Schoeps, Neumann, Sanken or Sennheiser shotgun???

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

Apple, I did a trial with the CMIT-5U in the High Atlas on a movie.
Superb mic in a crappy,noisy set
When the first storms came it failed
The MHK 416 came out and sailed through unmolested.
40 yrs on sets for me and RF capsule mics were the only really reliable modern exterior devices on booms.

That's what I'm saying. YMMV!

I have had situation where I had to replace an MKH by a Schoeps because of RF interference. You had situations where a Schoeps crapped out during a storm.

Even though I had the RF-issues 1-3 times I would not come here and state in every second posting just how "unsafe" MKHs are to use in RF-heavy cities.

I had my Schoeps crap out in foggy afternoons in San Francisco even during interior scenes but I have also used them all night in a Rycote rain cover during a scene with rain-machines without issues. But the relation between the days where they worked flawlessly and the few situations where they failed are to extremely small that it will not stop me from using them because I think they sound better.

I even had 416s receive modulus RF from Steadicams plenty of times just like with KMR-81s. Swaping out either mic for the other helped in those situations.

Looking back at the years I still would not say that RF mics are "safer" to use than non RF-mics or vice versa.

My problem is that when you read through GS it seems like the mic being RF or non-RF is the top criterium to pick a mic for because "science proves it". So where is the science that proves that it really matters in practice not just in theory?
iMO it's highly overrated.

[Puffer Fish]

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

Apple, I did a trial with the CMIT-5U in the High Atlas on a movie.
Superb mic in a crappy,noisy set
When the first storms came it failed
The MHK 416 came out and sailed through unmolested.
40 yrs on sets for me and RF capsule mics were the only really reliable modern exterior devices on booms.

As per your question why I need multiple mics, I think you just answered your own question. Do I need four? No. But I am not the only one using them--they are pool mics for a group of us doing location work. So that's the background. Does that make more sense? Anyway, I have the bad weather thing covered and I want to have another mic in our collection that has a different sound but is still a shotgun, I guess. I am thinking the Neumann is the way to go here. I do not need another clinical mic--got that.

Thanks for your input! I appreciate everyone sharing their experiences. It makes this forum a stronger place with all the various experiences getting shared.

[Rolo 46]

Originally Posted by apple-q

That's what I'm saying. YMMV!

I have had situation where I had to replace an MKH by a Schoeps because of RF interference. You had situations where a Schoeps crapped out during a storm.

Even though I had the RF-issues 1-3 times I would not come here and state in every second posting just how "unsafe" MKHs are to use in RF-heavy cities.

I had my Schoeps crap out in foggy afternoons in San Francisco even during interior scenes but I have also used them all night in a Rycote rain cover during a scene with rain-machines without issues. But the relation between the days where they worked flawlessly and the few situations where they failed are to extremely small that it will not stop me from using them because I think they sound better.

I even had 416s receive modulus RF from Steadicams plenty of times just like with KMR-81s. Swaping out either mic for the other helped in those situations.

Looking back at the years I still would not say that RF mics are "safer" to use than non RF-mics or vice versa.

My problem is that when you read through GS it seems like the mic being RF or non-RF is the top criterium to pick a mic for because "science proves it". So where is the science that proves that it really matters in practice not just in theory?
iMO it's highly overrated.

The heavy brass body of the 416 helps reject RF like no other
Only once in Shanghai up 20 stories and opposite a powerful Transmitter did I have RF induction
Are you using Star Quad cables ?
Science does prove RF capsule mics superior in exterior extremes
Just look at the vast numbers of MKH 416/816 sold world wide for tv Football matches.

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

Just look at the vast numbers of MKH 416/816 sold world wide for tv Football matches.

I'd love to. Where can I see those numbers?

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

Science does prove RF capsule mics superior in exterior extremes

I never denied that.
I am talking about how that really matters in daily practice.
Based on my personal experience I would never call a mic "unsafe for exterior recordings" when in 99% of all cases it will work just fine.
I will trade the sound I like better any time for that subjective 1% where I might need to use something else.
From what I read here you can get the impression that the ratio is actually the other way around and that in 99% of all cases a Schoeps and Neumann will fail outside.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by apple-q

oh, and regarding the 80xx: A fellow recordist has just sent in his 3rd 8060 replacement mic for the crackling issue. So how does that combine with theory of the "safer" RF-mic?

This has nothing to do with RF interference and is a technical issue that is being sorted - that's all I know.

Regarding working in practice - yes, I know that AF mics can work pretty well in normal circumstances, but does the noise increase although it may still be acceptable?

AF mics are not as safe as RF mics it's indisputable. And I say this as a UK distributor of AF condenser mics.; so, if anything, I should be defending what you say.

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by John Willett

This has nothing to do with RF interference and is a technical issue that is being sorted - that's all I know.

Regarding working in practice - yes, I know that AF mics can work pretty well in normal circumstances, but does the noise increase although it may still be acceptable?

AF mics are not as safe as RF mics it's indisputable. And I say this as a UK distributor of AF condenser mics.; so, if anything, I should be defending what you say.

Phew, I really wonder how I was able to "survive" 10 years on set with only Neumann and Schoeps mics with my Sennheisers mostly sitting in my Studio when science proves that my mics can only work "pretty well" under "normal" circumstances.

[RobAnderson]

Sorry to steer this slightly off-topic, but I am wondering how much of an impact the zepplin and dead-cat have on the sonic differences between the Schoeps and the 416 in an outdoors scenario.

Has anyone tried an AB?

I'd imagine that without the screens there is probably a significant difference. I just wonder how much of that subtlety gets lost with the wind muff.

[Rolo 46]

Schoeps has a switchable hf boost for Rycoting
416 already has a laser like response.
In the wet we changed and dried the furry regularly for both.

[Rolo 46]

Only a fool would risk a mic failure in extreme weather
Directors have no conception of the issues.
Why should they Apple?
'Pretty well'is not good enough.
Imho.

[philper]

Originally Posted by RobAnderson

Sorry to steer this slightly off-topic, but I am wondering how much of an impact the zepplin and dead-cat have on the sonic differences between the Schoeps and the 416 in an outdoors scenario.

Has anyone tried an AB?

I'd imagine that without the screens there is probably a significant difference. I just wonder how much of that subtlety gets lost with the wind muff.

I "hear" the zep more on my 416 than I do on my Schoeps, Neumann or Sanken shotguns. But that could be just that particular zep+dog.....

Re RF--my experience is that every dialog mic I've ever owned has had it's "day"--a situation in which it picked up too much RF etc crap to be useful. Like Mr. Q, that's why I bring a choice of mics with me--just as much for what will work in a given situation RF and etc interference-wise as for the diffs in sound. BTW, if you have an older Sanken CS3e, doing the RF mod to it (easy) REALLY cuts down on the crap it picks up from cel phones particularly.

phil p

[pkautzsch]

This seems to split up into a "reliability" discussion and a "sound" discussion.

Originally Posted by Rolo 46

The MHK 416 came out and sailed through unmolested.

Originally Posted by philper

Re RF--my experience is that every dialog mic I've ever owned has had it's "day"--a situation in which it picked up too much RF etc crap to be useful. Like Mr. Q, that's why I bring a choice of mics with me--just as much for what will work in a given situation RF and etc interference-wise as for the diffs in sound.

I was on a shoot in the Alps with a CMIT, every morning we had serious fog, one afternoon a thunderstorm that flooded half the location. No issues with the CMIT, no issues with the Arri 535. Video Village and the rented Lectro IFBs had some trouble, though. When the CMIT went gaga was a warm and windy dry day. Probably dust issue.
Right now I'm doing a period feature using mostly Neumanns (81, 150, 120) and for that outdoor stuff too close to a road or other modern noises it's the Senny 816 for its uniquely tight pattern. In nearly 6 weeks we had exactly one issue: a broken XLR in a cable during setup.

Originally Posted by RobAnderson

Sorry to steer this slightly off-topic, but I am wondering how much of an impact the zepplin and dead-cat have on the sonic differences between the Schoeps and the 416 in an outdoors scenario.

Has anyone tried an AB?

I'd imagine that without the screens there is probably a significant difference. I just wonder how much of that subtlety gets lost with the wind muff.

Originally Posted by philper

I "hear" the zep more on my 416 than I do on my Schoeps, Neumann or Sanken shotguns. But that could be just that particular zep+dog.....

The main difference is off-axis sound. The 416 has a very unique midrange color dependent on angle. This, to me, is clearly audible with and without zeppelin. A zep's inside reflexions will, of course, be colored as well. As colored reflexions are more obvious, "hearing the zep more" seems a natural consequence. I feel that different brands of zeps each have their signature sound.