thoughts on Sennheiser ME66 shotgun microphone?

[Tom Morrow]

Something I'm still confused about is what kind of microphone works well indoors. Garrett's answer "none of the interference mics, which is nearly all mics" is very succinct and to the point, but I wonder for those of us who can't afford fancy non-interference mics which ones would be better indoors.

Part of why I was attracted to the ME66 is that I had read many times that hypercardioid mics are not so good indoors, that supercardioid mics work better indoors. The ME66 is a supercardioid. But I have also seen people say that supercardioid is not good indoors either. If anyone has pointers to something that can clearly and accurately explain which interference mics work best on a boompole indoors, and why, please post a link.

It sounds like the issue is basically that the more directive the microphone, the more reflections from the side of the mic will mess with the directivity. You just can't win.

[Josh Bass]

From what I understand, hypers ARE generally better indoors. They are directional, but not as much as shotguns, which, though (I think) they are mostly supercardioid, have the interference tube/phase cancellation technology that does weird things to off axis reflections.

Hypers aren't built the same so they don't have this issue. They do however have a notable rear pickup lobe (look up a diagram to see what I mean) so you have to be careful where you point the back of a hyper.

Super cardioid mics WITHOUT the interference tube will behave totally differently, pattern-wise, as that pattern in its natural state is actually wider than hypercardioid, but not as wide as cardioid. Also doesn't have quite as large of a rear pickup lobe.

And this is all specific to the mic. . .just knowing the pattern doesn't tell you the whole story, as some mics are apparently much nicer than others in terms of what they pick up/reject and how well, regardless of the pattern.

To the ME66. . .when I was first getting started this mic was the one recommended to me, and it seems like everywhere I go, everybody has one. I think at one time it was one of or the best option its price range, but now there are better options. Some relatively low-cost hypers are: AKG SE300b/CK93 (blueline), AT4053 (I think. . .it's either that number or very close to it), Oktava MK012, though these are apparently all over the place quality-wise so you HAVE TO BUY FROM THE RIGHT DEALER.

Shape/size of the room also affects what mic/pattern works best. . .small room, hard walls = no good for shotgun/interference tube. Giant room where echoes take so long to return = shotgun might just work. Well insulated/padded small room = shotgun might be okay.

I believe all of this to be true, but I am just parroting what I've read/heard.

[Chris Soucy]

Hi, Tom............

Can't really answer your question in the previous post, too esoteric for me.

I shoot (usually) with an ME67 mounted on the camera, a ME66 used as interview mic and a ME 64 as an "incidental" if circumstances allow.

The problem with the 64 is it picks up everything "YOU" can't hear untill you're wearing cans and listen to what it can hear that you can't, so it doesn't get used much.

The 66 gets a real work out in runngun situations and is invaluable as a street interview mike, mated with a Rycote Softie, handgrip and Senny butt plug transmitter.

The 67 on cam mic is far superior to the "on boards" in picking up what the camera is looking at.

Has that helped?

Probably not, but one thing I can tell you, the listening public wouldn't give a toss if you used a Radio Shack $15 piece of junk, quite frankly.

You and the other "Pro's" may be able to hear the difference, most of the rest of the human race is so conditioned to second rate sound, they can't and won't.

Don't fret about this, as long as you have sound, the viewing public won't run screaming from any screening you're likely to give.

Go for whatever and stick with it, but DO get adequate wind protection from either Rycote or Rode, that's a must.

I have Softies for all three mic's and blimps as well (boy, did that cost) but they're game changers when that wind gets up.


CS

[Garrett Low]

Mike-
To my ears, the Rode is a more balanced sounding mic. It sounds more natural and has a fuller low end. As Gary noted, in a lot of situations the lower frequencies are rolled off in post but it still affects the overall tone of the sound. The Rode seems to have more clarity too. It's been a while since I've done a direct comparison but that is what I recall.

[Gary Nattrass]

The AT875R I mentioned works very well indoors and outside, that is why it is now my stock small shotgun mic as it gives a good sound whatever you throw at it, it also has a built in 80hz rolloff so there is less filtering to do in post.

I had a rode NTG1 but don't like their sound as they are very electret like with a slightly artificial sound and the phase cancellation makes this worse.

I have never been keen on the budget sennheiser ME66 either for the same reason but I have only used them as effects mic's on sport as I tended to have 416 mic's available for more critical work.

[John Willett]

The new Sennheiser MKH 8060 is also worth looking at.

I have seen it at just £639 from ProKit in the UK. (see HERE)

It's very much better than the old 416 and its ilk, and it's even better than the MKH 60.

Modern manufacturing techniques have kept the price well under £1,000.

That's the one I would go for.

[Gary Nattrass]

Thanks for the link John my good friend sound recordist Steve Phillips recommended this mic to me a few months ago and it looks good as I am after a higher quality mic to compliment the 875R's as gen purpose mics.

[Mike Butir]

Thanks everyone for your replies and useful information, i have made my decision and will go with the Rode NTG-3! theres no sense in buying a nice camera with crappy audio.. hopefully i will be happy with the results of the mic!

thanks again guys!

[Battle Vaughan]

Originally Posted by Mike Butir

so basically if i understand this correctly the sennheiser is going to be able to pick up audio from longer distances (more sensitive)? where this mic would be better if i had the mic on the camera during times i don't have a boom operator..if the subject was far away from the camera, if that makes sense? and the NTG-3 would be better while its on a boompole and can get it as close as possible to the subject. but wouldn't be as god mounted on the camera if the subject was far away from the camera?

Umm, maybe making too definitive a conclusion from my comments. The Senny is known as a "hot" mike in that it has a relatively high output (sensitivity) compared to some of it's competition ... I know for a fact that I did better at a distance with the company-supplied ME66 on my camera than I did with my personally-owned Audio-Technica AT8035, in terms of signal level. Many times I was pleased at the quality of audio made from a distance with the ME66, and that's about as much as you would want to read into this....every mike has it's strong and weak points, and many times the choice is purely subjective. You will not go far wrong with any name-brand shotgun that fits your camera, although there will be subtle differences among them and supporters and detractors of that brand, what ever you choose. There are no absolutes....

[Chad Johnson]

Here's s comparison I made a while back. I wanted to test all my mics in a reflective room. NT3, AT4053b (mics for inside) and the Rode NTG-2 and NTG-3 (mics for outside). The shotguns did pretty good. And you get an idea pf the flavor of the ntg-3 vs the ntg-2.

Hyper & Shotgun Indoor Shootout: AT4053b Vs. Rode NT3 AND NTG-2 Vs. NTG-3 on Vimeo