The Rode NTG-3... the poor man's 416?

MattinSTL

MattinSTL

Sound Modulator
Lately I've been thinking about underdogs a lot... and it seems that unless you maintain a voice for the underdogs, they'll be overlooked... usually in favor of a proven choice, and in this case a far more expensive one.

I've been using an NTG-3 for a couple months now and I figure it's about time to get something on the boards about it.

The next post will have an audio clip (video clip?) so you can hear the tonality in comparison to the AKG ck69 (which I use on the majority of my own gigs, when I bring my own mics). The AKG system is over a grand, so it's a good comparison (to a 416 or other high-end gun)... but really, the mic to compare directly with the NTG-3 is the Sennheiser 416. (I've been looking for Ty's direct comparison... and I can't find it. Was it taken down?)

Check out the physical similarities... Sennheiser 416 vs. Rode NTG-3... all the following specs are identical for both mics, unless noted in yellow.

Super-Cardioid pattern from Line Gradient (shotgun)
RF Biased for interference and humidity immunity
Frequency Response 40-20kHz
SN 81dBa
Self Noise 13dBa
Max SPL 130dB
48v phantom
No high-cut, No low-cut, No pad
Size 19mm x 250mm (416) and 255mm (NTG-3)
Weight 163g (NTG-3) vs. 165g (416)

The Sennheiser is matte black, and the Rode is a matte silver (which I trust will "evolve" to black... or maybe not, heck look at Schoeps).

Another little thing I like about the Rode is that if you register your purchase... they extend the 1 year warranty to 10 YEARS(!)... and finally, the aluminum tube-case that Rode offers with the NTG-3 is nothing short of awesome.

In past threads I've read concerns about how to protect your investment... and every other company on the planet should follow Rode's lead in this regard... Schoeps should have something like that for the CMIT (instead of an impractical wooden case), Sennheiser has a plastic box that looks like a cheap Craftsman toolbox (which is reasonably practical, but nothing like the bomb-proof Rode "tube"), and the fact that Rode offers this fantastic storage option... as standard... on a mic that's aiming at a price-range below the mics it's intended to compete with... well, I love it when the underdog gives you some extras that nobody else does.

So how does the NTG-3 sound? In short... it sounds a lot like a 416.

It was no surprise to me however... because as soon as I slipped the NTG-3 out of it's case... I instantly thought "hmm... it looks and feels like a 416." If you've ever held a 416 then you know what I'm talking about... a 416 isn't heavy, unless you compare it to a Sanken CS3e... but the 416 does feel like it has mass. The 416 feels really solid... and a little heavier then you'd expect for a mic of it's size. If you pick up an me66... and then grab a 416... you'll be surprised at how much more solid the 416 feels... in direct comparison to a larger, longer mic (me66)... and the NTG-3 feels that same way... solid.

Rather then get into overly lengthy descriptions of sound... which is subjective anyway... I'll say again, that the NTG-3 sounds a lot like the 416... the main differences I notice (from my own voice) in a 416 vs. the NTG-3... is that the 416 sounds perhaps just a little less sibilant... think "ssss-ssss" if you draw out an "s" in speaking... and the 416 may sound slightly... slightly warmer overall... but certainly not by much... and maybe it's not even worth mentioning... but I don't like to leave anything out.

Something I DO think is really important to mention (regarding sound)... is it just happens that one of the areas that frustrate people with a 416... happens to be a STRENGTH in the NTG-3... and that's the polar pattern. The 416 is notorious for having a really rough off-axis response... which makes it hard to boom, and very unforgiving.

It's no secret that I'm a big fan of hypers any time I can get away with one... because it's so much easier to boom a moving source, or to split the distance between two speakers. The NTG-3 has a much smoother pattern... with a higher probability for smooth and crisp dialog in the hands of a boom op. Whether or not you prefer the tighter frontal pattern of the 416 vs. the smoother over all pattern of the NTG-3 will depend on the particular situation... as well as your personal taste (and ability). Every mic is a compromise of some sort, but I lean towards smooth patterns over almost any other quality... because they're not only more forgiving... they also sound more natural, in more situations.

Another sound issue worth noting... is that the NTG-3 has less "tail" then the 416. Ideally we want ZERO "tail" on a shotgun... zero rear pickup is best... so for the NTG-3 to have even less tail then a 416 is a major plus.

My impression of the NTG-3... is that Rode is really coming of age in the video industry... and I'm thrilled about it... because in case you hadn't noticed... times are tough... and I'm not going to pull any punches in saying that yeah, it makes me glad to see that very soon after Sennheiser did an across the board price-increase... Rode stepped up to the plate for "the rest of us." While some people may be upset that Rode is essentially throwing open the gates at the country club... by introducing affordable options for traditionally expensive sound products... I'm not one of those people.

I'm not saying the NTG-3 is the equal to a 416, but there will be times when you won't be able to tell the difference... and there will be times when the NTG-3 will actually get a better result... and getting high-quality audio is what you're after when you're doing location sound. If you've always liked the sonic character of a 416, but couldn't afford one... I'm pleased to say that you've got a new, more affordable option to try out for yourself.
:beer:
 
Last edited:
My initial feeling is that the small extra cost for the NTG-3 is worth it, but again... since sound is subjective, your best bet will be to get a listen of both. That's what I intend to do later this week. I've got a gig coming up... and I know a guy working it that has a 4073a... I'll have him bring it.

If you've ever heard any of my 416 vs. 4073a comparisons... then you know that the two mics have a distinct character... and that's why I didn't mention the 4073a in my opening post. The 4073a sounds like an Oktava, with higher sensitivity and longer reach... and the 416 has a more crisp sound... where voices seem to stand out (for lack of a better term)... which is how the NTG-3 also sounds... so... that's why I say that you might want to hear both mics.

If I get a chance to do this side-by-side... I'm sure I'll get opinionated... and I'll certainly tell you all about it ;-)

The new Rode is in that same category of excellent bang for the buck... and in my case I prefer the sound of a 416 over a 4073a... but not at TWICE the price... and now you can have that same sonic character... in the same price-range as the 4073a.

It's still too soon for me to speak in absolutes, even as a matter of opinion... so let's see how it goes. For now all I can say absolutely is that it's a safe choice... and I expect this mic to retain high resale value, just like most other pro-level mics... so if you like the sound of a 416, and you're curious... I think it's a low risk in trying one out.
 
I'll say "Me too" to Matt's posts. I too have had an NTG-3 for a few months now and although I haven't had occasion to use it on a gig yet, in experimenting with it I'm very impressed with the sound and the overall build quality.
 
Hello Matt,
I always enjoy your posts and this is a very good one. I don't have an NTG3 and I'm not a fan of the 416 but your description would be invaluable to someone trying to decide between a used 416 and a brand new NTG3 with ten year warranty. I agree that Rode gives huge bank for the buck. I used to have an NT3 and even used it for an indoor boom mic before I was able to get my current setup. Their shock mount is very good for the price and I still use it on my hyper set up. The blimp they offer is also a great value for the money.
Looking forward to your clip.
Bernie
 
Let's hope the higher bandwidth Youtube is good enough to make subjective judgements. I wanted to put up a wave audio clip, but I think it's too confusing if you can't clearly SEE when you're hearing one mic or the other.

This video clip is rough... but I'm not getting paid to make this stuff look produced, and I don't find it especially entertaining... this is about THE TRUTH AS I HEAR IT. It's amazing how many people question the validity of these "tests" anyway. So take it for what it's worth... I'm not trying to convince anybody about a purchase, but simply relating my personal experiences and opinions... the same as I always have.

My opinion of this mic is continuously going up, however. I think the NTG-3 beats out my AKG ck69 by a fair margin... the most notable areas are handling noise... as well as side and rear rejection. When you first start the video you may think you're hearing the same mic... and the gap widens considerably on the side and rear part. About the handling noise in the AKG... I normally leave my ck69 with the 70hz roll-off engaged, so that helps a lot... but even WITH that on... the Rode demonstrates superior lack of handling noise.

I used to brag up the AKG ULS line because of the excellent hyper (ck63)... which I still like... but the ck69 simply is not the value that it once was... even considering the advantages of a modular system... I will no longer push anybody towards the AKG ULS.

As you'll hear the NTG-3 holds up VERY well to the AKG CK69 (beating it in several practical areas). One of the reasons I've been using the AKG as long as I have is because the shotgun works like a shotgun, but sounds like a hyper... and Rode has accomplished the same thing... for a lot less money.

Kudos to Rode. I hope they continue this trend.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5xDbNczhRs
 
Hey Matt,
I really enjoyed reading this post! I hope the others in here truly appreciate the time it takes to do this... that's what makes these forums great!
It's definitely tough to compare things like this, as sound can be a very subjective topic, but I found the points you did mention to be honest and accurate, and exactly some of the things people should know about this mic!
Keep up the great work, this is a great community here with people like you around. Thanks!
 
Nice review Matt, its always nice to read your thoughts as they always are good and honest. Hope you keep us posted if anything changes. One question - I know some use the 416 as a VO mic exploiting its proximity effect. Does the NTG3 exhibit a similar effect for VO use?
 
Thanks everybody... Jeff... Yeah... I'd say they're similar... the 416 probably does have a bit more proximity effect... you can judge for yourself with my voice, but I'd definitely rather hear Ty Ford give this a go and let us hear his results. I'm no VO guy... but HE is.

NTG-3 @ 1' and 3"<click
 
Ooh t-shirt pop-screen, fancy! Not a bad idea though... going to have to steal that...

Thanks for the test, sounds pretty good to my ears on headphones! Have to listen on the big speakers later...
 
Matt... Thanks for taking the time to do this comparison. It's tremendously valuable. It's clear that the Rode has better off-axis rejection.

Question: Assuming your boomed samples were from identical distances, to my ears it's difficult to tell whether the AKG is hotter or simply has a pronounced low-end response. Given your experience, which is the case here?
 
The AKG is definitely hotter.

The AKG c480b has a couple of nice features... a bass cut option at 70hz and 150hz (you'd probably NEVER use the 150hz... and I previously incorrectly said 120hz)... and the output pad is +6db (which is kind of stupid, because I doubt that the mic is actually creating it's own GAIN from the +48v phantom, but anyway... that's what it says)... 0db, and -10db... so 3 levels of sensitivity. In the +6db setting the c480b/ck69 is as sensitive as a 4073a... and in the 0db setting it's more like a 416 (probably less sensitive)... the NTG-3 is definitely a few db less sensitive then the AKG ck69 on +6... BUT... if I wanted, I could have set the dial to compensate... I intentionally set both levels to the same gain.

In the modern age of video cameras... anything from the original DVX and newer... there is NO benefit... ZERO benefit in having overly sensitive mics... because the pre-amp stages in modern cameras are SO much better then they used to be... that I still had probably 16db of room to gain up! We no longer need maximum sensitivity in a location sound mic... if anything it's almost a hinderance unless you have an optional pad in the mic. I've been saying THAT for years now.

Anyway... so in summary... the AKG is hotter AND it has more low-end response... but for a location sound mic... neither is really beneficial. Keep in mind the c480b is a modular system that has other functions... but it's also a really pricey shotgun with the ck69... one that I bought for it's smooth sound... and as you can hear for yourself... the NTG-3 sounds pretty smooth also.

I've asked in this thread, and also PM'ed Ty asking where his 416 vs. NTG-3 comparison went... I can't find it on his site. I think a lot of pros are going to see this new Rode as an attempt to slaughter a sacred cow... guys with 416's may be annoyed by the similarities. Perhaps some people will have a hard time accepting the new kid in town? I'm speculating... I don't know...

I'll never understand product loyalty... I never have... I buy and sell gear all the time... and if you have a 416 and you like it... who cares? But I'd say it was no small feat engineering a new mic to compete with the 416... and I'm glad to see it.

Audio is an area where we're still leveling the playing field... The NTG-3 isn't cheap... but it's cheap for what it is... and compared to other mics of similar performance.
 
Another thing I like about the NTG-3 is that it CAN be used like the 416... handheld! Almost any other shotgun I've tried transmits too much handling noise to do this... unless you can keep your hands as still as a robot... but the NTG-3 shares that same quality that I always liked in the 416... effortless use as a stick-mic (news)... also notice the traffic going RIGHT BEHIND me... and listen.

Check it out > CLICK
 
Wow that sounds great - forgot the 416 gets used like that...

Side note - is there a site where your green reporting is going up? Would like to see more if its public.
 
Nothing public up yet... I'm just playing around with an idea right now. I'm probably going to put stuff up on youtube in the same location so if you want to subscribe to that channel I'll add clips there.

I don't know too many people who use the 416 as a stick-mic... that was something I started talking about years ago... because it has such low handling noise. The NTG-3 works the same way.

I shouldn't say things like this, but if you don't mind seeing a mic on-cam, you can sometimes eliminate the soundman... as long as you can shoot and check levels.
 
Yeah YOU shouldnt say things like that at all! It really does sound great though and there are those time you just have to run and gun. I've seen the 416(or some shotgun with a slipon) come out and do stick mic duty on the news here occasionally. May just be a back up thing or a certain shooter that likes it. Great rejection though. Just looks a little weird when you are used to seeing the re50's and such.

I'll start subscribing Matt - you seem to be pretty good on that side of the camera - nice work!
 
very low handling noise and horrible proximity effect. i cant see the 416 as a good stick mic. On the other hand, stick mics are pretty cheap
 
rafaeldelauz said:
very low handling noise and horrible proximity effect. i cant see the 416 as a good stick mic. On the other hand, stick mics are pretty cheap
Click to expand...

A) have you ever TRIED a 416 as a stick mic?

B) the 416's proximity effect is a desirable effect for VO, and is used in very very close proximity. Now, and in the past, I've suggested that you could use a 416 as a stick mic when you don't want to put the mic right in somebody's face (as you often MUST do with a stick mic).

C) I'm comparing the ntg-3 to the 416, in that they can both be used handheld without the usual super-high handling noise inherent in almost every other shotgun.



Yeah, stick mics ARE cheap... but there's a million threads asking for one, single, do-it-all mic... and so if a mic can do more then one job I think it's worth mentioning it. An RE50 is $135... but if you RARELY need a stick-mic... then knowing a different mic in your bag can double as one is helpful.

I've got stick mics... and I use them in the normal situations where somebody would use one... (which is rare anyway)... but if I didn't have one... and I was in the market for a shotgun, I might like knowing that a particular mic could handle that job in a pinch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top