Schoeps MK41 vs Sennheiser MKH-416 at DVinfo.net

Ray Sigmond · February 22nd, 2005, 11:28 PM

I was pretty much set on buying a Sennheiser MKH-416 and after doing some listening and some research I decided to go with the Schoeps MK41. Have to give some thanks to Byran Beasleigh, Ty Ford and Matt Gettemeier for sharing their insight.

http://www.dvfreelancer.com/articles..._shootout.html

http://www.schoeps.de/E-2004/cmc.html

http://www.reddingaudio.com/schoeps/usems.php

Matt Gettemeier · February 22nd, 2005, 11:50 PM

Thanks for the nod Ray... I played around with a Schoeps and I own(ed) a 416 until recently and I'd say that you probably made the right choice. I see them as two completely different mics anyway... but it is fun owning a world class mic. (There is some debate on just how good a 416 is, but no debate around the Schoeps.) Congratulations.

Ray Sigmond · February 23rd, 2005, 12:26 AM

Do you guys prefer the Nickle finish or the Matte gray finish?

Dan Lahav · February 23rd, 2005, 02:31 AM

Yes, excellent mic!

Bryan Beasleigh · February 23rd, 2005, 02:52 AM

I never liked any type of shiny finish on anything. The nextel grey is a nice finish

Ty Ford · February 23rd, 2005, 06:11 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Matt Gettemeier : Thanks for the nod Ray... I played around with a Schoeps and I own(ed) a 416 until recently and I'd say that you probably made the right choice. I see them as two completely different mics anyway... but it is fun owning a world class mic. (There is some debate on just how good a 416 is, but no debate around the Schoeps.) Congratulations. -->>>

Um, There is no debate here on the 416. It is an industry standard and has been for many years. I have one and it kills. It is, however, a shotgun. Therefore it is not the mic of choice for interiors.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Matt Gettemeier · February 23rd, 2005, 07:37 AM

You'd be surprised how many people argued with me on other sites that the 416 WASN'T all that great. I, for one, totally agree with you... I love them.

I actually had a guy from Coffee argue that the 416 isn't a warm mic and that it sounds "brittle". He thought that a CS1 was a much warmer sounding mic...

Obviously I was pulling my hair out.

Then on RAMPS there were just a couple people calling it a "dessert island mic" and then a bunch of guys pushing other choices.

When I said debate... I sure didn't mean from me. I've only argued how great the 416 is. I agree that the 416 isn't the "go to" mic for interiors, but I was surprised how well it does in many interiors... I did an informal test with the 416 and Schoeps... The 416 has VERY little tail and I guess that's why I often found it acceptable indoors (although inferior to the Schoeps indoors).

Ray Sigmond · February 23rd, 2005, 10:36 AM

If it had not been for the info you guys shared, I probally would not of chosen the Schoeps and had gone with the MKH-416. This is what makes DVInfo and DVXUser my favorite video sites!!

Thanks again guys!

Ray

Ray Sigmond · February 23rd, 2005, 01:07 PM

Have any of you guys found it necessary or tested the MK41 with the Cut 1 Filter which is usually bundled in the CMC641-C set? And if so under would conditions did you find that the Cut 1 filter was needed?

http://www.soniccircus.com/store/mer...oduct_Count=24

Regards,

Ray

Ty Ford · February 23rd, 2005, 02:17 PM

Some use it. I don't. In my ignorance, I've found the high pass filter on my mixer (Sound Devices 442) is sufficient.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Ray Sigmond · February 23rd, 2005, 03:16 PM

Ty:

I have heard mixed opinions on using the Schoeps mounted on the camera. Some feel that it picks up too much of the motor and lens noise when mounted on the camera. What are your thoughts on this?

Regards,

Ray

Ty Ford · February 23rd, 2005, 04:14 PM

I guess it depends on how loud the camera is. Sony digital betacams, for example, are quite loud. Unless you're outside and/or in a crowd, camera monted mics of any sort will pick up the sound. Some of teh DVcams are a lot quieter than digital betacam cameras.

The Schoeps cmc641 is primarily used as a boom mic. I don't think the application discussed here was for it to be a camera mounted mic.

Once you get far enough away (over 2.5 feet, acoustics depending) you're sort of swimming around in acoustical crap anyway.

The cmc641 is a hypercardioid. As such, it doesn't have the reach of shotgun. But then a shotgun has all sorts of mid and low frequency stuff coming in off axis in a really nasty way.

If you're on a TV set, you can use the shotgun because there are usually no parallel walls and usually not a ceiling. In sitcoms and talk shows (when body mics aren't used.) A shotgun or three work nicely. The person mixing usually does a mix and splits each shotgun to a separate (iso) track, only going to the iso tracks if needed in post production.

For film style on a boom, with normal interiors, the schoeps wins as long as you can get within two feet. In some cases folks also hang sound blankets on reflective surfaces (not seen by the camera) to knock down the bounce.

Finally, in some highly reflective areas, where you can't get a boom close enough with the schoeps, omni body mics split tracked are the best solution.

Ya don't know until you try several approaches sometimes. That's why I like to talk to the producer before the about the location and shot setup. Sometimes I can help him/her from making an audio nightmare.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Ray Sigmond · February 23rd, 2005, 06:22 PM

Ty:

I am going to be shooting a martial arts instructional series. The lavs don't work because of the action. Most of the shooting will be indoors except when we do some weapons outdoors. I could probally get a student to hold a boom if available, but I would expect that they would have no or little experience at it.

Ty Ford · February 23rd, 2005, 08:35 PM

Boom op is not an entry level position.

I would try several approaches.....

wireless lav. transmitter taped to an arm or leg or ace bandage with the xmitter wrapped up inside.

PZMs mounted to the ceiling if it's a low ceiling.

I'd have to see the space.

Ty

Matt Gettemeier · February 23rd, 2005, 10:21 PM

I helped a local buddy of mine do a martial arts series and we used Lectro wireless and we shot two angles with a ck-69 long and a 416 (both my guns at the time... he liked the 416 so much he bought it a couple months ago)... Anyway we got pretty good sound but I'd have liked to get a hyper up close to the action, but out of sight, and then run some long XLRS back to the cam. If you can stand mount or boom your Schoeps (or something else) then proximity will yield the best results. In every thread like this I feel like talking about audio is like dancing about architecture (somebody else said that first)... once you get your mic going and play around with it for a while you're going to find out what it's best at... then you'll force the situation to work accordingly... either by moving the mountain to mohammed or vice versa.

February 22nd, 2005, 11:28 PM	#1
Ray Sigmond Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 119	Schoeps MK41 vs Sennheiser MKH-416 I was pretty much set on buying a Sennheiser MKH-416 and after doing some listening and some research I decided to go with the Schoeps MK41. Have to give some thanks to Byran Beasleigh, Ty Ford and Matt Gettemeier for sharing their insight. http://www.dvfreelancer.com/articles..._shootout.html http://www.schoeps.de/E-2004/cmc.html http://www.reddingaudio.com/schoeps/usems.php

February 23rd, 2005, 02:52 AM	#5
Bryan Beasleigh Trustee Join Date: May 2002 Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,922	I never liked any type of shiny finish on anything. The nextel grey is a nice finish __________________ Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting ".......holy smokin rubber lips...what a ride!"

February 23rd, 2005, 06:11 AM	#6
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	<<<-- Originally posted by Matt Gettemeier : Thanks for the nod Ray... I played around with a Schoeps and I own(ed) a 416 until recently and I'd say that you probably made the right choice. I see them as two completely different mics anyway... but it is fun owning a world class mic. (There is some debate on just how good a 416 is, but no debate around the Schoeps.) Congratulations. -->>> Um, There is no debate here on the 416. It is an industry standard and has been for many years. I have one and it kills. It is, however, a shotgun. Therefore it is not the mic of choice for interiors. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

February 23rd, 2005, 02:17 PM	#10
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Some use it. I don't. In my ignorance, I've found the high pass filter on my mixer (Sound Devices 442) is sufficient. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

February 23rd, 2005, 04:14 PM	#12
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	I guess it depends on how loud the camera is. Sony digital betacams, for example, are quite loud. Unless you're outside and/or in a crowd, camera monted mics of any sort will pick up the sound. Some of teh DVcams are a lot quieter than digital betacam cameras. The Schoeps cmc641 is primarily used as a boom mic. I don't think the application discussed here was for it to be a camera mounted mic. Once you get far enough away (over 2.5 feet, acoustics depending) you're sort of swimming around in acoustical crap anyway. The cmc641 is a hypercardioid. As such, it doesn't have the reach of shotgun. But then a shotgun has all sorts of mid and low frequency stuff coming in off axis in a really nasty way. If you're on a TV set, you can use the shotgun because there are usually no parallel walls and usually not a ceiling. In sitcoms and talk shows (when body mics aren't used.) A shotgun or three work nicely. The person mixing usually does a mix and splits each shotgun to a separate (iso) track, only going to the iso tracks if needed in post production. For film style on a boom, with normal interiors, the schoeps wins as long as you can get within two feet. In some cases folks also hang sound blankets on reflective surfaces (not seen by the camera) to knock down the bounce. Finally, in some highly reflective areas, where you can't get a boom close enough with the schoeps, omni body mics split tracked are the best solution. Ya don't know until you try several approaches sometimes. That's why I like to talk to the producer before the about the location and shot setup. Sometimes I can help him/her from making an audio nightmare. Regards, Ty Ford __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

February 22nd, 2005, 11:50 PM	#2
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Thanks for the nod Ray... I played around with a Schoeps and I own(ed) a 416 until recently and I'd say that you probably made the right choice. I see them as two completely different mics anyway... but it is fun owning a world class mic. (There is some debate on just how good a 416 is, but no debate around the Schoeps.) Congratulations.

February 23rd, 2005, 12:26 AM	#3
Ray Sigmond Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 119	Do you guys prefer the Nickle finish or the Matte gray finish?

February 23rd, 2005, 02:31 AM	#4
Dan Lahav Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: CA Posts: 172	Yes, excellent mic!

February 23rd, 2005, 07:37 AM	#7
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	You'd be surprised how many people argued with me on other sites that the 416 WASN'T all that great. I, for one, totally agree with you... I love them. I actually had a guy from Coffee argue that the 416 isn't a warm mic and that it sounds "brittle". He thought that a CS1 was a much warmer sounding mic... Obviously I was pulling my hair out. Then on RAMPS there were just a couple people calling it a "dessert island mic" and then a bunch of guys pushing other choices. When I said debate... I sure didn't mean from me. I've only argued how great the 416 is. I agree that the 416 isn't the "go to" mic for interiors, but I was surprised how well it does in many interiors... I did an informal test with the 416 and Schoeps... The 416 has VERY little tail and I guess that's why I often found it acceptable indoors (although inferior to the Schoeps indoors).

February 23rd, 2005, 10:36 AM	#8
Ray Sigmond Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 119	If it had not been for the info you guys shared, I probally would not of chosen the Schoeps and had gone with the MKH-416. This is what makes DVInfo and DVXUser my favorite video sites!! Thanks again guys! Ray

February 23rd, 2005, 01:07 PM	#9
Ray Sigmond Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 119	Have any of you guys found it necessary or tested the MK41 with the Cut 1 Filter which is usually bundled in the CMC641-C set? And if so under would conditions did you find that the Cut 1 filter was needed? http://www.soniccircus.com/store/mer...oduct_Count=24 Regards, Ray

February 23rd, 2005, 03:16 PM	#11
Ray Sigmond Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 119	Ty: I have heard mixed opinions on using the Schoeps mounted on the camera. Some feel that it picks up too much of the motor and lens noise when mounted on the camera. What are your thoughts on this? Regards, Ray

February 23rd, 2005, 06:22 PM	#13
Ray Sigmond Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Edison, NJ Posts: 119	Ty: I am going to be shooting a martial arts instructional series. The lavs don't work because of the action. Most of the shooting will be indoors except when we do some weapons outdoors. I could probally get a student to hold a boom if available, but I would expect that they would have no or little experience at it.

February 23rd, 2005, 08:35 PM	#14
Ty Ford Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD USA Posts: 2,337	Boom op is not an entry level position. I would try several approaches..... wireless lav. transmitter taped to an arm or leg or ace bandage with the xmitter wrapped up inside. PZMs mounted to the ceiling if it's a low ceiling. I'd have to see the space. Ty __________________ Ty Ford's Audio Bootcamp Field Guide Ty Ford's Audio Video Blog

February 23rd, 2005, 10:21 PM	#15
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	I helped a local buddy of mine do a martial arts series and we used Lectro wireless and we shot two angles with a ck-69 long and a 416 (both my guns at the time... he liked the 416 so much he bought it a couple months ago)... Anyway we got pretty good sound but I'd have liked to get a hyper up close to the action, but out of sight, and then run some long XLRS back to the cam. If you can stand mount or boom your Schoeps (or something else) then proximity will yield the best results. In every thread like this I feel like talking about audio is like dancing about architecture (somebody else said that first)... once you get your mic going and play around with it for a while you're going to find out what it's best at... then you'll force the situation to work accordingly... either by moving the mountain to mohammed or vice versa.