Does anyone have any experience using the Sound Devices MM-1 microphone
pre-amp? (Or the MP-1 preamp - same thing without the headphone monitor)

It looks like a very promising device especially for use with a radio boom
rig. The boom operator gets to monitor the audio directly without depending
on an IFB link. But an IFB signal can be fed into the device so the boom op
gets private line communications from the mixer. It supplies phantom power
and, as a preamp, it would feed controlled signal to the radio transmitter..
One would expect this to enhance audio performance.

On the other hand, it does look a bit big. The boom op would have to hang
this clunky device from his (her) belt along with the regular transmitter
and the IFB receiver. True, you wouldn't have to have a separate phantom
supply but the MM-1 appears to be quite a bit bigger than the phantom supply
would be.

The monitoring capabilities are a plus but the real question is there is any
advantage to having a dedicated microphone preamp for use with a radio boom.
That is, is there any performance advantage of the preamp or the limiter of
the MM-1/MP-1 compared with using a regular phantom supply (Denecke, PSC)
and connecting directly to, say, a Lectrosonics transmitter?

Moreover is the advantage, if any, worth the inconvenience of that big box?

Thanks for your thoughts.

David Waelder

Does anyone have any experience using the Sound Devices MM-1 microphone
pre-amp? (Or the MP-1 preamp - same thing without the headphone monitor)

It looks like a very promising device especially for use with a radio boom
rig. The boom operator gets to monitor the audio directly without
depending
on an IFB link. But an IFB signal can be fed into the device so the boom
op
gets private line communications from the mixer. It supplies phantom power
and, as a preamp, it would feed controlled signal to the radio
transmitter.
One would expect this to enhance audio performance.

On the other hand, it does look a bit big. The boom op would have to hang
this clunky device from his (her) belt along with the regular transmitter
and the IFB receiver. True, you wouldn't have to have a separate phantom
supply but the MM-1 appears to be quite a bit bigger than the phantom
supply
would be.

The monitoring capabilities are a plus but the real question is there is
any
advantage to having a dedicated microphone preamp for use with a radio
boom.
That is, is there any performance advantage of the preamp or the limiter
of
the MM-1/MP-1 compared with using a regular phantom supply (Denecke, PSC)
and connecting directly to, say, a Lectrosonics transmitter?

Moreover is the advantage, if any, worth the inconvenience of that big
box?

Thanks for your thoughts.

David Waelder

Does anyone have any experience using the Sound Devices MM-1 microphone
pre-amp? (Or the MP-1 preamp - same thing without the headphone monitor)

It looks like a very promising device especially for use with a radio boom
rig. The boom operator gets to monitor the audio directly without
depending
on an IFB link. But an IFB signal can be fed into the device so the boom
op
gets private line communications from the mixer. It supplies phantom power
and, as a preamp, it would feed controlled signal to the radio
transmitter.
One would expect this to enhance audio performance.

On the other hand, it does look a bit big. The boom op would have to hang
this clunky device from his (her) belt along with the regular transmitter
and the IFB receiver. True, you wouldn't have to have a separate phantom
supply but the MM-1 appears to be quite a bit bigger than the phantom
supply
would be.

The monitoring capabilities are a plus but the real question is there is
any
advantage to having a dedicated microphone preamp for use with a radio
boom.
That is, is there any performance advantage of the preamp or the limiter
of
the MM-1/MP-1 compared with using a regular phantom supply (Denecke, PSC)
and connecting directly to, say, a Lectrosonics transmitter?

Moreover is the advantage, if any, worth the inconvenience of that big
box?

Thanks for your thoughts.

David Waelder

David

Like Brian's Boom Op, I don't find the size of our MM-1s to be a
problem as I too wear a belt with pockets. It you have T-powered and
Phantom powered mics then this box is a boon. Not only can it be used
for wireless transmittion but I've also wired it up to the headphones
for two-way comms between boom op and mixer, when we need it (see the
manual for the MM-1 which shows a diagram of this type of setup). The
two AA batteries last pretty much all day.

Great device and in addition to having virtually the same opinion as
the above posters I think it also has an as good if not better mic pre
than many of the smaller field mixers on the market. Great box.

"Navillus" <alexonash...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:ac116502-bf63-40f9-9f95-469e17d697df@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

Great device and in addition to having virtually the same opinion as
the above posters I think it also has an as good if not better mic pre
than many of the smaller field mixers on the market. Great box.

Only thing missing is a slate tone...then it would be the perfect 1 channel
mixer!

"Navillus" <alexonashoot@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac116502-bf63-40f9-9f95-469e17d697df@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Great device and in addition to having virtually the same opinion as
the above posters I think it also has an as good if not better mic pre
than many of the smaller field mixers on the market. Great box.

Only thing missing is a slate tone...then it would be the perfect 1 channel
mixer!


From the responses I've seen here and on Jeff Wexler's forum, it doesn't

On 3/10/08 10:43 PM, in article b_oBj.70560$Ft5.60416@newsfe15.lga,
"Charles
Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:


"Navillus" <alexonashoot@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ac116502-bf63-40f9-9f95-469e17d697df@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
Great device and in addition to having virtually the same opinion as
the above posters I think it also has an as good if not better mic pre
than many of the smaller field mixers on the market. Great box.

Only thing missing is a slate tone...then it would be the perfect 1
channel
mixer!


From the responses I've seen here and on Jeff Wexler's forum, it doesn't
seem that many people use this device. It appears to be more popular in
England than here in the States.

Those who use it all comment favorably about the limiters and claim
improved
performance compared with using the preamp (+ outboard phantom supply) of
a
Lectro transmitter.

So far I have no production experience with the unit. I borrowed one to
try
and my initial listening tests have been promising. My quest for a way to
use the short Neumann mikes with radio link led to this inquiry. I
installed
a Neutrik connector with RF trap in the microphone pigtail, confirmed
presence of the latest circuit board in the mike, and even put an
isolation
transformer in the Denecke phantom power supply, all without any good
effect. The low level background hash continued to be generated with the
100
series Neumanns. With the MM-1 power supply, the hash was completely gone
and the resulting audio was just like a hard wire. I don't yet know why
the
MM-1 should function well while the Denecke-Neumann combination produces
noise; I'll continue to investigate.

I acquired a pair of the Sennheiser MKH 8050s so the issue of using the
Neumanns is somewhat moot. (Although, sometimes one would like a third
mike
with a radio link for a plant.)

Just listening to the unit with low level backgrounds, I have a sense of
improved performance even with the Sennheisers. Radio booms never seemed
"hard-wired" to me although they often exhibited performance that was
really
good enough. Any background noise was effectively masked by the voice
being
recorded. Occasional "squashing" from the limiter may have been noticeable
in headphones but was not apparent in speaker playback. Listening to
various
mikes through the MM-1, I really do get the open sense that I experience
when listening to a hard-wire mike. But this is preliminary testing
without
the dynamics of an actual production. I have a small assignment coming up
and that will give me a chance to make a critical listen. I'll make a
follow-up report.

David Waelder