Review: Sennheiser MKH416 vs Sennheiser ME66 vs. ME64 vs RODE NTG3 vs NTG2 vs NTG1.

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PlotinusVeritas

Member
A "new" type of shotgun microphone comparison by someone that owns most of the high-end microphones. (I did leave the Sanken out of this specific review for now).


There are ENOUGH "this sounds like this" sound sample videos / audio out there. LOTS.

......... So, I thought I would mention the OTHER ATTRIBUTES to consider when choosing a high quality shotgun mic.:)


VIDEO HERE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bGoXFntB3w



Ive seen a LOT of hate on this board for the Sennheiser ME66 and recommending the NT2 for example, OVER THAT of the ME66.......welllllll......

that leaves out VITAL INFO such as:...

NTG2, while it has more robust sound (to a degree) in a tight room for example......

NTG2 has NOWHERE near as much sensitivity as the ME66

and absolutely NOWHERE near as much side rejection as the ME66

and is MUCH heavier than the ME66

.....and the ME66 is MUCH MUCH MUCH quieter than the NTG2.



also,... while the MKH416 is "IT", the ME66 is by far the superior foley effects MIC.



etc etc in this fashion in the little video clip I made about the OTHER attributes of one mic vs. another mic.


Lux et veritas
 
Hmmm, we tend to use a U87 & MKH40, 50, or 60 combo for Foley work depending, and would never consider the ME66 for Foley work. As a matter of fact the only time we break out the ME66 is for low budget run n gun event work. But hey, I'm old and set in my ways.
 
David W. Jones said:
Hmmm, we tend to use a U87 & MKH40, 50, or 60 combo for Foley work depending, and would never consider the ME66 for Foley work. As a matter of fact the only time we break out the ME66 is for low budget run n gun event work. But hey, I'm old and set in my ways.
Click to expand...

I know MANY people who use the exact same setup!
 
How can you trust the word of someone who forgot to capitalize Foley? ;~)

We almost never used a shotgun for Foley. I have seen them used at a distance to add more room to the usually large diaphragm condenser that is the main mic.

I haven't used a ME66, but it seems that the main complaint was the sound. Sound would trump any other benefits.
 
The video is not really a comparison as an add for the 66. BTW 416 is not a big nature recording mic.
 
Noiz2
said-----

Sound would trump any other benefits.



That depends on your required definition of SOUND, crisp? LOW self noise? attributes? nature recording? etc etc.


example:

http://hljodmynd.blogspot.com/2012/03/rode-ntg3-vs-sennheiser-me66-noise.html


his quote:

The spectrogram looks very bad for NTG3 but the mic is not as bad as it looks. The ME66 datasheets display referred noise as 10dB(A) and the NTG3 datasheets display referred noise as 13dB(A), so ME66 has lower referred noise than NTG3. This difference is probably what we see on the spectrogram. This two microphones does not have exactly same bandwidth, as the ME66 has a reduced audio bandwidth which in turn reduces the referred noise. The ME66 top end roll off starts around 14Khz (0dB) and is -6dB at 20KHz, NTG3 is +2dB at 14KHz and -2dB at 20KHz.
NTG3 is RF biased microphones designed to withstand high humidity and harsher environments than the ME66 condenser microphone. So while the NTG3 and ME66 are both shotgun microphones they are designed for different operating conditions.
NTG3 would be my choice for most “normal sound pressure” level. But for quiet nature sounds where most audible sounds are in low level and mid-high frequency, I would choose some other mic.
 
PlotinusVeritas said:
Noiz2
said-----

Sound would trump any other benefits.



That depends on your required definition of SOUND, crisp? LOW self noise? attributes? nature recording? etc etc.
...
Click to expand...

Actually it's the "crisp" that I have heard as being the problem, though harsh and crispy are the adjectives used more often.

And while the guy is talking about using the 66 for nature recording I didn't see it listed as being used in any of the recordings he posted. I know a lot of nature recordists and a shot gun is not often part of the mix. Though I guess if you are shooting bird songs or something it would come into play.

Anyway I don't dislike the 66, I don't have an opinion on one way or the other. I would have to hear it in person to judge if what I have heard from others is correct. Not sure what mic you used on the video but that sound I found quite "bright" in an unpleasant way.

There are certainly folks who like the 66, so it may be something of a personal preference.
 
There are certainly folks who like the 66, so it may be something of a personal preference.<<<



There are many clubs in the bag for golfing, the ME66 is certainly a wood, and not a putter


its attributes for a reporting montage, its directionality, weight, and low noise and high sensitivity make it a "must own" tool, regardless of cost.

like new used ME66 with K6 can be had for $250 to $350


I never said I would grab iN GENERAL the ME66 over my pair of MKH416, rather pointed out the attributes of all of them.


I DID NOTICE some peeps on this board recommending others "get the Rode NTG2 over the ME66" ,,........and that is a rather insane choice, despite the NT2 having a warmer sound than the ME66

in general that is.


but again, its the situational requirements.
 
If you don't mind answering that question PlotinusVeritas, which microphone did you use to record the video?

Did you sign up on this forum to post this video? Welcome, btw!
 
I have used the 416, ME66 and NTG1 but my preference for a general purpose good all round mic is the AT875R.

I don't like the ME66 and NTG in comparison as they sound very electret to my ears with that artificial scooped out sound where the AT875R seems more balanced to me.
 
Oh, the crummy video is just shot on the fly with a sony point and shoot.


I have a 3 chip CANON (older XHa1) and panasonic HC X920 and a Canon X20


I just wanted to make a small video about attributes not found in other comparison videos.



No, I did not sign up just to post this video, ...however I did read a lot of crazy smack talk about the ME66 on this board, telling newbies to "get the Rode NT2 instead"


which is an absurd (in general) recommendation


I certainly have nothing against RODE, i believe I own 24 or so RODE mics ( NTG3, 3 NTG2, NTG1, M5, NT5 matched pairs, several, on and on and on).....


however Id never reach for the NTG2 over an ME66 in most all circumstances.


however of course Id also never reach for the ME66 over my pair of MKH416 either .



The video i just a crummy video for informational purposes. Im not about to spend much time setting up a fancy video for a youtube info-spot. (too lazy)
 
Let's not make a sweeping generalization accusing those who have a personal preference on a VERY subjective matter as being absurd.

Okay, so you prefer the ME66 over the NTG-2. It's good to hear why you have that preference, how you arrived at that choice. However, there are very good recommendations made in the other direction here. It doesn't have to be one or the other. In sound, we work by ear and must have the tools that our own ears know and trust. Nothing more, nothing less.

Please be careful not to write everyone else off for having a difference of opinion and preference.
 
Subjective is right. I watched a video of a comparison of the mke-600 and the mkh-64 by a couple of sound people:


And the sound guy much preferred the mkh-64 because according to him it had much more "presence" and was "brighter", whereas the mke-600 was "dull". And that's why you need to use your own ears and not just rely on what someone's opinion is, even if they are a sound pro - because they may know a lot more about objective technical things, but taste is taste, and that is subjective. Because for me, personally, I vastly preferred the mke-600, because I found the sound not just "warmer" and with more of a low-end, but actually richer and more balanced - that's how a human voice sounds, whereas the mkh-64 sounded slightly tinny, and frankly *brittle*. Now, you may be able to EQ in post to make them sound fairly similar, but out of the box, I much, much preferred the mke-600. But it's all about what you use it for - for narrative, to me the mke-600 is so much better, whereas the mkh-64 made it sound like you are watching tiny characters on a cheap TV. I am not claiming my taste is superior - just that you choose the mic for the job, and what you hope to get out of it. I do thank the OP for the post though, because it is true that there are other considerations other than just sound, and that's frequently glossed over.
 
GaryNattrass said:
I have used the 416, ME66 and NTG1 but my preference for a general purpose good all round mic is the AT875R.

I don't like the ME66 and NTG in comparison as they sound very electret to my ears with that artificial scooped out sound where the AT875R seems more balanced to me.
Click to expand...

I currently use an Oktava and a 416. Would you recommend trading in the Oktava for the AT875R?

Or is the AT875R more general purpose whereas having a cardiod and a shotgun specifically is still preferable?

Just curious. At $150 better than the 416 says something!
 
What a great little dust up in this thread. It's good to have some discussion beyond why does my cheap mic not work so well with my cheap recorder. Since opinions are being thrown about, here is mine:

I have an 875r and it is a terrific shotgun for the price, but its best attributes IMHO is the small size and forgiving wide pattern. I use it in my minimalist backpack kit. I would never reach for this mic when I could use a better (read more expensive) shotgun. My best shotgun is a NTG3 and once again IMHO, there is really no comparison. The 875 is pretty thin by comparison.

Policar, The oktava and the 875 are very different mics and the small 875 shotgun in most circumstances would not take the place of the Oktava small condenser. However, for those who could only afford one modest mic, the 875 should get some consideration. All mics have drawbacks, strengths and weaknesses and even the wide pattern 875 will struggle in excessively lively rooms indoors.

Grant
 
OldCorpse said:
And the sound guy much preferred the mkh-64 because according to him it had much more "presence" and was "brighter"
Click to expand...


you MEANT TO SAY ME64...


yes I know that video, YES OBVIOUSLY ITS (the sound) SUBJECTIVE , nobody said otherwise.



"This soup tastes best"........yes, the glaringly obvious subjective premise is of course ALWAYS AT PLAY.


I merely pointed out some OTHER attributes people SHOULD consider, nothing more.



as for my SUBJECTIVE premise the MKE600 sound like RE-FRIED STINKING AWFUL HELL, .... its MUDDY, VERY COLORED , and makes my fanny pucker.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top