Mic Shootout: Audio-Technica AT4053b Vs. Rode NT3

Chadfish

Chadfish

Veteran


This is my first informal test of the AT4053b Hypercardoid mic I just bought. In this video I am switching between the AT453b and the Rode NT3. Both mics were placed in pretty much the same place above my head.

Make you own conclusions. To me the AT4053b is much darker than the NT3. At first listen the NT3 sounds more open and clear, but the AT4053b is more rich and full. I would have liked more clarity in the AT4053b, but perhaps I didn't have the mic pointed directly at my mouth. I have to do more tests. I like the NT3 for camera mounted home movies, as it picks up everything in front of the mic great. I'm not so sure the AT4053b will be as clear. I could roll off below 80hz I suppose, but the NT3 is clear with no roll-off.

What do you think?

{{{{Update}}}}

Here is my 2nd shootout between the 2 mics, as well as a comparison of the Rode NTG-2 & NTG-3, in a 4-way orgy of mic shootoutosity. I founf the Rode Shotguns to do pretty well indoors, at least in the reflective room I was using.
 
Last edited:
The AT could use a touch of EQ, but it does sound less brittle than the NT3. You'll have to refresh my memory, does the 4053 have a built-in roll off?

Also, you should do a series of microphone theme songs.
 
hahaha, i love the mic theme song!

FYI - The NT3, according to RODE's website, is an end-address cardioid (not a hyper), just like my M3.

Thanks for doing the vid, once i get some decent speakers to listen on I'll be able to say more about the two mics sonic qualities.
 
Nice comparison video! To me the Rode is a little brighter sounding with less low end. Not bad on a male voice but on a female voice it could get too spitty sounding. The AT has a little more richness in the low end and to my ear a bit more realistic sound. Some eq would help with clarity, but its not far off. I used that same Rode on a boom pole for a short time till I could afford a better choice. It was a workout though. Both are nice mics for the price.
Bernie
 
I've updated my original post to compare the 2 mics in a different room, and also throw in the Rode NTG-2 & NTG-3 shotguns, just to see how well they do in a reflective room. Not too shabby!
 
It's an interesting comparison. However, as already mentioned, the NT-3 is a cardioid and not a hyper. That's a pretty big difference between the two mics when it comes to practical application.

Also, this test compares mics mounted on floor stands. The NT-3 is much beefier (read: weightier), as you pointed out. For boom work, every ounce counts.
 
It's weird that the NTG-2 is about a third of the price as the NTG-3. Is the NTG-3 worth the extra cash?
 
Chamber005 said:
It's weird that the NTG-2 is about a third of the price as the NTG-3. Is the NTG-3 worth the extra cash?
Click to expand...

It is. The design is more robust, and the sound is very close to the 416. Considering that the NTG-3 is half the price of a 416, it's a steal.
 
Chamber005 said:
It's weird that the NTG-2 is about a third of the price as the NTG-3. Is the NTG-3 worth the extra cash?
Click to expand...

I second C2V's response. It's totally worth the extra cash. The NTG-3 is a career-long mic IMO. Also, though it's officially a no-no, the NTG-3 doesn't do too bad indoors, so theoretically if you were buying one mic now with plans to get another later, I'd go with the NTg-3.
 
I have to say that the AT4053b did wonderfully yesterday in some interview style cooperate video work I did sound on. I'm very happy with the mic.
 
Chadfish,

What a clever and entertaining way of mike comparison.

Made me feel good about my NTG-1 (since it is a NTG-2 without battery power).

Now I need to hear a song about my Oktava Mk-12.
 
Kelly Olsen said:
Chadfish,

What a clever and entertaining way of mike comparison.

Made me feel good about my NTG-1 (since it is a NTG-2 without battery power).

Now I need to hear a song about my Oktava Mk-12.
Click to expand...



Thanks Kelly! If I had an Oktiva I would make a little ditty for it too. The tunes would be even better if I wasn't just improvising them off the top of my head!

The reason I, as an audio engineer and studio musician, like to throw a guitar into the mix is that the instrument and the singing utilize a much wider spectrum of sound than dialog alone. I feel it gives me an instant feel for what the mic is picking up from high to low in just a couple of seconds.

As a side note I would (but haven't yet) use the AT4053b on guitar in a studio recording. I'd place the mic about 12" away from the 12th fret of the guitar, and angled slightly toward the sound hole to taste. The more you angle to the sound hole the more bass response from the guitar you pick up.
 
Chad Fish,

Is the 4053b worth the difference in cost from the NT3. From you recordings I could not hear much difference. Right now I have an NTG-3 but we have a load of Interview style videos we have to shoot. I would love to use the NTG-3 for I love the sound I get from it. I know its against standard to use a shotgun Mic for this. I have to buy one today so I hope I can get your thoughts on this. Thanks.
 
Let me add what I'm looking at and I would hope to get input.

SCX-1 - akg se300/93 - 4053b - NT3

I just want to get the best sound possible without going over this price point. What out of the 4 will give me the best Interview sound and Guitar recordings. Thanks guys. I never resort to asking in forums - just a reader but this has been a frustrating process..... Just hate to make a mistake in equipment. I do like a lower register in the mix.
One last thing - Is the MKH 8050 worth over double the money from the Mics listed above. If it sounds that DIFFERENT then do you bite the bullet and go for it. But I feel the sound should be over double the quality. Thoughts and thanks for any advice here.
 
iujmdmf said:
Chad Fish,

Is the 4053b worth the difference in cost from the NT3. From you recordings I could not hear much difference. Right now I have an NTG-3 but we have a load of Interview style videos we have to shoot. I would love to use the NTG-3 for I love the sound I get from it. I know its against standard to use a shotgun Mic for this. I have to buy one today so I hope I can get your thoughts on this. Thanks.
Click to expand...



Between the akg se300/93 & 4053b I would say the AT4053b based on reports from a guy here named Jay. I can't speak directly for him but from what I remember: Firstly the CK93 is a capsule mic with various capsules to choose from, only the only one worth getting is the CK93, so the value of being able to buy a different cap is lost. Also he reported that the CK93 is more susceptible to humidity, and has produced some "pffff" sounds on humid days. Finally he prefers the 4053b in sound quality as well. Ty Ford also endorses the 4053b as a sweet mic with great value. I can not personally compare the 93 as I don't have one, but I can say that the 4053b is well worth the extra money over the NT3. I have 2 NT3s and have used them happily for years, but in my comparison to the 4053b they sound brittle. Listen again with good headphones on, or quality monitors. You'll find the 4053b has a very full sound with good low coverage, and a more natural sound. The NT3 may sound a little more clear at first listen, but upon further examination the NT3 is thin and brittle. The NT3 is also heavy if you are using a boom pole.

I do like the NTG-3 as well, but now that I have the right tool for the job I will not use it for indoor booming because I have a better mic for that.

Finally the 4053b would be nice on guitar at the 12th fret, pointing a little towards the sound hole.
 
Oh and iujmdmf

The audix may be cool, but it's not a hyper. it has no lo-cut filter, or pad, it's Frequency Response is only 40Hz to 20kHz. I don't need to hear it to know that it's not right for my use. You want a hyper polar pattern and the ability to cut the rumble on the mic BEFORE the signal gets to the mixer. And it's nice to pad down when you have something very loud to record.
 
So it sounds like I should return the NTG-3 and get the 4053b. I love the sound from the NTG-3 but if it is really not able to work for interviews - I guess I will have to get over it. Its weird for I have tested the mic (not in a true on location interview, I will actually shoot that next weekend for the first time, but at home) and it sounds great. I did not get that echo from the Mic and I tested it in a few unfavored areas - like the kitchen. I have the Sony 7506 and still did not hear any echo. Figured I could get away with it. Last thought - return the NTG-3 and go with the 4053b. Is that the final answer. Thanks for taking your time to answer this Chadfish.
 
Chadfish said:
Oh and iujmdmf

The audix may be cool, but it's not a hyper. it has no lo-cut filter, or pad, it's Frequency Response is only 40Hz to 20kHz. I don't need to hear it to know that it's not right for my use. You want a hyper polar pattern and the ability to cut the rumble on the mic BEFORE the signal gets to the mixer. And it's nice to pad down when you have something very loud to record.
Click to expand...

You can get the Audix with a cardiod, hyper, or omni capsule. Its a screw on capsule so you can get all three if you want.
Bernie
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top