at 4041 cardioid as an internal dialogue mic?
- Thread starter blake2404
- Start date
Steve House
Veteran
You're looking at mics that fall on both sides of the sweet-spot you're looking for to record dialog in a normal, reflective interior. I'd expect the AT4041 to be a good quality mic but it is a cardioid pattern, meaning it needs to be pretty close to the source - its working distance would make it almost impossible to keep out of the shot - and it's going to pickup a lot of the room in use. You need something more directional to eliminate the room and to give you more "reach" on the working distance. The ME80 and MCE86 are both shotguns, and though they're directional, as shotguns their directivity is frequency dependent. At low frequencies they tend to become almost omni directional. That means the room reflections interact with the direct sound at the mic to the detriment of the recording. The combination of directivity and reach on the one hand and good behaviour in reflective environments on the other is why hypers are recommended.
Steve House
Veteran
LOL - pattern names can get a bit cloudy - I mean, what's the difference between "hypercardioid" and "super-cardioid?" What's imprtant is exactly HOW they get their directivity. The culprit with most shotguns is that they're based on the interference tube principle, that long tube with the wide vents that give them their name, and it's the interference tube that makes them misbehave indoors.
JordanBlock
Well-known member
For some not so light afternoon reading on microphone theory & design, pickup patters and whatnot, check out Neumann's book Microphones. (900K PDF)
dpFilms
Member
blake2404... I think I speak for most forum members when I say we're all more than happy to offer you advice. Lord knows this board is a godsend to my when I'm researching a new purchase. But I've noticed this has been your 6th-ish independent thread on this topic over the past couple of days.
So take this advice from someone (i.e. me) who is very much an over-researcher...
Buy a microphone (& accessories) you can afford and start recording audio. Every day you spend combing boards and starting threads is a day you don't spend shooting and honing your craft. There will ALWAYS be opportunities to upgrade your gear once you've nailed the basic skills and saved--or earned--some money.
The guys on this board have offered you multiple suggestions. You can trust these them. They're knowledgable and don't mind sharing what they know. Rather than continuing to throw out options that haven't been recommended (read: round hole / square peg), pick a combination of kit components within your budget (i.e. one's that have been recommended), make a purchase and start using it. You won't be sorry. This isn't marriage. If you fall out of love with your MC-012 or CK93, there will be someone willing to take it off your hands for almost what you paid for it.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting you're not welcome to ask additional questions or start new threads. But take it from me, no amount of time you spend on this or any board will beat donning headphones and holding a boom over your head pointed at an actor... or a television speaker if you want to practice on your own.
Nike's right. Just do it.
So take this advice from someone (i.e. me) who is very much an over-researcher...
Buy a microphone (& accessories) you can afford and start recording audio. Every day you spend combing boards and starting threads is a day you don't spend shooting and honing your craft. There will ALWAYS be opportunities to upgrade your gear once you've nailed the basic skills and saved--or earned--some money.
The guys on this board have offered you multiple suggestions. You can trust these them. They're knowledgable and don't mind sharing what they know. Rather than continuing to throw out options that haven't been recommended (read: round hole / square peg), pick a combination of kit components within your budget (i.e. one's that have been recommended), make a purchase and start using it. You won't be sorry. This isn't marriage. If you fall out of love with your MC-012 or CK93, there will be someone willing to take it off your hands for almost what you paid for it.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting you're not welcome to ask additional questions or start new threads. But take it from me, no amount of time you spend on this or any board will beat donning headphones and holding a boom over your head pointed at an actor... or a television speaker if you want to practice on your own.
Nike's right. Just do it.
Sound Chaser
Active member
Not recommended
Not recommended
I own a pair of AT4041's.
While it is possible to use it for dialog, it is better for VO. The mic pops easy even with the wind screen, which means that the thing will also pick up wind noise with a swing of the boom. Really I only use these mics for drum OH, but they also sound good on string instruments.
I probably sound like an Oktava salesman but, the large diaphram MK102 is what you want. I wish someone else would give it a review as I seem to be the only one singing it's praises.
btw: One common myth I hear continually repeated on this forum is that a hyper has reach and a cardiod does not. Mics do not have reach in the same way a lense can focus in. What we interpret as "reach" is the ratio of direct pickup vs off axis cancellation. In this respect the published polarity patterns for a particular mic is an indicator of whether a mic will function well in a given application. In this respect a cardiod (such as the MK102) can have excellent reach but, it will have a slightly wider front axis pickup pattern, which can at times be a good thing. IT IS THE OFF AXIS PATTERN THAT DETERMINES FUNCTIONALITY BETWEEN DIALOG AND ROOM INTERFERENCE.
In the end, hearing is the only true test.
Not recommended
I own a pair of AT4041's.
While it is possible to use it for dialog, it is better for VO. The mic pops easy even with the wind screen, which means that the thing will also pick up wind noise with a swing of the boom. Really I only use these mics for drum OH, but they also sound good on string instruments.
I probably sound like an Oktava salesman but, the large diaphram MK102 is what you want. I wish someone else would give it a review as I seem to be the only one singing it's praises.
btw: One common myth I hear continually repeated on this forum is that a hyper has reach and a cardiod does not. Mics do not have reach in the same way a lense can focus in. What we interpret as "reach" is the ratio of direct pickup vs off axis cancellation. In this respect the published polarity patterns for a particular mic is an indicator of whether a mic will function well in a given application. In this respect a cardiod (such as the MK102) can have excellent reach but, it will have a slightly wider front axis pickup pattern, which can at times be a good thing. IT IS THE OFF AXIS PATTERN THAT DETERMINES FUNCTIONALITY BETWEEN DIALOG AND ROOM INTERFERENCE.
In the end, hearing is the only true test.
Last edited:
Steve House
Veteran
You are technically correct about reach but the fact remains that different polar patterns have differing optimal working distances. With a tighter pattern rejecting undesired sounds coming from off-axis (higher ratio of on-axis to off-axis response) you can work the mic farther away from the source and make up for the lower level (one can't avoid the action of the inverse square law) of the desired on-axis sound with increased amplifier gain. Different polar patterns have different optimum working distances - closer than optimum and proximity effects start to become apparent and aim becomes more critical while farther than optimum and ambience and room effects begin to intrude. Considering speech, the mic's distance from the mouth will have a lot of effect on the on-axis level due to the action of the inverse square law but almost no effect at all on the off-axis levels. Thus the ratio of on-axis to off-axis sounds hitting the mic is going to vary depending on working distance. For cardioids, optimum is around 8 to 12 inches from the source; for hypercardioids 18 to 24 inches; short shotguns 24 to 36 inches; and long shotguns 36 to 48 or perhaps 60 inches. In other words, a cardioid at 10 inches would have about the same ratio of on-axis to off-axis response as a hypercadioid might at 24 inches. Hence what is loosely called "reach."
Schoeps "Showcase" website has some very interesting demos of their mics at different working distances on seveal types of material. http://schoeps.de/showroom/
Sound Chaser
Active member
I would argue that the entire microphone including polarity, sensitivity, preamp, size of the diaphram and method of transducer decides effective working distance. The best example of this is a SM58 vs a U87. An 87 hears the entire stage. A dynamic can be quite sensitive but, falls off immediately.
The inverse square law has no bearing. It merely states that the doubling of distance from source equals -6db in amplitude. What matters is the RATIO of on axis vs off axis and how tight and consistant that pattern remains throughout the freq spectrum. That is why I made the previous comparison of a camera "lense." A microphone does not work like that!
I use cardiod mics at distances of 30' on string orchestras. Sometimes the program is softer than the spoken voice. My MK102 cardiod has better reach than my MK012 hyper. Same manufacturer, same preamp and body, but tighter pattern on the 102 even though it is a cardiod.
Dialog is only one limited way to judge the workings of a microphone. Musical instrumentation, ambient, sound effects, foley, studio recording, live reproduction and speaker RTA, will give you a much bigger picture of how mics pickup in different situations.
Last edited:
Steve House
Veteran
No one said that dialog is the only way to judge a mic. You judge a mic based on its suitability to the job at hand. Just remember that the "job at hand" for most of the folks participating here who are considering the Oktava is indeed dialog where the mic will be on the end of a hand-held boom, held just out of frame over the head of a character speaking lines or answering questions in a normal speaking voice, in a normal room such as a residence or office. If it were me in that situation, my first thought would be to use my Schoeps CMC641 - I would not use my Rode NT1a or my Sennheiser MD46 or one of my AT 3031s. All four are excellent mics for their intended purpose but for THIS purpose the Schoeps is the best choice. Were I close micing a kick drum, my first thought would be an EV RE-20, not the Schoeps. If I was shooting "streeters" I'd grab the MD46 ... etc etc You said you use cardioids on string orchestras - well and good, and a cadioid would be my first thought were I micing a string section as well. But not for location dialog recording, and location dialog recording is what most posters here asking about the Okatava line are specifically interested in using it for. It's suitability for a string section isn't relevant.
Tighter pattern on a cardioid than on a hypercardioid? Do we mean the same thing when we use the term "tighter pattern?" I would interpret that to mean that the cardioid has more rejection of off-axis sounds arriving from 45 degrees or 90 degrees than does the hypercardioid, just the reverse of what it's supposed to be. Other than in the rear lobe of the hyper pointing directly aft, off-axis response with the hyper should be less than with the cardioid. Not disputing your findings but that's just plain unexpectedly weird.
BTW, I've been looking for info on the MK102 and can't come up with anything. Is it still current in the product line?
Good clips on your website, nice sounds. Good work!
Last edited:
Sound Chaser
Active member
The MK102 seems to be missing on the Canadian site as well as a few others. Haven't been there in a while and the prices are way up. You can find some info on the Russian site here: http://www.oktava-online.com/mk102.htm#over but, not the polarity pattern. Too bad a thing of beauty but, if you look at the freq response you can see an almost perfect rejection pattern.
I had to wait 4 months for the 102 capsules. These are the same gold sputtered diaphrams used in their flagship MKL5000 tube mic. I usually have graphs of everything I own but can't find the material. When I have some time I will try and link a 102 vs 012 comparison sample.
I am not a fan of the Oktava hyper but, I have had some success with the 102 in like you say, "certain dialog situations." I have never done a side by side comparison so I am interested to try it for my own sake also.
Last edited:
Steve House
Veteran
I'm neutral on them, to tell the truth. As I mentioned before, I already own a Schoeps so adding an Oktava to my kit wouldn't make a lot of sense but it does seem like a popular entry-level choice. The important thing is a lot of folks on limited budgets try to record dialog indoors with an ME66 or similar shotgun mounted on their cameras and a bargain hyper such as the Oktava on a boom will usually give them signifigantly better results.