14:13 GMT, "Lorin David Schultz"
<Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote:

>The fact that it was a wireless mic seems irrelevant. I can't think of
>any way that using radio waves to transmit the signal instead of wire
>would account for that effect. Unless the compander circuit of the
>particular wireless system in question improved gain-before-feedback
>somehow, but that seems unlikely.
>
>Much more likely that the directional pattern of the head on the
>wireless was much tighter than the wired mic. That would allow for more
>gain before feedback, so the mic could be cranked up a bit more when it
>was further away from his mouth.

Are we talking about just volume? I assumed he was hearing other
characteristics of a close mic - proximity effect and breath noise.