Question about mic quality.q

actually might sound too thick, if there is such a thing in the pro audio world. I told that echoey thing to my friends, but they said the quality is so good compared to the AT4053b, that they would rather have the echo. Can a great mic with an incorrect pick up pattern, sound better than an okay mic, with the correct pick up pattern? I wonder if this is a good thing when showing a movie in theaters later. But here's a sample of both mics. Is their a difference in pick up pattern quality?

The 4053 has a "low cut" switch. Have you ever changed it? If the switch is in the position that cuts the low frequencies, it will drastically change the perception of the sound quality. That being said, I just shot an entire feature using this mic on all interiors (4073 on exteriors) and was very happy with the results. With the switch in the low cut position, I got two advantages: 1) virtually no boom pole handling noise and 2) 100% intelligible dialogue , and that's before post work, to my ears which are terrible, thanks to 40+ years of audio work. Without the low cut, you get a thicker, more "Hollywood" sound but those advantages will be lessened.
 
Not sure why anyone would bash the 4053b comparing the sound to a mid-priced shotgun. I have been using the ntg3 shotgun in more situations than I did originally as I have become more comfortable using it. But dang, anybody that can't love the 4053b is just wrong. There are better small condensor hyper-type models for more $$, but for a moderately priced mic, it is very good.

Grant
 
This is a bit off subject, but has anyone tried the Samson C02 mics for film sound?

http://www.samash.com/p/Samson_C02 Pencil Condenser Microphones_-49986983

They look a LOT like the Oktava, get good reviews from musicians, and a matched pair here is $139. Only hitch is no hyper is made, only cardiod, with some models having additional omni caps supplied.

Edit: found a review here:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/oct05/articles/samsonc02.htm

The reviewer describes it as "verging on hypercardiod". Hmmmm.....
 
Last edited:
ggrantly said:
Not sure why anyone would bash the 4053b comparing the sound to a mid-priced shotgun. I have been using the ntg3 shotgun in more situations than I did originally as I have become more comfortable using it. But dang, anybody that can't love the 4053b is just wrong. There are better small condensor hyper-type models for more $$, but for a moderately priced mic, it is very good.

Grant
Click to expand...

I agree the 4053 is a good microphone... and I've always been a big fan of the 4073a, in the right situation... but the NTG-3 has a really fat sound to it... like the 416... regardless of the NTG-3's price, so it's no surprise to me that the guys this dude's doing sound for have said they prefer the NTG-3. I don't think that's saying the 4053 is a bad mic... but I've heard a Schoeps mk41 sound HORRIBLE when used in an OR at the hospital. It wasn't me using it BTW... and maybe any mic would have sounded bad... maybe an NTG-3 would have sounded better. I always said... ALWAYS... that shotguns are generally best outdoors UNLESS it's a very good shotgun, like a 416 or CS3e... and I said that before the NTG-3 came along. The NTG-3 is a budget 416... and pretty much works like one.

Even if the 4053 sounds more realistic, or flatter, in the OP's use... I can see where some guys... especially indi-types who aren't used to hearing a really full "hollywood" character to voices in their shoots... would like the NTG-3. Back when I was a bit obsessed with the 4073a and the 416 (owned both at the same time)... I had times where I liked one or the other, but I sold the 4073a first, because I liked the fat sound of the 416... and the 416 worked for interiors where much of the time the 4073a didn't. I later sold the 416 as well... because of the AKG ULS system, but now I also have an NTG-3 because it still has that fat 416 sound, at almost half the price.
 
Steve House said:
Shotguns in an indoor non-reflective environment such as on a soundstage would be just fine. So assuming you're not just ignoring bad sound, those of you who report using them sucessfully must be working in situations where reflections aren't much of a problem for one reason or another. But in a non-conditioned space the short-term reflections can interact with the direct sound in the interference tube and create comb filtering effects that will change the timbre of the sound. The comb filtering causes some frequencies to be emphsized and others supressed. The problem is not one of echos or reverb - echos are long-term reflections - but a hollow, sometimes almost metallic ringing, tonality to the sound. It can happen outdoors as well, say with a shot set up next to a brick wall on a paved area. The rule-of-thumb of hyper indoors and shotgun outdoors all depends on the specifics of the space where you're shooting.
Click to expand...

Someone should make a video showing exactly how this works. We could then reference this video showing how the physics of the interference tube do in fact cause a "hollow, metallic ringing, tonality to the sound." Then everyone could hear exactly what it sounds like and maybe even show how to avoid it. Maybe an NTG-3 and a 4053b in a very reflective environment?
 
Guy_Cochran said:
Someone should make a video showing exactly how this works. We could then reference this video showing how the physics of the interference tube do in fact cause a "hollow, metallic ringing, tonality to the sound." Then everyone could hear exactly what it sounds like and maybe even show how to avoid it. Maybe an NTG-3 and a 4053b in a very reflective environment?
Click to expand...
That would be an excellent idea. It seems to be popularly believed that the issue is echo reduction when that's not it at all. - the problems are a)the timbre of the recorded sound gets changed in unattractive ways; and b)typical guns tend to become omni at lower frequencies so the frequency distribution of off-axis sounds gets distorted. I have an NTG-3 and a Schoeps CMC641 and they would make an interesting comparison, alas they're packed away in a stack of boxes at the moment due to a move of household a few months ago and it'll be several more months before I would be in a position to undertake such a project.
 
Steve House said:
That would be an excellent idea. It seems to be popularly believed that the issue is echo reduction when that's not it at all. - the problems are a)the timbre of the recorded sound gets changed in unattractive ways; and b)typical guns tend to become omni at lower frequencies so the frequency distribution of off-axis sounds gets distorted.
Click to expand...

This, combined with overall "perfect" (as it gets anyway) directionality... is my justification for the cost of the CS3e.

I'll try to get some more videos going on some of this stuff.
 
I know people who use 416 all the time (indoor, outdoor) and people who hate it.. I think it's also depending on who's doing postsound, how it's done, if the guy knows a trick with EQ or something to "fix" it...

And sometimes it's just the room that sucks...
 
MattinSTL said:
This, combined with overall "perfect" (as it gets anyway) directionality... is my justification for the cost of the CS3e.

I'll try to get some more videos going on some of this stuff.
Click to expand...

Matt - If you're game, as a sponsor, I'll put up a $500 DVeStore shopping spree, a bounty if you will, on a well made video that clearly shows the results of a reflective mid/high frequency sound bouncing back into a traditional interference tube shotgun. It should be so clear that an instructor at a film school would reference the video in class. I'd even help with motion graphics, and supply any mics needed. Game?
 
...If you want a location where the 4053b should sound better, try recording in a small reflective bathroom, which is one of the worst case scenarios for any mic.
 
I'm down for putting together a video... I've got a really busy week this week, and next... but as of the 9th of Dec. I will get on this.
 
Test both mics in each room and use the one that gives the best sound for that room.

Echo can't be removed in post, but it can easily be added as needed, so if one mic picks up echos that the other doesn't...

You can often add some fullness to the sound of a recording using a mild reverb or through EQ adjustment, all of which can be done in post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top