Ok. I will stand up and say that I am a newbie. I have been reading for quite a while, but still feel at very much of a loss.

I have a Sony HDR-FX1, and I am looking for an external mic for better sound. I have read enough to now be thoroughly confused. I am trying to come up with a game plan.

Ok, a little about me. I will not be shooting movies. This is more of a run and gun type of thing...assuming that I am using even this term correctly.

Ok, now the questions...

I read that the AT897 is a good general mic, but you wouldn't want to use it indoors. I am ok with this. Do I need two mics? If so, which ones? I don't care as much about the price within reason since this is a plan and not a buy all at once type of thing.

Ok, I read that the 4053 and 4073 are better than the AT897, but the 4053 sounds like it is better for indoors and the 4073 is better for outdoors? Am I correct at all? I have also read that the 4073 isn't good for things that are further in the distance? The more I read the more confused I seem to get.

Can the 4053 do everything the 897 can, but better? As I said, I have been reading for quite a while now, but it hasn't helped enough. What would be a good combination to end up with? I don't mind up to $500/mic if needed, and to buy them one at a time. With this said, I don't want to throw away money either.

BTW: A few more stupid questions. I believe that I will need a shock mount. Which one for my camera? I believe they mount on the hot shoe adapter?? Also, it seems like the rycote softie is the best for reducing wind noise if I am outside?

Did I mention that I was a newbie?

Your attitudes toward reading, learning and holding out for quality equipment distinguish you from a lot of newbies.

The only one of those that you mentioned that I've owned is the AT897. It was a good outdoor mic and would work in some indoor situations, but I quickly learned that it wasn't ideal for recording in a musical theater environment and returned in favor of an AT3031, an excellent indoor mic (two of them, actually).

You are correct that you will need several mics. Some people here (not me) seem to have several dozen. When you say you want better sound, what do you hear as the main shortcoming of what you're getting now? Your first external mic should be chosen to address that.

Yes, the softie is far superior to foam type windscreens.

There are several shockmounts in the $30 to $60 range that will slip into your accessory shoe:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?ci=1&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=SearchBar&A=search&Q=*&shs=shock+mount+shoe

Hi Brian,
You are right about the shotguns. The 4073 is a better shotgun than the 897, but they are still both short shotguns. If you are looking for a mic to simply mount on the camera, the 4073 will be better, but an 897 on a boom pole near the dialog (if that's what you are getting) will sound much better than pretty much any mic mounted on the camera simply because the closer you can mic the MUCH better the sound will be. So, the real question you probably need to answer is HOW will you mic things? In any case, I would always suggest that you get the best mics that you can afford. They last a very long time and you will always be better off in the end.

I have both the 4073 and the 4053 and several other mics and can tell you that the combo of the 4073 and the 4053 will let you cover a large number of situations. They are both excellent mics, especially for the money.

The 4073 is a short shotgun and is best used in areas where there is not a lot of reflected sound, i.e outdoors or in acoustically damped areas. It can be used indoors, and I have used it with great results in rooms with heavy carpets and drapery etc. It has very good reach and therefore it is tempting to use most of the time. If you are using it on the camera outdoors, you will probably love it. If you need more reach from the mic, you can get an AT4071a, which is physically longer and gives you more reach than the 4073. but may or may not work on the camera as it may protrude to far and get in your wiode shots.

If you are indoors, the 4053 works very well and sounds much better than the short shotguns; however, like all hyper-cardiods, it does not have a long reach and really needs to be within a couple of feet of the sound source. That might not fit your situation well if you mount it on the camera and move around a lot. If you can't use a boom mic for some reason, you should then probably think about wireless lavs o help get people talking if that's what you are doing.

Bottom line, it really all depends on what you are shooting and HOW you are shooting it. Is it dialog? In a crowd? 3 feet from the camera? 10 ft from the camera? Is the camera moving from the subject alot? Can you use a boom operator? If you can be more specific about what you are planning it will be easier for anyone to give you more detailed answers.

Ragards,
Matt

I too am new, and purchased the AT4073a, but I suspect that most of the stuff I'll end up shooting will consist of interior dialogue/monologue shots, and not necessarily in carpeted or sound dampened rooms (hope this mic can be used in those situations without too much problem).... is their an industry standard, or a few main mics of choice that are used in filmmaking for recording dialogues, say two people in a kitchen talking, or several people at a table eating dinner? (oh, and if the industry standard mics cost thousands, it would still be nice to know which ones they use, but perhaps also let us know what is commonly used for those scenarios in say the $500-$750 range)

Greatly appreciated.

The industry standards for dialog that you described are the Schoeps MK41 and the Sennheisser MKH50. Both of these are hypercardioids. The MK41 is a capsule and needs a preamp, either a CMC4, CMC5, or CMC6. Total cost is about $1300 to $1400. The MKH50 runs about the same. You really need to use a hypercardioid for interior dialog instead of a shotgun because of the relfection issues. A shotgun will just sound too hollow. You generally need to mic within a couple fo feet, but for close interiors that's usually no problem.

If you can't quite see spending the money for the Schoeps or the MKH50, the AudioTechnica AT4053a is a great alternative. It is very similar to the Schoeps MK41 at about 1/4 price. I know the Schoeps is supposed to be better and some believe it is considerably better than all other mics, but I've recorded dialog in a tiled kitchen with the MK41 and a 4053a side by side and I cannot tell the difference, nor could others that listened to the results. While there may be some slight difference in some situations, I think you can't go wrong with the AT. In fact, I just bought a second one. They're only $377 at G&G Video. Incredible bargain.

Matthew, I really appreciate the information and your personal thoughts.

Coming from a music background, and oddly enough having done a lot of recording in that music realm, I have seen a LOT of scenarios where people make purchasing decisions based on specs and product reviews, and not on what they can actually hear or perceive as a true value add. Admittedly sometimes the inability to hear or see the difference between a cheaper product vs. a more expensive product is due to a lack of experience, but as a musician I've found that the majority of lay people (the listening/viewing audience) can't tell the difference when really expensive equipment is used. I tend to use more expensive equipment when I want durability and longevity or if the product also enables me to work more efficiently or inspires me creatively somehow.

Thanks again for the info.

I think you're right. I come from a music background as well. Specs only tell part of the story, and that's only if you can believe them. What I think people really need to understand is that technique is as important as the equipment used. Of course, good technique and good equipment will give the best results. I tend to try and get the best gear I can afford knowing that it can last a very long time. I have been looking seriously at picking up an MK41 for dialog, but after directly comparing the Schoeps and 4053a, I just couldn't justifiy the cost difference. Even when it comes to durability, since the Schoeps is known to suffer a bit in humid envioronments.

So, if all you had was the 4073a and had to shoot an interior that consisted of mostly reflective surfaces, are there certain techniques you would employ to ensure the best dialogue recording as possible, e.g. using blankets or other sound dampening material in the room, and also perhaps mic positioning would be even more critical when using this kind of mic?


*I'm not sure why I decided to go with the 4073a, I had been reading a lot of forum posts and somehow thought this would be a good mic to have if you only had one and were only going to spend around 500-700 for mostly dialogue driven filmmaking.... perhaps I can sell it or return it under warranty for an upgrade, though I don't think the return would be honored as it's been a little over a month since I bought it.

Well, maybe the reason I bought the 4073a is because I'm a bit compulsive (even after doing a lot of research).

I say this because I just (compulsively?) purchased an AT4053a…

yes, within minutes of reading this post.

Why?

…well, after doing a quick GOOGLE/FROOGLE search, and seeing that all of the approximately 32 listings were selling the 4053a for ~$499.00, I came across a listing at 8th Street Music (who I’ve dealt with before) and they had a "B Stock" unit ("B-Stock: This is a factory repacked item in new condition with a full Audio Technica warranty.") for $295.95

…so, I bought it!

Perhaps I made another glaring mistake, but a fully warranted $200 discount was too good to be true, plus I have a shoot in a couple of weeks (my first), and I didn't want to have to spend a lot of time worrying about setting up dampening material or getting a less than ideal final sound recording.

*I also did a quick search through the forums on this model and everyone seemed to agree it was a great mic for the price (even at $500).

Wow! that's a great deal on that mic! Unfortunately, there is no one mic that will cover all situations, but I truly think that you now have two that will cover most. I don't think you'll want to return the 4073a, it's a great mic and can work indoors as you described, close-miking with sound blankets etc.. AND will work very nicely in non-reverberant rooms and outdoors. For the tight rooms where it doesn't, the 4053a will generally be much better, but it needs to be close. You can also get other capsules for that mic, the 4051a is a cardiod that also sounds nice and they also have an omni. Congradulations on the killer deal. I just paid $377 and was happy. Pays to look around well.

[QUOTE=Matthew Wilson] ...I don't think you'll want to return the 4073a, it's a great mic...QUOTE]

Agreed, I'm not gonna sell it, but would have considered it if I had to pay full price. I just finished reading another thread where that is someone's "kit", the 4073a and the 4053a, plus I can see myself doing a fair amount of documentary type stuff, so I presume the 4073a would work well for those outside/interview scenarios.

by the way, for those tight indoor locations (bathrooms, kitchens, etc), what kind of windscreen (if any) are sommonly used? Are they necessary when there's no "wind"?

The 4053a comes with a little foam screen that should do fine indoors. Outside, pretty much all mics need something other than the foam windscreen. A zeppelin system is the best way to go, but they are expensive. Rycote and some others make one piece "softies" that are much better than the standard foam. You shouldn't need anything special indoors though. I'm sure that you will like them both for their intended use. I'm very happy with mine. Man, $295 is such a deal. I've seen several used go on Ebay for more than $350.

Yeah, the 4073a also came with the foam screen. I recently purchased a Lightwave EQ-104 Equalizer Windscreen for 4073a, I presume it will work for both...

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=details&kw=LIEQ104&is=REG&Q=&O=productlist&sku=292337

About the only thing a foam windscreen is good for is air mass between the mic and a dead cat. Indoors, there rarely is enough air to make any difference with a foam screen, and it only blocks sibilance. I'm somewhat of a prude about this though, so it might not bother you losing that additional top end. I don't know if others typically don't use the foam or not. On lavs and such, I virtually never do unless it's covered with silk. Clothing and foam screens don't get along very well.

That's interesting. I've always used foam windscreens indoors, and had no idea I was giving up anything. It does protect the mic from bumps, smoke and dust though doesn't it?

That's interesting. I've always used foam windscreens indoors, and had no idea I was giving up anything. It does protect the mic from bumps, smoke and dust though doesn't it?

Record with the windscreen on, and record the same source with it off.
You'll hear the diff, and see in in your DAW/NLE display.

I know the Schoeps is supposed to be better and some believe it is considerably better than all other mics, but I've recorded dialog in a tiled kitchen with the MK41 and a 4053a side by side and I cannot tell the difference, nor could others that listened to the results. While there may be some slight difference in some situations, I think you can't go wrong with the AT. In fact, I just bought a second one. They're only $377 at G&G Video. Incredible bargain.

OTOH, I did compare the two and could tell the difference immediately. It may help that I review mics for a living.

You get what you pay for. The Schoeps cmc641 is worth it. You don't see 4053s on movie sets, you see cmc641. The reason, it sounds better. :)

Regards,

Ty Ford

And all this time, I've only had my Azden wireless lavs, and an ATR55 w/foam to work with. Never having to work with a dead cat, the foam has seemingly worked alright, inside or outside. Or is this just my untrained ear?

If you are actively booming almost any mic indoors, you'll still need at least a foam screen in place to defeat the air noises of moving the mic through the air.

I'm not really trying to be difficult, just not overly learned when it comes to audio. I just mount my ATR55 on the cam, no boom, as it is usually just me. I also don't have the cash to spend on all the accessories, so I only get what I really need, and what I can afford.

As I previously said, just using the foam outside hasn't seemed to produce any undesired effects. At least, none that my untrained ears can detect. What should I look or listen for? Are there any affordable alternatives to the Zepplin or Rycote?

Keith,
I'm amazed that you're not getting wind rumble with only a foam windscreen outdoors. I've had no luck at all without a Rycote.

I have heard wind rumble, but not on my footage. I guess I haven't been in a strong enough wind yet?

keith,

i got my hands on a lightwave equalizer immediately after getting burned with a foam windscreen. granted, the weather was horrible. after shelling out $120, certainly not chump change, i feel it was a great investment.

when i was shopping for a softie last month, i stumbled on this guy in denmark, who runs his shop out of ebay. i was impressed with his ebay feedback, and when i emailed him, he was extremely polite and helpful. his stuff seems cool, and much cheaper.

here's the link to his page:
http://www.reinhardt-film.com/new/ebay.html

i've never used his products -- i'm just throwing this out there as something to potentially look into as an inexpensive alternative.

Hey Henry- thanks for the link, I'll check it out.

I haven't used anything other than the foamy, and so far, haven't heard any noises other than what I wanted... aside from people between me and the target. The reason I got the shotgun, was because I was consistantly getting more noise from behind the cam, and not enough of the desired subject. I found this AT for like $100 on ebay, and actually had the cash in pocket. Like I said, I have been really happy with it, but ignorance is bliss eh?

OTOH, I did compare the two and could tell the difference immediately. It may help that I review mics for a living.
You get what you pay for.

Hey Ty,
I am sure there are differences besides the cost. Can you be a little more specific in what it is that you noticed when you compared them? I have had limited situations to put them side by side but I honestly don't hear the difference. For me, small differences in mic placement make a much greater difference than I can hear between these two mics.

OTOH, I did compare the two and could tell the difference immediately. It may help that I review mics for a living.

You get what you pay for. The Schoeps cmc641 is worth it. You don't see 4053s on movie sets, you see cmc641. The reason, it sounds better. :)

Regards,

Ty Ford

Ty and others,

I sincerely don't want this to turn into one of those classic arguments about microns of difference that only the most sophisticated machines and testers can differentiate, however, I would sincerely like to know if there are any posted shootout results so we could perhaps "hear" the differences for ourselves.

Two points that I think are very important to keep in mind:

1. Just because a piece of equipment is used by the pros doesn't mean it is the the "best", though it is powerful marketing and yes, often times the "best" gets there by being.... well, the best at a given point and time or that which was best marketed. I can assure you that I've seen this myth perpetuated many times in the music business ("product 'z' is what e-v-e-r-y-o-n-e uses"), and although there are definitely occasions and instances where a piece of equipment is noticeably "better", often times something becomes (or stays) a standard for reasons beyond what is discernable to the masses: spec envy, "everybody uses 'x'", change is slow, etc.

*Keeping in mind that I too am susceptible to having to go with, and am influenced by, "what is used in the studios" opinions and reviews, as I've not had the luxury myself to test these kinds of mics used in filmmaking/non-music applications

2. "...the majority of lay people (the listening/viewing audience) can't tell the difference when really expensive equipment is used", i.e. the difference between the "best" and something close, is often times not worth the additional cost if there is no measurable difference (obviously I'm not comparing a radio shack plastic mic with a top of the line wide diaphragm, and when I say "measurable", I mean audible to the largest segment of the listening/viewing audience)

*Again, if there really is a discernable difference then I sincerely would like an opportunity to hear it as I do want to know the limitations or qualities of various equipment when they are substantial.

For what it's worth, and I certainly don't have the experience or ear that Ty has, I've compared an AKG Blueline CK93 and MK41 side by side, and for the life of me couldn't tell the difference most of the time. There were a few times though when I noticed I was getting a little more echo from the CK93 depending on where the mic was placed in relation to the wall. Specifically, recording from about a foot and half away, with the mic pointed downward maybe 70 degrees and a closed door about another two feet behind the mic. I think it goes without saying that the Schoeps has lower self noise and with the talent slightly off axis will be more forgiving. Is it worth the extra $1,000? The overwhelming opinion of professional sound people seems to be that it is. But if you don't have the bucks, you can definitely get some pretty good audio from a $400 mic.

...I've compared an AKG Blueline CK93 and MK41 side by side...

...There were a few times though when I noticed I was getting a little more echo from the CK93 depending on where the mic was placed in relation to the wall. Specifically, recording from about a foot and half away, with the mic pointed downward maybe 70 degrees and a closed door about another two feet behind the mic...


Marco,

That's the kind of information I'm really interested in, and although I realize you're not referring to an actual shootout (controlled test scenario), if there are factors like this that really do exist between these mics (or others for that matter), then those are useful and tangible differences that everyone should know about when making a purchasing decision. Thx!

My feelings exactly Shawn. I've read some comparison "shootouts" between various mics but I haven't found one specificly addressing the ones at issue here. Ty Ford's got a lot of good reviews posted for different mics, but he doesn't have the 4053a. I was on the fence for quite a while and then I finally just went and rented an MK41 and did my own listening tests and that's how I came to my conclusions. I think it was a great $25 investment. Though I didn't have time to compare them in more than a few situatiuons, what I did hear convinced me that the AT was a very good choice. Since then, I have used it on several shoots and have been very well pleased with the results. I think, in the end, that's what matters most: does it sound good?

Matt

Hey Ty,
I am sure there are differences besides the cost. Can you be a little more specific in what it is that you noticed when you compared them? I have had limited situations to put them side by side but I honestly don't hear the difference. For me, small differences in mic placement make a much greater difference than I can hear between these two mics.

Between the 4053 and the cmc641 (and mind you, I'm a BIG fan of AT mics) The selfnoise was obviously lower in the Schoeps. The 4053 had a little edge that I didn't like the sound of. The Schoeps was smooth, no edges.

The off axis sound was more natural with the Schoeps. And rememeber regardless of where you point the mic, there will always be sound coming in off axis from somewhere.

I THINK I recall the Schopes pattern was a little tighter. In the end I had no choce but to buy the Schoeps. I could plainly hear the differences. You might look at it as TWICE THE COST. I look at it as another $600- $700 for a mic that I'll use for years and will give me great sound for a long, long time.

BTW, spend the extra bucks for the more expensive tear drop foam filter. It's worth it. I now own two cmc641. I use them a lot, inside and out. They don't have the reach of a shotgun, but if you can get within two feet of a mouth, they sound really good.

I also use them as plant mics, rigging them on desks, in boxes, pencil holders and they are quite nice on acoustic guitar and as a vocal or V/O mic.

Regards,

TyFord

<<<And all this time, I've only had my Azden wireless lavs, and an ATR55 w/foam to work with. Never having to work with a dead cat, the foam has seemingly worked alright, inside or outside. Or is this just my untrained ear?>>>

Neither of these mics will have the crisper top end that you'll note the differences in by having or not having a foam screen indoors.

Regarding Jay's post, the key word is "actively." If the boom is held in place, and it's not a high movement shoot, you'll be better off without the windscreen. For those that have the "Now Hear This" vid, you can clearly hear, even in compressed audio, a substantial difference. But, if you are moving around a lot, a foam windscreen is helpful. I just use a silk sleeve instead.

Do you switch capsules or do you have complete setups for all your Schoeps and AT's?

Do you switch capsules or do you have complete setups for all your Schoeps and AT's?

AT and Schoeps are not interchangeable. I have Sennheiser 416, 816, Schoeps cmc641, AT 897, AT 4073, Rode VideoMic, NTG-1 and NTG-2.

(and other studio mics)

Regards,

Ty Ford

You have me really intrigued now Douglas. As I have no real working knowledge of windscreens, I'm soaking this all in. I can understand How some form of protection is needed outdoors, where wind can create an awful howl. Indoors, I would think the mic would have to be used like a light sabre, before producing the same anomaly.

So, what are the "standard situations" for using covers? Silk? Foam? Fuzzy? Zepplin? What are the construction differences between the last two?

PS... Sorry if I'm hitchhiking on your thread Brian ;)

AT and Schoeps are not interchangeable.

Well wouldn't that be amazing!

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that they were interchangeable across manufacturers, what I was wondering was if you had multiple capsules that you used on one or more Schoeps handles, and multiple AT capsules that you used on one or more AT handles. ;-)

Well wouldn't that be amazing!

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that they were interchangeable across manufacturers, what I was wondering was if you had multiple capsules that you used on one or more Schoeps handles, and multiple AT capsules that you used on one or more AT handles. ;-)

The Schoeps system does have many different capsules. I only use the mk41 hyper at present.

I don't think the AT have removable capsules.

Ty Ford

The AT4053 is indeed part of a modular system. There's also the AT4051 (cardiod) and AT4049 (omni) caps.

Keith... the atr55 is the first mic I bought... and I liked it so much I bought two... but I didn't know what I was missing until I sprung for an me66/k6. Wind is less of a problem for the 55 because it's a way, way less sensitive mic. You really need some first-hand experience with something else before you're going to realize that... There's no better way to appreciate the higher quality of a better mic then to use it side by side with something else.

I thought the 55 was great, but I often felt like I was missing details and lacking reach when I'd edit my footage... then I got an me66 and I couldn't believe the difference... and I thought that was the best mic in the world as I told myself that there were too many other tools that Hollywood had (and I didn't have) that allowed them to produce rich and natural dialog. It wasn't until a buddy of mine (Bryan Beasleigh) sent me some clips which compared my me66 to a Rode nt1a that I realized how night and day the differences in mics could be... and then I got a 4073a. Once again I couldn't believe what I had been missing... even going from the me66 to the 4073a opened up a whole new world of sound. When I realized that EACH time I thought I was hearing perfection... and then had that perception SMASHED by a better mic... I went nuts and bought a ton of mics over the course of the next year. Over and over again the "you get what you pay for" addage was reinforced.

Now I'm not saying that "you get what you pay for" is an absolute... because I also believe in the law of diminishing returns... but until you hear for yourself what you can do with an 897 or 4073a (or better) you won't know how much that 55 is limited.

Hey Matt, thanks for the word up on the me66, but... I do very little work as it is, and what I have done, the ATR55 has been unbelievable. I don't doubt you in the least, it's just that there are many other mics, lights, cameras that I could use, and no free scratch to cover it. I'm thinking since I have a good shotgun, my next mic should be a hypercardioid, as I don't have one. As I cover the other bases, I'll slowly upgrade the rest, a piece at a time. Just the way I built my kit. Maybe get a fuzzy condom for the shotgun?

Although... everytime I see an me or mk for sale, I start drooling ;)

In case my post wasn't clear... don't get an "me".

The point was that I thought an atr55 was great until I heard an "me"... and I thought an "me" was great until I heard an "AT".

If you can afford ME get AT. I don't want anybody to misunderstand me on that.