xlr adapter question?

Discussion in 'Professional Video Production' started by rhickling, Dec 16, 2003.

  1. rhickling

    rhickling Guest

    I want to hook up an xlr-connected microphone (probably a sennheiser
    me66) to my Canon Elura mini-cam which has a regular stereo jack.

    I've seen two types of xlr adapters:

    1) the cable kind which just has an xlr connector on one end and a
    stereo connector on the other

    2) the box kind like a beachtek or studio 1

    Obviously there's a big difference in price. What's the advantage of
    using a box adapter? Does it sound better? or is it just that you
    have more control over the input levels?

    Any opinions?


    Rob
     
    rhickling, Dec 16, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. rhickling

    Ed Anson Guest

    The Beachtek adapters provide a number of things you can't get with the
    cable adapter:
    1. Audio transformers cleanly convert from the balanced source (your
    mic) to the unbalanced input of your camcorder. This gives you a cleaner
    signal.
    2. As you mentioned, you get attenuators that can help if your signal is
    too hot.
    3. If you use a separate mic pre-amp or mixer with line level output,
    you have a built-in pad to drop the signal to mic level.
    4. If your mic requires phantom power, some of the Beachtek units can
    provide it.

    I have used all of those options. YMMV.
     
    Ed Anson, Dec 16, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mostly control and convienence.
    They cannot make a signal "sound better" unless you
    mean eliminating external interference (RFI, hum, etc.)
    or matching levels (padding line-level down to mic-
    level, etc.)

    It is possible, both in theory and in practice, to use a
    properly-constructed cable to directly connect a mic-
    rophone(*) to the input connector of a typical camcorder.

    All of the advantages listed by Mr. Anson are absolutely
    correct. But none of them REQUIRE use of a "box adapter".
    The "box adapter" just makes things easier. But there may
    be conditons where use of a proper cable is more desirable
    than using a "box adapter".

    (*) Note that likely NONE of the camcorders with 3.5mm
    mini-phone plug mic inputs will provide P48 phantom power
    to pro mics. You must use a mic that either requires no power,
    or uses an internal battery (or use a "box adapter" that provides
    P48 phantom power).
     
    Richard Crowley, Dec 16, 2003
    #3
  4. rhickling

    Steve Guidry Guest

    OK, educate me here . . . (I haven't had much experience shooting with
    consumer cameras, or those pro-sumer ones with just a mini jack.

    How does using a Beachtek or other adapter benefit you at all if your camera
    doesn't allow you to defeat the auto level controls ?

    It seems that you're just solving a peripheral problem (using a good mic),
    when the real problem (the audio artifacts of ALC) go unchallenged.

    I'm sure there is an answer to this, but darn if I can figure it out on my
    own . . .

    Steve
     
    Steve Guidry, Dec 16, 2003
    #4
  5. rhickling

    RGBaker Guest

    How does using a Beachtek or other adapter benefit you at all if your
    camera
    It lets you use a long mic cable run without introducing noise -- you can
    mic your subject, not your camera.
    I wouldn't call mic placement a peripheral problem, not mic choice ... and
    though I chose a camera that lets me defeat the ALC, I often use ALC on the
    safety channel and frankly ... it works very well. Wouldn't want to stake
    my career on it, but it seems a whole lot better than it use to be. So the
    answer is -- your 'real problem' goes unchallenged, but might not be quite
    the issue you assume it is.

    Now if you want to get me going, lets talk about auto iris during a shot ...

    GB
     
    RGBaker, Dec 16, 2003
    #5
  6. rhickling

    Mike Kujbida Guest

    ....


    And what's wrong with using auto iris???
    I happen to like blown out whites, no compensation for those "into the
    window" shots, no "true" exposure control for those beach/snow shots on a
    bright sunny day, etc., etc. , etc.
    (insert huge grin here)

    Mike
    (manual iris guy for 30+ years)
     
    Mike Kujbida, Dec 16, 2003
    #6
  7. rhickling

    RGBaker Guest

    And what's wrong with using auto iris???
    Actually, I can almost live with those things -- what I _hate_ is having the
    exposure 'adjust' during the shot. Drives me crazy. But worse is auto
    focus hunting ... which I can't even bear to talk about.

    GB
     
    RGBaker, Dec 17, 2003
    #7
  8. rhickling

    Mark B Guest

    Any idea where I can get a cheap "box adapter" to supply phatom power? Or
    even better do you know where I can find a circuit

    thanks
    Mark
     
    Mark B, Feb 23, 2004
    #8
  9. Beachtek sells the boxes. Perhaps others also.

    Ideal circuit is online at...
    http://www.jensentransformers.com/as/as037.pdf
    (most likely better than what Beachtek uses)

    Biggest issue, of course, is producing the 48V for
    phantom power. I found a nice little voltage
    multiplier circuit somewhere using standard CMOS
    logic (and no inductors).

    Complete list of Jensen circuits...
    http://www.jensentransformers.com/apps_sc.html
     
    Richard Crowley, Feb 23, 2004
    #9
  10. rhickling

    Steve Guidry Guest

    Whirlwind, Sescon, and a number of folks make those. Some even use 9v
    batteries. Others power a number of cameras. Check their web sites.

    Steve.
     
    Steve Guidry, Feb 23, 2004
    #10
  11. rhickling

    Mark B Guest

    thanks

     
    Mark B, Feb 24, 2004
    #11
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.