Sound is very subjective....

Noel Evans

Noel Evans

Mod V3 New and Improved
Staff member
Assume that all things are equal and you have a solid system that has extremely undetecable noise if any, including mics. Now when it comes to mic choice Im always thinking hmm does that sound better? Or does that? Maybe this? Thus I have two hypercardoids, two shotguns and two different lavs...... Is it just my ears? Anyway today I went through every mic review I could find on the net and re read posts in this forum, listened to sound test after sound test. Then went on line and purchased a new mic which will be the cheapest I have in my kit....... Octava MK012A "Bello Nero" Condenser Microphone, with hypercardoid cap. heh its the new? black one. But yeah from the tests online even with this in the line up the sound just did it for me...... does that make sense to some of the experienced sound people here? Anyway I now have 3 hypercardoids, so usually there is something that is more suitable in any given situation.

I have always found it hard to tell (apart from noise, hiss, hot, pops) what actually sounds good.

EDIT: On seraching for this mic in Japan I found one supplier... price .. about $700 USD.. I was like wtf. So I ordered from sound room in the US total order including some sexy extras with shipping came to about $340 USD. Generally speaking mics are much more expensive here ...... even Sanken thats made here.
 
Last edited:
Yup, i know what you mean that its sometimes hard to tell whats best until you hit the real world.

What other hypers do you own? In my opinion, its Oktava then Schoeps. Theres nothing in the middle ground that really grabs me to be honest.
 
ah, tricky question because I've havent used one for more than maybe 3 days total in my life.

But, its a great mic. The problem with it is that its too close in price to the Schoeps to rival it, because 99% of people you talk to would rather have the Schoeps. The one thing the MKH50 SERIOUSLY has going for it is its durability - as with all the MKH series, the 50 is probably a better choice for rough environments (think Lost, or a desert in Africa, etc etc).

Im no expert on the mic though, so I cant comment specifically on its tone or performance or anything like that.

Tim
 
OK my hypercardioids

AT AE6100
Rode NT3
PLUS: the new octava


Shotguns
AT4073A
ATM57 Not available outside Japan About $700 USD: http://www.audio-technica.co.jp/proaudio/microphones/atm57/ATM57.html
Senn MKH418S - bought it almost new for about half price....

From these Im hoping the Octava will be my go to mic for interiors. My favourite of the shotguns is the ATM57, siince I got it I rarely use the others at all. Might even sell the senn soon.

Plus My wireless lav systems - sony and senn.. really need to upgrade the mics a little here, but at the moment the G2 and sony standard are doing fine for my purpose.. so Ill wait until i really need to.
 
Tim: Just curious. I ended up with one and have been quite happy with it. I find it odd that it rarely gets mentioned. I guess the Schoeps is tough competition, but for us indies, sometimes I think it might be worth it trading a tiny bit of quality for durability.

Backups? Who needs backups? :)
 
The mkh-50 is a very well regarded mic... it's just that it's so close to the Schoeps that it ends up in the shadow. There are some people who actually prefer the 50 to the Schoeps... and when somebody says that I have no problem with it because it's not like they chose the 50 to save $. Personally I could go either way... but if I was in that price-range I'd have a hard time NOT going with the Schoeps just on cred alone.

Sound is subjective. The reason I like the Oktava is because it's flattering to most voices and to many audio for video systems... specifically running a mic directly into the DVX. Cheap recorders also make the Oktava sound really thick 'n juicy and in your face... which is good for video.

My only caveat with the Oktava is that the lower mids... or upper bass... is a little muddy... or "blooming". If you get in a room with some serious resonance you'll hear it... and certain voices will really bring it out. The thing is that sound is still decent and it's not like it's killing the audio... but I'd have to say that there are some intermediate choices that have the overall natural sound of the Oktava... with even more detail on top... and they don't have any of that upper-bass to lower-mid "bloom".

Here's the catch. It takes a pretty good audio path before these differences become obvious! If you have a mixpre or similar ultra-clean mixer then you can hear it at the moment of recording by just listening from the mixer directly. Once you output from the mixer... as long as you're going into a clean recorder... you'll still hear it pretty easily. If you run from the mixer into the DVX you won't hear it as much.

The best way to test this is to hear a male voice that carries. I hate my own voice, but mine does it in some rooms.

I've got a couple Oktavas, an AKG ck63, and a THE hyper... and I can hear the differences in those mics pretty easily when I listen to them side by side. In a blind test I'd bet that most of you would pick the same line of preferrence.

The Oktava's a great mic... and more then good enough for indi-video... but if you have something high-end you won't have too much trouble telling the difference. It's a total bargain at the price and I use mine almost all the time... but on occasion I'll consciously choose to use something else. My mic choice often times comes down to what the job pays and who will see it and on what final system... then I factor in the voice and size of the area I need to cover.
 
MattinSTL said:
Sound is subjective. The reason I like the Oktava is because it's flattering to most voices and to many audio for video systems... specifically running a mic directly into the DVX. Cheap recorders also make the Oktava sound really thick 'n juicy and in your face... which is good for video.

My only caveat with the Oktava is that the lower mids... or upper bass... is a little muddy... or "blooming". If you get in a room with some serious resonance you'll hear it... and certain voices will really bring it out.
Click to expand...

Thats great to hear. In Japan no room has any resonance at all, for standard house/interior/apartment shots that I would do. All rooms are small and almost dull thus I thought the Octava might be a good choice HERE to lift it up a bit... my current mics do well but seem flatish. So sounds like I have made the right choice.

Quick reply huh heh... was scanning waiting for some input... glad I did.
 
kidtexas, cool for you - like i said, the 50 is a great mic but just too close to the schoeps for a lot of people to swing in its direction. i really agree with you that trading some quality for some durability is most definately NOT a silly thing for some of us.
 
I find it funny that different niches in location recording have settled on different favorites. In dialogue production, it seems like the Schoeps MK41 can do no wrong. From what I've read about nature recording, Schoeps are way down in the ranking due to reliability and the MKH line is king. They subject mics to pretty harsh conditions and no one can deny that the new MKH mics are quiet. Concert recorders love Schoeps MK41's too... as well as AKG 480's, Neumanns, and a ton of others. They seem to be the most divided. Of course, they all love to run with active cables.

Sound is very subjective as the thread title implies...

I sold my stereo pair of MK4's to get my MKH mics (used of course) with some cash left over for the 722. Can't say that I've regretted the move, but I would love to get a pair of Schoeps again when the money permits me to. Don't really know the point of this post, just felt like rambling...
 
:) being able to recognise the right tool for a job is a more valuable skill than simply having a good tool for one job, and trying to force it to do all the others.
 
One of my favorite quotes ...

"When the only tool that you have is a hammer, all of your problems begin to look like nails."

Kevin.
 
Yes the Schoeps does not do well outdoors due to it's more fragile nature. The MKH50, like it's brothers, is built like a tank. The reason this doesn't bother film sound people is we use it indoors where the moisture and other environmental hazards are not an issue. If I ever have to shoot in a sauna I got big issues. :(

When you factor in a Cut1 and a collett cable or swivel to get it's size back to a managable length the Schoeps does become significantly more expensive then a MKH50, which has the bass rolloff built in. But to those who fell in love with Schoeps sound it is worth the extra dough. Many can't hear the difference or even prefer the MKH, it's all....subjective :happy:

Think of it as Coke (MK41), Pepsi (MKH50), and the Oktava as generic brand soda. Some can taste the difference and have a preference, some can't, and still others THINK they can tell the difference but are more swayed by brand popularity and marketing.

Cheers
 
I've spent a lot of money on video equipment in the last couple years. When I realized that I could have an Oktava, a nice shockmount and wind protection for less than I was expecting to spend on a microphone alone... I was sold. It's so cool that a quality mic is available at that price.
 
wabbit said:
Think of it as Coke (MK41), Pepsi (MKH50), and the Oktava as generic brand soda. Some can taste the difference and have a preference, some can't, and still others THINK they can tell the difference but are more swayed by brand popularity and marketing.
Click to expand...

Who's RC Cola?
 
Hmmm I drink coke but I use a 50... but a 50 is a pepsi and I drink coke but a 50 is a a ah ahhh.. KABOOM! ..5...si. ...c.. ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top