I'm going to get some serious gear soon and I have to upgrade my current shotgun.

I'll be shooting a lot of interior dialogue shots in small to medium sized rooms. From what I've been told, a shotgun mic like the MKH 416 is terrible for indoors, correct?

What's the best indoor mic for $1,000 and under?

From what I've been told, a shotgun mic like the MKH 416 is terrible for indoors, correct?
-- It depends... on the individual room. 'Generally' a non-interference tube cardioid mic is preferred for interiors, if one doesn't know what will or will not work. Much has already been discussed on this topic. Search this audio forum for more info and opinions.

Save yourself a few hundred $ and look at this thread...

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/517845-whats-best-shotgun-mic-under-700-a.html

I'm going to get some serious gear soon and I have to upgrade my current shotgun.

I'll be shooting a lot of interior dialogue shots in small to medium sized rooms. From what I've been told, a shotgun mic like the MKH 416 is terrible for indoors, correct?

What's the best indoor mic for $1,000 and under?

Interference tube mics (most "shotgun" mics) don't do well with rapid first reflections. That is, with reflections off of surfaces that are close -- like interior walls and ceilings often are. Since many (most?) indy productions tend to use existing structures and not build their own sound stages, they tend to shy away from interference tube mics for interior dialog. As they should.

One of the favs of indy soundies for booming interior diaglog is the Audio-Technica AT4053b. Right pattern, decent price, excellent sound, relatively forgiving.

Do some searching on the 'net -- there are some decent comparisons of popular mics in this price range -- just bear in mind that if you are listening over the 'net, you're hearing fairly compressed sound streams and therefore won't likely hear the nuances, just the broader differences.

What about the NTG-3 vs the Audio-Technica AT4053b?
Are either one of those better than the other or are they evenly matched?

The NTG-3, like the 416, is an interference-tube shotgun, the AT4053 is not.
Again, typically the NTG-3 would be preferred for exteriors.. the 4053 for interiors.

Hi, Jarred! You might want to check out this thread. You dollar threshold is $300 >, but a lot of the same discussion is going on. My recommendation is the Audio-Technica AT4053b - Hypercardioid Polar Pattern. But there are other recommendations. If, you go with the AT4053b, you'll have money left over.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/517845-whats-best-shotgun-mic-under-700-a.html

I hope this helps.

Best regards,

J.

In addition to the AT4053b, the AKG Blue Line is another contender.

AKG Blue Line Series Hypercardioid Microphone Kit B&H Photo

Unfortunately, I've never heard the two compared in the same test. Both get high marks from their owners.

For indoors, I think the scale goes like this:

1) A big, heavy, studio hyper, which can be used on a stand but will make a boom operator look for a different occupation. But if you have access to one and the talent will be stationary, it's an option.

2) The AT4053b or AKG Blue Line for the $500-ish range.

3) The Sanken CS-3E, which doesn't behave like a typical shotgun. Not cheap but it works indoors or out and can even perform well in high-echo situations like tradeshow floors. Has a tighter pattern than most hypers, so it requires skilled operation. The key is that the off-axis sound is attenuated at all frequencies.

4) Schoeps 641 - The gold standard for indoor use, but you will also need a shotgun for outdoors.
Schoeps Colette Series Supercardioid Microphone Set CMC641G SET


For me, the two most attractive mid-range options are the AT4053b/AKG-Blue-Line for indoors plus a Rode NTG-3 for outdoors, or the Sanken CS-3E as the all-in-one solution.

Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of other lightweight hyper- or super-cardioid mics out there with high sensitivity. You can find small hyper mics for drum overheads, but they aren't sensitive enough for dialog.

John,
My preference for indoors 4woud be the 4053b but thanks for posting about the Blue line. I need to find some user reviews on it though.

In 2010, I asked for a comparison of the AT and AKG. Got many positive responses for both but no direct comparisons:

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/482632-at4053b-vs-akg-blue-line-ck93.html


To summarize, people liked them both. Some claim the AT4053b is a bit bright (though one person disagreed), and somebody claimed that the AKG Blue Line was not good with humidity.

A couple of notes: sometimes mics are tuned bright to compensate for wind protection (which is sometimes used indoors when the mic might be moved quickly.) And humidity resilience isn't as crucial for an indoor mic as an outdoor mic.

Still waiting on a head to head comparison. :)

I've been using the AKG Blueline for a number of years and frankly it is my #1 goto mic for indoor use when I can't use a lav. The mic is ALWAYS on my A camera and has been since I got it. It works quite well as far as I'm concerned both on camera and on a stationary boom. It is bright enough for my purposes and honestly, while I don't use it outdoors for anything big, I haven't notice any real degradation when I do use it outdoors. While I know it's not the right mic to use outdoors sometimes I have to move quickly from indoors to out and there is no time to change over.
Anyway, I've been very happy with the AKG for a good long time and it will continue to be used by me in the way I've been using it.

Hey Don which capsule are you using on your AKG 91 or 93?

FYI, there is another contender from AKG to consider as well, their ULS (Ultra Linear Series) C480B power module with the CK63 hypercardioid capsule. The combo comes in right about $1100.

I have the C480b with the CK61 cardioid and CK63 hypercardioid capsules. It is an outstanding mic, but was much lower in cost about 8 years ago. I seem to remember in the $800 range with one capsule(?). Other mics I have looked at over the years are fairly steady in price but this one jumped up a few years ago.
My only complaint with this mic is that any handling noise picked up is much higher in frequency than typical handling noise, so you can't simply roll off the bass to get rid of it. Budget for a really good shockmount, with very soft and flexible XLR cabling so noise isn't transmitted into the mic body if you choose this AKG.

Jerry,
I use the CK93 capsule. I've thought about getting another but frankly, I can't make myself spend the money when I'm happy with the CK93. ;-)

I have the 4053b, and don't find it to be bright, but rather darker than most other mics in online tests I've heard. Chad Johnson has a test from a couple of years back and its full, rich sound is what drew me to it.

The frequency chart at the AT web site seems to bear this out as well.

Interesting. I've heard a few people recommend the Rode but quite a few more recommend the AT.
I'm guessing because the RODE is more of a shotgun like the 416 like you said.

My only fear is the 4053 might be too bassy. I could only find 2 online tests of it and it seemed a bit bassy in both.

The 4053's strong suit is working indoors. I think thats where it wins.

"My only fear is the 4053 might be too bassy"
- Short answer: Not a problem
There's a switchable 80Hz. HP filter I normally leave engaged for dialog. If there's excessive LF content, for instance in a moving vehicle or encountering air turbulence, I'll engage an additional filter on the mixer and/or recorder.

Jarred...I think a couple of people mentioned handling noise. The AT4053b, is susceptible to 'handling noise'. a good 'Suspension Mic Holder' is recommended.

Best regards,

J.

Frankly, we shouldn't be too concerned about the general frequency balance. That can be easily EQ'd. What we want to avoid is holes or peaks in the response.

For instance, if a mic rolls off at 12 kHz and you want more "air", boosting the highs will just give you noise. If a mic has a strong peak at 2.5 kHz, it will sound nasally on some people and will take exceptional skill to accurately null this out.

Here's a quick and general frequency guide:

200-300 Hz - This is the voice fundamental. It can be important to balance this between different talent for consistent sound. If the mic is boomy or thin, this is the range to control. The EQ curve should be broad and smooth, rather than peaky, for this adjustment.

600 Hz - This area is relatively unimportant for voice. You can dip this to allow for music and sfx.

1.2 kHz - This is critical for consonants. You can add a narrow boost here. (And you can dip the music and sfx to allow the voice to be understandable.)

2.5 kHz - This is the nasal area. Boost smoothly if the voice is dull. Tamp if the voice is nasal. You can also add narrow dips if there are certain annoying frequencies. This area can help us distinguish voices that sound similar. It also helps us differentiate flute from oboe.

5-15 kHz - This is the "air". Boost smoothly, for air. Cut smoothly to eliminate noise.

When comparing mics, it makes sense to apply smooth EQ around 250 Hz and at 5-15 kHz to get a similar sound. Make sure to balance the overall levels. *Now* compare the mics..

Does either mic have a resonant sound or a brittle frequency? Does one have more clarity and definition? Is there any audible distortion? How about noise? Is there handling noise? Is there any flanginess?

The ideal mic, for me has a combination of creaminess and a sharp edge. The creaminess is the lack of distortion and a smooth frequency response with smooth phase. The sharp edge has to do with some bite on consonants and the nasal range. It helps each voice sound clear, strong, and unique, but not harsh. The creaminess aspect counterbalances any harshness.

Other aspects are the sensitivity, handling noise, the width of the pattern, and the smoothness of the pattern as it goes off axis. Also, is there a strong response directly behind the mic? For an indoor mic, you can sweep the boom pole quickly and listen for wind noise. You shouldn't need a big zeppelin indoors.

Unfortunately, it's all too easy to hear more or less bass in mic comparisons (as well as differences in volume) and to judge mics simply on those grounds. Given that it's easy to adjust gain and smooth EQ curves, it's good to neutralize those aspects and judge the mics at the next level.

Very useful post Jon. Thank you.

I really wonder, why after 2 sites, nobody mentioned the elephant in the room - the Oktava MK012.

It's an excellent sounding indoor dialog hyper for an attractive price.

I got one (even came with 3 capsules) that I use since years and I take it any day over the AT.
It's a bit prone to handling noise, but If you have a good suspension on your boom, that's actually a no brainer.

Just make sure you get a genuine Russian one, there are some bad China fakes around.

Oktava MK-012 condenser microphone. Oktava-online - only genuine Russian made studio microphones (http://www.oktava-online.com/mk012.htm)

On top of it, it's pretty hackable ;-)

http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Oktava/MK-012

The 012 can be a great sounding mic, but lots of possible issues in purchasing/using one.
One of which, it's relative low output (10 mV/Pa) which can create a noise issue with budget preamps, mixers, recorders an such. Unusually high susceptibility to handing and air turbulence is another. Also as was stated in the articles, all Oktavas are not created equal, though QC has allegedly gotten better and not even counting the 'counterfeits', many folks, myself included, purchased their Oktava mics from 'The Sound Room', www.oktava.com/ ...who hand picks, tests and tweaks the best ones. This is not a 'Dorcey' type modification however, but one still pays a little more for this service. The 'Dorcey' type modification will also not turn a turkey into a winner.

Good call in mentioning the Oktava MK012.

Some people love the mic. Personally, I've never liked the sound from the tests I've heard. The problems Rick lists have made me shy away from it. That said, I've never used it and many speak highly of it.

I've always wondered if the Oktava might be the "Studio Projects C1" of the video world. Many musicians claim that "the Studio Projects C1 sounds just like a Neumann U87". It took me some time to come across one I could demo. Well, it ain't no U87. But at a fraction of the price, it might be a good value for some. I personally prefer Rode's low cost large condensers for value mics. I didn't care for the C1 sound and noise level.

Of course, if the Oktava works well and sounds good to your ear, that would make it an excellent value. (Mic choice can be a personal thing.) So, yes, it belongs in the list. :)

The Oktava 012 has often been referred to as "a poor man's Schoeps" in which I agree to an extent. Does have the same off-axis response though. The MJ modded Oktava 012 sounds very close to a Neumann KM84 in MJ's tests.
Don't know how a "Studio Projects C1 could sound any wheres near a LD U87.

Correction: I meant to say: "Does NOT have the same off-axis response as the Schoeps".