Help! MKH416 is bad for indoors?

D

dtzfilms

Well-known member
I'm a writer, finally braving the film-making world. I have over 30 shorts, 9 features, so I thought rather than rent or hire expensive professionals (30 times) in the beginning, I'd invest in a mic and shoot a few scripts myself until I'm ready to shoot a critical script. I initially thought of getting an MKH 416 to go along with an AF100 and just shoot a whole bunch, but my projects are predominantly indoor and dialogue heavy.

I know you're probably supposed to run the mic through a mixer but I'm thinking of just running it straight into the AF100. In one forum, however, I heard the MKH 416 is not good for indoors and in one I heard it's the industry standard for dialogue in film and television. Indoors - I'm thinking dialogue at bars, restaurants, apartments, bedrooms. In some cases I'll have three or five actors talking one after the other as in a house party scene.

I shot an interview using a boomed MKH 66 which I was led to believe was not as good as the 416 but the client was happy anyway, and I liked the sound and we shot in a tiny closet-spaced Radio show booth. Anyway, what should I buy? I've budgeted $2K for sound and was going to get the B&H photo Ultimate shotgun kit for the 416, now I hear the 60 is better? Supposed to be replacing the 416? I don't know what to buy.

I'm hoping to monetize the shorts eventually. The first two shorts will be my rookie director test films obviously, but still I'm trying to get the best sound I can for all the projects.

Not too technical, please or I might need a glossary of terms - I'm a layman. Thanks for all the advice.
 
As a general rule, shotguns are a bad idea inside. Hypercardioids are the go-to pattern for interiors. A search for hyper or hypercardioid here should return more discussion on this that you could ever possible want to read.
 
Rule of thumb: shotgun outdoors, hypercardioid condenser indoors.

The condensed version is that a shotgun mic's interference tube, by virtue of its design, is able to use phase cancellation to reject off-axis sound outside. But inside, that same principle makes it really susceptible to reflections that muddy the sound. A hypercardioid condenser for an interior, on the other hand, doesn't reject all the reflections but also doesn't muddy itself with an interference tube. It has a much more natural sound.

A shotgun can work indoors, assuming the room is pretty much non-reflective (lots of sound absorption on walls, floors, ceilings). It will work on large sound stages.

Just remember that there is no such thing as a "do it all well" microphone. You need to have a selection of tools to cover the different jobs.

EDIT: Jordan beat me to it (posted while I was typing).
 
You're going to get lots of opinions and suggestions, so just keep in mind that opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one and they all stink.* :grin:

It's very difficult to give you solid information without getting technical. There are several pickup (polar) patterns for microphones. On a film set the pick-up patterns you will most will be shotgun (lobar) and cardioid. Shotgun mics tend to be preferred for outdoor usage as they (supposedly) have good off-axis rejection; they don't pick up sounds from the sides as much as directly in front of it. Cardioid mics - specifically hypercardioids - tend to be favored for indoor usage; they have a more forgiving pickup pattern.

Because of the physics of acoustics and mic polar patterns shotgun mics will sound "roomier" than cardioids when used indoors. This is not to say that cardioids can not sound "roomy", it's just that when using a cardioid the pickup pattern accentuates the room less.

Mic choice, in most cases, is less important than the skill with which the mic is used. A great boom-op is worth his/her weight in gold. S/he knows the script, noiselessly keeps the mic properly aimed at the correct actor and keeps the boom out of the frame and from casting a shadow; tough freakin' job! The less skill your boom-op has the more you should probably have a cardioid to use indoors.

My own stinky advice is to get a hypercardioid for indoors and a shotgun for outdoors. Everyone has their personal preferences; I would get the Rode NTG-3 shotgun kit (mic, shock-mount, boom-pole, wind jammer) and the Audio Technica AT4053b as your cardioid. It will cost about as much as the -416 or the -60 and you will have covered both indoors and out. Others will have their own recommendations, and have much more experience than I do.



* There are lots of very sharp, experienced folks here who are worth listening to, but you should always do your own research. You could just rent for a shoot to see what you do or don't like; some places will apply some or all of the rental to the purchase.
 
Thank you very much guys, I'll look into the options. I remember what we used for the interview was not an MKH 66 - as no such thing seems to exist. It was a Sennheiser ME 66 K6 - it rocks the wallet at $450 at the moment, and I remember liking how it sounded. I'm seeing folks say make a boom pole cheaply for $25 as opposed to buying one. I'm sure it doesn't look professional but it'll undoubtedly get the job done. What is your take on this? Maybe buy a boom pole used? I've read through the forum for hours straight - a well of knowledge generously shared. Thanks. ME 66 K6 Super Cardioid short shotgun mic. I like it, but opinions please, smelly or not, I'd love to hear them.
 
The ME66 is a terrible microphone. Id rather use a NTG2

Personally id rent my mics if its only for a few days. Treat your production to a 416 for EXT. and a 41 for INT. You will thank yourself in post.
Renting mics (in the UK anyway) is not alot of cash for the value they bring.

You could always spend the 2k on a 302 with bag and accessories and rent your mics.

Just my 2 pence.
 
Okay, SJcambell, thank. I'm assuming the 416 is the sennheiser, but what's a 41? and what's a 302? I"m a writer and I've googled these numbers but come up with... well, nothing I think matches what you're suggesting.
 
dtzfilms said:
Okay, SJcambell, thank. I'm assuming the 416 is the sennheiser, but what's a 41? and what's a 302? I"m a writer and I've googled these numbers but come up with... well, nothing I think matches what you're suggesting.
Click to expand...

Sorry, lol. Bare in mind its just my opinion.

The kit i was referring to:
Sound Devices 302 Mixer
Schoeps MK 41 (Capsule) (Would have to be paired with a cmc6)
And the classic Sennheiser 416

But again it completely depends on what your covering. Why not get a student film maker involved?
 
SJCampbell, Thanks, I might get a student involved or maybe an inexpensive pro.

I'm shooting three INTeriors, restaurant floor & kitchen; an apartment front room, and a car interior. plus EXT: short conversation over the roof of a car, in car conversation and Restaurant EXT. walk and talk back to car. SJCambell, where are you in the UK? I'm trying to use this short as an entry requirement for the directing program at Beaconsfield.
 
sjcampbell said:
The ME66 is a terrible microphone. Id rather use a NTG2
Click to expand...

LoL

The ME66 is actually an excellent microphone.

It's just that some people prefer a different sound and use something else.

I know people who use the ME66 in the arctic circle and get great results.

I don't think I know of any "terrible microphones", most microphones are pretty reasonable nowadays. There are excellent mics and cheaper cost-effective mics. - but in the end it comes down to what you are plugging it in to, the sound you want and how you use it.

I find that mostly, when people describe something as horrible, it's mostly down to either how they are using it, or that it just does not give them the sound they want.
 
sjcampbell said:
Its simply my opinion.
Click to expand...
You didn't say that earlier.


sjcampbell said:
IMO anyone that would give credit to the 66 is a turkey.
Click to expand...
Now, that's just rude.


sjcampbell said:
There are so many other products out there that have a greater sound than the 66.
Click to expand...
I didn't say there wasn't.


sjcampbell said:
Also it maybe worth getting your ears cleaned.
Click to expand...
Again, that's just plain rude.


What you were doing is rubbishing a mic. just because YOU don't like it, because it does not suit YOUR way of working with the equipment that YOU have.

OK, you find it unsuitable for YOUR purpose.

But - someone with different equipment, using it in a different way, may find it perfect.

All I am saying is don't state as absolutes something that is an opinion.

Personally, I would not use an ME66, I have far better mics, costing a lot lot more, that I would use instead. But I would not rubbish it, just because it is not suitable for me.

Some mics are clean, some are coloured; some people prefer one and others vice versa. Some microphones may show up deficiencies in the mic. pre. (and the ME66 is certainly capable of doing this), so the user may choose a different mic. that does not show these up.

Microphones are like paintbrushes, you use the one that matches the job you are doing.

You don't say an artist's paintbrush is rubbish because you want to paint a house, just as you don't say a 2" brush is rubbish because you want to paint a watercolour.

Sorry - sometimes it gets me cross when people on forums rubbish a product simply because they find it unsuitable for what they are doing.

Many times I have read wonderful things about products that I would not touch with a bargepole on a rainy day, but that does not mean I think they are rubbish - just not the paintbrush for me.
 
I use the 416 for outdoor and when I'm doing ENG/EFP stuff (like news, interviews for tv-stuff).

And when I'm helping for no-budget projects....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top