Whats the best Shotgun Mic for Weddings and Interviews? at DVinfo.net

Kevin Lepp · September 26th, 2004, 09:17 AM

I've just tested the me66 and wasnt as impressed as I thought I'd be.

Now I need to know whats the best kind of all around shotgun mic I should get.

I'll be using it for weddings and for interviews.

It needs to be under $600.

What do you all use?

thanks

Kevin Shaw · September 26th, 2004, 10:09 AM

For weddings I try to use wireless microphones whenever possible, including for interviews, but I recently bought an Azden SGM-1X shotgun that's not too bad. I particularly like it because it has an XLR output, so I can run that into one channel of an XLR adapter and put a wireless microphone on the other channel. B&H Photo Video as the Azden for just under $150.

Ignacio Rodriguez · September 26th, 2004, 03:17 PM

Anybody here tried the Beyer Dynamic shotgun condenser kit?

Jonathan Nicholas · September 29th, 2004, 06:42 AM

Audio Technia AT897

It's absolutely brilliant. As good as the Sennheiser.

Jon

Mike Rehmus · September 29th, 2004, 04:38 PM

I wouldn't and don't use a shotgun. Way overrated for this application. A nice Cardiod is much better in my opinion. I use a Shure SM-81 for on-camera work when I'm not using the stock microphone that came with my DSR-300.

Kevin Shaw · September 30th, 2004, 07:54 AM

Mike: I'm confused by your use of terminology--seems to me that shotgun and cardiod are related terms. In any case, what do you see being the practical difference between the Shure microphone you use and traditional shotguns?

Mike Rehmus · September 30th, 2004, 08:59 AM

Shotgun and cardiod are not the same device in terms of response to the world. For example, a shotgun is usually much more directional which means that sound approaching from the side can be distorted and the rise and fall of captured sound levels as one pans across them is much more apparent.

Biggest issues for me are that the cardiods can sound much better and they are (at least for the one I use) incredibly more resistant to SPL overload.

Next issue is that they tend to be much shorter.

After that, they can be hand-held in an interview situation and they tend to be a bit more rugged.

Bill Keen · September 30th, 2004, 11:05 PM

<Kevin>
Mike: I'm confused by your use of terminology--seems to me that shotgun and cardiod are related terms. In any case, what do you see being the practical difference between the Shure microphone you use and traditional shotguns?
-----

<Mike>
Shotgun and cardiod are not the same device in terms of response to the world. For example, a shotgun is usually much more directional which means that sound approaching from the side can be distorted and the rise and fall of captured sound levels as one pans across them is much more apparent.

Biggest issues for me are that the cardiods can sound much better and they are (at least for the one I use) incredibly more resistant to SPL overload.

Next issue is that they tend to be much shorter.

After that, they can be hand-held in an interview situation and they tend to be a bit more rugged.
-----

Kevin, thanks for asking for clarification and thanks to Mike for the explanation! I currently using the Senn ME-66 and am not pleased with the results. Looks like I'm in the market for the Shure SM-81.
Thanks guys.

Mike Rehmus · October 1st, 2004, 11:16 AM

The 81 might not be the best. I'd post in 'Now Hear This' and ask Douglas what he recommends. I use the 81 because I have it for other tasks and it works very nicely. But there may be better or less expensive microphones (the 81 lists for around $600 and normally sells for under $400)

I like it because it will handle the exhaust sounds from an engine right at the exhaust port or the sound of a 50 calibre sniper rifle.

Ignacio Rodriguez · October 2nd, 2004, 11:00 AM

The usual jargon I am used to in terms of mic directivity is as follows:

Omni: no directivity at all.
Cardioid: "natural" human ear-like directivity.
Hypercardioid: "highly focused" directivity.

The terms hypercardioid and shotgun tend to be used for the same thing. I'm not sure if this is formally correct but I do it too ;-)

Bear in mind that these three terms are quite general, one hypercardioid can be much more "focused" than another one, and there are terms like "wide" cardioid and "narrow" cardioid. Also, directivity usually changes over different frequency ranges, and this can turn out to be very important. The best way to get a good idea of a mic's directivity is to take a look at it's polar pattern.

There are also other kinds of directivities like that of boundary effect microphones (which is rather wide but no exactly omni) and parabolic reflector microphones (which are very focused).

September 26th, 2004, 09:17 AM	#1
Kevin Lepp Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Charlotte, NC Posts: 38	Whats the best Shotgun Mic for Weddings and Interviews? I've just tested the me66 and wasnt as impressed as I thought I'd be. Now I need to know whats the best kind of all around shotgun mic I should get. I'll be using it for weddings and for interviews. It needs to be under $600. What do you all use? thanks __________________ Kevin

September 26th, 2004, 03:17 PM	#3
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	Anybody here tried the Beyer Dynamic shotgun condenser kit? __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.

September 29th, 2004, 04:38 PM	#5
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	I wouldn't and don't use a shotgun. Way overrated for this application. A nice Cardiod is much better in my opinion. I use a Shure SM-81 for on-camera work when I'm not using the stock microphone that came with my DSR-300. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 30th, 2004, 08:59 AM	#7
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	Shotgun and cardiod are not the same device in terms of response to the world. For example, a shotgun is usually much more directional which means that sound approaching from the side can be distorted and the rise and fall of captured sound levels as one pans across them is much more apparent. Biggest issues for me are that the cardiods can sound much better and they are (at least for the one I use) incredibly more resistant to SPL overload. Next issue is that they tend to be much shorter. After that, they can be hand-held in an interview situation and they tend to be a bit more rugged. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

October 1st, 2004, 11:16 AM	#9
Mike Rehmus Wrangler Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vallejo, California Posts: 4,049	The 81 might not be the best. I'd post in 'Now Hear This' and ask Douglas what he recommends. I use the 81 because I have it for other tasks and it works very nicely. But there may be better or less expensive microphones (the 81 lists for around $600 and normally sells for under $400) I like it because it will handle the exhaust sounds from an engine right at the exhaust port or the sound of a 50 calibre sniper rifle. __________________ Mike Rehmus Hey, I can see the carrot at the end of the tunnel!

September 26th, 2004, 10:09 AM	#2
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	For weddings I try to use wireless microphones whenever possible, including for interviews, but I recently bought an Azden SGM-1X shotgun that's not too bad. I particularly like it because it has an XLR output, so I can run that into one channel of an XLR adapter and put a wireless microphone on the other channel. B&H Photo Video as the Azden for just under $150.

September 29th, 2004, 06:42 AM	#4
Jonathan Nicholas Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham, UK Posts: 90	Audio Technia AT897 It's absolutely brilliant. As good as the Sennheiser. Jon

September 30th, 2004, 07:54 AM	#6
Kevin Shaw Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Sacramento, CA Posts: 2,488	Mike: I'm confused by your use of terminology--seems to me that shotgun and cardiod are related terms. In any case, what do you see being the practical difference between the Shure microphone you use and traditional shotguns?

September 30th, 2004, 11:05 PM	#8
Bill Keen Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Water Valley, MS Posts: 52	<Kevin> Mike: I'm confused by your use of terminology--seems to me that shotgun and cardiod are related terms. In any case, what do you see being the practical difference between the Shure microphone you use and traditional shotguns? ----- <Mike> Shotgun and cardiod are not the same device in terms of response to the world. For example, a shotgun is usually much more directional which means that sound approaching from the side can be distorted and the rise and fall of captured sound levels as one pans across them is much more apparent. Biggest issues for me are that the cardiods can sound much better and they are (at least for the one I use) incredibly more resistant to SPL overload. Next issue is that they tend to be much shorter. After that, they can be hand-held in an interview situation and they tend to be a bit more rugged. ----- Kevin, thanks for asking for clarification and thanks to Mike for the explanation! I currently using the Senn ME-66 and am not pleased with the results. Looks like I'm in the market for the Shure SM-81. Thanks guys.

October 2nd, 2004, 11:00 AM	#10
Ignacio Rodriguez Contributor Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Santiago, Chile Posts: 932	The usual jargon I am used to in terms of mic directivity is as follows: Omni: no directivity at all. Cardioid: "natural" human ear-like directivity. Hypercardioid: "highly focused" directivity. The terms hypercardioid and shotgun tend to be used for the same thing. I'm not sure if this is formally correct but I do it too ;-) Bear in mind that these three terms are quite general, one hypercardioid can be much more "focused" than another one, and there are terms like "wide" cardioid and "narrow" cardioid. Also, directivity usually changes over different frequency ranges, and this can turn out to be very important. The best way to get a good idea of a mic's directivity is to take a look at it's polar pattern. There are also other kinds of directivities like that of boundary effect microphones (which is rather wide but no exactly omni) and parabolic reflector microphones (which are very focused). __________________ Ignacio Rodríguez in the third world. @micronauta on Twitter. Main hardware: brain, eyes, hands.