Schoeps MK41 vs Sennheiser 416 for boom op?

[mosrite]

Hey Guys,

Any disadvantage to using the MK41 over the 416 for indoor and outdoor TV location recording?

I presume the 416 is a bit more directional but in practice, and on most shoots, would this be an issue?

(I already have Schoeps bodies so can save money by going MK41)

[John Willett]

Quality wise, both are good.

But the Sennheiser is an RF condenser and is not troubled by the damp like AF condenser mics. It's not for nothing that the MKH series became the industry standard for film and broadcast outside use.

The explanation is (copy /pasted from a question originally asked on another forum):-


Question:

Can anybody give me a quick explanation of why RF modulated microphones are less susceptible to humidity problems than are AF microphones?


Answer:

Basically, AF capacitor microphones use the capsule as a capacitor to store charge. With one fixed plate and the other free to vibrate in sympathy with the sound, the capacitance varies, and the charge moves in or out of the capsule accordingly. This is measured by the head pre-amplifier and an audio signal results.

All well and good, but the capsule is inherently in a high impedance circuit (over 1GigaW) – it has to sit there with stored charge until the diaphragm moves and any changes in the charge are perceived as audio. In a humid atmosphere the stored charge finds it easier to escape on water molecules in the air rather than through the input of the preamplifier, hence noisy and reduced output, and misery all round. The high biasing voltage also attracts dust particles to the diaphragm, reducing its efficiency and linearity.

The RF system (as used in Sennheiser MKH microphones) uses the capsule (a low impedance capsule) in a completely different way: as a tuning capacitor for an RF oscillator – which inherently employs it in a low impedance circuit where a high frequency signal is being passed through the capacitor all the time. Changes in capacitance (caused by sound moving the diaphragm) alter the resonant frequency of the circuit (circa 8MHz) and so its frequency becomes proportional to the audio signal. A simple RF demodulator restores the output to a conventional audio signal.

More complex and sophisticated (but still very rugged), this system is highly immune to the effects of humidity and is thus the preferred design to be used out of doors (or when moving from outside to inside on a cold day!).

[Jim vanBergen]

My time in TV and film production helped me to derive my position:

Given my experience both as a boom op, production mixer, sound designer and post re-mixer, I find the 416 is more robust for outdoor work and the MK41 is sonically superior indoors. I would find BOTH an excellent kit, but I don't think onely ONE boom mic is ideal. If I had to choose, I'd suggest the 416, but given that you have the Schoeps, you might just want to invest in the Rycotes and give them a shot.

[John Willett]

Don't forget there is also the Sennheiser MKH 60, which is lighter and better than the 416.

And still an RF condenser.

[Jim vanBergen]

MKH60: Lighter, yes. Great sound, yes. Wonderful mic, no doubt.

There are a lot of people in the production sound world who think that nothing beats a 416. It's really good and really small, and it's the world standard. Just like the MKE-2 lav is the Broadway standard for lavalier microphones in theatre.

I was surprised that no one said to try an MKH 8050 hypercardioid on a shock mount...
YET.

[Karl_Lohninger]

It depends a bit on what kind of 'location recording' you're thinking. News, reality, fiction... run-and-gun or carefully set up shots?
Generally there's very good reasons the 416 has been around so long and is #1 used worldwide - at least for exteriors. (calling the mkh 60 a 'better' mike is highly debatable btw). What the 416 has and the Schoeps mk41 has not is the ability to pull out human speech. The mk41 is totally ok, but you gotta get closer to the source with it.
On scripted shows that might be possible but in run-and-gun situations....good luck ;-)
Thinking interiors, smaller locations, lower ceilings, hard surfaces the 416 quickly shows its limits and the mk41 its strenghts.....

2nd hand 416s are plenty around, if your mixer offers T-powering get a 415 and save a few hundred bucks!

good luck, Karl

PS. re humidity: yes, it can happen that capsule-system mics react, not only the Colette's also i.e. AKGs 460/480s do that - but, while it may happen, it really doesn't happen very often....in any case you'd need a backup standing by to be safe.

currently shooting in Berlin, Germany

[zoom]

Hi
here are some fresh audio files from the measurement lab. Two weeks ago I've used an anechoic chamber to measure a few microphones in freefield condition and both of your candidates: the MK41 (supercardioid) and the MKH416 (shotgun) were tested.
It was done with a broadband noise signal of 74dB SPL RMS (each mic got the same level). If you listen to it you will hear once a 'click' when the turntable starts at 0° and again when it ends at 180°. This half turn takes 40sec. So you can calculate the angle. Compare the rejected sound to the sound at 0° - it is like an audible polar diagram:

wav-files:
[1] MK41
[2] MKH416
[3] other shotgun
(these are single channel wave files, 24/48 Size: 7-8 MB)


Listen to the rejection of the sound coming from the side, listen to the coloration.
Before you buy I recommend to test both under real life (or real work) conditions with rental mics. The 416 has the reputation to be very reliable in critical environments (humidity etc.) and its (colored) sound is well known as a film-&TV standard... the MK41 doesn't color the sound from the side and sounds more neutral but needs to be placed much closer to the sound source.

Cheers
Stefan

[MichaelPatrick]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

I was surprised that no one said to try an MKH 8050 hypercardioid on a shock mount...

Would be great if the 8050 could be tested like Stefan did the others.

I've heard the 8050 has a harder polar cutoff than MK41 so the edges around the sweet spot aren't as forgiving. This may be ideal depending on the shoot, operator, etc. or it may be quite bad if sources are moving in and out of there and you hear levels jumping around.

[bcgood]

The 416 because it's tough, very directional, cleaner signal from longer distances, smooth character, it's the sound of the movies...