Head mic or collar mic?

[Spider]

I am seeing many videos with onstage presenters walking around with head mics (like the old-fashioned telephone headsets without the earpiece) rather than a collar mic (a mic attached to one's collar) as commonly used by television presenters.

Does anyone know why this is? Is it just a habit formed in a particular industry, or is one device better than another?

TIA

[nealrm]

I think this is done for aesthetics. The head set give a more tech images to the presentation.

[Spider]

Does it? I am surprised! - the head mic seems so low-tech to me.

I wondered if quality of recording had something to do with it.

[KristineS]

Collar mics can pick up a lot of rustling from fabric. If you're moving around a lot you also tend to move your head more, gesture more, and that can change the position of your mouth in relation to a collar mic. Anchors and television presenters generally sit in one place, so collar mics work better.

[cbscreative]

Does it? I am surprised! - the head mic seems so low-tech to me.

I wondered if quality of recording had something to do with it.

I think Kristine provided a great answer. The head mic is actually more high tech compared to the handheld mic alternative. Some of them now are barely noticeable.

[billbenson]

Think of this, every picture of a 911 operator, radio DJ etc shows a head mic. Also remember that your voice projects out from your mouth, not your chest or collar. Something that is in front of your mouth logically seems that it would be easier to design in quality with out having to design in as much noise cancellation etc.

[DeniseTaylor]

I agree with Kristine S.

I have used a lot of mics over the years and prefer the boom mics over any others. More control and more comfort and the noise issue really is one with collar mics.

[Spider]

Interesting comments - thank you, all. I was concerned that there might be a quality difference in the recording capabilities of the microphone.

At Toastmasters, in our district, for small meetings (10 people) for recording purposes, and for large conferences (150 people+) for projection purposes, we always use collar mics. Noise from clothing and head movement problems have never occurred, when I was in the room. I have always used a collar mic clipped to my tie or similar central location on my shirt, if tieless.

To the best of my knowledge, we have never used - and the hired DJs have never used - head mics, yet lately many videos of conferences (where the speakers have been seated in interview or panel discussion style presentations) have seen the use of head mics.

I was just wondering if there was a technical reason for that. Seems not - I guess it's just what one gets used to.

Thanks.

[TimPiazza]

There is a technical reason for choosing one over the other in some circumstances. Sensitivity falls off quickly with distance from the mic. If you are in an environment where there is a lot of background noise requiring the amplifier to be cranked up, you need to crank up the gain on a lapel mic much more than a head-worn unit that is close to your mouth. In that case, you are more susceptible to feedback with a lapel mic.

Tim

[Spider]

Thanks, Tim. Wouldn't accoustic echo cancellation solve that? Plus, direction-sensitivity of the mic itself? Even so, the distance from lips to mic with a lapel mic is not going to be greater than 4" or 5"

I can see the need for a head mic if one is working in a machine room, but on-stage and in-studio presentations are not going to be that noisy as to make much difference between the two, are they? (Yes, a singer in front of a rock band needs a head mic but I'm talking about speaking engagements.)

[billbenson]

At some point if the volume from the speakers and the volume from your lips is to great, you will get to much feedback and noise cancelation isn't going to protect enough from that. It sounds like you haven't had any problems, so I wouldn't worry about it.

[TimPiazza]

Lapel mics are usually omni-directional, meaning they are sensitive in every direction. Small distances make big differences with microphones. It's a logarithmic function, so the difference between 1" and 4" can be something like 8x difference. I'm not a mathematician, and if I were, I'd probably be sorry I tried to explain it. :-)

I was really just providing more information, not suggesting you should use a head-worn mic. It's all a matter of environment. A trade show, for instance, might be too noisy for a lapel mic.

Feedback is a tricky thing, when you do have to deal with it. Most of my stage experience is in a band setting where there are all sorts of environmental dynamics that change how the mic hears the room as the day or night progresses. Moving an acoustic instrument closer to a mic increases its sensitivity, an audience creating more ambient noise causes the sound engineer to push the PA volume to just under the point of generating feedback, then somebody moves away from a loudspeaker and all hell breaks loose. :-)

Tim

[Spider]

Very helpful - thanks. I had forgotten the exponential character of distance from source. I'm dealing with much quieter situations so the lapel mic works fine.

[Dan Furman]

I simply "like" a head mic better.