Azden SGM1X decent budget mic?

Azmyth

Azmyth

Veteran
I read the new to audio sticky.. and I didn't see any azden mics in there, but I've read quite a few good reviews on them.. thoughts?
 
Its weird how audio for film is so much different than studio audio.. like mics in studio work. I can buy a 69.00 mic from musiciansfriend for studio recording, and it will sound good... sure there will be a noticeable difference between it and a 600.00 mic, but so far from what I can tell the gap is MUCH larger in film.. like.. the low end mics are literally crap, compared to the higher end ones.
 
Steve House said:
Azden does not hold a lot of favour with most working pros. Sorry.
Click to expand...


I'm shooting on a Canon HV40.. the words "working pro" does not apply here, since noone is actually "working" on my set. We are creating. I feel the two should be differentiated. I don't want to come off sounding harsh, but what a professional thinks about a microphone really means squat to me in terms of what I am using it for. If they are working professionals, they are probably not wasting their time shooting no budget movies.

To clarify. I respect the opinions of professionals. I just don't feel being that picky applies here is all.
 
Last edited:
If you don't want people's opinions, don't ask for them. You asked, we answered with recommendations for decent low-budget gear, not top of the line mics that you'll find on professional sets.
 
JordanBlock said:
If you don't want people's opinions, don't ask for them. You asked, we answered with recommendations for decent low-budget gear, not top of the line mics that you'll find on professional sets.
Click to expand...

No, thats not at all what I was saying. Of course I figured someone would take it that way since you can't display inflection over a chat window.

As I said, I wasn't trying to come off as a know it all. I obviously don't know it all or I wouldn't be asking. Noone offered up any reason WHY the pros don't like the azdens. Instead of saying "the pros don't like em so you shouldn't either". Why don't they like them? Give me details. Telling me something sucks, without some valid reason for it.. is just as useless as not posting an answer at all. The Azden is not a pro mic, so why would a professional use it? Isn't that kind of obvious?

If it sucks for low/no budget filmmaking.. why?

A better response would have been...

Your not gonna wanna go with the azdens.. "because they are not.. <insert reason why they aren't suitable for my use">

Not, "the pros don't favor them"...

what does that even mean?

It means, they don't use cheap mics? Well.. thats a given anyway. I've just never been the type to take the "we don't like it because it sucks, and thats all you need to know" answer. If you can't give me a reason why you dislike something, thats more than "we don't like it".. then yeah, maybe I should ask someone else.

and for the record, I was talking about the comment by the person regarding them not being favored by the pros.. I appreciate the budget mic suggestions.. I'd just like to know why the azdens are disliked.
 
Never do Azden. Every Azden mic I have used was prone to drop outs. Nothing like sitting there listening to your talent then all of a sudden...nothing......it's pretty maddening.
 
Azmyth said:
If it sucks for low/no budget filmmaking.. why?
Click to expand...
For starters, it has a signal to noise ratio of 65 dB.

If you're recording dialogue this is much too low, which is to say that the mic is just too darned noisey. That ratio alone is a deal-breaker, in my opinion.

Azmyth said:
... "the pros don't favor them"...

what does that even mean?
Click to expand...
It means that men and women whose livelihood depends on such things do not consider it a sound investment.

Perhaps you don't share the mercenary goals of the average professional sound person, that's fine. However, when it comes to gear selection I doubt your criteria of evaluation differ that greatly.
 
SMuir said:
For starters, it has a signal to noise ratio of 65 dB.

If you're recording dialogue this is much too low, which is to say that the mic is just too darned noisey. That ratio alone is a deal-breaker, in my opinion.


It means that men and women whose livelihood depends on such things do not consider it a sound investment.

Perhaps you don't share the mercenary goals of the average professional sound person, that's fine. However, when it comes to gear selection I doubt your criteria of evaluation differ that greatly.
Click to expand...

I choose gear by lots of factors. Usually none of which is by how much they cost. In my 10 years of audio and music production. I've used extremely expensive mics and extremely cheap mics.. both with good results.. depending on the application.

My problem, was beinig told that "professionals don't like them" without being told "why". That would be like me going into a chicken joint and saying "I don't like your chicken".. and then walking out. At least tell them why you don't like their chicken. Is it too greasy? To many bones? Not enough white meat?
 
Thanks for clarifying what you're looking for, sorry I misunderstood what you were after. As the others have posted, Azden gear in general is very poorly made, to poor specs, and is generally unreliable.

A distinction should be made between 'cheap' and 'inexpensive'. A pro isn't going to use a cheap mic, but they will use an inexpensive one. There was a discussion on the board a while back about some $50 pair of condensers from CAD. Certainly inexpensive, but they're great for use in a dangerous situation where you wound't want to risk far more expensive mics.
Those CAD's are inexpensive, the Azden is cheap.
 
Azmyth,

It would be good if you gave us some idea about what type of production you are doing. Different productions have different sound needs. In your initial inquiry, you requested opinions about Azden mics with no other qualifiers. You got what you asked for and then criticized the responders.

Though you didn't get specific details of Azden deficiencies, this is not about pros dissing a certain mic or preferring more expensive equipment. Most of the sound folks here buy there own gear, and if they could get by with a cheaper solution such as Azden products, they would. It has everything to do with better sound. Your Canon cam can create excellent images, what are your expectations for sound? How good is good enough; you must decide. There are posts here every week from folks who have spent larger dollars on a cam and then want a good sound package for $200. A good place to start is that your sound budget should be equal to you cam budget. Your HV-40 was somewhere near a $1000 right? Listen and learn, you will find wisdom here, cruel as it may be.

This should be a sticky

Grant
 
"The pros don't use them" may seem like a generalization without explanation, but that is because you are ignorant of what an audio professional requires from their gear. And please, don't take the meaning of the word "ignorant" as a negative connotation aimed at anyone, including your self. I am totally and completely ignorant about molecular biology; that doesn't make me stupid, just lacking in knowledge. The admission of ignorance is an indication of intellectual honesty.

So this is a quick primer into what a sound professional looks for in the gear they select.

1. Sound Quality.

This may seem obvious, but that is the basis if all of our decisions. What is not obvious is that every piece of gear that interprets audio sources has it's own "personality." The way that a microphone is constructed has an affect on the way it picks up frequencies. Recording engineers, especially in the music biz, refer to it as "coloring" the sound; some mics are "Fat", some are "Thin", some are "Harsh", some are "Warm", some are "Cold" and others are "Flat" or neutral. A "Flat" mic (supposedly) records the sound exactly as it sounds in real life, without "coloring" the sound. Consumer and Prosumer gear tends to color sound in ways that make it more pleasing to the user without any effort the process the sounds. When doing production sound most professionals prefer a mic with a flat response.

2. Self-Noise.

Sound professionals hate unwanted noise - hiss, hum, buzzes, crackles, digital artifacts, etc. All audio devices create self-noise, usually hiss. The amount of self-noise a unit generates depends upon the quality of its design, the quality of its components and the quality of the manufacturing process. Units that generate little self-noise tend to be more expensive; they have better engineering, better components and more stringent manufacturing requirements. This is coupled to signal-to-noise-ratio (SNR), which is the difference between the amount of wanted signal and how much unwanted noise is present in the signal.

3. Durability/Reliability.

A professional wants a piece of gear that will stand up to the rigors of the chosen application. To a production sound professional this means that it will take the occasional bump, drop or jolt and will stand up to reasonable environmental extremes such as heat, cold and humidity.

4. Ease of Use.

This one is pretty obvious, but when working on set or in a studio you are on the clock. The unit should allow the user to work quickly and efficiently.

5. Return on Investment.

Will the unit provide all of the above in a fiscally responsible manner? A very important consideration when your livelihood and professional reputation are on the line.


So to quickly sum up, professionals don’t use Azden mics because they are highly colored, noisy, have copious self noise, have a poor SNR, are not reliable, and have horrible ROI potential.
 
Thanks for the more detailed info. Thats all I was looking for. For someone who is ignorant on the subject as you say, a one line answer usually isn't sufficient.

I'm not one of those stupid people who goes out and buys a 8000.00 camera, and then wants a 200.00 mic. I paid 759.99 for my camera, brand new. So, to me.. it only makes sense to pay less than that for a mic. I've been looking at the Rode NTG-1 and 2 and either one seem like they would fit the bill for my needs.
 
Azmyth said:
...
I'm not one of those stupid people who goes out and buys a 8000.00 camera, and then wants a 200.00 mic. I paid 759.99 for my camera, brand new. So, to me.. it only makes sense to pay less than that for a mic. ....
Click to expand...

Not quite. The audience forgives compromised picture far more readily than they will overlook compromised sound. So if you running tight in the equipment budget (and who isn't?) and something's got to give, it makes more sense to try to shave corners with the camera than it does with the audio. It's actually not at all uncommon to see a set where the sound gear costs quite a bit more then the camera. Up on the top shelf, pricing out a Sonosax or Cooper mixer and a Deva or Aaton Cantar recorder is guaranteed to give you sticker shock LOL.

The Rodes you mentioned are both decent sounding and solidly built economy mics. If you aren't already aware they are essentially the same mic, differing only in that the NTG-2 offers an internal battery for situations where phantom power is unavailable while the NTG-1 needs to have an external source of power. Rode stands behind their gear with excellent warranty service should anything go wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top