help me choosing a mic: rode NTA or rode NT1000

[Jose di Cani]

Hi

I need a mic for my future camera (xm2 probably now that they cheaper then ever). I will be using it for indoor and outside short movies etc.

I know what they cost in the shop here in HOlland.


Røde NT 1 A

from € 317,-
to : € 179,-

Røde NT 1000

from € 413,-
to: € 199,-

Røde NT 3
from: € 236,
to: € 149,-

blue ball mic:
Euros 179 euros

euros=dollars


So I checked this site out ( http://www.dvfreelancer.com/)
and searched the forum for audio samples and the ROde nta was reviewed and it seems like the best out there (better than the senheiser 66 and the octava mics). The rode nt3 which uses batteries and XLR I guess was alos a good mic but not as clear as the rode nt1a. I guess you can plug the ROde nt3 straight into your canon or sony cam's line in. In Holland it costs 149 dollars..a bargain. I also saw the blue ball mic
http://www.bluemic.com/modules.php?o...ndex&prod_id=2
and it costs 179( droppped in price from 340 euros). I heard about blue mics being hot stuff, so maybe I could use this blue ball mic easyly to mount on the cam. :)

SO now the questions>>>
1) THe xm2 doesbn't have a xlr input, so how can I connect the rode nt1000 for example to my cam's audio line in put. See rode spec here below.
2) which rode should I buy?

extra info:

canon xm2 audio specs: Audio system:
16-bit 2-channel, 12-bit 4-channel
Microphone: Yes, input (3.5mm stereo mini-jack)


rode nta/nt1000: • Cardioid Polar Pattern

• 1" Gold Sputtered Mylar Diaphragm
• Ultra Low Noise
• State of the Art
Transformerless Circuitry
• Monocoque sub-assembly
• Internal Shock Mounting System
Capsule: Externally polarised 25mm (1") condenser
Active Electronics: JFET impedance converter with bipolar output buffer
Pickup Pattern: Cardioid
Frequency response: 20 Hz-20 kHz
Output Impedance: 40 Sensitivity: -34dB re 1volt/pascal (20mv @ 94dB SPL) +/-2dB
Equivalent Noise: <13 dB SPL ("A"-weighted per IEC268-15)
Maximum Output: +2dBu (@ 1% THD into 1K)
Dynamic Range: > 115 dB (per IEC268-15)



Rode nt3 specs:
Specifications

Capsule: Externally polarised 19mm (3/4") condenser
Active Electronics: JFET impedance converter with bipolar output buffer
Pickup Pattern: Hypercardioid (see graph)
Frequency response: 20 Hz-20 kHz
Output Impedance: 200 Sensitivity: -39dB re 1volt/pascal (12mV @ 94dB SPL) +/-2dB
Equivalent Noise: <17 dBA (ÒAÓ-weighted per `IEC268-15)
Maximum Output: +9.5dBu (@ 1% THD into 1K)
Dynamic Range: > 123dB (per IEC268-15)
Maximum SPL: > 140dB SPL (@ 1% THD into 1K) Signal/Noise Ratio: > 77dB (per IEC268-15)
Power Requirements: P48, P24, P12 phantom 9V battery Packed Weight 680g (Mic only no battery 371g)


blue ball mic specs:

Year Introduced: 2003
Operating Principal: Dynamic transducer with active"Class-A" phantom-powered solid-state circuitry
Polar Pattern: Cardioid
Frequency Response: 35Hz - 16kHz
Sensitivity: 3.5mV/Pa at 1kHz, 1 Pa = 94dB SPL
Output Impedance: 50Ω
Recommended Load Impedance: 2kΩ
Maximum SPL: 146 dB SPL (2kΩ load at 1% THD)
Output Noise Level: 18 dB-A
Power Requirement: 48V DC Phantom Power
Current Draw: 2.5 mA



review rode nt: http://www.tweakheadz.com/review_of_the_rode_nt1.htm

[Bryan Beasleigh]

The NT1A and NT1000 are bothl side adress large diaphram and as such are only suitable for voice over or interview.

The NT1a is the best bang for the buck pof these two but you could never use for anything but what I've mentioned above. The mic could be boomed ( stand mounted) or placed on a table , desk or lectern, in front of the speaker.


The NT-3 would be suitable for general use in close situations but it's a heavy mic. You'd also have to work out some sort of wind protection ( if you used it out of doors)

These mics are dirt cheap through B&H in NY. The NT3 is $152 and the NT1a is around $170. It may be cheaper to import these mics, but I'd recomend that you look for something more usable.

There are plenty of other mic samples at dvfreelancert but most require phantom.

[Jose di Cani]

HI

So I guess I should go for the senheiser m66 then instead of the ROde NTa mic? I don't know why they reviewed the rode then in their ' best mic for your digital camcorder test' . They recorded the rode mic 1, 2, 4 and 8 feet away and they did off-axis tests and also they did record sound effects such as the opening of a can of coca cola. I have to look for more info. Thanks.

[Bryan Beasleigh]

They didn't review the mic for on camera use. How do i know, well I did most all of those samples. I'm also the moderator on those 3 audio forums. Matt Gettemeier and I were taken with the sound of the two mics and experimented a little.

That test you mention was the Single Malt Scotch test and the Soda water (chaser, never mixed) test. After around 10 or 12 takes we had to quit.

They'd work fine in an interview situation but that's all.

The mics that are suitable for DV use were all included on the Shotgun Shootout

[Bryan Beasleigh]

Look at the AT 897 for a shotgun.,

The NT3 would work as a stand mounted or boomed interior mic

They're both battery operated.

[Jose di Cani]

THANKS a lot. That was the answer i was looking for. I thought they could be used for video shooting as well. I was reading another post saying ' If you have wide shots with two characters then having two mics (like the Samson pair) might work better but would still probably be too far away'
And the poster said the rode mics had to be boomed in order to record anything.

I will go for the audio technica then.

[Bryan Beasleigh]

What are you going to be doing? Indoor, outdoor, interviews?????
If you're predominately indoors then a shotgun isn't the right mic.

What you need is an adapter that'll supply phantom, then there are a ton of mics.

[Jose di Cani]

HI

I am going to record conversations outside as inside. I will also make short drama movies in the trend ' one flew over the cookoost nest' . That kind of work. An audio technica should do the work then right? I own a MXL condensor mic for voice overs and one to one conversations real close, but I need a a mic for the typical wide shots.

I have been using cubase for 9 years now so after-audio editing is a big plus for me, so I don't need the best of the best. I can edit it afterwards using some good digital plugins like PSP vintage warmer and PSP saturator to give that NUMANN analog vibe to it.

Thanks

[Jose di Cani]

Heh Bryan.

I saw one of your older posts and in there you were saying that the rode 3 was like the audio technica and a couple of replies earlier you told me that the rode was onl y meant for interviews (quote ' The Rode NT3 is a heavy mic yet it's powered by a 9 volt battery(no phantom required) and it sounds as good as an Audio Technica 4053 (or so I'm told').The original poster was talking about the best indoor/outdoor mic.

Thanks. I am confused now.

<<<-- Originally posted by Bryan Beasleigh : Marty said"If only it were that easy... to record some MP3 clips demonstrating the differences between microphones. If only."

Marty, if you read my post i stated that only a full and uncompressed file played on a pro system would give you some indication of a mics worth.

The intent of Matt and myself was only give people that had NO ACCESS to professional quality microphones a taste of what they might be missing. While not scientific my clip[s of a MKH60 and a Schoeps MK41 show a similar tonal quality and a seamless and open air. It's certainly enough to make them want tpo hear the mics first hand.

Some of your past posts indicate a less than perfect knowledge of the various mics and their characteristics. Do you want me to highlight these I will be happy to.

I have a new project, show how for a few bucks you can improve your sound imeasurably. I'm guilty along with others of constantly carping on the Schoeps perfection and the premise that the very best is a must.

Horse cookies to that notion! Barry has mentioned a mic that can really improve his sound a great deal. I'd like to present a comparison of audio from built in mic through the very best, in increments that start at 100 to 200 dollars.

The Rode NT3 is a heavy mic yet it's powered by a 9 volt battery(no phantom required) and it sounds as good as an Audio Technica 4053 (or so I'm told) $152 at B&H and your well on your way to excellence. It's not tiny, or cool but it sounds great.

What I'd like to do is quantify the value of certain entry level mics in the path to audio nirvana. I can already show that a $50 Oktava can almost equal an 850 dollar Neumann.

It's unfair to expect everyone to strive for the same level. If their work will be shown to people on a small screen TV via a standartd VCR then why risk heart failure and personal bankruptsy.


Barry if I can help than email me. maybe together we can do a service to the more moderate user.

I will admit that I'm a lost cause. Like my good buddy Matt G, I'm doomed to an lifetime of poverty in my search for audio excellence. You see, like Matt I can hear the difference and it means a big difference to me. To some it's meaningless and that shouldn't be a big '


ps: I can make a cheaper mic sound like a expensive one with audio plug-ins and cubase sx2. It is like deinterlacing and adding that film look. The same with audio film sound.

[Bryan Beasleigh]

Jose

Did you read the writeup on mic pattern?

Simply put, if your working indoors and doing dialog an NT3 will work well. It is a big heavy microphone and it's not something you'd want to hold on the end of a boom pole. It would work great on a static (stand mouinted boom). If the weight is unimportant then go for it.

You have no phantom adapter so you're pretty well stuck with the battery operated mics. The NT3 is the only hyper i know of that is battery operated. So far as shotguns go the most reasonable, good quality is the AT 897.

Listen to the 360 degree clips of hypers and shotgun to get a better idea. The shotgun will have more reach and sound better outdoors or in large spaces. The NT3 will do better in close proximety.

You can't make a cheap mic sound like a Schoeps. A Schoeps doesn't really have a sound. A Schoeps is like haveing no mic just the real thing.

The closest you'll get to a schoeps is the AKG CK93. The CK93 has more self noise and the off axis isn't as forgiving.

[Jose di Cani]

Ok, thanks for your reply. I will check out the difference between the AT and the rode nt3, just to know why the shotmics have this large range. I will also compare both noise levels. As both are hypermics, I will have to decide. Thanks.

[Bryan Beasleigh]

The most (all purpose) useable would be the AT. It will work indoors and out and can be easily camera mounted or boom mounted. it will work but will be less than ideal in an indoor situation.

Why don't you get that and later when you have more money buy a hyper.

The best of the bunch is actually the sanken CS-1. It's a short shotgun that behaves like a hyper and has the rear lobe of a cardoid. It's $750US though.

Listen to the clips that Glen Trew did for me in his Toronto shop. The shop is a long narrow room with 8' ceilings and very harsh and reflective. The hypers are great but all of the shotguns are a tad hollow.

If it's any consolation, i went through the same pain. i couldn't gigute out why no one would tell me which mic was the best ;-)

[Bruce S. Yarock]

Brian,
What would you suggest for an on camera mic, indoors, doing an informal interview with 2 or 3 people?( for "on the fly'' type situations). I picked up an Oktava kit, in addition to my at 897. Would the Oktava with the cardiod capsule be any good for that situation? I tried the on board stereo mic on my xl2, and it was useless outdoors, and haven't tried it yet indoors for several people.
Thanks
Bruce Yarock

[Jay Massengill]

If you're framing 3 people and limited to an on-camera mic because it's run and gun, then nothing is going to sound great because the mic is too close to the camera and too far away from the subject. As you move in closer the situation will improve.
I'd first try the 897, the Oktava cardioid is very open. It has good sound but will also pick up everything you don't want to hear.
Did you get the hypercardioid capsule in your kit? If so I'd try that, but I still think the 897 would be better among what you already have. Definitely run the mic on phantom power, you'll need the slight improvement in sensitivity and dynamic range for this to sound best.
To improve this situation you could either go cheaper or more expensive. Get a less expensive interview type mic and hand it to the interviewees or mount a more expensive shotgun on the camera.
For starters you can strive to interview in a quieter location, work as close as you can without intimidating people or making them look too distorted, and see what the 897 gives you.

[Bruce S. Yarock]

Jay,
Thanks for the info. I do have the hyper capsule also, and I'll try it. What shotgun would be best for indoors? I love the sound of the cs3, but it's soooo much money.
Bruce yarock