Rode VideoMic Copy? 50 bucks less! Opteka VM-100 Video Condenser Shotgun Microphone

[Doc Bernard]

Where the difference usually comes in, is in the quality and precision of the components, as has been said. The Tele may have a capacitor that may cost .50, but the knock off uses one that costs, say, .10 And as we all know (for us audiophiles) that reduction in quality can be noticeable.

But yes, the Tele circuit has been copied by a lot of manufacturers. Funny thing is, in the industry that circuit is referred to as a 460 circuit. How sad is that? Telefunken designed it, but it is referred to as another mic circuit.

 

[davefisk]

Copycat products happen all the time. I can attest to that. When I used to sell gear, I saw a new copycat product every month. Sometimes they took off, sometimes not. Now, as a manufacturer, I see it even more. It's part of our little world. What sets one company apart from another is more than just the product. It's the customer service and support that builds brand loyalty (as well as quality products, which goes without saying). Unless you have a patent, there really isn't anything you can do about this, and even then, sometimes all it takes is just a little teeny difference in functionality, even if the products look identical, to get around the patent.

 

[Allan Black]

Years ago Neumann got very upset that every man and his dog was marketing a mic shaped like their famous U67/87. Obviously getting ready to take some action, they sent a petition around to the studios asking the owners to identify silhouttes of those various mics, all of which looked very similar to theirs. They asked studios here to participate by naming the mics, sign and date it and send it to our local agent which I did.

About 6 months later according to the agent, Neumnann was inundated with worldwide signed petitions .. but AFAIK nothing came of it. Most of those copy shapes are still around.

Cheers.

 

[ggrantly]

Copycat products happen all the time. I can attest to that. When I used to sell gear, I saw a new copycat product every month. Sometimes they took off, sometimes not. Now, as a manufacturer, I see it even more. It's part of our little world. What sets one company apart from another is more than just the product. It's the customer service and support that builds brand loyalty (as well as quality products, which goes without saying). Unless you have a patent, there really isn't anything you can do about this, and even then, sometimes all it takes is just a little teeny difference in functionality, even if the products look identical, to get around the patent.

And then sometimes patent law is abused; witness Vitek Group company Lite Panels which has filed suit in the US patent office to stop the import of basically all LED video lights. It's as if they think they invented the LED or something. More can be read on this in the Lighting Section of DVXuser and in particular, check the postings by Richard Andrewski of Cool Lights, a DVXuser sponsor. The merit of this is just silly, yet it goes forward, likely to intimidate competitors or cost them a bunch of money. Of course Vitek is a pretty large company and besides Lite Panels, includes: Manfrotto, Gitzo, Avenger, Kata, Petrol, Vinten, Oconnor, and Anton Bauer amongst others. If successful, many of the smaller companies now competing may sink.

Grant

 

[emweb]

Has anyone used the opteka?
How does it compare to the rode videomic?

 

[Noiz2]

And then sometimes patent law is abused; witness Vitek Group company Lite Panels which has filed suit in the US patent office to stop the import of basically all LED video lights. ...
Grant

Actually that is not the case. For one thing the patent office has no say over imports, or anything else but the granting of patents.

They filed suit with the USITC and they based that suit on their claim of patent infringement.

A very noted patent attorney that I used to know has pretty accurately described a patent as a "license to litigate". It doesn't protect you from anything. It gives you grounds to sue someone for infringement. The catch being that if you loose you also loose your patent. And according to my old friend only about 10% of US patents hold up to a serious challenge. So to avoid that issue Lightpanels has decided to file a complaint with the USITC claiming patent infringement. Since they are not suing over the patent itself they don't put it at risk.

I hope they get trashed in the proceedings because what they are doing is just wrong.

 

[Noiz2]

Years ago Neumann got very upset that every man and his dog was marketing a mic shaped like their famous U67/87. Obviously getting ready to take some action, they sent a petition around to the studios asking the owners to identify silhouttes of those various mics, all of which looked very similar to theirs. They asked studios here to participate by naming the mics, sign and date it and send it to our local agent which I did.

About 6 months later according to the agent, Neumnann was inundated with worldwide signed petitions .. but AFAIK nothing came of it. Most of those copy shapes are still around.

Cheers.

Mostly because that would be very hard to protect. It's not patentable unless you can claim some valid structural reason for it and also prove that you invented that shape and that it is unlike any before it. OR you need to copyright it as a creative work. Someplace in there you might be able to use Trademark but?

You might be able to file suit with a claim that they were trying to mislead customers into thinking they were buying your mic when they weren't but that is kind of a stretch also.

Maybe a point here is do you really think that anyone who had the money and desire to buy the Neumann mic would go for a cheap crappy rip off? And in reverse to you think anyone who is buying a mic because it looks like a "pro" mic is going to spring for a Neumann?

I would say No and no. So Neumann didn't lose any sales which leaves them with very little to sue over since there wasn't any damages.

 

[Chadfish]

Has anyone used the opteka?
How does it compare to the rode videomic?

Don't waste your money. It's been tested, and it's crap. It does not sound the same as the Rode VM. You are going to eff up your audio trying to save 50 bucks and it's not worth it.

 

[ggrantly]

Actually that is not the case. For one thing the patent office has no say over imports, or anything else but the granting of patents.

They filed suit with the USITC and they based that suit on their claim of patent infringement.

A very noted patent attorney that I used to know has pretty accurately described a patent as a "license to litigate". It doesn't protect you from anything. It gives you grounds to sue someone for infringement. The catch being that if you loose you also loose your patent. And according to my old friend only about 10% of US patents hold up to a serious challenge. So to avoid that issue Lightpanels has decided to file a complaint with the USITC claiming patent infringement. Since they are not suing over the patent itself they don't put it at risk.

I hope they get trashed in the proceedings because what they are doing is just wrong.

Thanks for the correction about the suit.
Grant

 

[Mitch.Kear]

Don't waste your money. It's been tested, and it's crap. It does not sound the same as the Rode VM. You are going to eff up your audio trying to save 50 bucks and it's not worth it.

Are there samples or did you test it yourself?

 

[Chadfish]

I didn't test it, but it's been tested by someone I know. No samples available that I know of. Hey if anyone wants to roll the dice to save 50 bucks on an already cheap mic - go for it. The Rode VideoMic is basically an NTg-2 capsule with a plastic tube, and consumer (3.5mm) jack. It's a great sounding mic - for what it is, which is a simple mic designed for people that want something to put on their camera if that camera only has 3.5mm / 8th" jack. It's a consumer mic! Not to be judged by pro standards, yet a lot of pros use it. What's happening with these Optikas is there is one Chinese manufacturer who is selling the design to 3 or 4 companies that put their name on it. It's pretty safe to say that any Chinese copy of an original product is going to cut corners, but they pass the savings on to the consumer - so yeay! Cheap crap for the common man! I've tested 4 of what I consider to be "high-end consumer on-camera mini shotguns". I have not heard of anything that beats the Rode VM and VMP in that category. Not that I'm not open to a better mic coming along. But I don't really use these mics. My main mic is an AT4053b hyper that does about anything I record inside. But I dig the Rode VMP for slapping on a DSLR for walking around, and that's about it. That's it's intended use.

Here's my shootout if anyone hasn't seen it:

 

[Framerate]

Hey if anyone wants to roll the dice to save 50 bucks on an already cheap mic - go for it. The ]

I have no knowldge of the Videomic copy - but, sometimes, cheap mics can be very surprising.

I'm no mic expert - my 'best' one is a Sennheiser K6/66, and I also own a couple of Rode M3's, a Rode Stereo Videomic - and two HTDZ shotguns.

The HTDZ is, of course, famous/infamous as the 'cheap Chinese ebay mic' - usually selling at less than £20, including delivery from Hong Kong.

All I can say about them is that they are not as 'hot' as the ME66 - but sound almost as good, are a bit more directional, have a similar external build quality, and cost a tiny fraction of the price.

In fact, according to the source, the HTDZ can sometimes sound better than the ME66 - a bit warmer, more coloured (but in a pleasing way)

Considering the Sennheiser's (overrated?) reputation, and the relatively high cost, I think that the HTDZ (stands for 'High Tech Development Zone ) is genuinely the best audio bargain around at the moment.

 

[Chadfish]

Personally I can't stand the ME66 sound. I have one. I find it way too bright. But yes, sometimes you can find an el-cheapo thing that really isn't too bad.

 

[Framerate]

Personally I can't stand the ME66 sound. I have one. I find it way too bright. But yes, sometimes you can find an el-cheapo thing that really isn't too bad.

Welll, you doubtless know more/have far more experience than me, but I don't find the ME66 that bad. A bit bright, yes - but it does have remarkable clarity.

I explored the HTDZ website - surprising to see they are a very high-tech organisation, lots of happy Chinese girls in company uniforms busily assembling products in a spotless environment.

Not shown (but doubtless there) was the 'Research Department' - which is probably full of engineers taking brand name products apart to see how they can copy them :happy:

EDIT - post amended, as per Mod's request - at least they didn't delete it arbitarily, thanks.

 

[Noiz2]

Welll, you doubtless know more/have far more experience than me, but I don't find the ME66 that bad. A bit bright, yes - but it does have remarkable clarity.

Well brightness can translate to "clarity", in fact a very muted low end would also probably come off as "clarity". It kind of depends on what your needs are. If you want to grab some intelligible dialog in rough conditions with very minimal post work (read ENG) then a mic with very little lows and a punched up area in the higher vocal range is a big plus. If your trying to get an "accurate" sound that will be tuned in post then you wan a mic that is as uncolored as possible. Most film folks like something closer to the later the 66 tends toward the former.

There isn't really a wrong choice. Neither is really "accurate" they are just different takes on reality. If you like the sound it's a good mic for you.

It's kind of what folks have been saying. There is a quality issue with mics (self noise, build quality, electronics etc.) and then there is the "sound". A high end mic will have good "quality" but it still may not sound good to you. A cheap mic with good quality, may sound good or better (to you) than the $$$$ mic. And that makes it a good buy.

A cheap mic with poor quality is a waste. Even if you like the sound it's going to fall apart on you.

There are a fair number of cheap good quality mics around. Some also sound good.

There are also, unfortunately, a ton of cheap poor quality mics around most of which sound bad (but often look like a quality mic).

 

[Doc Bernard]

Personally I can't stand the ME66 sound. I have one. I find it way too bright.

Interesting. I actually like the sound off the 66, and am hopefully getting another soon to complement my 64. My first one died a horrible death (gotta love PA's, bless their hearts, and damn their eyes) , but the k6 survived. I found throwing a inexpensive furry sleeve on it was able to tame the highs (even indoors - though I usually pull out the 64 for that). I call it fuzzy eq'ing. Another trick I would use is throw the mic slightly off axis. You can see by the polar plots, the 66 at higher frequencies gets very narrow on axis. This is true for almost all hyper/super mics.

LOL, just goes to show, every engineer will have their likes and dislikes. And never will they be absolutely the same. Chadfish, if you decide to go another route.....I would be interested in your 66. Dont need the k6, just the capsule.

 

[Chadfish]

Doc the 66 is in my posission, but it belongs to an employer. BUT I did some work for a friend for trade, and he is bringing me a Sennheiser ME-67 and K6. I am planning on selling that. I think the only difference is possibly a tighter polar pattern?? Not sure, as I have not studied it much. Anyway, maybe that is something you are interested in?

Another reason I don't like the 66 is that its not very forgiving in a reflective room. Not that you are supposed to use these inside, but it's not so great with reflections. I'm not saying it's a bad mic, I think they just designed it a bit brighter because when it came out it was an analog world, and that extra brightness helped it cut through. With digital, that is not necessary, as there is no dingy analogue tape to cut through any more. I like the lows to be fully represented, as well as a little sizzle around 5k to add clarity. Of course I can bend any mic's sound to my taste in post, but it's faster if I don't have to.

 

[Doc Bernard]

I might be interested.......

The 67 is a supercard pattern. Less tight than a Hyper. It's the pattern between a cardioid and a hyper cardioid. PM me, let's talk. That's the other capsule I want.

Now the omni capsule (ME62) I have no use for. Never liked omni's.

Totally get the post thing. "Using the right brush". But, LOL, I have my on-set tricks (many I won't share, LOL) that make the ME series mic an extremely viable tool for me.

 

[Framerate]

Doc the 66 is in my posission, but it belongs to an employer. BUT I did some work for a friend for trade, and he is bringing me a Sennheiser ME-67 and K6. I am planning on selling that. I think the only difference is possibly a tighter polar pattern?? Not sure, as I have not studied it much. Anyway, maybe that is something you are interested in?

Another reason I don't like the 66 is that its not very forgiving in a reflective room. Not that you are supposed to use these inside, but it's not so great with reflections. I'm not saying it's a bad mic, I think they just designed it a bit brighter because when it came out it was an analog world, and that extra brightness helped it cut through. With digital, that is not necessary, as there is no dingy analogue tape to cut through any more. I like the lows to be fully represented, as well as a little sizzle around 5k to add clarity. Of course I can bend any mic's sound to my taste in post, but it's faster if I don't have to.

Just out of interest, re. the China mics.

When I bought the HTDZ-81 I was impressed enough to buy a second one to use as a stereo pair.

Then, being a compulsive ebay searcher, I happened to come across a variant of the HTDZ (same size, appearance, different name) for the princely sum of £13.37, delivered from Hong Kong.

Working on the assumption that these prices simply cannot last, given the global economic realities (and because £13.27 is a modest amount by any standard) I bought it.

It arrived a couple of days ago - if the HTDZ is a poor man's Rode, then the EM88 (the name on the barrel) is an even poorer man's HTDZ :happy:

The finish is, imo, not quite as good as the HTDZ - for example it doesn't appear to be anodised, and the grille has an open weave lining that allows you to see the ribbon in the barrel)

BUT

It sounds better than the HTDZ - and (dare I say it here?) better than the Sennheiser ME66!

Noise (used with an H4N is lower than either the HTDZ or the ME66. The EM88 is more sensitive than the HDMZ (but not as sensitive as the ME66) and is less sibilant than the ME66.

A lucky batch?

Anyway, I've ordered another one - talk about pocket money prices! - even if it fell to bits after a few months (and, judging from the build, I don't think it will) it's still virtually free recording.

 

[Chadfish]

Not a bad bargain for roughly 20.00US Framerate! Especially if it beats the ME66 at $500.00! But at those prices, I would think that durability will probably be a factor.