Recently, we bought these Lewitt Audio LCT 040 Matched Pair Small Diaphragm Condenser Mics for our band, Labor XII. Ross decided one day that we should try them on set for interviews and they DO NOT DISAPPOINT.
This is actually very informative as it gives an extra usage to the mic. It sounds Great to me. Just think that it requires a certain sound proof environment
After watching this, I bought a 040 as my main talking mic. It works great, but I am the only voice talking. I wonder, though, if I could use a pair of 040's for an interview with two people talking. I recently did an interview with my wireless mic set, and I have a large amount of microphone bleed. I'd like to prevent that from happening again. I wonder if I should get a pair of SM57 dynamic mics or if I can make something work with another 040.
@@wakuyanow there are a couple of things going on here. First, you can absolutely run two of these for an interview. We do it all the time. The second thing, is no matter what you do, there will be bleed between the two microphones simply because the microphones don’t know what they’re supposed to hear and what they’re not, so, you have to edit around the dialogue. With these microphones, the thing you’ll need to look out for, and this is the case with all microphones, is phase cancellation. If you went for the SM57 pair, that would certainly reduce the amount of bleed, but only if the microphones are up close. Those microphones are generally used as instrument microphones for guitars and drums, and are EQrd as such. I would not recommend using them for dialogue, or any other dynamic microphone for that matter. there is a reason that condensers are standard across multiple industries. A dynamic mic will be OK for singing live or a public address system, but not for dialogue. Will it work? Yes. But, it’s not going to sound near as good and will take a lot more work to make it sound good. Editing dialog in an interview is just part of the game. Sometimes, if the levels are different enough between the two people, you can use a noise gate whenever you’re editing, and that will automate a lot of the process for you, but it’s also not perfect. They much more expensive attempt at this, would be to use iZotope RX advanced. This has an excellent module for removing bleed from Microphones. However, getting this app costs several hundred dollars if not close to 1000
@@HamilBrosStudiosLubbock I really appreciate your reply. It has been helpful, and I am thinking more about the issue. iZotope RX advanced is something I can't balance right now, but I could maybe swing WTautomixer, which does automatic switching. In the meantime, I'll practice with my mics, study up on gates, and try to improve my edit skills. Thank you so much. 😃
Well, that's a question with a very convoluted answer. The short version is that I clean my dialog with Izotope RX Advanced, then on my dialog track I have a preset FX chain that starts off with Slate Virtual Mix Rack (I think) with the Trimmer instantiated to pull the dialog up or down. From there I've got Waves Q10, Waves Q4, Waves R Compressor (set at about a 1.68:1 ratio), another instance of R Compressor (3:1 or higher depending on the dynamics of the dialog), Izotope RX De-esser, Waves Vocal Rider, lastly Waves L1 Limiter with the output set to -0.1 to prevent any overages). On my dialog bus, I'm running Soundtheory Gullfoss and Izotope Nectar. Nectar isn't doing anything to the dialog, but it feeds into an Izotope EQ on my music bus to duck conflicting frequencies (or "un-masking" as Izotope calls it). Thanks for the question!
@@HamilBrosStudiosLubbock Woah, that's an amazing reply!! That must have taken you ages - thanks so much! Really really appreciate you taking the time do put that together and share your expertise. It'll take me a while to digest it! You're a gentleman. Thanks kindly.
