Login / Register
 
Schoeps CMIT5U or Sennheiser MKH-416
New Reply
Subscribe
RickGobe
Thread Starter
#1
23rd June 2013
Old 23rd June 2013
  #1
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 666

Thread Starter
RickGobe is offline
Schoeps CMIT5U or Sennheiser MKH-416

I just bought a Sony PMW200 camera and wanted to compliment it with a nice shotgun. My question is how much better is the Schoeps? I've used the Sennheiser before and everybody knows that it is a great shotgun. I'm going to be using it for comedy skits. Will the Schoeps blow me away?
__________________
Make life easy and buy High end!
#2
23rd June 2013
Old 23rd June 2013
  #2
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
CMIT sounds best
416 will work in any situation known to man
Its your choice.
RickGobe
Thread Starter
#3
23rd June 2013
Old 23rd June 2013
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 666

Thread Starter
RickGobe is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
CMIT sounds best
416 will work in any situation known to man
Its your choice.
Thanks.. Maybe i'll just get both!
#4
23rd June 2013
Old 23rd June 2013
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,155

Earcatcher is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickGobe View Post
Thanks.. Maybe i'll just get both!
Yes, it is not unusual for shotgun users to have several, for different situations. I'm using the CMIT 5U and Røde NTG3. Very happy with that combination. NTG3 is similar to 416. It is also a true RF mic. Great value for the money and a good backup.
#5
23rd June 2013
Old 23rd June 2013
  #5
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 8,123

John Willett is offline
Personally I would not buy a 416 nowadays - I would go for the new MKH 8060. It's smaller with the same length interference tube and a good deal quieter.
__________________
John Willett
Sound-Link ProAudio Ltd.
Circle Sound Services

President - Fédération Internationale des Chasseurs de Sons

(and lots more - please look at my Profile)
#6
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #6
Gear nut
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 103

myke2242 is offline
CMIT, although it is odd that it is 416 or CMIT. kind of two different mics.
#7
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #7
Lives for gear
 
RobAnderson's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: NY New York a wonderful town
Posts: 1,002

RobAnderson is offline
I'll throw the 418 into the mix. All the benefits of a 416, but with built-in mid side capability.
__________________
Quote:
"Everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense." - G. Stein 1946

The reputation of a thousand years may be determined by the conduct of one hour. - Japanese Proverb

"Look into his face and hear the music of the ages. Don't pay too much attention to the sounds--for if you do, you may miss the music." - George Ives
http://www.andersonsoundrecording.com

http://www.facebook.com/AndersonSoundRecording
#8
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
Not a music mic,more sports coverage
RickGobe
Thread Starter
#9
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 666

Thread Starter
RickGobe is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Not a music mic,more sports coverage
Which one?
#10
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
Mkh 418
#11
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #11
Lives for gear
 
RobAnderson's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: NY New York a wonderful town
Posts: 1,002

RobAnderson is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Not a music mic,more sports coverage
For sure.

But then, I'd not recommend any shotgun just for music work.

However, you would find the MS shotguns to be more useful than a regular shotgun in that role.
#12
24th June 2013
Old 24th June 2013
  #12
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
Agreed
However the camera is never within the critical distance and always pans and zooms....
Sep sound on a stand mounted shaver would be better for music.
RickGobe
Thread Starter
#13
25th June 2013
Old 25th June 2013
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 666

Thread Starter
RickGobe is offline
It's not for music or sports... Dialog.. Think SNL!
#14
25th June 2013
Old 25th June 2013
  #14
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
Use a CMIT on a boom then
Back to the MKH 418, I did see some NPR music clips shot with the 418,that were musically very atmospheric ,but on locked off wide shot.
A cameraman shooting sound needs the whole range of kit
Shotgun,wireless and a sep sound Shaver on a mic stand, to cover various events effectively
#15
26th June 2013
Old 26th June 2013
  #15
Lives for gear
 
huub's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Location: amsterdam
Posts: 1,630
My Recordings/Credits

huub is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
Personally I would not buy a 416 nowadays - I would go for the new MKH 8060. It's smaller with the same length interference tube and a good deal quieter.
We tested the 8060 mounted on camera, it was close to useless.
Lots of low level rumble, and the breathing of the cameraman was very prominent.
It was almost like mounting a KM140 on a camera (also useless).

We use mostly 416's for this purpose, but the dpa 4017 also works great (and is very light and small and sounds great)


I do not know if you'll be using your mic mounted on your camera, just sharing my experience in outside broadcast situations.
#16
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,323

aracu is offline
A little off topic... the interference tube of the 416 can be removed by unscrewing one screw, if I remember correctly, and it works with no added hum, as an odd looking supercardioid mic. Maybe the capsule is electret, for the mic to not need a faraday cage to function.
#17
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #17
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
Its an RF condenser, not an electret and it needs a metal body.
It will fit in a 816 tube so you can have 2 mics in one...

I used to fit MKH 40 to Sony DigiBeta cameras when doing sep sound with a PD4.
Needs bass cut engaged
With a Rycote Softie this could produce excellent on camera sound,with no rear pick up.
#18
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #18
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,861

The Listener is offline
Why is Sennheiser MKH416 so much more popular than Sennheiser MKH60 or 70 or at least mentioned more around here? That question lies in the back of my head for quite some time.

I have a privilege of working with MKH70 for the last 12 days and it sounds great to me. I am also wondering what to buy myself later as a "go to" boom mic for film dialogue and foley - MKH70 which is an old Sennheiser design that obviously works and is supposedly the next step over 416 - or does 416 have some special "charm" that makes it so popular? Or should I look at the newer Sennheiser desings (but why are then the "old" ones still in production and even cost more?? If they would be in any way outdated or improved upon in the new 80.. versions I guess that would not be so?) Or even look at Schoeps CMIT5U... but I really really like how MKH70 works and sounds, can CMIT5U really work "better" or just slightly different... I also have two MKH60 at my disposal, but since we only have one boom operator, we use mostly only MKH70 and MKH60 only when we hide another boom somewhere... MKH70 somehow sounds even "cleaner" and more focused on the source than the MKH60 and overall it captures a nice natural tone of the voice from the distance and just seems "right"... it sounds good even in the interieurs.
__________________
"The first question I ask myself when something doesn't seem to be beautiful is why do I think it's not beautiful. And very shortly you discover that there is no reason."

John Cage

http://elmutante.bandcamp.com/album/...of-kindness-ep

http://worldhappinessmusic.bandcamp.com/
#19
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #19
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,323

aracu is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Its an RF condenser, not an electret and it needs a metal body.
I'm not kidding you, it works without the int. tube, which slides off, with the circuit boards exposed, without a (noticable) difference in hum from lack of shielding.
#20
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #20
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 8,123

John Willett is offline
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by huub View Post
We tested the 8060 mounted on camera, it was close to useless.
Lots of low level rumble, and the breathing of the cameraman was very prominent.
Use a Rycote Universal Camera kit and an S-series cable to decouple the mic.

The 8060 has a more extended frequency response than the ancient 416 and the MZF 8000 filter module should be used in this instance.

It's not that the mic. was "close to useless", just that you did not use it as it really should be in these circumstances.
#21
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #21
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 8,123

John Willett is offline
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Listener View Post
Why is Sennheiser MKH416 so much more popular than Sennheiser MKH60 or 70 or at least mentioned more around here? That question lies in the back of my head for quite some time.

I have a privilege of working with MKH70 for the last 12 days and it sounds great to me. I am also wondering what to buy myself later as a "go to" boom mic for film dialogue and foley - MKH70 which is an old Sennheiser design that obviously works and is supposedly the next step over 416 - or does 416 have some special "charm" that makes it so popular? Or should I look at the newer Sennheiser desings (but why are then the "old" ones still in production and even cost more?? If they would be in any way outdated or improved upon in the new 80.. versions I guess that would not be so?) Or even look at Schoeps CMIT5U... but I really really like how MKH70 works and sounds, can CMIT5U really work "better" or just slightly different... I also have two MKH60 at my disposal, but since we only have one boom operator, we use mostly only MKH70 and MKH60 only when we hide another boom somewhere... MKH70 somehow sounds even "cleaner" and more focused on the source than the MKH60 and overall it captures a nice natural tone of the voice from the distance and just seems "right"... it sounds good even in the interieurs.
The 4i6 is an ancient design - it came out in about 1975 and was basically the same as the old 415 but with phantom power.

The MKH 40 was the first of the new line of symmetrical capsule mics and came out in 1985 - the 60 and 70 were the short and long gun versions and came out a couple of years later.

The 416 was kept on because people kept buying it, even though the 60 was better.

The 8060 is the latest and came out in 2010 - and is better.

It's just that people keep buying the old stuff, even though the newer is better.

The 416 is quite a bit noisier than the 60 and 8060, so maybe the noise is hiding things that are shown up by the better and newer mics ???

And, yes, I would say that the new symmetrical capsule mics are more neutral and natural than the 416.

The CMIT5U is a totally different design - the 60 and 8060 are symmetrical capsule RF condensers with extremely low distortion and self-noise and the symmetrical capsule design means that the acoustic impedance does not change.

The CMIT has a normal capsule and is an AF condenser.

You may find reading "The MKH Story" by Manfred Hibbing, the designer of the MKH microphones, interesting reading as it explains a lot (and is very readable).
#22
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #22
Gear addict
 
Jaymz's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 364

Jaymz is online now
My problems with the 8060,

1. Reliability : If the issues are now truly worked out, then fine. But I went through 4 of them so I really have a hard time trusting it.

2. As opposed to a mid-high bump, it has what is almost a cross between that and a high-freq shelf....



The best feature about the 60 is its extremely low noise, but that's mitigated in the 8060 by the massive high-freq boost making it seem almost as noisy as a 416 (even though in paper it's quieter). Honestly, if I were to sum it up, it's like an MKH60 with the high-shelf constantly engaged but with better off-axis respone (it's best feature actually).

If I want a presence boost with robust MKH reliability in humidity, I'll go with the 416.

If I want very low noise in a short shotgun, I'll go with the MKH60.

My main short shotgun is now the Schoeps CMIT 5U and I couldn't be happier. All my other mics are still MKH series though (8050 for indoor boom / close framing, 8040 pair for ORTF and 30 as side mic for MS). So I'm a huge Sennheiser fan, just this particular mic isn't for me.
__________________
IMDb Credits
#23
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #23
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Stroud,Glos,UK
Posts: 2,316

Rolo 46 is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by aracu View Post
I'm not kidding you, it works without the int. tube, which slides off, with the circuit boards exposed, without a (noticable) difference in hum from lack of shielding.
Well of course it works
But only a fool would use it exposed to the elements,it needs a proper brass interference tube
#24
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,323

aracu is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Well of course it works
But only a fool would use it exposed to the elements,it needs a proper brass interference tube
As any fool knows, most capacitor mics cannot be used without the
metal shielding because the ratio of hum becomes too high. The 416 is
unusual in this regard. You did not get the point.
#25
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #25
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Oxfordshire, UK
Posts: 8,123

John Willett is offline
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by aracu View Post
As any fool knows, most capacitor mics cannot be used without the
metal shielding because the ratio of hum becomes too high. The 416 is
unusual in this regard. You did not get the point.
Of course - and Rolo does understand all that.

A normal AF condenser has an extremely high impedance capsule (Giga-Ohms) which sits there with a permanent charge.

The 416 is an RF condenser with a low impedance capsule which is a tuning capacitor for an RF circuit.

The AF condenser needs the Faraday cage to protect the capsule from interference. The RF condenser does still need a shield, though, but to protect the circuit from becoming a radio tuner. The first batch of MKH 60s were perfect receivers for BBC Radio 2 when they were used on the Boat Race by the BBC - Sennheiser immediately recalled every single one made, did a redesign of the shielding and replaced every single one.

Every RF condenser is like this -you were just lucky you did not receive interference.
RickGobe
Thread Starter
#26
27th June 2013
Old 27th June 2013
  #26
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 666

Thread Starter
RickGobe is offline
Can anyone with the CMIT5U post a clip of some indoor dialog?
#27
28th June 2013
Old 28th June 2013
  #27
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,861

The Listener is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
The 4i6 is an ancient design - it came out in about 1975 and was basically the same as the old 415 but with phantom power.

The MKH 40 was the first of the new line of symmetrical capsule mics and came out in 1985 - the 60 and 70 were the short and long gun versions and came out a couple of years later.

The 416 was kept on because people kept buying it, even though the 60 was better.

The 8060 is the latest and came out in 2010 - and is better.

It's just that people keep buying the old stuff, even though the newer is better.

The 416 is quite a bit noisier than the 60 and 8060, so maybe the noise is hiding things that are shown up by the better and newer mics ???

And, yes, I would say that the new symmetrical capsule mics are more neutral and natural than the 416.

The CMIT5U is a totally different design - the 60 and 8060 are symmetrical capsule RF condensers with extremely low distortion and self-noise and the symmetrical capsule design means that the acoustic impedance does not change.

The CMIT has a normal capsule and is an AF condenser.

You may find reading "The MKH Story" by Manfred Hibbing, the designer of the MKH microphones, interesting reading as it explains a lot (and is very readable).
Thanks for all those explanations... I guess "better" as in the statement 8060 is "better" is probably subjective, I will have to hear one to decide if I like it more than MKH70 I guess... But why are the MKH60 and MKH70 still more expensive than the newer 8000 series? I know quality and price are not always related - but those mics come from the same company... and they decide how to price their products, usually the best get the highest price tag, isn't it so? I am just a bit puzzled about that...

Anyway, I will have to hear all those mics... I really like how MKH70 sounds, that's what I know for sure, and I also liked how Rode NTG-3 sounded, but didn't compare the two directly... with Sennheiser MKH70 I have a feeling that it sounds even more natural and smooth than Rode, but I used those mics a few months apart in different projects, so this intuitive observation is hardly relevant... Will have to test MKH8060/70 and CMIT5U myself to decide if I like them more then MKH70 I guess...
#28
28th June 2013
Old 28th June 2013
  #28
Gear Guru
 
charles maynes's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Location: out in the dirt.
Posts: 15,907

charles maynes is offline
as a big fan of shotguns, my experiences with the ones being discussed-


MKH416- I love this mic... it is the sound of cinema as far as I am concerned... It has a really strong mid range, and probably the best off axis rejection of anything I have ever used in a short shotgun mic.

CMIT5 - I havent used the 5, but have used the 4.... I typically love Schoeps mics, but I just wasnt that impressed by the 4.... It does sound nice, but not amazing to my ears- it has a similar feel to it that the 8060 does, which is sort of like more of a super-hyper cardiod than a shotgun.

MKH8060 - nice sounding, low noise, but seems a lot closer to the MKH60 than the 416- it has great low end (in my experience) and seemed pretty cool. Frank Bry does magic with the 8000 series Sennheisers, so I know they can sound brilliant....

RODE NTG3- I Love this mic as well- it seems to give a sort of modern 416 styled sound with nicer highs and lows, but has little less off axis rejection... I think this is the best shotgun for the money on the planet. I actually own two of these and use them everytime I am out.
__________________
Charles Maynes credits
Charles' webpage



“Judging others makes us blind, whereas love is illuminating. By judging others we blind ourselves to our own evil and to the grace which others are just as entitled to as we are.”
? Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship
#29
28th June 2013
Old 28th June 2013
  #29
Gear addict
 
Jaymz's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 364

Jaymz is online now
Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
MKH416- I love this mic... it is the sound of cinema as far as I am concerned... It has a really strong mid range, and probably the best off axis rejection of anything I have ever used in a short shotgun mic.
Have you tried the Sanken CS-3e?

Everytime I use it, I can't believe it's not a long-shotgun. It's rejection is superb. I did interviews on a Nat Geo show in a noisy parking lot once and it was incredibly useful. Definitely needs to be kept on-axis though, good boom operation is a must.

But alas, doesn't sound like a 416.

Quote:
Originally Posted by charles maynes View Post
CMIT5 - I havent used the 5, but have used the 4.... I typically love Schoeps mics, but I just wasnt that impressed by the 4.... It does sound nice, but not amazing to my ears- it has a similar feel to it that the 8060 does, which is sort of like more of a super-hyper cardiod than a shotgun.
As far as I know, there is no CMIT4. The only two shotguns Schoeps have ever made are the CMIT 5 U and the Super CMIT 2 U (which is the same but with digital output capability and built-in noise reduction options).
BRH
#30
28th June 2013
Old 28th June 2013
  #30
BRH
Gear Head
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 39

BRH is offline
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Topic:
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.