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

Status
Not open for further replies.
ggrantly said:
My best shotgun is a NTG3 and once again IMHO
Click to expand...



I used to suffer the VERY SAME (mental lack of comparison) ERROR .



Now that I own ALL OF THEM, I basically now NEVER use the NTG3.


The NTG3 also has a LOT of noise, but thats mostly due to its frequency response, but its a living hell on caputuring low ambient sounds.


You can get a NEW NTG3 for $500 (by lowballers out of new york), and Senny MKH416 for $740 from the same goons,...... for $250 more, its a NO DEBATE MUST BUY of the MKH416


Even arguing for "I like the sound better", money being irrelevant, there is no question to NOT EVER get the NTG3.


In fact Ive never heard anyone say---- " Money is irrelevant, and I like the NTG3 sound better so I use THAT" .


I left the Sanken out of this review since most peeps have never even heard of it.



Heres my little go-to rig (if you can even qualify it for that), Panasonic HC-X920 with Senny ME66 with K6 power module (phantom or battery AA)

it weighs NOTHING, its a rig used by a lot of folks (with diff. cammys).

920.jpg
 
Last edited:
PlotinusVeritas said:
I used to suffer the VERY SAME (mental lack of comparison) ERROR .



Now that I own ALL OF THEM, I basically now NEVER use the NTG3.


The NTG3 also has a LOT of noise, but thats mostly due to its frequency response, but its a living hell on caputuring low ambient sounds.


You can get a NEW NTG3 for $500 (by lowballers out of new york), and Senny MKH416 for $740 from the same goons,...... for $250 more, its a NO DEBATE MUST BUY of the MKH416


Even arguing for "I like the sound better", money being irrelevant, there is no question to NOT EVER get the NTG3.


In fact Ive never heard anyone say---- " Money is irrelevant, and I like the NTG3 sound better so I use THAT" .


I left the Sanken out of this review since most peeps have never even heard of it.
Click to expand...

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Opinions are like xxxholes everyone has one.

Here is another opinion, you have crossed the line from contributor to troll. What works for me, my shooting requirements, my personal taste, or any other parameter I choose, has nothing to do with you calling me out on those preferences.

Grant
 
That term means nothing and is thrown around by EVERYONE (except me).


I said from the beginning that the SOUND is subjective (of course),........ that will always REMAIN.



however its ALSO TRUE that .....In fact Ive never heard anyone say---- " Money is irrelevant, and I like the NTG3 sound better than the MKH416 ......so I use THAT" .



maybe someone heard it at SOME POINT..........I however NEVER HAVE.
 
PlotinusVeritas said:
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.
Click to expand...

Understood. And that's why I said I'm glad you covered these other considerations that are frequently omitted. That said, it simply points out why it is so important to rely on your own judgment. The way I've picked mics, is by scouring various sites for comparison outtakes between mics, and listening *without* knowing which sample is which mic. Here's a couple such tests:

http://learnlightandsound.com/2014/10/01/dialogue-boom-microphone-blind-comparison/

http://learnlightandsound.com/2014/08/26/which-lav-mic-sounds-best/

That's the first step. Based on that, I order a mic, and then test it. If I don't like it, I send it back. That way, I'm not influenced by people's opinions, brand, reputation etc. Sometimes it results in my being the lone madman who has an insane preference that literally nobody else agrees with - I'm OK with that - f.ex. I tested a high end Sanken mic and effing hated it. Just hated it - it sounded thin and sibilant to me, and I said to myself - screw it, I don't care to impress people on the set with my Sanken, or have them turn up their noses because I prefer a lowly Sennheiser or Audio-Techica. I have the same idea with the rest of the gear, camera, lenses, lights etc.. And the reason is simple - I shoot my own stuff, nobody pays me. I only have to please myself. And therefore, I will pick what I like because I'll get the effects I want. If the end result sucks, I have nobody to blame but myself - I like that. Sometimes my tastes evolve - as I learn more, I appreciate gear I didn't before, but at all times I am genuine in my choices, and don't ever follow "fashion". Oh, and btw. I didn't like the universally praised indoor mic AT4053b, so I returned it. I don't care if anyone thinks I'm an idiot (as a matter of fact, I call myself an idiot - that's what I think of that, it means less than nothing).

Now, this doesn't mean that I listen to no one. I solicit opinions, as I do on this board. But then I take those recommendations, and do my own tests. Sometimes I like the recommended gear, sometimes not, but it's a great starting point.

And so it is now. I'm sure you are 100 times more experienced than I am. I am very grateful for your recommendation, and I checked it out. I still prefer the sound of the mke600 over the me64, and that's that. Different strokes for different folks. Have a great day!
 
That is Curtis Judd videos, ......Ive talked with him,....his videos are very very novice level on the use of mics.....and he even honestly admits it, ....he says some rather hair brained things that are eye-rollers, ... but a sound sample is a sound sample...... but outside of that, hes said almost nothing of worth on the topic of mics.


As for "high end" (expensive) , youre correct, expensive doesnt translate into great sound.


As for audio technica, the general "rule" is audio technica makes incredible studio condensers, but their shotgun mics SUCK (really bad!) . .........yeah yeah, subjective statement (however true).


Ill bow down to Audio technica studio mics, but their shotguns I wouldnt wipe my fanny with.



You said----. I still prefer the sound of the mke600 over the me64

That MAY BE, but I doubt you could say the same of the MKE600 over the MKH416 or even the Rode NTG3, ....... worlds apart.


take a 416 or NTG3 for a test drive.


ME64 /ME66 is , outside of subjective OPINIONS.........superior to other shotguns in:

1. ambient sounds with extremely LOW self noise perfect for nature and news / reporting ON CAM run and gun.

2. Superior to all else in VERY LOW WEIGHT for prosumer camcorders. Its just a featherweight "beast"

3. Flat, most realistic response



Also the ME64, with its VERY short tube has MUCH better directionality than even the Rode NTG3, and weighs a TON less.



Theyve all got their "place" obviously.
 
"As for audio technica, the general "rule" is audio technica makes incredible studio condensers, but their shotgun mics SUCK (really bad!) . .........yeah yeah, subjective statement (however true).
Ill bow down to Audio technica studio mics, but their shotguns I wouldnt wipe my fanny with"
> I would suggest stating actual model numbers instead of generalizations, the 40 series AT mics (including the 4071/73 shotguns) are highly regarded by most professionals.
 
All the stock mics used on the Olympics are Audio Technica so they can't be just dismissed out of hand as they have their uses and limitations as other have said.

I have five AT875R and find them very useable for most applications as a general purpose location mic.
 
This will be my last warning:

If you cannot state your opinion without telling everyone else that their opinions are wrong, then you are in the wrong place. Further, admitting that the matter is subjective, but then telling everyone who disagrees that they are wrong, is argumentative and unproductive.

Keep it civil, or keep it out.
 
Last edited:
Well, that was certainly very strange. I mean, it's just gear. The whole thread developed in an odd direction.
 
Some sounds are not 'opinion' debatable.


You/ anyone may "love" the sound of a $90 radio shack mic over a sennheiser.....


as the saying goes "youre entitled to your own opinions,but NOT your own facts"



money doesnt always buy the best sound to be sure......, but it typically does.


you cant make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
 
So after reading that me66 vs ntg3 noise article, i've actually done the tests myself, well because i've never heard any noise problems with my ntg3(when i used denoising, i was denoising ambience, and not mic's or preamps noise), and after test, i can say, that either he had bad ntg3 mic...or i don't know what happened, because my ntg3 does not have such noise through whole spectrum, as in his spectrograms.

Now regarding me66 vs ntg2, for me "out of the box" me66 sounds tiny and bright, but it is better in all other specs, and you can eq it to sound fuller and less bright.

And regarding 416 vs ntg3...well as far as i'm hearing 416 is a better mic(slightly different pickup pattern(narrower), and more fidelity in 416), but ntg3 for me was already a too expencive mic, that i still got, and i'm happy with it... seriously i almost forgot denoisers when using ntg3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top