Hypercardioids revisited

[Chad Johnson]

Man the more I hear about it, the more I want a CS-3e.

[Tom Morrow]

Chad's phrase "the flangey sound of a shotgun getting wall reflections" is I think very apt. I'd been hearing that sound off and on ever since I started out with an ME66. But I never really knew what it was from. It would appear in some boom positions but not others. Yes, I think it's the destructive interference of interference-tube microphones causing comb filtering, perhaps with effects as air passes over the interference tubes during boom movement, causing response anomalies.

Today I got a chance to use the CS-3e for the first time, indoors in a home. I was truly amazed at the lack of those flangey sounds, in comparison with the ME66. It was just easier to get good sound, less "oh it doesn't sound good here lets try another position". And a bit less of that flangey distortion while moving the boom, which allowed me to follow an actor with the boom whereas with my ME66 I would have probably held the boom still to avoid that sound.

I can't financially justify a CS-3e right now for myself but it really is night and day better at rejecting what you want to reject. I did notice it was a bit more directive than the ME66, but the ability to move it through the air without as many wind/flangey noises makes up for that in some situations.

It turns out the Mic I was using was the one that Garrett bought from Guy's (the same one in Guy's video), so maybe we just happened upon a magic sample. I'm not saying I never hear that flangey sound with the CS-3e, but it happens only maybe 30% as often as with the ME66. Here's to hoping that I can buy this one used when Garrett upgrades to a Shoeps :-)

[Garrett Low]

@ Tom - Don't hold your breath waiting for me to sell my CS-3e. I don't think I'll have enough money to buy a Super-CMIT for a long time. You'll turn blue before that. ;-)

-Garrett

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Tom Morrow

...so maybe we just happened upon a magic sample.

Definitely not a magic sample. The CS-3e achieves its magic by rolling off not just the highs but the mids and lows as well as you go off axis. It's not perfect in this regard, but it's night and day compared to a typical interference tube shotgun. The magic is built into the 3-capsule design.

I still remember the first time I used a narrow interference-tube shotgun. The room had a bad echo and a terribly loud HVAC system. I figured that a narrow-pattern shotgun would be perfect for isolating the voice. We bought the AT815b. Man, was I disappointed when I heard the muddy rumble and flanged vocal sounds! I was never going to get studio quality sound in that room, but a CS-3e and some blankets would probably have done pretty well.

[Jay Soriano]

Sorry to bring up an old thread. I'm looking for an indoor/outdoor mic that will be on a boom. How well does the Sanken CS-3e sound for interior/exterior vs. going w/ a Rode NTG-3 for exteriors and AT4053b for interiors?

[Garrett Low]

I'm sure I'm biased since I own a Sanken but I prefer the CS-3e over the 4053b but there are situations where the 4053b does a better job. Between the NTG-3 and CS-3e there is a pretty big difference. The CS-3e has better side rejection and does not suffer from proximity effect as much as the NTG-3. For me the next jump for interior recording will be to acquire a Scheops CMC641, and if I were to go for another shotgun it would be to something crazy like a Scheops SuperCMIT 2U, if I hit the lottery.

Here's an example of the CS-3e in interior locations.

Sanken CS-3e example - YouTube

[Jay Soriano]

For the male in the live room, first thing I noticed was the slight echo w/ the Sanken which did a good job in dampening it. How would a hypercardoid such as the AT4053b performed in this same situation?

The CS-3e perfomed well in in the female footage.

Thank you for posting this comparison. Definitely Schoeps CMC641 and CMIT5u for interiors and exteriors once the budget allows.

[Chad Johnson]

Just for reference, here's my demo video f the AT4053b on 3 voices. Miked just out of frame, maybe a little higher. Within 18" I'm fairly sure.

AT4053b Demo - 3 voices. on Vimeo

[James Kuhn]

Interesting discussion. I have both the NTG-3 and AT4053b and would recommend both microphones. Both are excellent performers.

Several years ago, I PMd Garrett Low and asked for a recommendation within a 'specified budget' for a Shotgun Mic and a remote Lav system. He recommended the RODE NTG-3 and the Sennheiser ew 100 ENG G3 Wireless Microphone System. At the time, I believe Garrett said, 'You'd have to spend a considerably larger sum of money to beat the performance of the NTG-3'. Or, words to that effect. Both, microphones have served me well, while at the same time not completely emptying my bank account.

Now, that my ears are a little better trained, I 'hear' the shortcomings of both systems. However, do I get $1,500 to $2,000 less performance from either system? Not at this point! I'd like to have some of the better performing microphones, but an increase in performance vs. the cost is just not required for what I do. And that's a key point. If you 'need the performance' of the Sanken, Schoeps or another high-end microphone for your production, then by all means, get it.

On the other hand, I don't care if you've got the greatest microphone made on the planet, nothing can ruin a very good video like poor audio recording technique. Conversely, if you've got 'good' equipment and 'good technique', you can achieve excellent results.

I also have an impedance matched pair of AKG c414XLS and AKG c451 B. But, these are for special occasions where I'm recording acoustic music or if I have access to a studio.

Regards,

J.

[Garrett Low]

It's hard to really compare without a side by side comparison like some of the other ones that Chad has done. For the interview with the male, the room was super live. Even a great hyper like the CMC641 would have some problems in there without some serious sound treatment. This was the lobby of one of the the Treatment Clinics at Stanford University. It was on a Saturday so there was still some very light traffic so we couldn't totally take over the space and put up tones of sound blankets. There floor was tile, ceiling and walls all hard surfaces. It looked great for the subject matter but a nightmare from a sound perspective.

The Female video was shot in her living room which was much more intimate and had a lot more soft nice absorbing materials. There was still a hint of reverb in the room and there was a couple of frequencies where the room would ring but overall not bad.

The thing I like about the Sanken is that it gives a really nice full tone and it has one of the best side rejections out there. It also maintains tonal consistency better than a lot of other mics. So if you're slightly off axis it isn't going to penalize you as much.

If I had a CMC641 I'm sure I would have used it in both situations. But, budget doesn't allow it right now.

[Garrett Low]

James, you hit the nail on the head. First and foremost, technique will win out over any priced equipment. Take a $4000 mic and just plunk it down anywhere an you'll most likely get crappy sound. Take care with a $200 mic and you'll be superior sound. Take care with a $4000 mic and you'll get superb sound. Will you hear $3800 worth of difference. Probably not.

For me the key is if the piece of equipment will pay for itself. If my clients demanded that I use a $4000 mic and I could recoup the cost in a reasonable amount of time, I would invest in it. The reason I went with the Sanken was that I was able to find it at a good price and it yielded enough gains over my previous mic (ME66/K6) that it was worth the expense. Doing corporate videos I often shoot in less than ideal locations. The Sanken was the mic that allowed me to make the interviewer sound good and gave me enough versatility to be able to use it in several situations.

That said, if I hadn't found a good price on the Sanken I would have probably gone with the NTG-3. I've also got a couple other mics I use for various other recording needs so if you are serious about getting good recording you are not going to only have one mic. That's be like saying I'm only going to have one lens to shoot every video. At least that's my opinion.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Based on Chad's video, don't spend more money on mics. Spend money on shoes. They seem to make good diffusers. :)

[Chad Johnson]

I was thinking the same thing! Those shoes made the room sound professionally treated.

[Garrett Low]

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

Based on Chad's video, don't spend more money on mics. Spend money on shoes. They seem to make good diffusers. :)

Yeah, but with the price of shoes now a days you'll spend more than $4000 on them.