MKH50 is good but ....

S

stringz

Active member
I find it too bassy. Ignoring the problems with handling noise which I can get round to some extent by being more delicate, I find that with men's voices I am having to pull the mic back from their mouth in order to reduce some of the bass response. Now I know there are many mixers/recordists out there who love the 50, but I am wondering if that is because they are able to make use of more aggressive roll off on mixers that have more eq options than my SQN.

any thoughts?
 
stringz said:
I find it too bassy. Ignoring the problems with handling noise which I can get round to some extent by being more delicate, I find that with men's voices I am having to pull the mic back from their mouth in order to reduce some of the bass response. Now I know there are many mixers/recordists out there who love the 50, but I am wondering if that is because they are able to make use of more aggressive roll off on mixers that have more eq options than my SQN.

any thoughts?
Click to expand...

The MKH 50 has a much better bottom end than other super-cardioid mics because of the way it's designed.

Also - a super-cardioid will have more proximity effect than a cardioid when used close.

If it's too bassy for you, the MKH 50 *does* have a bass roll-off switch on it to reduce the bass when it's being used close.

I assume you did not switch this in ???
 
Yes, I do use the roll off on the mic (it's permanantly on, on my MKh60 as well) and on my sqn as well.
 
I find with the 50 roll off and the 442 roll off (at 80hz), sounds nice and rich, never had a problem with the low end being too much. Rycote InVision lyre mount. Maybe it's the SQN? I don't have any experience with that mixer. Worthwhile to maybe try it on a different mixer, A/B it to be certain.
 
For many things - at least for me - I would rather have too much than not enough; I would rather roll off some low end in post than try to add something that isn't there.
 
Production mic opinions are always tricky imho (at least once you get into professional quality mics like the MKH 50)...

1. It should work well on the set (reliable, sturdy, noise rejection, ect...)
2. What does it sound like when played back in a movie theater?

It's very hard to find a scenario when you can truly compare two mics, both boomed on a set, played back in an actual theater with the same processing. (Or for that matter, finding out how much flexibility each mic gives the dialog mixer)
I remember an article Jeff Wexler wrote a while back about swapping mics on different takes of a two-shot exterior (416 to the cmc6 + mk41 I think) and then coming to dailies to listen to both of them (this was in an article explaining why he liked using the mk41 outdoors), but that's a rare opportunity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top