Sennheiser MKH 416-P48 - microphones (Studio, 40 - 20000 Hz, XLR-3, Wired, Super-Cardioid, 19 x 250 mm)

Product Information

Of course, there are very many more possible scenarios. . .and my selections for these few are just 'maybe' answers at best. Ultimately it depends on other environmental issues. And the DPA 6060 lavalieres answer is a cheat as they usually involve expensive wireless transmitters/receivers as well. But sometimes, it seems there is just no other way. Well you’ve probably heard audio through it before if you’ve ever watched a movie – or television. It is a standard in the film and TV industries, often used outdoors for news casts and interviews as well as location shoots.

Some say that it ISN’T the best microphone for voice while others swear by it. However, I think that everybody agrees that it’s the perfect option for film sets. Other awesome features of the 416 make it nearly indestructible (not that I put that to the test with the review mic:)), less sensitive to plosives (p-pops), and less sensitive to the proximity effect, which is that thing where the low bass frequencies get more hyped the closer the mic gets to the source. Voice-over folks may think, “hey I like it when my voice sounds deeper when I get close to the mic.” I know that last one is a curve ball. But you would be an all-in-one force with that set up. There are tons of gigs out there that want someone to use a 4K DSLR camera and a decent mic setup to record things. For some, a lot of this information may be difficult to keep up with. But a lot of these features we mentioned really highlight the level of detail Sennhieser put into the MKH416 to make sure not only that the sound you record is of high quality, but that you can focus more on your target audio source and less on your environment.Personally, I think shotgun microphones like the Sennheiser MKH 416 sound great even in “controlled” environments. I mount it on my desk and use it for my YouTube videos and any other voice-over work I might need to do. Dedicated boom operator with multiple actors [outdoors, or indoors with adequate room between actors and ceilings]: Schoeps MiniCMIT As for using studio mics, I think you nailed it with the application of planting them within the scene cleverly, which I was thinking of doing. Like putting my Coles 4038 or my CAD m179 hidden in the scene near the performance, say in the four feet range. I guess I’m asking to see if anyone has actually done something similar and realized it’s end result was not worth the struggle.

Also, which one would be the most future proof? In terms of budget the MKH 50 sounds the most appealing to me, but I’d rather spend more money on something that lasts me for a very a long time.I did notice in the first test that the 416 produced a little more sibilance (the high hissy “ssssss” frequencies) than I normally like. Then I remembered that I have a bit of EQ permanently set on my preamp to reduce the lows and increase the highs. I did that because the Rode sounded a bit heavy in the low end without it.

The audio would have been truly awesome if we had a 3rd person holding the mic on the end of a boom pole (sometimes called a fish pole) mic holder with the mic just above my head and out-of-frame, pointing down at my mouth. I’ll do that test another day. The mics in question, 2 are hyper cardioids (the schoeps and MKH 50) and the dpa is a shotgun (I think?). If I don’t plan on building up my kit beyond one mic at this point, which one would be the most sensible choice? Delivery prices are subject to change and delivery is not guaranteed due to circumstances beyond our reasonable control. It's great to see you already have the other microphones for music recording. I wouldn't spend too much effort on 'future proof'. . .beyond questions like: 'is this the best microphone for the scenarios I need to cover? and the best I can afford at this time?'It’s one of the microphones with the “flattest” response which has earned it the accolade of the “NO EQ Microphone”. Of course, it depends on what you’re looking for. For example, some may prefer NOT using shotgun microphones when the situation doesn’t absolutely call for it. However, I agree that the best place to use the Sennheiser MKH 416 is OUTDOORS because that’s what it was designed for.

Using a more versatile approach to the microphone capsule to allow these shifts in patterns is one of the single reasons this microphone is worth the price tag. Working with the different frequencies in audio is its own challenge, and using a microphone that knows what's good & bad will save you a lot of hassle in the long run. I’d say interiors with just one, sometimes a few actors would be the most representative of what I’d be working with. With exteriors coming second [. . .]You can read the technical details of this in this article, but RF ( radio frequency, btw) biasing has some benefits, such as that the mic becomes less sensitive to moisture ( a good thing in an expensive mic commonly used outdoors), has a wider frequency response, and is extremely low noise levels. Other features? If you're looking for one of the best microphones to use for your next project, you can't go wrong with the Sennheiser MKH416. The sound quality is outstanding, the noise control and weather handling are industry standard, and you can feel the level of quality in the materials used. It's so well-rounded and one of my favorite microphones on the market. This mic has a hypercardioid pattern, which rejects sound coming from behind it in about a 120-degree field. The 416 is also different from regular condensers in that it uses something called RF biasing rather than the more common DC-biasing.