ISO: Smaller Version of Rode NT4

[basspig]

I love the Rode NT4 that I use on one of my EX1s. I would buy two more of them but for one thing: they're huge and heavy and make the camera cumbersome to handle, insert and remove from duffle bags and the fact that 85% of the mic's size and mass are to support the handle/battery storage compartment.

I've looked at alternatives from 3-4 other manufacturers, but the frequency response is terrible. I want an X-Y stereo mic that is relatively flat from 20-20K, like the NT4, but without the bulky, space-wasting body, which serves no function on a camera system but to frustrate the efforts to attach it to the camera.

So, I'm spreading out feelers for an alternative mic that might exist outside my knowledge. This mic would have the same style capsules, but thinner, shorter body, and would fit neatly into Sony's mount without need for cumbersome shockmounts. I want the mic to fit tightly and closely to the camera body, so it doesn't stick out and become imperiled by nature of it tending to hook or catch on anything nearby.

Now that I have the EX3, I'm anxious to install a good mic on it, but would rather not deal with the bulk of another NT4, as much as I like the sound.

Any suggestions other than the poor offerings from A-T (Audio-Technica BP4025 is a remote possibility, but the response deviates a lot over the passband) and the Schoeps CMXY 4V at $5500 is too expensive. Mics from Roland and Tascam were found extremely lacking.

Is there anything else in the balance XLR world that is compact like the Schoeps, but under $1000?

[ullanta]

Not sure what your intended use is (would help to know)... but I'd say DON'T consider the BP4025... I find it to be unisable for anything that requires an accurate stereo image, especially of things relatively "on-axis" - everything "on-axis" sounds pretty bad. For ambience where you don't need a precise stereo image and don't have anything specifically "on axis", it works OK and is indeed nice and quiet. But the flexibility isn't there for other things. It has NO "reach".

[basspig]

Intended use is a good 'reality capture'--that includes music, marching bands, pyrotechnic and aviation sounds, to name a few of the events I use my EX1s at.
I wasn't impressed in the least by the response graph on the A-T mic. It's awful, in fact. Why they would publish that is beyond me. I come from a world of Neumanns, so I guess from my vantage point, everything else looks like garbage. But the Rode, given it's relatively minor deviations, is a solid performer and has good reach for a stereo mic, without sacrificing a lot of stereo separation. I'd really love a chopped down version of the NT4. Maybe I'll just buy another and have a machine shop make me a smaller body with a taper and thread to match the original mic capsule head and I'll rewire the whole thing. Looks like a competent mic is going to be almost impossible to find without customizing one myself.

[Chadfish]

What about rigging 2 Rode NT6 mics somehow? They are very small, and I believe have the same capsule.

Or this Sure VP88
It's 40-20, but I have heard great things about it. You could boost the bass back up if you really need that low rumble below 40.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/68506-REG/Shure_VP88_VP88_Mic_with.html#features

[basspig]

Too bulky to rig dual mics. Boosting in post is always going to be a losing proposition. Boosting the bottom end means boosting LF noise in the mics, preamps and other electronics, however small, and is not an idealogy I work by. My goal is to maximize s/n at every step of the process. That means having ample spectrum capture by the mics, so boosting is not necessary. I looked at those mics, but unless you record pipe organs and pyrotechnics, it's not a problem until you hear the difference between that and a really wide band mic.