Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
The Sennheiser MKH416 is the industry standard for film/tv work. Sound designers like to use it too (things like recording car doors closing and motorcycle engines, etc.). That would be the one to benchmark against. You mentioned interview work, so a lavalier is also usually part of the scene. 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. The other scenario is in a pharmacy, which is a little more standard setup with the actor behind the cash register. Though once again I plan on doing a decent amount of coverage with most of the shots close up and little movement from actor(s). 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. Depends on the room [and mic], but 4 feet can be a very long way off. When I spoke of a plant, I didn't mean to imply 'near the performance', but rather 'at the performance' - more often, within a couple feet. . .and in the 'right' direction.
As we've mentioned earlier, rarely, we don't have anything to critique. The Sennheiser MKH416 is one of the few microphones we've reviewed that truly deserves the 10/10 score and one we recommend with total confidence. Okay… Maybe it’s a little expensive, but I’ll tell you what I did to pay it LESS later. For now, let’s just focus on the features that make this microphone indispensable. I also got some mics for music producition that I’ll experiment with (Coles 4038s, AKG D12, Shure 55s, RCA Varacoustic, and etc). Having a really high quality sound that brings a nuance to my production(s) is a precedence. Though, if I can get away with saving money, I will go with that option in a heartbeat.Hi anvesh -Due to its operating principle, the MKH416 P48U3 is relatively insensitive to wind and pop noise. The MKH416 can often be used as a soloist and broadcast microphone, without the need for an additional pop shield. However, for outdoor recordings, the use of an additional windshield is recommended to help with creating the best possible recording. 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. 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? As we cover our favorite parts about the MKH416, we're going to talk about some of the more technical details. We're going to try our best to make sure it's understandable for all audiences as these specific features play a massive role in how microphones maintain maximum quality. It’s one of the microphones with the “flattest” response which has earned it the accolade of the “NO EQ Microphone”.
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 [. . .] 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.
Table of Contents
Also in this review I tested the Rycote Softie Windshield on the Sennheiser for an outdoor video test on a windy day. So, enough of the gushing – gimme details. Yes, I heard you. OK, here is the skinny. 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. 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. 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?' 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.
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. I should have mentioned in my original post that I got a camera kit! I have a GH5, several nice lenses including an anamorphic build - plus I just got an aputure 120d ii!! It is perhaps useful to note that [in almost every case] I use the A10s on all microphones - not just for the lavaliers. 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. 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?The frequency response intentionally has a slightly rising characteristic at high frequencies. The microphone has a low proximity effect and therefore provides a well-balanced sound Both of those things can help when you’re reading a script while recording. But ultimately the real reason this mic is terrific as a voice mic is that it simply sounds incredible. Shotgun Shootout Lastly, I really appreciate the Sennheiser MKH 416’s ruggedness. It’s another one of those “indestructible” microphones, so you can have peace of mind when using it in the field.
However, I agree that the best place to use the Sennheiser MKH 416 is OUTDOORS because that’s what it was designed for.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.” Our team has worked with nearly every popular microphone on the market in multiple capacities, and the one thing we can say is that a high price point does not always correlate with the microphone quality. For that reason, we'll be trying to determine not only the pros and cons of the MKH416 but also whether or not it's deserving of the high price tag. 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.
Great Deal 
New Comment