If you are considering a shotgun/cardioid...

puredrifting said:
Thought I would also chime in, I am editing a project that I shot last week with the Audio-Technica AT875r. This mic is amazing for the money. Two days of interviews and b-roll on location in Philadelphia. I am listening to the sound on the Genelecs and it sounds very good, I would dare say even better than some of my $500.00 to $800.00 mics.

For those of you considering the Rodes and Oktava, don't forget to consider and listen to this one, it's a sleeper.
Click to expand...

This is music to my ears. I'm on a student budget for audio and I need the best bang for the buck so I was all set on a Rode for my shotgun choice because it was hard to find reviews of the recently released AT875. After reading your excellent comparisons, I think I'll definitely pick up the 875 over the Rode :)
 
Wish that I had reviewed the Rode because I keep on getting asked about them. I have never used one, heard one or seen one, but they must have something going for them.

The AT-875r is an outstanding value for the dollar, it's surprisingly good and I think a viable solution for people who cannot afford $500.00-$1,000.00 for a better mic.

Dan
 
i know some chiniz brands that they are outstanding value for these who cant afford 500-2000mics :-)
i heard it - it about autstanding as the rode - the only good its small and light so could work as camera mic
 
Keegan, as you can see Oleg and Dan can give you great advices over a bunch of different mics. They can do this probably because before buying anything they spend time renting different gear and getting their own opinion about these microphones. Dan 's review is great but before jumping and buying a microphone because his test you should get familiar with the gear is out there. Why do you need to buy right now?
 
perfect timing!!!!
today i just got the tascam hd p2, and was confused about what mic to get, now you've made it a whole lot easier...with a $500 buget
(the dealer trying to sell me a Rode NTG2)



rez

also just incase you need more reviews check out this link i just found

http://dvestore.com/theatre/mics_guide.html
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that nice write up and sound clips,

I was really considering buying the Rode NTG-1 with a shockmount and Deadcat windscreen, but I liked the sound of the clips for the AT875R, but I can't find many sound clips for the Rode NTG-1 or 2,
Does anyone have them both to compare?

Also Bh photo video doesn't offer the shockmount with the AT875R, which shock mount will work with this if i decide to go with this microphone and will that dead cat wind screen work on it?
 
rafaeldelauz said:
Keegan, as you can see Oleg and Dan can give you great advices over a bunch of different mics. They can do this probably because before buying anything they spend time renting different gear and getting their own opinion about these microphones. Dan 's review is great but before jumping and buying a microphone because his test you should get familiar with the gear is out there. Why do you need to buy right now?
Click to expand...

Well, I've heard clips from most of the budget mics and the AT sounds pretty good to me. I'd like to buy soon so I can get the most use out of a better (than on-camera) mic while I'm still in school and working on projects for my classes. If I'm always waiting for the next best thing I'll end up with nothing at all ;)
 
Late in the thread (very)

Fantastic thread. Very good job, Dan.

This will be a reference for years to come.

It would be nice if you updated it with some of the other popular choices, like the AKG CK69 (I'm looking into it), the Sennheiser 416. Its ALWAYS mentioned, etc.

A tricky question: What is your personal favourite? (Without looking at the cost.)

Fantastic resource, indeed!
 
Hi Sergio:

Glad you found it helpful.

AKG refused to send microphones for inclusion for this review, even after repeated requests.

Purposely did not include MKH-416, it has been around for about 20 years and I feel that the MKH-60 is vastly superior and I also tested the MKH-50. I really didn't want it to turn into a Sennheiser commercial, which, if I would have had three Sennheisers in the article, it would have been.

While there is nothing patently wrong with the 416, it is ancient technology and is not a good mic for newbies as it requires more accuracy and is less forgiving with boom skills. Generally anyone with good boom skills would generally not be reading up on audio gear on a site like Kens, the article is geared toward newbies and intermediates. But I always make a point of NOT telling professional sound mixers my opinions as I am pretty low on the audio totem pole in comparison and skills.

My personal favorites were both Schoeps, they were both amazing. If I could afford them, I would own them. Need an HPX-170 and a Carrion more so the mics will have to wait. I own an MKH-60, ME-64, 66, 67 and the Audio Technica AT875r.

Best,

Dan
 
Has anyone reading this used or tested the DPA 4017? I have never even heard of it but knowing DPA, it probably sounds pretty sweet.

Dan
 
puredrifting said:
Purposely did not include MKH-416, it has been around for about 20 years and I feel that the MKH-60 is vastly superior
Click to expand...

33 years actually - the MKH 416 came out in 1975.

The MKH 60 is much newer - it came out in about 1987.

And I agree that the 60 is much better. :thumbsup:

If we are talking gun mics - don't forget the MKH are RF condensers which give superior performance in damp conditions.
 
Well done...excellent job dealing with very HARD to find info. Thank you...
I would love to see a similar (Down and dirty...KISS) comparison of 1.) On-camera vs boom mike 2.) Lavaliere 3.) Wireless vs XLR cables...also throw in some input re: HOW -TO capture good audio at EVENT VIDEOGRAPHY shoots. I am shooting a rock band CD release party soon and may not be allowed to get a direct cable feed from the BAND sound mixer. After some testing of my own...considering Octava w/ -10db capsule located a few feet from a loudspeaker...or maybe shotgun w/ wireless transmitter.
 
OH yes

OH yes

puredrifting said:
hi all:

If you are in the market for a shotgun/cardioid mic, we just posted an article that you might find helpful http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/right_mic_brockett.html

take a look. I hope that you find it to be an informative read. Let me know if you found the article to be a good resource.

Dan brockett
Click to expand...


Thanks dan... Very helpful indeed!! In view of these tests my OUTRIGHT preferred mic HANDS DOWN or up or sideways, is the Shoeps CMC641 test. However, as someone else remarked in another thread; that an oktava can sound entirely different at a distance of 1' than at 3'.. I now ask myself... how would the shoeps (or all the mics listed) perform at varying distances. For example would an MKH-60 outperform a shoeps at distance exceeding, say, 3 feet and beyond? I need some answers here. Also, is Phantom Power a given on all these tests?

The reason I preferred the shoeps is because I closed my eyes and asked myself which mic sounded the most "believeable": I also happen to like the term clean when it comes to recordings. Behind the sheops I liked the neuman then the oktava as having the cleanest sound - eventhough the shoeps was by far the most believable. The reason I attribute to this, is that the shoeps seems to have picked up some ambience or (space) if you will, thereby making it easier for me to generate a mental image of a guy sitting in front of my computer's speakers - talking. Them dang Germans 've done it again.. (that's noob for, "I liked the shoeps").

Thinking out loud here: Ok.. If I can't get the shoeps owing to a "What (mf*ing) Budget??" status, then I will go for the Oktava. The Oktava, although it seems to mildly resonate (meaning: unwanted amplification at mid and lower frequencies) still gets the job done nicely, and, being the best bang for the buck seems to be the way to go. As well, the oktava's frequency response seemed a bit strange such that it seems that with a little tweaking or fine-tuning, the oktava could match the shoeps - who knows. I would like to hear a modded oktava mic and compare. My reaction (for whats its worth) regarding the neuman is that it sounds very clean with a most elegant smoothing of the lows but in that it sounds amplified is therefore less believable. I wonder if the neuman would sound as good as the shoeps placed a few feet back - I suspect not. Still, I have a slight suspicion that the shoeps at a distance of 3 feet would sound very different in an un-good sense. It worries me that the shoeps could be one of those mics that excels at a distance of 1 foot or closer and sounds like hell in the making at 2 feet and beyond.. hmmm.

In any case, thanks again for the tests!!!
 
Last edited:
William Lewis said:
Thanks dan... Very helpful indeed!! In view of these tests my OUTRIGHT preferred mic HANDS DOWN or up or sideways, is the Shoeps CMC641 test. However, as someone else remarked in another thread; that an oktava can sound entirely different at a distance of 1' than at 3'.. I now ask myself... how would the shoeps (or all the mics listed) perform at varying distances. For example would an MKH-60 outperform a shoeps at distance exceeding, say, 3 feet and beyond? I need some answers here. Also, is Phantom Power a given on all these tests?
Click to expand...
All tests were performed using phantom power, I think all of the mics tested require it. IMHO, placing a mic more than 3' from subject will result in lousy sound no matter which mic is used so it's moot point for me. 3' is the "outer limits" of good sound recording distance.

William Lewis said:
Thinking out loud here: Ok.. If I can't get the shoeps owing to a "What (mf*ing) Budget??" status, then I will go for the Oktava. The Oktava, although it seems to mildly resonate (meaning: unwanted amplification at mid and lower frequencies) still gets the job done nicely, and, being the best bang for the buck seems to be the way to go. As well, the oktava's frequency response seemed a bit strange such that it seems that with a little tweaking or fine-tuning, the oktava could match the shoeps - who knows?
Click to expand...
IMHO, the Oktave is nowhere near as transparent as the Schoeps but we all have different ears and opinions. I will tell you that I was shooting on Prison Break last week, and on 24 a few weeks ago and both sound mixers were using the CMC-641. I was on the set of Corrado, Adam Cultraros film. His sound mixer was using the CMC-641. So in those three shoots, we are talking budgets from the millions per episode down to a little $300k feature. All were using the industry standard. The only people using the Oktavas in sound for picture are the people who cannot afford the Schoeps. Not that the Oktava sounds bad, it sounds great...for the money, but you get what you pay for, taking in mind the law of diminsihing returns. In audio, the more you pay for a product, the smaller the differences between the products become. Personally, I would rent a Schoeps over buying an Oktava but I wouldn't mind owning an Okatava to just experiment with. It's cheap enough to experiment with mods, etc. To that end, I have been recording some amazing audio with the ultra cheap Audio-Technica AT-875r, my new favorite low end mic.

Best,

Dan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top