I currently have just one microphone: the Sennheiser ME66. Which also means I own the K6 power module. I'm looking for a second microphone to go along with it for interior dialogue scenes, since I've read that shotgun microphones aren't ideal. Obviously, since I own the K6 module, I might be able to get something from Sennheiser that would work, and was looking at the ME64. But I also read that a hyper-cardioid is the way to go and that the NT3 is a good option at a similar price. What do you think?

In my interview days, I had an ME64/K6 which I used as a handheld iv mike with a plug-in transmitter, as a desk mike and on a short (3 foot) boom for talking heads....worked a treat. It is, IIRC, a cardioid, decent pickup in front without the echoish problems a shotgun can give inside. Press conferences ,etc, I would just put it on a desk stand with the radio plug and was always happy with it.

I'm gonna be using it for film fiction, hopefully boomed from above. The problem I have is that houses over here are quite echoey anyway. The ME64 definitely seems much better than the ME66 for this particular use, but I've heard good things about the Rode.

The other advantage of the Rode is that I could use it and the ME66 at the same time, whereas if I get an ME64, I'd only have one power module. I can't imagine when I'd want to use both at the same time, but it's always nice to have options.

Excellent points, and the Rode has a good reputation. I have no experience with it, so can't compare, but that sounds like it would be a good choice. Might check output level vs. the Senny, as the latter has a "hot" output that is quite nice, needing less in-camera amp than some of the competition (talking to YOU, Audio-Technica).

Joe, did you mean the Rode NTG-3? The Rode NT3 is a sensitive mic that will not isolate your sound source like the NTG-3 will.
In a quiet setting, where you have an interviewer holding the mic between him and the interviewee, the NT3 is actually very useful
since you don't have to point it as accurately as a mic that is more directional. But for a boom mic, not so good at isolating sounds.

THe NTG3 is a wonderful shotgun, but he's already got the Senny 66...a cardioid or hypercardioid in a room interview can work pretty well if you can mike it close enough...just my 2 cents...

Joe, did you mean the Rode NTG-3? The Rode NT3 is a sensitive mic that will not isolate your sound source like the NTG-3 will.
In a quiet setting, where you have an interviewer holding the mic between him and the interviewee, the NT3 is actually very useful
since you don't have to point it as accurately as a mic that is more directional. But for a boom mic, not so good at isolating sounds.

As I understand it though, there's something about the physics of shotgun mics that make them particularly susceptible to echo indoors. From what I've read, hypercardioid mics are better, because they don't pick up as far, meaning you get the dialogue, but less of the background noises and more natural/less echo. As you can probably tell, I don't know a massive amount about this, but everything I've read says hypercardioid for dialogue indoors.

The other issue is that a shotgun can actually be too directional indoors, meaning you have to work pretty hard to capture the full conversation. I've recorded a few scenes with the ME66 so far (admittedly without a boom), and just had to record each actor's lines one at a time. But that gets a bit unnatural, because you end up having to ask the actors not to interrupt each other and leave spaces between the lines for you to edit them together later.

If you are after a low cost hypercardioid have a look at these... I've been using them for about a year or so and VERY impressed with the results.

Samson — C02 (http://www.samsontech.com/samson/products/microphones/condenser-microphones/c02/)
http://www.zzounds.com/item--SAMC02

As I understand it though, there's something about the physics of shotgun mics that make them particularly susceptible to echo indoors..

The problem with 'guns indoors is not so much pickup of echo as it is their reaction to the presence of short-term reflections. Echos are much longer term reflections than we're worried about here. Imagine standing in a normal room interviewing a subject who is standing 6 feet in front of you. Some of the sound travels direct from his mouth to your mic but a portion of it bounces off the ceiling and then hits your mic, kind of like a glancing billiards shot. The path the bounce travels is slightly longer than the path the direct sound takes and so it takes a little longer for that portion of the sound to get to the mic. The reflected wave front arrives at the mic slightly out of phase with the direct sound due to the transit time differences and when they interact within the mic's interference tube it leads to comb filtering that distorts the sound. Hypers don't have an interference tube so the reflections don't interact with the direct sound in the same way. Shotguns are also "selectively directional" and at low frequencies often become almost omnidirectional. Good hypers have a pattern than is more consistent over a wider range of frequencies.

I should also mention that a 'gun is no more sensitive than a hyper - there really is no such thing as "reach." The narrower pattern of the shotgun allows it to be held a little farther away from the subject than a hyper and still achieve the same ratio of desired sound to extraneous noise picked up from the sides and rear. But we're not talking about a big difference in working distances, ie a 'gun at 22 inches is about equivalent to a hyper at 18 inches.

The O.P. is quite correct that hypercardoids are usually recommended for most indoor use, for the reasons that Steve states. "Usually... for most..." because interior spaces vary so much in their wall, ceiling, and floor surfaces, and their dimensions, that there really can't be a hard and fast rule about mic choices for interiors.

The Samson CO2 is too heavy to put out on the end of a boom pole. By all means do try it if you own one, it's really a great value for a medium diaphram mic. But don't buy it if your primary use is at the end of a stick, it's really more of a V.O. and singing mic by design.

Arguably, the NT3 is on the heavy side, and not directional enough. This is a mic designed to hold a 9v battery... which makes it quite a bit bigger than mics designed for the purpose. More people are familiar with the AKG C1000, which is a similar design. Having said that, a cardoid is sometimes the best choice on the end of the boom, and the NT3 is another great value with great sound from Rode. Heavier and less directional...

The classic approach is a hypercardoid small-diaphram "pencil" design, about 3/4" in diameter, that depends on phantom rather than a battery. Your k6 with an ME64 is actually a very good choice for this for under $200.

If you wanted to spend a little bit more so that you could simultaneously use your existing shotgun and a new mic the Oktava MK012 system with a hypercardoid capsule (phantom power only) is a great value, if you can avoid the many counterfeits. But, why would you? You're really going to have only one mic on a stick at a time, yes?

Okay, I might go for the ME64 then. The other issue with the Rode would be the need to buy a different-sized mount for it, which could set me back another £30-40.

I have the Rode NT3 and NTG3 and the AKG-CK93 and they all fit nicely in an Audio Technica AT8415 which is not that expensive. The NT3 is indeed fat and heavy so you'd have to make sure it was secure for boom pole use. The CK-93 is hypercardiod and is a good contender for indoor work. It's quite small.

The ME64/K6 works well as an overhead boom mic, although I haven't recently tested it directly against any of my hypercardioids. I've mainly been using it for wider coverage of two to four people without having large changes in the character of sound when it's a little off-axis when the group speaks quickly. It's also handy to run on the internal AA battery so phantom power isn't required from the plug-on transmitter.
It can also be equipped with less expensive furry wind coverings due to the short length of the mic.
I find the Pearstone universal shockmount to have the best support bands and connection options among the low-cost shockmounts. It's about $50 online by itself, although in the past it could be purchased as part of a mic kit for almost no additional cost. That's how I got my first one. The example below is listed as "for camera shoes" and it does that well, with a swivel adjustment too. It also has a 3/8-16 thread for boompoles.

Pearstone DUSM-1 Universal Shock Mount for Camera Shoes DUSM-1

Arguably, the NT3 is on the heavy side, and not directional enough. This is a mic designed to hold a 9v battery... which makes it quite a bit bigger than mics designed for the purpose. More people are familiar with the AKG C1000, which is a similar design. Having said that, a cardoid is sometimes the best choice on the end of the boom, and the NT3 is another great value with great sound from Rode. Heavier and less directional...


If you wanted to spend a little bit more so that you could simultaneously use your existing shotgun and a new mic the Oktava MK012 system with a hypercardoid capsule (phantom power only) is a great value, if you can avoid the many counterfeits. But, why would you? You're really going to have only one mic on a stick at a time, yes?

Personally I prefer the sound of the Rode NT3 to an AKG C1000. But I agree they are both fat and heavy mics and require a different mount than thin pencil mics. As far as cardioid mics go, I would prefer slim pencil mics like the Shure sm81 or an old AKG C451 to eithe rof them though. But..really it's hyper cardioid that is required, and none of the above have that pattern.
I totally agree that The Oktava MK-012 is a really versatile choice with their screw on capsules with various polar patterns...and they sound pretty good too. Many say ( though I haven't tried myself) that Michael Joly modded Oktava's are even better still. Great for the price.

Some 012 mics are nice sounding and the MJ modded 012 is indeed better, but still subject to it's inherent issues.. though some are lesser with the MJ/Dorsey type mod. As I have previously stated here and elsewhere, IMO, it's not a good mic for the inexperienced and/or when using the POS preamps on budget portable recorders.. and by the time one spends the extra $$ for a hand-picked and modded 012, the price is that or more than a medium priced small diaphragm hyper anyway.

I recently bought a AT4053b hypercardiod for indoor interview work and I like it very much. Bit more info here:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/513256-audio-technica-4053b-hypercardoid-mic.html

On Monday I used an AT4053 on a boom in an indoor interview setup (also had a AT899 lav for backup). I recently picked up the 4053 second hand from a member here.

Anyway, the 4053 sounded terrific. When I played it back the dialog was rich and natural with just the right amount of room ambiance in the mix. This will be my go-to instrument for indoor setups from now on.

I would recommend putting an ear on one of those before making your final purchase.

Worth mentioning that there are 2 versions, the older AT4053a and the newer AT4053b version. I gather the older one was a very good mic but there are some improvements in sound quality in the latest version along with a few other things relating to EU materials of construction legislation etc. (so I've read).

I have the "a" version.

The main difference between the 4053a and 'b' is RoHS compliance. (Restriction of Hazardous Substances Directive) There may be some other minor 'improvements'. According to AT spec. sheets, the superseded 'b' version is about 2mV less sensitive than the 'a'. All in all, any sound differences would be negligible, I would surmise.

I currently have just one microphone: the Sennheiser ME66. Which also means I own the K6 power module. I'm looking for a second microphone to go along with it for interior dialogue scenes, since I've read that shotgun microphones aren't ideal. Obviously, since I own the K6 module, I might be able to get something from Sennheiser that would work, and was looking at the ME64. But I also read that a hyper-cardioid is the way to go and that the NT3 is a good option at a similar price. What do you think?

No, they are daft. Let them try to hold an NT3 on the end of a 10 foot boom for more than 20 seconds. Maybe an NTG-3, but you said interior. Start with a Audix SCX-1HC and go up to Audio Technica 4053b, ...Sennheiser MKH50, or Schoeps CMC641.

Regards,

Ty Ford

Yeah, the NT3 would work on a mic stand, but not on a handheld pole.

Add the AKG Blueline CK93 to the list of hypers that can be used on a boompole.

"on a mic stand" infers no hands on operation.

To the OP. Don't know where you're coming from but putting up any mic on a stand and sort of aiming it at the person speaking is a precursor for crappy sound.

You need to be 18" or closer to begin to make it happen correctly and that's in a well-treated room.

Regards,

Ty Ford

A stand can work when the person is seated and is conscious of the need to stay relatively still (and within the mic's cone) for good audio. (For instance, I can do a one-man audio test that way.) But this is the exception, rather than the rule. To grab an NT3 because it's on hand for a seated interview is one thing. To buy an NT3 as a general indoor video mic would be another.

BTW, we hired a pro sound guy here for a project a couple years ago, and he brought a stand with an attachment that could hold a full-sized boom. He used a lav as well as this fixed boom for seated interviews with no problem. Note that in this case, the "talent" was speaking to a person to the side of the camera and it was a technical topic, so they stayed quite still without emoting. Had the topic been more emotional, or if the person were dealing with props that would cause them to move their head, the stand would have been a fail.

Even with a lav, I've had people turn their head to a camera and then back to a display or whiteboard. I ended up having to ride the gain wildly in post to get an acceptable result, even for documentary purposes. (For better results, I would have ridden the EQ as well, but the project didn't require it.) For this situation, don't mount the lav too high, and make sure it's centered with their expected range of motion. A boom op could get quite the workout in this situation and would still have changing room acoustics as the head flips from camera to whiteboard.

Jon,

Agreed!

Regards,

Ty