BBC Presenters - 2 lav mics?

[MarkOne]

OK, I have no idea why this BBC practice (which seems a fairly new phenomenon) of kitting out their presenters with double Lav mics - sometimes on separate lapels and in the case of newsreaders etc 2 mics on a single lapel clip.

What possible advantage could there be?

Enquiring minds...

[Drew Stephenson]

Failover redundancy? Though you'd think a splitter box would cover that.

[zenguitar]

[cynic] One for the broadcast and one for the podcast [/cynic]

Andy

[OneWorld]

Well, there's 2 sides to every story

[adrian_k]

Well, there's 2 sides to every story

[Kwackman]

OK, I have no idea why this BBC practice (which seems a fairly new phenomenon) of kitting out their presenters with double Lav mics - sometimes on separate lapels and in the case of newsreaders etc 2 mics on a single lapel clip.

What possible advantage could there be?

Enquiring minds...

Main mic and spare, usually only on live shows.
This has been a regular practice for more than a decade.
If the presenter is at a table, the spare mic could be a table mounted mic and only one clip mic used.

[ef37a]

On a related mic matter. Son and I had been looking at mic techniques for classical guitar on YTs. A very common one seems to be two (cardioids?) about 1-1.5m away below the player but mounted parallel to each other and spaced less than 100mm apart. We concluded this could only be for redundancy/backup? No 'acoustic' advantage that we are aware of?

I said one of my theories was that the operator was going into a common or garden USB interface and one mic would only give them 'one ear'ed', real time monitoring. He does not agree.

Dave.

[Drew Stephenson]

No 'acoustic' advantage that we are aware of?

Other than stereo?

[Drew Stephenson]

Main mic and spare, usually only on live shows.
This has been a regular practice for more than a decade.
If the presenter is at a table, the spare mic could be a table mounted mic and only one clip mic used.

So you have complete redundancy for the whole chain?
I wonder how many times mics fail? But obviously often enough for it to be worthwhile.

[Tomás Mulcahy]

Yes it is a spare in case one mic dies. They've been doing it on RTE Late Late Show since Tubridy started. Except for the longest time both mics were in the mix. I have found it useful, it was a great way for my students to learn what phasing sounds like Incidentally, before the lav mics thing they used to add into the mix reflections from a mic on short mic stand on the table. Not an acoustic table. A normal table

[Matt Houghton]

No 'acoustic' advantage that we are aware of?

Other than stereo?

How many lav mics will they need once they start broadcasting in Atmos?

[MarkOne]

Main mic and spare, usually only on live shows.
This has been a regular practice for more than a decade.
If the presenter is at a table, the spare mic could be a table mounted mic and only one clip mic used.

Interesting.

I'd love to know how often they have to cut over to the spare mic. Is this a 'we just like a spare, in case' or has bitter experience shown they really need one. I've never had a lav mic go down, and since we moved over to licensed spectrum I've not had issues with interference on our radio packs (But I guess we have a quite benign RF landscape compared to the BBC newsroom)

One of my day job activities involve mission critical comms, and some of those users could potentially be in mortal peril if their mic doesn't work. They only have one!

[Hugh Robjohns]

There are several different things potentially going on here.

For live broadcasting it has always been standard practice to have main and standby (backup) mics. In my BBC early days it was often two AKG C451s on opposite sides of the presenter's desk.

For 'soft' sets there was often a 451 on an extension tube next to the chair, and something else flown overhead, either on a Fisher boom or a drop arm from the lighting grid.

It was normal to provide independent phantom supplies for the separate mics, too, and the BBC-designed consoles had duplicate signal paths and switchable output chains, so there was pretty much complete redundancy through the whole signal path and no single point of failure.

When those huge (by modern standards) Sony ECM50s became standard presenter mics, they became the main mic (with a battery in the preamp in case of phantom failure) and there'd be a desk mic or something overhead as the backup.

Today, it's standard for live newsreaders to have a double sub-miniature tie clip with two mics to provide main and spare, again.

There is much less importance given to full redundancy and avoiding single points of failure, these days, basically because the gear is so reliable, and mic failure is also extremely rare, of course....

But it's depressingly common for presenters to accidentally wheel their chairs over lavalier mic cables, or disconnect things.... so main and spare remains an important requirement.

I've had several occasions in my live broadcasting career where I've had to use the backup mic, so it is still a sensible and low cost precaution.

Mics on opposite lapels is standard for the host in chat shows and panels where there are guests on both sides, or in other situations where the presenter is required to look in different directions.

If a lavalier is on the left lapel, say, but the presenter is talking to someone on their right, they will sound extremely off-mic... and the contrast in sound quality when they subsequently talk to someone on their left is very dramatic.

So a mic on each lapel avoids that problem (and sounds better than a central tie mic)... provided the sound operator has the ability to fade up the right mic at the right time. As pointed out above, both mics open usually results in nasty comb-filtering. The unused mic doesn't have to be closed completely, just dipped 10-12dB below the used one.

[Hugh Robjohns]

We concluded this could only be for redundancy/backup? No 'acoustic' advantage that we are aware of?

Who knows the thinking behind the people posting on YT... but I imagine the close spaced mics are to achieve a sense of scale in a stereo image.

Twin parallel near-spaced mics is a standard practice for soloist miking in the classical world.

[Bob Bickerton]

On a related mic matter. Son and I had been looking at mic techniques for classical guitar on YTs. A very common one seems to be two (cardioids?) about 1-1.5m away below the player but mounted parallel to each other and spaced less than 100mm apart. We concluded this could only be for redundancy/backup? No 'acoustic' advantage that we are aware of?

I said one of my theories was that the operator was going into a common or garden USB interface and one mic would only give them 'one ear'ed', real time monitoring. He does not agree.

Dave.

Best classical guitar recordings I've made have been an A/B spaced pair of nice Omni SDCs at around 300mm (in a good acoustic). That spacing of 100mm seems fairly small, but nevertheless, acoustic guitars benefit from some sort of stereo imaging. Are you sure they aren't omnis?

Bob

[ef37a]

We concluded this could only be for redundancy/backup? No 'acoustic' advantage that we are aware of?

Who knows the thinking behind have the people posting on YT... but I imagine the close spaced mics is to achieve a sense of scale in a stereo image.

Twin parallel near spaced mics is standard practice for soloist miking in the classical world.

Well yes Hugh, some were obvious 'living room wannabees' but some quite professional setups in nice surroundings, halls and churches. The video editing between pieces was pretty slick on some of them and the sound as well.

Re your last sentence...why? And would they usually be omnis or directional mics?

Hi Bob, very hard to tell the mic type. You tend to get very few then fleeting glimpses of the gear from far away.

Dave.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Re your last sentence...why?

Because stereo sounds a lot nicer than mono — even narrow stereo.

And in the context of soloists within an ensemble stereo accent mics dont collapse the overall stereo image in the way that a mono spot can.

And would they usually be omnis or directional mics?

Depends on the situation. Generally Omnis by preference... but cardioids (or hypo-cardioids, or even fig-8s) if the situation requires them.

...very hard to tell the mic type. You tend to get very few then fleeting glimpses of the gear from far away.

Yes, its often very hard to see, but SDC omnis dont usually have sound entry slots on the side, whereas cardioids usually do (behind the capsule).

[Kwackman]

So you have complete redundancy for the whole chain?

No, although certain major OB events do.
A lot of lav mics are radio mics for a couple of reasons, so it's another thing to go wrong and having a spare is wise!

I wonder how many times mics fail?

I wasn't frequently mixing this live type of program, but I can remember one time when it did happen to me, and the sheer relief of having that spare mic to fade up was a very good for my heart!

[Hugh Robjohns]

It comes back, yet again, to the risk versus consequence ratio.

The risk of mic failure might be very low, but the consequence of it happening in a live broadcast could be catastrophic. So, an extra spare mic is a precaution well worth taking.

I recall a Blue Peter presenter wearing a silk blouse. The weight of the lavalier mic pulled on the fabric and didn't look good, so it was agreed the mic could be clipped onto the middle of her bra.

All went well in the rehearsal. In the broadcast she leaned forward, the mic got squished, and the sound became extremely muffled! Fortunately, a co-host was standing alongside and pulling his mic up served as a workable substitute until she stood up straight again!

The perils of live broadcasting...

[Drew Stephenson]

Thanks both, makes sense.

[muzines]

In the broadcast she leaned forward, the mic got squished, and the sound became extremely muffled!

Looks like she made a bit of a boo-b-oo...

(Sorry...!)