Why do a lot of people prefer the MKH416 over MKH60?

[Dumb-Ask]

On paper the MKH60 seems like a much better mic but I keep hearing from film location recordists that they prefer the 416. Can anyone explain this?

[philper]

Originally Posted by Dumb-Ask

On paper the MKH60 seems like a much better mic but I keep hearing from film location recordists that they prefer the 416. Can anyone explain this?

It has a different sound, it is cheaper, it is often avail used, it has a certain movie mojo since it has been used so widely for so long, it is relatively bullet proof re RF and to a lesser degree, wind. To some people it feels like it has a high degree of "reach" since the off axis response is so different (and lower fi) than the on-axis response.

phil p

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Dumb-Ask

On paper the MKH60 seems like a much better mic but I keep hearing from film location recordists that they prefer the 416. Can anyone explain this?

The 416 is the industry standard and has been around since 1975.

The 60 is more neutral, lower self-noise, lower distortion, etc..

I have found that when people actually use the 60 for a while they don't want to go back to the 416 and find the 416 is noisy and low output in comparison.

People who prefer the 416 have either mostly not used the 60 or have only done a quick comparison and prefer the one they are used to. People who have really properly used both and prefer the 416 are quite small, I think.

The 60 has the same character as the 20/30/40 series.

I would certainly prefer the 60 over the 416, it's a much better mic..

But the new MKH 8060 is due any moment and will be the same 19mm diameter of the 8000 series.


Posted via the Gearslutz iPhone app

[Dumb-Ask]

Thanks you very much for the info.

I found this post about preferring the mkh416 to mkh60 by Noah Timan very interesting

Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60 - rec.arts-movies-production-sound -

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Dumb-Ask

Thanks you very much for the info.

I found this post about preferring the mkh416 to mkh60 by Noah Timan very interesting

Sennheiser MKH 416 vs. MKH 60 - rec.arts-movies-production-sound -

Interesting, but he doesn't understand it all, it seems.

The intermodulation-noise of the 60 is way way better than the 416, also its of-axis response is more uniform with less comb-filter effects.

The 416 *is* noisier.

The sound is different, as the 60 is cleaner - it's like a more directional MKH 40.

The 416 is an updated version of a mic. that first came out in the 1960's - the 60 was a brand-new innovative symmetrical capsule design that came out in the late 1980's - basically 20 years younger.

As I said; most people after they have really used the 60 in anger for a while don't want to go back to the 416.

Though, personally, I would now consider the new MKH 8060 which Sennheiser have been showing for the last 10 months and should be available properly in the next couple of months (from what I have heard).

The 8060 has the same diameter 16mm diaphragm as the 60, but in a smaller 19mm diameter tube (as opposed to the 25mm diameter of the 60) and is part of the MKH 8000 series (which means there is an AES42 digital option which can convert the mic. to AES42 at any time).

[pkautzsch]

As others have stated, the 416 is a sort of industry standard that's been around long enough to be the "sound of the movies". Knowing its pattern well enough enables the operator to make it work in favor of the picture and lead the listeners' attention. Basically you can do a lot of "mixing" with a 416 just by angling it, and even by turning it around its axis (!).
The 60 is definitely better technically. It's got a cleaner off-axis response and less self-noise. I've found it, ironically, to be more susceptible to wind and therefore needing more protection (=more weight on the boom's far end). It also is a little longer and way thicker. It feels a little bulky and plasticky, especially the switches. Definitely a mic to be handled with care.
My personal favourite is the KMR 81 because it's quite clean off-axis, less susceptible to wind, and still has the right amount of "character".

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

My personal favourite is the KMR 81 because it's quite clean off-axis, less susceptible to wind, and still has the right amount of "character".

But is an AF mic. rather than an RF and not so good in the damp.

But a very nice mic. - I do have a KMR 81i myself (which I bought back in 1983, I think).

[pkautzsch]

Originally Posted by John Willett

But is an AF mic. rather than an RF and not so good in the damp.

But a very nice mic. - I do have a KMR 81i myself (which I bought back in 1983, I think).

Neither the 416 nor the 81 nor the CMIT have ever let me down in moist conditions up to fog and heavy rain.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

Neither the 416 nor the 81 nor the CMIT have ever let me down in moist conditions up to fog and heavy rain.

Great, you have been very lucky - but that does not make any difference to the fact that the MKH series are RF condenser mics and the others are both AF condensers and only RF condensers really have that safety in damp and humid conditions.

Don't get me wrong, I like all three mics you mention - it's just simple physics.

For sound quality I would probably choose the KMR 81i or the CMIT over the 416 - though if I was recording outside in the damp I would go for the MKH 60 now or the MKH 8060 when it's available.

[Winter]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

even by turning it around its axis (!).

Please, can you explain how does this trick works?
Thanks a lot in advance

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

The 60 is definitely better technically. It's got a cleaner off-axis response and less self-noise. I've found it, ironically, to be more susceptible to wind and therefore needing more protection (=more weight on the boom's far end). It also is a little longer and way thicker. It feels a little bulky and plasticky, especially the switches. Definitely a mic to be handled with care.

The 60's wind problem seems to be more with the holes for the switches - so once you have set them, stick a bit of tape over them to seal the air gaps.

The 60 is made of aluminium, rather than a drilled brass rod, to make it lighter. The switches are the same as used on a large number of Sennheiser microphones and radiomicrophones and are a high quality reliable small switch.

The new 8060 is the same diameter as the 416 and I think will be shorter - but the interference tube will be the same length.

It was about a year ago I last handled an 8060 and did not get a chance to compare it side by side with the 416.

[boojum]

Originally Posted by John Willett

But is an AF mic. rather than an RF and not so good in the damp.

But a very nice mic. - I do have a KMR 81i myself (which I bought back in 1983, I think).

John, FWIW, I live in the rainiest city in the US, average rainfall of 67+ inches. I have never had a problem with any of my microphones for any reason. On that basis I think your AF vs RF is way overblown. Maybe in a swampy rain forest in the tropics. Maybe. Maybe in a downpour. But in real life situations I am not seeing it happen in rainy, rainy old Astoria.

Astoria, Oregon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[JOHNPAUL215]

While price may be a factor in the popularity of the 416, there are far more expensive mics selling well. You see plenty of people with KMR 81i or CMITs and they cost as much, or more, than the MKH60. Maybe people don't feel like the 60 is worth 50% more than the 416 because they think of them as both being Sennheisers?

You said film location recordists, so in that case the price gap is pretty negligible. A film location sound package is probably worth more than $50,000 US, so the difference of $500 on the primary mic for the department is not such a big deal. They are using what they like.

I'm sure a TON of 416s are sold to rental houses, news departments and crewing companies that buy them by the case, so that price gap adds up. It's also the same mic they have been using as long as any of them have worked there, so it's become de facto standard in a way (like seeing a SM58 on stage). I know some people think of the 60 as "a 416 with a cut filter and a pad built in that I can do on the mixer anyway". Obviously an oversimplification.

I own a 416 and like it a lot. I've spent lots of time with MKH416s and MKH60s and would never say either mic is wrong. It's possible that the 35 years of the 416 has made it the mic we are used to hearing. I spent more than a year doing a docu-reality TV show with a MKH60 as my primary mic, and a 416 as my backup (standing by in a full blimp for gusting winds). It was all run+gun, no time to carry a spare mic with me (possibly a spare in a car somewhere) and no time to switch mics when going from indoors to outside city streets or running through the woods.
After that job, I didn't go out to buy a 60, nor to regret the purchase of the 416. What short shotgun I buy next would be a different discussion. It would be something as a companion to the 416, but not a replacement (and probably not a Sennheiser). If my 416 was lost/destroyed, I think I would buy another 416 to replace it.... but would look at the 8060 and consider the MKH60.

@boojum: what mics are you using in your high humidity location? When I do docu-reality jobs it's quite possible we will get caught in an unexpected downpour, and our backup gear is hours away and if something is happening, we have to roll. At least on films, we have some time to adapt to the rain.

Humidity aside, either Sennheiser is also very good at RF rejection. I know plenty of mixers/boom ops that have had issues with something like a bad ballast in a fluorescent light causing lots of noise. Some jobs just don't allow for messing with things like that, and I feel better having a mic I know can do it all.

I'm very interested in the 8060 and 8070, because I love the 8040. When it came time for me to buy a cardoid/hyper boom mic, I went with the 8040 over a Schoeps. Sennheiser's ability to work through humidity and RF was a major factor.

At the end of the day, people will say to try them both side by side and go with what you like. Like I said, neither is wrong, so at the end of the day it is your choice.

btw there is also a thread on JWSound along the lines of "swiss army knife boom mic". Lots of opinions on lots of mics, but a few people said "if I were to own/carry only one short shotgun on a job it would probably be a 416". Remember that most mixers for film sets will have a few mic options with them because there is not one perfect microphone for everything.

[Remoteness]

Wow, an MKH8060!!!

Tremendous; they should go well with my MZE 8000 series extension tube/bar stands...

I cannot wait for that possibility.
They should look seriously sexy.


What are going to do with all those MKH416s we have in stock?

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

Wow, an MKH8060!!!

Tremendous; they should go well with my MZE 8000 series extension tube/bar stands...

I cannot wait for that possibility.
They should look seriously sexy.

Haven't you seen the 8060 and 8070 yet Steve?

Sennheiser were showing them in the UK at several trade shows last year.

If they have them at the BVE (Broadcsat Video Expo) tomorrow I will try and take a picture with my iPhone.

[Remoteness]

That would be fabulous John.

If the MKH8060 is similar to the MKH60 or 416, is the MKH8070 like the 816 or 8070?

Thanks!

Originally Posted by John Willett

Haven't you seen the 8060 and 8070 yet Steve?

Sennheiser were showing them in the UK at several trade shows last year.

If they have them at the BVE (Broadcsat Video Expo) tomorrow I will try and take a picture with my iPhone.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

That would be fabulous John.

If the MKH8060 is similar to the MKH60 or 416, is the MKH8070 like the 816 or 8070?

Thanks!

I'm not sure if the 8070 is more like a 70 or 816. The length will tell.

Sennheiser will definitely show them at NAB I an told.



Posted via the Gearslutz iPhone app

[pkautzsch]

Originally Posted by John Willett

Great, you have been very lucky - but that does not make any difference to the fact that the MKH series are RF condenser mics and the others are both AF condensers and only RF condensers really have that safety in damp and humid conditions.

Don't get me wrong, I like all three mics you mention - it's just simple physics.

For sound quality I would probably choose the KMR 81i or the CMIT over the 416 - though if I was recording outside in the damp I would go for the MKH 60 now or the MKH 8060 when it's available.

That's right about physics, but I feel this kind of physics is a bit more theoreical than actual weather conditions. However if I went to shoot a doc in the jungle, it would probably be 416 and 816 because of their ruggedness. I'd be less concerned about monkeys.

Originally Posted by Winter

Please, can you explain how does this trick works?
Thanks a lot in advance

Basically there is a slight difference in treble rejection depending on where the sound comes from, due to the interference tube's ports being located on two opposite sides, with as much closed area between them. Sound from the side entering the ports directly will be rejected MORE than sound from the side hitting the mic on its closed parts. This effect starts at wavelengths about twice the mic's diameter.
The measurements below were done by a colleague who posted them on the German forum Tonthemen.de :: Index (for anyone who understands German: Tonthemen.de :: Thema anzeigen - Lngsachsen-Unsymmetrie bei Mikrofonen mit Interferenzrohr ). The red graph is the 416's response when the ports point to the source, the blue one is for ports pointing up/down.
0° (on axis)

Originally Posted by John Willett

The switches are the same as used on a large number of Sennheiser microphones and radiomicrophones and are a high quality reliable small switch.

The new 8060 is the same diameter as the 416 and I think will be shorter - but the interference tube will be the same length.

It was about a year ago I last handled an 8060 and did not get a chance to compare it side by side with the 416.

Actually I think the switches on the radio transmitters are a little awkward, too. They feel a little too soft, and if used more often, their edges tend to get round so you can't operate them without a tool anymore - and by using a tool, they get even rounder. It's the same with the KMR81 and other KM 8x switches, but not with, say, U87.

8060 is interesting. On the Tonmeistertagung Neumann video I've also seen a digital Neumann interference mic...I guess that's based on KM-D?

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

That would be fabulous John.

If the MKH8060 is similar to the MKH60 or 416, is the MKH8070 like the 816 or 8070?

Bad news, I'm afraid.

I was at BVE today and Sennheiser UK had not brought the new MKH 8060 and 8070 with them.

However, I was told that they will definitely be at NAB in the USA in April.

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

On the Tonmeistertagung Neumann video I've also seen a digital Neumann interference mic...I guess that's based on KM-D?

Basically, Neumann have taken the analogue KMR 81 & 82 (as well as the TLM 103 and some vocalist mics) and integrated the basic KM-D circuit into them, so increasing the range of digital microphones available.