I did a test like this with a half dozen shotgun mics in about 1996. I saved my pennies, swallowed hard and bought the then $1,200 Sennheiser MKH 416-P48, rather than the much cheaper options most of my colleagues were using. About a year later I bought a second one. That pair has circled the planet with me for a couple decades now. They’ve been the best audio investment I ever made, which includes multiple studios, and they’ve paid themselves off 100 times over. Funny thing is, every year or so a new mic comes out that claims to be a 416 killer and I first blow it off, then keep hearing about it, then have to know for myself. So I get one, and sometimes they sound good and I give it a try. For a while. But I always come right back to my 416s. Literally yesterday I was doing an interview with a doctor in a hospital conference room, with AC humming that couldn’t be turned off. Before he got there, I had rolled of the room at about 120hz, but when he sat in and I heard him speak, I changed my plan. He had a deep rich broadcaster voice, that was authoritative and fit the purpose of the interview perfectly, and I didn’t want to roll off his voice. If you know the 416, you know that yeah you can obviously aim it at the subject, But almost equally important is that can you aim the null of it at the noise source, and change that ratio dramatically. (Acoustic Source to Noise as opposed to Signal to Noise Ratio). So the combination of using the null of the mic to reject as much of the room as possible, and having him speak while adjusting my HPF, I was able to find a sweet spot for intelligibility and authority all the way down at 50hz, and his rich voice joined the 10,000 other interviews captured by that trusty old microphone. Tip: In all audio, second (if not first) to Microphone Choice is Microphone Placement. (Any mic on this list, if well placed, beats the 416 if poorly placed.) For a talking head interview, thread your boom through whatever mess the camera operator has created. Now pretend you’re in a recording studio and only recording audio. Start by aiming your 416, at mouth level directly between the interviewer and interviewee, smack dab in their eyeline, parallel to the floor at mouth level. Got it? Skull-416-Skull. Okay so in your imaginary studio, bring the 416 to about 8-inches away from the subjects mouth (and imagine a pop filter in between while you’re at it). With your headphones on, and talent speaking, if you bring the mic any closer you start to get proximity effect and their voice gets bassier. (This is precisely the setup you will find in many Voiceover studios around the world, and the 416 is a top choice for spoken word often beating out LDCs costing 2-10 times as much.) Now back on set, imagine you have a second person raising your stand slowly, you are slowly angling the 416 (white tipped, no windscreen of course), and the higher the stand goes, you keep the mic aimed at the subjects lips in proportion by slowly twisting a section of your boom. When the white tip just barely clears the top of the cameras frame, stop. You’ll be at about a 45-degree downward angle, and most of the time you’re set. But let’s go further. If there is a side of the room or area that sounds worse than the other, assuming that your boom is parallel to the floor (I use a Mafer Clamp rather than the half dozen specialty boom holders I own), then you can telescope your boom either in or out from this center position, and ‘tilt’ the head of your boom keeping it aimed directly at that mouth, And out of frame, AND getting maximum rejection of whatever noise you’re trying to kill. Wanna go further? Imagine being at the beach for an intimate soft spoken scene, right at the water, on a pebbly beach with the waves crashing against some rocks, at golden hour. Looks beautiful. Sound is a nightmare. Oh, and it’s windy, so you have your zeppelin on the mic. About the best you can do is shoot the Wides like before, but when you move in for coverage, boom from the SIDE of the frame, with the null end of the 416 aimed directly at the noisiest part of the beach, and the front end so close to the talent that one or two hairs on your windjammer breaks the frame. Another common scenario is working on city streets with road traffic. I can’t tell you how many impossible scenes my 416s have saved from an ADR destiny. Get a 416. It’ll be with you longer than most of the people in your life. Till death do us part.
Indeed! If there was an TH-cam Award for best thumbnail, this would definitely be at least at the top 5 2020! Not that I remember a better one, just being humble and assuming there are lots of thumbnails out there.
I had the sales guys at B&H perform for me a test in their mic room and the Sennheiser MKE 600 was the clear winner. It was the size - mountable on my camera, price - under $400 and the fact that it was powered mic - could put a wireless brick on it and plug into DSLRs, were the reasons it won out. Also, it doesn't blow out - I shoot alot of concerts & loud events like my old phantom powered Audio Technica did. The Sennheiser MKE 600 has just been a solid top mic for my cameras through the years. I love it.
Yes, a current on-camera microphone round up is needed. I don't think any big channels have done a full roundup since the Deity D3/D3 Pro came out, so far as I can find.
Catastrophically wrong test. The polar pattern should be assessed in an anechoic chamber or in extreme cases outdoors. Sound blankets for such measurements are not helpful. You measured reflections. Interference tubes do not suppress coherent reflections. Microphone sensitivity is only important if you have a bad noisy recorder. Much more important is the self noise of the microphone. Finally, rate the sound quality with a terrible bluetooth speaker is a disaster. In this video, all microphones are good in their own way. Even this long mic NTG8 is good. It is needed to work in a very noisy environment. You definitely don't need it. I'm glad you chose a microphone that really suits you.
The “natural light” background is so relaxing, people should do this more often. Also, you always put out such quality content, both visually and informationally. You’re one of the best, Mr Pike. Thanks for doin what ya do.
Nice job, Caleb! It is interesting how your tests mirrored your own subjective choice and I have to say, they're pretty close to my own impressions as well. That 416 sounds great on your voice!
@@jesaispasvraimentquoiecrireici These things are somewhat subjective. If you don't like the NT5, that's totally legitimate. The NT5 is pretty good for its price and can be a better option when working indoors in reberberant spaces vs. any shotgun microphone, especially the longer shotguns. Those can create this sort of warbling sound in those situations. The NT5 won't do that in the same space. Also, it seems to have a better reliability record than the Oktava and certainly has a better warranty.
@@MARTINTALIA I'd generally opt for a non-shotgun if most of my recording will be indoors. But if you manage severe reverberation and aim the microphone correctly and monitor carefully when recording, the NTG5 is fine microphone.
Curtis, I'm surprised you didn't see the problems with this review. The sound quality test is VERY flawed! 1. We don't know what recorder/preamplifier he's using. I know the microphone itself will make more of a difference than the recorder will, but this detail has an effect on sound quality too. 2. The speaker he used, sounds very low quality and is NOT an accurate test subject... No professional would ever judge a mic based on how it sounds pointed at a cheap $30 speaker vs. an ACTUAL person talking. We don't even know which mic was used for the recording that he played back from speaker, which also could have an effect. A better way to do this would have been to either say the same line 12 times with each mic, or place a few of them next to each other and read lines. Which is actually very easy to do despite what he said in the beginning. Normalize in post afterwards. 3. 9:30 I'm shocked he put the NTG5 so low, since Rode themselves designed it to have a flatter/more natural sound than both the NTG3, and BY FAR better a NTG4+. 4. The Oktava and Rode NT5, shouldn't have been in the review since they're not shotguns. By design, they simply cannot perform at the same level as a shotgun mic, if they were used at a distance outdoors. Which shotguns excel at. This point is relevant because, it's suppose to be a "Shotgun mic test" not a "Indoor boom mic test". Other than that, still a neat idea for a video.
You can take a minute sure, just don't ask me or anyone else to. If people do like it they will likely state it themselves without prompting from someone else
Oh, man, I love these kinds of videos. I was really surprised about some of these. I also personally love the MKH416. I have two of them, one for my TH-cam videos and one for my live streams. It sounds perfect on my voice, and that's the variable that no test can figure out for someone else on TH-cam. I always tell people to borrow or rent a mic before buying one because not all mics sound good on every voice (my voice sounds horrendous on the Shure SM7B). Great video, dude!
Great test! thanks for doing this. I am a bit confused on the math with the Rode NT5. Sensitivity: 3 points, Rear Rejection: 6 points, Side Rejection 1 point: Quality of sound: 12 points. 22 points total. but you have it in 11th place with 15. The only reason I noticed it was because after getting the top score on the quality, I thought it was weird it only had 3 other points from everything else. Not a huge deal obviously, just curious! Again, great test!
Can we take a minute to talk about the incredible lightning of this set? Remember when he turns out the light it's full black... And yet it looks like there is light going through some windows. Incredible and warm atmosphere here. It is one of your best lightning set so far imo! And the rest of the ideo is gold quality as usual. You're my favorite gear youtuber Caleb. Thank you for everything.
Hey it's my favourite voice over youtuber. Your videos are already helping me a lot with my first project. I'd already gotten a Rode NTG3 before I saw your video though. Budget probably wouldn't have permitted a MKH416 though. Using it with the Scarlett 2i2 3rd gen to add the air to make it less bassy at a more budget price.
Thank you for this test. I enjoyed watching it. I got MKE600 and am happy with the versatility it provides, to be able to use one AAA battery and use it when needed on camera or use it with external recorder. Great option and I am glad to see it in 4th position at least, which it deserves.
Great test! We've been using the MKE600 for years in soooooo many different scenarios. Landed aproximate to where I'd expect in your ranking as its truly an "everything' shotgun. Nice job Caleb.
I actually liked it more than some of the others higher on the quality list. It's not as clean but I find the voice is more readable which might be more important in some situations.
I have to wonder if the voice he used for the test wasn’t too low for the microphone. The NTG4+ tends to do a better job of picking up higher-pitched voices and is much more sensitive in that range. If a female TH-camr did a similar comparison, she might reach a different conclusion, especially with the MKH 416’s aggressive presence boost.
Former Technical Production Manager & Senior Technician for a corporate AV company, video producer/editor and musician here.. when I watch your videos your know your stuff and your ear is spot on ~ superb work! 🙏
Dude... no. I respect you as a DSLR video shooter but NOT as a microphone reviewer. I'm going to try to be nice about this, and sorry in advance if I'm direct, but a minute into this video and I'm hearing a lot that isn't accurate. Call me a triggered pro sound guy if you'd like... just know that I respect you and am spending this time to try to help you and your viewers. Sensitivity is not how loud a mic is, it's more along the lines of how hot the output is. The null area of the microphone doesn't help with artifacts, it helps with attenuation of off axis sound. If you're having "weird EQ issues" with your S-Mic 2 it's more than likely reflection off a hard surface in your studio because it's a shotgun microphone. In your video opening, for example, I hear that your microphone is picking up your voice a lot off of the table in front of you. Is boominess the "weird EQ issue" you're encountering? Because if so, it's probably the angle you're using your mic at. Your testing method. Good God, what is that?!?!?! A Bluetooth speaker in the proximity effect zone of a mic? Not a hardlined, coaxial studio speaker but a Bluetooth speaker? First of all, the coloration of such a speaker will skew your results all over the place. Secondly your moving blankets will only help control the highs, the bass will boom back at the mic. You don't understand sensitivity at all and that's me being nice. "The more sensitive a microphone is, the less noise you're going to have in your final recording." That's not the way it works because there's also microphone self noise to consider. I understand what you're saying about camera preamps but don't just assume that because you don't have to turn up your preamps as much, a microphone is better. When we test the EIN of digital audio recorders and interfaces, it's done at full volume where you get the most accurate preamp performance. I know camera audio preamps are far noisier and inconsistent than actual audio equipment but camera audio inputs vary and don't also apply gain to inputs linearly. Case in point, the Rode NTG8 has a higher sensitivity than the MHK-416 (nearly 4X the output voltage) but you have it ranked lower and you also have it above both Deity mics which also have slightly high sensitivity by spec although different units will vary +/-2dB. The NTG-5 ranks at the top of your list with it's sensitivity of -23.5dB and the NTG8 is higher sensitivity at -20dB. This entire test is garbage and not based on any kind of accurate measurement and didn't yield valid results. Rear rejection testing? You put the polar patterns on the screen for each mic so you should know that the rear lobe isn't the null area for 10 of your 12 microphones. Only the NTG5 and MK-012 are cardioid and the rest are super/hypercardioid which is not fair. As for why the NTG4+ topped your list over the insane rejection of the NTG8... how did you test them? All preamps at the same volume for each mic or did you calibrate the preamp with a control volume level out of your speaker and then set preamps accordingly? That matters and I'll assume that if your results tell you the the NTG4+ has more rejection than the NTG8, that's a very invalid test. The NTG8 so far should top your charts regarding sensitivity and rejection thus far if you were doing accurate tests. Side rejection test... still not a valid test based on the polar patterns. Sorry dude but the null area of most of these microphones is approx 135 degrees off axis from the front of the mic and you split the difference in your two tests giving poor results. We sound pros do what's called "playing the pattern" and point the null area of the microphone at the loudest noise or sound we want to reject because that's maximum attenuation. As for the sound quality test... all kinds of issues there too. How did you record the poem you used? 1 foot away again? That skews the results. Microphone manufacturers measure microphones in an anechoic or virtual anechoic chamber using a flat, coaxial test speaker at a distance of 1 meter from the mic and use sweep tones. What are the technical specs for the Bluetooth speaker? I'm sure it's colored and not flat which means that it needs to play right with the mic you use and how you use them together to give you good results. Some of the mics like the 416 and NTG8 pick up a lot of low end rumble which tells me your test room isn't treated enough with sound absorbing material and isn't sound proof either. If you're only planning on recording voices from your test speaker in this room then cool but if you're recording the human voice, not one of these tests is valid. This is why your two pencil condensers topped the charts. Honestly, I'm glad you landed on a mic like the 416. It's bulletproof and has been for decades. I'm a bit surprised that the results weren't skewed in another direction to tell you the truth based on all tests. You'll do well with the 416 but consider rolling off your video below 80 Hz because it's a bit much in the low end. Please don't think I'm just trying to trash you. I appreciate what you... attempted to do but think you could have done far better testing. On my channel I do all kinds of tests including numerous real world tests taken to the extreme. For example, watch my NTG8 video if you want your mind blown. I'd like to offer my services in either consultation, knowledge, etc when it comes to sound in your future videos. For you, a brother TH-camr, I'm here anytime. Thanks for staying with me and I'll look forward to your next camera video.
Caleb, welcome to the world of audio. 😉 I have to agree with Sound Speeds on his assessment of your tests. As a fellow youtube reviewer (I mostly review sound reproduction products i.e. speakers.) I can understand how much time it must have taken to review so many mics AND film them. I believe you only did your ratings to give people some insight into your thought process and add a visual aspect to it; correct me if I'm wrong. I've run into the same issues in my reviews. Audio is tough because it's invisible and so the science used to explain it has to be pretty spot on. Our fellow youtubers like Sound Speeds and Curtis Judd are willing to take testing to the levels that I'm not willing, capable, or knowledgeable enough to do. So I thank them for their efforts. I think I might have been corrected in some of my previous mic comparison videos by Sound Speeds before too! Curtis is way too nice so he probably just shakes his head at my mistakes. 🤣 Overall, I found the video entertaining and you came to the CORRECT conclusion...MKH 416 all day which is what I use. Either that or the Shure SM7B if I need more rejection when my kids are yelling! I actually think the best value in that group is probably the NTG5. I have the less expensive VideoMic NTG and that thing is scary good for the price, so I can imagine that the NTG5 would be even better.
@@joentell I've watched many of your videos too. I don't always comment though. If you ever need sound consultation on something, please, don't hesitate to reach out. I appreciate what you do and always smile and shake my head when I see one of your videos show up higher in search results than mine. ;-)
@@DovidoxVideos LOL. Yeah...mic reviews are tough. I get into some periods where all I'm watching are yours, Mike's, Curtis', and Podcastage's videos. I don't even need a mic...I have a whole drawer full! 🤣
@@joentell Mics are tough? Speakers are tough! I have no idea how I could review speakers in a decent way because the audience doesn't share in the user experience. Everything experienced is at the mercy of the way you're listening to the video. I say that about me but it's funny because when I've watched your videos, I trust you. You're very convincing and I like your methods. I would be far too harsh on myself though.
Great choice. You really cannot go wrong with Sennheisers, especially over a long period of time. My kit also includes the Sen 416, 1x AKG 414 (original), 2x Sennheiser digital wireless packs, an old Tascam pencil, two Sony ecm wired lavs (great for both lavs and aerials, too) and a smattering of misc mics to complete the kit. I'd love to have a matched pair of the AKG 414s and a pair of matched Earthworks mics for ambisonics. Probably seems crazy to have all of these mics, but each mic has its purpose and strengths. This is especially true when doing a lot of music. When doing larger ensembles, I generally will rent, but this kits allows me to do nearly everything a small ensemble would ever need. Little hint for those wanting to learn more about microphones is that Guitar Center actually rents out some incredibly high-end mics, for reasonable rates. Each location is a bit different, but the higher-end stores will tend to have mics you never thought you would be able to see, much less rent.
You absolute fucking legend. No bullshit, you said what you wanted, performed controlled tests and then analysed the results at the end instead of just presenting meaningless data. First time I've ever watched a review without feeling the need to watch another.
Lovely edit. Like how you gave just enough of the poem for a good sample but not enough to bore us, then you let the poem play out once at the end; perfect. 🤩 8:40
You are absolutely right. In addition, the type of signal used to measure sensitivity was not specified. I think it was white noise that is not suited to simulate normal use. This is why it is usually measured at 1 kHz. The measurement of off-axis rejection with white noise also hides important properties. Also, I'm pretty sure the sensitivity of the Rode NTG4 + is wrong, as I have more confidence in the manufacturer's datasheet than in this test (NTG4 + should be 8.5dB less than the NTG5). Still, the sound comparisons are useful.
@@SoundSpeeds Allen, I'm a big fan of your work. I'd love to introduce you to my audience of audio-curious folks. Would you object to a livestream conversation on my channel about why these tests were so wrong, and generally unhelpful in choosing a mic? It should be noted that I love Caleb and learn a ton about video and lighting from his channel. But these audio tests were obviously missing the mark.
I think a front to back and front to side difference would be more useful than raw numbers but since you gave us the data we can calculate that ourselves if we want so thank you for that! My reasoning is once you tweak your gain based on the output from the front of the mic, how many DB quieter it is from the side will give you an idea of off axis rejection. If a mic has lower front output, you'll have to turn up the gain more than a mic that has higher native outtput to compensate, which will also raise the levels received from the side.
Glad someone else had this same thought. For example the Rode NTG4+ had a low -11.1db for sensitivity, so the -23.6db from the back is really only -12.5db less than from the front, when you boost the NGT4+ up to nominal levels the back-facing sound will also be boosted, so you have to account for the sensitivity as well. Comparatively the NTG5 had a base sensitivity of 5.0db, and a read sensitivity of -20db, meaning the rear rejection is a relative -25db compared to the front. This would completely rearrange the values. It's possible the numbers shown were rearOrSideSensitivity - frontSensitivity, but the video makes it seem like they're just the raw sensitivity from the directions.
I feel like this video (and the summary of which mics are good for what scenario) is the detailed explanation of what most filmmaking TH-camrs are thinking when they say “it depends” lol. I’m going to have to watch a couple more times to spot everything, although the Mk 416 conclusion is consistent with what I’ve always heard about “best shotgun mic”. That said, I always appreciate when someone actually gives their opinion instead of dodging the question, thanks Caleb for a great video! Also, I am a HUGE FAN of the studio background! Very creative and gutsy choices, like a splash of film noir with that lamp! PS congrats on your new mic!
I said the same thing to myself. If a mic is very sensitiv...,of course it will pick up more from behind - regardless of the quality of the rejection abilities. That would mean...put the speaker in the front...gain normalize all mics (is that a thing ?) to the same recording levels and than test the rejection from behind.
I was thinking the same thing too! But I guess since he included the values we can do the ratios to figure out the actual rejection amounts for each mic.
Actually I went ahead and ran the numbers for rejection from front to side and front to rear and here’s what I got. Looks like the most drop off is obviously from the Rode NTG5 Decrease in dB from front to side: Rode ntg5 24.4 Azden SGM-3500L 20.5 Sennheiser MKH 416 18.9 Rode ntg3b 17.7 Deity S-Mic 2 17.4 Azden SFM-3500 17.2 Rode NTG8 14 Sennheiser MKE 600 12.2 Deity S-Mic 2s 9 Rode NTG4+ 8.6 Rode NT5 4.5 Octava MK-012 4.4 Decrease in dB from front to rear: Rode ntg5 25 Sennheiser MKH 416 17.9 Rode ntg3b 17.8 Azden SGM-3500L 17 Azden SFM-3500 16 Rode NTG8 15.7 Sennheiser MKE 600 13.9 Rode NTG4+ 12.5 Rode NT5 10.9 Deity S-Mic 2 7.2 Octava MK-012 6.9 Deity S-Mic 2s 3.2
Awesome comparison. I personally love my MKH 416! I plan on reviewing it soon. This video gave me some ideas of shotgun mics that I want to test out! So thank you!!
RODE M5’s in stereo cross pattern: Great natural stereo sound but also clear in mono (narration) if the stereo tracks are consolidated and centered. I’ve noticed most content creators seem to lack knowledge on how sound works and have little DAW experience. I would never spend +$200 on a microphone for field recording because after proper EQ and compression, you will be surprised how technique wins every time, regardless of the mic design. I’m referring to strictly field recording though.
I'm glad you started off with the disclaimer about this being a test to your specs because the right mic is so specific to each individual need. Great video but unsurprised that the 416 came out on top. It's been The King of shotguns for over 30 years now - and for very good reason. Enjoy it!
Ya man. I've had the MKH-416 for a few years. I basically never need to EQ anything and is well-suited to almost any situation. You can't do better for an all 'rounder than the MKH-416.
The NTG5 actually has the most rejection as well as sensitivity 😱 Comparing the level at the fron vs the side and rear you get a much higher dB decrease than all the rest. You can see the results below. I feel like knowing this it might have ranked much higher. Overall the top 4 here are also the obvious top 4 when looking at your tests. Side Rejection from front in dB Rode ntg5 24.4 Azden SGM-3500L 20.5 Sennheiser MKH 416 18.9 Rode ntg3b 17.7 Deity S-Mic 2 17.4 Azden SFM-3500 17.2 Rode NTG8 14 Sennheiser MKE 600 12.2 Deity S-Mic 2s 9 Rode NTG4+ 8.6 Rode NT5 4.5 Octava MK-012 4.4 Back rejection from front in dB Rode ntg5 25 Sennheiser MKH 416 17.9 Rode ntg3b 17.8 Azden SGM-3500L 17 Azden SFM-3500 16 Rode NTG8 15.7 Sennheiser MKE 600 13.9 Rode NTG4+ 12.5 Rode NT5 10.9 Deity S-Mic 2 7.2 Octava MK-012 6.9 Deity S-Mic 2s 3.2
I agree with this logic, you really have to take in their sensitivity into consideration in understanding how much they are actually rejecting. If a mic is 10 db lower in sensitivity clearly it should naturally be rejecting 10 db less but will you have had to turn it up anyway by 10 db to get it at the same level?
I bought the NTG4+ a while ago based on TH-camrs recommendations, but I just didn’t like it. As you concluded it’s not very sensitive. Ended up getting the Deity s-mic 2 instead and it’s much better
Like you, I’m pleased with the MKE 600. I picked up a couple of used ones on eBay. I run each of them through its own DBX 286S. Also use a dbx 231S for equalization.
Love the a-roll lighting. Kinda film noir style. Suggestion: start adding a quick wide behind the scenes shot at the very end of each video to show your lighting setup and camera positioning
I love how thorough your tests are and making sure there's a constant. We're looking to upgrade our fleet and you really answered that question. Your work in this video just got you a like, comment, and subscriber.
Oh man. I wish you'd done this 9 months ago. I ended up buying a Rode NTG2. It's great, but I'd have loved to really see this comparison before I'd bought. Great job Caleb!
Great comparison Caleb. The 416 seems to be a classic for decades. Thus I am wondering how the 80x0 Sennheisers which were engineered just a couple of years ago stack up against it.
I had a matched pair of Rode NT5's for years that I absolutely loved. My big problem with them was the lack of a switchable pad on the mic itself. They were absolutely amazing to use as overheads on drums for genres like Jazz where you don't necessarily want to close-mic the toms. They were just too sensitive for my liking on instruments. All they needed was a built in pad to make them perfect.
I use my 416 as a snare drum overhead. I do not close like any of my drums. The 416 runs through one of three different AI assisted gates like the Oxford Drum Gate. The rear and side rejection coupled with the low end proximity effect is a pleasant surprise while the using the 416 for drums. The microphone emulation version of the 416 is my other main overhead. My Townsend digital microphone sits just above my head and serves as the Tom and kick microphone. Again using the Oxford drum gate to dampen down and diminish the high end. The 416 emulation version in the universal audio software sounds unbelievable.
Thank you for this a lot! We need a break from these recent crazy camera releases and refresh our concern on audio department! Great video i really need this!
We’ve been needing this for SO LONG! You’re the best person to do it, 100% killed it! I’m curious...a lot of audio guys I work with on sets swear by the Schoeps microphones for any audio, both on set and in an interview setting. Any reason why those didn’t make the lineup?
**Very** thorough! This is a service to the community! Thanks for including the vocal "clarity" snippets: it allowed me to make my own subjective judgement. :)
I think your tests are excellent at exposing the issue of "best" in many areas. It's really about the "best tool for the job" as one can see the different strengths and weaknesses of each. It would be interesting to extend your tests, using the same mics, for different use cases. Examples might be, indoor dialog, on camera, outdoor dialog, outdoor reach. This is very much why a good sound person often has a "tool kit" of microphones so they can pull out the right one for the environment. To make it even more fun, after you do the tests and commentary, perhaps have Curtis Judd provide his own as well showing how two sets of ears might evaluate the same test results.
Good Day. This video is very interesting to watch and some good mic comparisons. One note I would like to add and this is coming from a sound engineers perspective so don't take it too harshly. The sensitivity section for me if you want to improve this test should rather be replaced with the SNR or signal to noise ratio. This is more of a testament to the mics than sensitivity. there are loads of tutorials on how to measure this and it will also equalize all the mic tests for you so that it can be standardized metrics to measure.
This video was so helpful and well laid out, many thanks and kudos, the chapter separations and the charts at the end of each really made it super effective.
I have the Sennheiser ME66 and I believe it’s quite similar to the MKE600, I couldn’t be more happier considering it kicks around used for about 150-200. Great comparisons!
Very well performed test: compliments! Love the Sennheiser as wel. Bought the NTG3 because of the price difference. But your test made me rethink. Thanks again! Very well done.
Would the deltas between dB measurements from the front, and dB measurements of sides and rear be a better measure than just comparing each mic's side rejection and rear rejection to get an overall sense of how each mic might handle rejection? Loved the side by side testing - very helpful!
As an FYI, there's a huge room node in your opening scene around 125hz. If you put a 31band EQ and notch out 125hz by about 3-6dB, that'll clean up that room resonance. It sounds like a reflected frequency.
One metric I wish you covered was distance. Rejection is great (I needed to know this too), but I've seen folks unhappy with the budget options because when you move just slightly away from the mic the tonality changes.
Thank you!! I'm a newbie and I hate how my voice sounds super sharp and crispy. My S and F are awful since have a lisp. Really interested in the Røde NTG3B. Such a warm boomy storytelling sound
You should try a Sontronics STC-1 that stands very well beside the Oktava MK-012. In terms of sensitivity, adding an inline mic preamp like the Tritonaudio Fethead Phantom (that adds almost 20dB to a condenser mic) could be a great choice in order to keep modularity in your mic toolbox. A mic with 3 capsules (omni, cardioid, hyper cardioid) and 2 different levels of sensitivity, can cover 90% of situations. I'm not a big fan of mics with interference tubes (aka directional mic) because they often sound "boxy". Except for the Senn. 416, a great performer without any doubt. If you can, try the Schoeps CMIT-5U as a reference mic. Final question: did you mention HOW did you captured these audio tests? I mean the quality of preamps of any digital recorder can really turn a good mic into a bad one. Thanks for your effort.
Very cool video. Not to be the math nerd police, but I noticed the NT5 should have had 22 points instead of 15 at the end. I knew something was off when the NT5 got 12 points for sound quality and somehow only 15 overall so I went back to double check.
Hey nice video as always! For indoor recording you should have probably tested more small diaphragm mics with either hyper or super cardioid pattern like the Audix scx1-hc or the Audio Technica at4053b. But I guess you can never go wrong with the 416 ;)
I'm surprised he was looking at shotgun mics for indoor use. Caleb, what were you thinking??? I purchased my AT4053b used, and my oh my, I immediately fell in love with the sound. No worry about room reflection problems. I first bought a Sennheiser ME66, and maybe I got a bad version (used) but I hated that mic!
I wish Audio tecknica was on the list as well. And better and more natrual speaker would used used for sound quality and outdoor test to , to see power of long guns .
Hi mate, excellent video - thanks for making it. Don’t know if you’re aware of the SE Electronics SE8 - which I bought earlier this year to boom over dialogue and works AMAZING. It is super sensitive, extremely low noise (for pencil condenser) and has a nice flat curve that delivers a rich sound even at boom distance. I looked at the RODE M5, RODE NT5 and other mics too and found the SE8 to be the best. Thanks again for the terrific content you create. Cheers.
Great job Caleb, love these kinds of comparison videos with a lot of different options! Just a thought from someone from an audio background: the fact that the NT5 and the Oktava have wider polar patterns probably plays into their hands in the sound quality test. A cardioid polar pattern microphone in a space with great acoustics is probably a lot better for natural-sounding dialogue over any shotgun mic. That being said, those same cardioid mics probably would be much worse if recorded in an echo-y space, where the shotgun mics would in turn do a lot better since they generally reject much more room echo. So for anyone looking to record clear sound, a wider polar pattern is probably not going to cut it if you are not able to control the space well enough.
Just a friendly reminder that if what you care about is not having hiss in your recordings, you shouldn't just worry about the sensitivity: the SNR/EIN spec for the mic is often the more important spec, assuming you're using reasonably good preamps. If you're using crappy in-camera preamps, sensitivity might be important to prevent hiss.
These are all xlr mics. All require phantom power. Which cannot be provided by most DSLRs or mirrorless cameras. So we can rule that out. Condensers: the noise that you hear is most likely to be the self noise. The lower the self noise of a particular mic, the cleaner it will be. Because condensers do not require as much gain as dynamics (for a studio setup like this, even a Focusrite Scarlett Solo which costs about 120 bux can provide more than enough gain required to any of the mics). So your point is absolutely correct
I love to see the focus on audio! Not nearly enough of this going around on the popular TH-cam video gear channels. Great job as always, too, clean, organized, thorough, to the point - I would expect nothing less. That said, please let's see a comp next of real, professional, serious microphones without all these youtuber hype microphones from rode and deity thrown in. I'm talking Sennheiser MKH 50, MKH 60, MKH 8050 and 8060, Sanken CS3-E, Neumann KMR-81, DPA 4017, Schoeps CMIT5U, and Schoeps CMC641. Those are all serious microphones used commonly in professional settings! It would be very interesting to see someone like you who is so proficient at making these types of videos take it to that level - if you pulled it off, there really wouldn't be much of anything else comparable on mics like those compared all together anywhere else
gave you a thumbs up. one of the few youtube reviewers who actually gave us your opinions on the various mics you reviewed. a whole majority of the youtube reviewers took the easy way out and just ask the viewers to form their own opinions. sheesh, what's the point of a review if the reviewer ask viewers for their opinions. they always give the lame excuse that it all depends on their voices. True , but they know their voice best and should just form an opinion on which mic suits THEIR voice best.
Love your videos and really appreciate the time you’ve put into this, but I’m left scratching my head at how a cheap Bluetooth speaker with a completely non-natural response curve, placed directly in front of a shotgun mic is any indication of audio quality. I get that you’re trying to standardize but you would have been better off booming these overhead and recording yourself even if there were slight variations in the takes because then we’d be able to see what they sounded like on an actual human voice. Obviously, the best methodology would be to boom all of them overhead at once to record, but then you’d need 12 inputs on your interface. I feel like you set out to validate your choice of the MKH 416 which, why wouldn’t you, it’s a legendary microphone and sounds great on your voice. Glad you found your mic but would love to see how these microphones compare with actual dialogue.
Great comparison. I love the Oktava for its richness of sound and the clear harmonic content that it can reproduce. Which capsule did you use? I’m guessing, cardioid. I choose whichever capsule might reject most in the room I’m in .... a bit like having 3 mics!
I did a test like this with a half dozen shotgun mics in about 1996.
I saved my pennies, swallowed hard and bought the then $1,200 Sennheiser MKH 416-P48, rather than the much cheaper options most of my colleagues were using.
About a year later I bought a second one. That pair has circled the planet with me for a couple decades now.
They’ve been the best audio investment I ever made, which includes multiple studios, and they’ve paid themselves off 100 times over.
Funny thing is, every year or so a new mic comes out that claims to be a 416 killer and I first blow it off, then keep hearing about it, then have to know for myself. So I get one, and sometimes they sound good and I give it a try. For a while. But I always come right back to my 416s.
Literally yesterday I was doing an interview with a doctor in a hospital conference room, with AC humming that couldn’t be turned off. Before he got there, I had rolled of the room at about 120hz, but when he sat in and I heard him speak, I changed my plan. He had a deep rich broadcaster voice, that was authoritative and fit the purpose of the interview perfectly, and I didn’t want to roll off his voice.
If you know the 416, you know that yeah you can obviously aim it at the subject, But almost equally important is that can you aim the null of it at the noise source, and change that ratio dramatically. (Acoustic Source to Noise as opposed to Signal to Noise Ratio). So the combination of using the null of the mic to reject as much of the room as possible, and having him speak while adjusting my HPF, I was able to find a sweet spot for intelligibility and authority all the way down at 50hz, and his rich voice joined the 10,000 other interviews captured by that trusty old microphone.
Tip: In all audio, second (if not first) to Microphone Choice is Microphone Placement. (Any mic on this list, if well placed, beats the 416 if poorly placed.)
For a talking head interview, thread your boom through whatever mess the camera operator has created.
Now pretend you’re in a recording studio and only recording audio. Start by aiming your 416, at mouth level directly between the interviewer and interviewee, smack dab in their eyeline, parallel to the floor at mouth level. Got it? Skull-416-Skull.
Okay so in your imaginary studio, bring the 416 to about 8-inches away from the subjects mouth (and imagine a pop filter in between while you’re at it). With your headphones on, and talent speaking, if you bring the mic any closer you start to get proximity effect and their voice gets bassier.
(This is precisely the setup you will find in many Voiceover studios around the world, and the 416 is a top choice for spoken word often beating out LDCs costing 2-10 times as much.)
Now back on set, imagine you have a second person raising your stand slowly, you are slowly angling the 416 (white tipped, no windscreen of course), and the higher the stand goes, you keep the mic aimed at the subjects lips in proportion by slowly twisting a section of your boom. When the white tip just barely clears the top of the cameras frame, stop. You’ll be at about a 45-degree downward angle, and most of the time you’re set.
But let’s go further. If there is a side of the room or area that sounds worse than the other, assuming that your boom is parallel to the floor (I use a Mafer Clamp rather than the half dozen specialty boom holders I own), then you can telescope your boom either in or out from this center position, and ‘tilt’ the head of your boom keeping it aimed directly at that mouth, And out of frame, AND getting maximum rejection of whatever noise you’re trying to kill.
Wanna go further? Imagine being at the beach for an intimate soft spoken scene, right at the water, on a pebbly beach with the waves crashing against some rocks, at golden hour. Looks beautiful. Sound is a nightmare. Oh, and it’s windy, so you have your zeppelin on the mic.
About the best you can do is shoot the Wides like before, but when you move in for coverage, boom from the SIDE of the frame, with the null end of the 416 aimed directly at the noisiest part of the beach, and the front end so close to the talent that one or two hairs on your windjammer breaks the frame.
Another common scenario is working on city streets with road traffic.
I can’t tell you how many impossible scenes my 416s have saved from an ADR destiny.
Get a 416.
It’ll be with you longer than most of the people in your life.
Till death do us part.
what a cool comment! Was interesting to read. I’m choosing an xlr mic myself for yt videos…
I dont know anything about audio. However, I really enjoyed reading this comment, even though it was like reading a foreign language
Man your comment is amazing!!
That is awesome! Sennheiser makes great microphones
I feel this way about the CMIT 5u, saving my Pennies for one as we speak
thumbnail is so good dude
Thank you!!!
Yeah I love it
Indeed! If there was an TH-cam Award for best thumbnail, this would definitely be at least at the top 5 2020! Not that I remember a better one, just being humble and assuming there are lots of thumbnails out there.
I had the sales guys at B&H perform for me a test in their mic room and the Sennheiser MKE 600 was the clear winner. It was the size - mountable on my camera, price - under $400 and the fact that it was powered mic - could put a wireless brick on it and plug into DSLRs, were the reasons it won out. Also, it doesn't blow out - I shoot alot of concerts & loud events like my old phantom powered Audio Technica did. The Sennheiser MKE 600 has just been a solid top mic for my cameras through the years. I love it.
Yes, a current on-camera microphone round up is needed. I don't think any big channels have done a full roundup since the Deity D3/D3 Pro came out, so far as I can find.
I've got to tip my hat to your thumbnail game. That's one of the best thumbnails I've seen ... I gotta step up my game.
Thanks man!
I’m not going to lie, I came here to say the same thing. Perfection.
It caught my eye 👍🏻
I don’t comment a lot, but I had the same thought the second I saw the thumbnail
whoa you’re that smart home guy right? you made go into a rabbit hole regarding solar panels though
Catastrophically wrong test. The polar pattern should be assessed in an anechoic chamber or in extreme cases outdoors. Sound blankets for such measurements are not helpful. You measured reflections. Interference tubes do not suppress coherent reflections.
Microphone sensitivity is only important if you have a bad noisy recorder. Much more important is the self noise of the microphone.
Finally, rate the sound quality with a terrible bluetooth speaker is a disaster.
In this video, all microphones are good in their own way. Even this long mic NTG8 is good. It is needed to work in a very noisy environment. You definitely don't need it. I'm glad you chose a microphone that really suits you.
I can’t take you seriously, if you are hyperboling in every sentence. Try it a little toned down.
The “natural light” background is so relaxing, people should do this more often.
Also, you always put out such quality content, both visually and informationally. You’re one of the best, Mr Pike. Thanks for doin what ya do.
Nice job, Caleb! It is interesting how your tests mirrored your own subjective choice and I have to say, they're pretty close to my own impressions as well. That 416 sounds great on your voice!
What is your order for the quality test? I don't think that the NT5 should be in the top Five, I don't agree with this part of the video
@@jesaispasvraimentquoiecrireici These things are somewhat subjective. If you don't like the NT5, that's totally legitimate. The NT5 is pretty good for its price and can be a better option when working indoors in reberberant spaces vs. any shotgun microphone, especially the longer shotguns. Those can create this sort of warbling sound in those situations. The NT5 won't do that in the same space. Also, it seems to have a better reliability record than the Oktava and certainly has a better warranty.
@@curtisjudd what do you think about NTG5 for indoor to make short films?
@@MARTINTALIA I'd generally opt for a non-shotgun if most of my recording will be indoors. But if you manage severe reverberation and aim the microphone correctly and monitor carefully when recording, the NTG5 is fine microphone.
Curtis, I'm surprised you didn't see the problems with this review. The sound quality test is VERY flawed!
1. We don't know what recorder/preamplifier he's using. I know the microphone itself will make more of a difference than the recorder will, but this detail has an effect on sound quality too.
2. The speaker he used, sounds very low quality and is NOT an accurate test subject... No professional would ever judge a mic based on how it sounds pointed at a cheap $30 speaker vs. an ACTUAL person talking. We don't even know which mic was used for the recording that he played back from speaker, which also could have an effect.
A better way to do this would have been to either say the same line 12 times with each mic, or place a few of them next to each other and read lines. Which is actually very easy to do despite what he said in the beginning. Normalize in post afterwards.
3. 9:30 I'm shocked he put the NTG5 so low, since Rode themselves designed it to have a flatter/more natural sound than both the NTG3, and BY FAR better a NTG4+.
4. The Oktava and Rode NT5, shouldn't have been in the review since they're not shotguns. By design, they simply cannot perform at the same level as a shotgun mic, if they were used at a distance outdoors. Which shotguns excel at.
This point is relevant because, it's suppose to be a "Shotgun mic test" not a "Indoor boom mic test".
Other than that, still a neat idea for a video.
Can we just take a minute to acknowledge Caleb's amazing setup. That background is on point 👌
Seriously?! I need a breakdown on how he achieved this
I just saved this video for that reason! Glad to see some props for it here too
It’s a blender background.
You can take a minute sure, just don't ask me or anyone else to. If people do like it they will likely state it themselves without prompting from someone else
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May
Rough winds do, in fact, shake the darling buds of May
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May
@@stevengonz Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May
Yes, rough winds do shake the darling buds of May
shoot I heard butts 12 x lol
Literally came just to comment about how great of a thumbnail that is, bravo 🔥
Oh, man, I love these kinds of videos. I was really surprised about some of these. I also personally love the MKH416. I have two of them, one for my TH-cam videos and one for my live streams. It sounds perfect on my voice, and that's the variable that no test can figure out for someone else on TH-cam. I always tell people to borrow or rent a mic before buying one because not all mics sound good on every voice (my voice sounds horrendous on the Shure SM7B). Great video, dude!
Great test! thanks for doing this. I am a bit confused on the math with the Rode NT5. Sensitivity: 3 points, Rear Rejection: 6 points, Side Rejection 1 point: Quality of sound: 12 points. 22 points total. but you have it in 11th place with 15. The only reason I noticed it was because after getting the top score on the quality, I thought it was weird it only had 3 other points from everything else. Not a huge deal obviously, just curious! Again, great test!
YES. On camera microphone video please, dude! That'd be so cool! Got 2 NTG2s arriving today c: wish this video was just a few days earlier haha
Can we take a minute to talk about the incredible lightning of this set? Remember when he turns out the light it's full black... And yet it looks like there is light going through some windows. Incredible and warm atmosphere here. It is one of your best lightning set so far imo!
And the rest of the ideo is gold quality as usual. You're my favorite gear youtuber Caleb. Thank you for everything.
Aw thank you so much Benjamin! That really means a lot to hear!
Yup, I that was the first thing I noticed. Loved the atmosphere it created
Welcome to the 416 club! It is fantastic for voiceover too. I love love love mine.
Hey it's my favourite voice over youtuber. Your videos are already helping me a lot with my first project. I'd already gotten a Rode NTG3 before I saw your video though. Budget probably wouldn't have permitted a MKH416 though. Using it with the Scarlett 2i2 3rd gen to add the air to make it less bassy at a more budget price.
@@adrianbaev5277 hey Adrian, what would you suggest between shotgun mics like these vs a dynamic mic? I am about to start a commentary channel
Thank you for this test. I enjoyed watching it. I got MKE600 and am happy with the versatility it provides, to be able to use one AAA battery and use it when needed on camera or use it with external recorder. Great option and I am glad to see it in 4th position at least, which it deserves.
Great test! We've been using the MKE600 for years in soooooo many different scenarios. Landed aproximate to where I'd expect in your ranking as its truly an "everything' shotgun. Nice job Caleb.
The NTG4+ was recommended to me by some people, but I’m glad I watched this video.
I like my NTG4+ and works great if you are a run and gun shooter because of the internal features.
I have it and although I never compared it as methodically as we see here, I find that it us pretty good, depending on one's use cases.
I actually liked it more than some of the others higher on the quality list. It's not as clean but I find the voice is more readable which might be more important in some situations.
I have to wonder if the voice he used for the test wasn’t too low for the microphone. The NTG4+ tends to do a better job of picking up higher-pitched voices and is much more sensitive in that range. If a female TH-camr did a similar comparison, she might reach a different conclusion, especially with the MKH 416’s aggressive presence boost.
You may want to take a look at DPA microphones.
Mike tested one next to an MKH 416. To me, the 416 sounds like a walkie-talkie next to the DPA 4018.
Former Technical Production Manager & Senior Technician for a corporate AV company, video producer/editor and musician here.. when I watch your videos your know your stuff and your ear is spot on ~ superb work! 🙏
I love the lighting setup behind you in the talking head segments.
Thank you Adam!
Whoa! Talk about an undeniable thumbnail! You're going to get 100% click through rate on this one!
Aw thanks!
I watch this video and I don't see a man. I see the definition of QUALITY. Definitely one of the best channels in youtube.
Dude... no. I respect you as a DSLR video shooter but NOT as a microphone reviewer. I'm going to try to be nice about this, and sorry in advance if I'm direct, but a minute into this video and I'm hearing a lot that isn't accurate. Call me a triggered pro sound guy if you'd like... just know that I respect you and am spending this time to try to help you and your viewers.
Sensitivity is not how loud a mic is, it's more along the lines of how hot the output is. The null area of the microphone doesn't help with artifacts, it helps with attenuation of off axis sound. If you're having "weird EQ issues" with your S-Mic 2 it's more than likely reflection off a hard surface in your studio because it's a shotgun microphone. In your video opening, for example, I hear that your microphone is picking up your voice a lot off of the table in front of you. Is boominess the "weird EQ issue" you're encountering? Because if so, it's probably the angle you're using your mic at.
Your testing method. Good God, what is that?!?!?! A Bluetooth speaker in the proximity effect zone of a mic? Not a hardlined, coaxial studio speaker but a Bluetooth speaker? First of all, the coloration of such a speaker will skew your results all over the place. Secondly your moving blankets will only help control the highs, the bass will boom back at the mic.
You don't understand sensitivity at all and that's me being nice. "The more sensitive a microphone is, the less noise you're going to have in your final recording." That's not the way it works because there's also microphone self noise to consider. I understand what you're saying about camera preamps but don't just assume that because you don't have to turn up your preamps as much, a microphone is better. When we test the EIN of digital audio recorders and interfaces, it's done at full volume where you get the most accurate preamp performance. I know camera audio preamps are far noisier and inconsistent than actual audio equipment but camera audio inputs vary and don't also apply gain to inputs linearly. Case in point, the Rode NTG8 has a higher sensitivity than the MHK-416 (nearly 4X the output voltage) but you have it ranked lower and you also have it above both Deity mics which also have slightly high sensitivity by spec although different units will vary +/-2dB. The NTG-5 ranks at the top of your list with it's sensitivity of -23.5dB and the NTG8 is higher sensitivity at -20dB. This entire test is garbage and not based on any kind of accurate measurement and didn't yield valid results.
Rear rejection testing? You put the polar patterns on the screen for each mic so you should know that the rear lobe isn't the null area for 10 of your 12 microphones. Only the NTG5 and MK-012 are cardioid and the rest are super/hypercardioid which is not fair. As for why the NTG4+ topped your list over the insane rejection of the NTG8... how did you test them? All preamps at the same volume for each mic or did you calibrate the preamp with a control volume level out of your speaker and then set preamps accordingly? That matters and I'll assume that if your results tell you the the NTG4+ has more rejection than the NTG8, that's a very invalid test. The NTG8 so far should top your charts regarding sensitivity and rejection thus far if you were doing accurate tests.
Side rejection test... still not a valid test based on the polar patterns. Sorry dude but the null area of most of these microphones is approx 135 degrees off axis from the front of the mic and you split the difference in your two tests giving poor results. We sound pros do what's called "playing the pattern" and point the null area of the microphone at the loudest noise or sound we want to reject because that's maximum attenuation.
As for the sound quality test... all kinds of issues there too. How did you record the poem you used? 1 foot away again? That skews the results. Microphone manufacturers measure microphones in an anechoic or virtual anechoic chamber using a flat, coaxial test speaker at a distance of 1 meter from the mic and use sweep tones. What are the technical specs for the Bluetooth speaker? I'm sure it's colored and not flat which means that it needs to play right with the mic you use and how you use them together to give you good results. Some of the mics like the 416 and NTG8 pick up a lot of low end rumble which tells me your test room isn't treated enough with sound absorbing material and isn't sound proof either. If you're only planning on recording voices from your test speaker in this room then cool but if you're recording the human voice, not one of these tests is valid. This is why your two pencil condensers topped the charts.
Honestly, I'm glad you landed on a mic like the 416. It's bulletproof and has been for decades. I'm a bit surprised that the results weren't skewed in another direction to tell you the truth based on all tests. You'll do well with the 416 but consider rolling off your video below 80 Hz because it's a bit much in the low end.
Please don't think I'm just trying to trash you. I appreciate what you... attempted to do but think you could have done far better testing. On my channel I do all kinds of tests including numerous real world tests taken to the extreme. For example, watch my NTG8 video if you want your mind blown. I'd like to offer my services in either consultation, knowledge, etc when it comes to sound in your future videos. For you, a brother TH-camr, I'm here anytime. Thanks for staying with me and I'll look forward to your next camera video.
Caleb, welcome to the world of audio. 😉 I have to agree with Sound Speeds on his assessment of your tests. As a fellow youtube reviewer (I mostly review sound reproduction products i.e. speakers.)
I can understand how much time it must have taken to review so many mics AND film them. I believe you only did your ratings to give people some insight into your thought process and add a visual aspect to it; correct me if I'm wrong.
I've run into the same issues in my reviews. Audio is tough because it's invisible and so the science used to explain it has to be pretty spot on. Our fellow youtubers like Sound Speeds and Curtis Judd are willing to take testing to the levels that I'm not willing, capable, or knowledgeable enough to do. So I thank them for their efforts. I think I might have been corrected in some of my previous mic comparison videos by Sound Speeds before too! Curtis is way too nice so he probably just shakes his head at my mistakes. 🤣
Overall, I found the video entertaining and you came to the CORRECT conclusion...MKH 416 all day which is what I use. Either that or the Shure SM7B if I need more rejection when my kids are yelling! I actually think the best value in that group is probably the NTG5. I have the less expensive VideoMic NTG and that thing is scary good for the price, so I can imagine that the NTG5 would be even better.
@@joentell I've watched many of your videos too. I don't always comment though. If you ever need sound consultation on something, please, don't hesitate to reach out. I appreciate what you do and always smile and shake my head when I see one of your videos show up higher in search results than mine. ;-)
@@DovidoxVideos LOL. Yeah...mic reviews are tough. I get into some periods where all I'm watching are yours, Mike's, Curtis', and Podcastage's videos. I don't even need a mic...I have a whole drawer full! 🤣
@@joentell Mics are tough? Speakers are tough! I have no idea how I could review speakers in a decent way because the audience doesn't share in the user experience. Everything experienced is at the mercy of the way you're listening to the video. I say that about me but it's funny because when I've watched your videos, I trust you. You're very convincing and I like your methods. I would be far too harsh on myself though.
@@DovidoxVideos Thank you! Binaural mics help a bit.
I got the MKE 600 probably 5 years ago and it has served me well - especially for $330
Ive owned the 416 for years and it is such a great mic. Totally worth it.
The 416 is great. Been using it for a year and I couldn't do without it now.
Great choice. You really cannot go wrong with Sennheisers, especially over a long period of time. My kit also includes the Sen 416, 1x AKG 414 (original), 2x Sennheiser digital wireless packs, an old Tascam pencil, two Sony ecm wired lavs (great for both lavs and aerials, too) and a smattering of misc mics to complete the kit. I'd love to have a matched pair of the AKG 414s and a pair of matched Earthworks mics for ambisonics. Probably seems crazy to have all of these mics, but each mic has its purpose and strengths. This is especially true when doing a lot of music. When doing larger ensembles, I generally will rent, but this kits allows me to do nearly everything a small ensemble would ever need.
Little hint for those wanting to learn more about microphones is that Guitar Center actually rents out some incredibly high-end mics, for reasonable rates. Each location is a bit different, but the higher-end stores will tend to have mics you never thought you would be able to see, much less rent.
You absolute fucking legend. No bullshit, you said what you wanted, performed controlled tests and then analysed the results at the end instead of just presenting meaningless data. First time I've ever watched a review without feeling the need to watch another.
Lovely edit. Like how you gave just enough of the poem for a good sample but not enough to bore us, then you let the poem play out once at the end; perfect. 🤩 8:40
The sensitivity-noise-relation is wrong explained. A condenser mic can have a high sensitivity and also a high self noise level.
You are absolutely right. In addition, the type of signal used to measure sensitivity was not specified. I think it was white noise that is not suited to simulate normal use. This is why it is usually measured at 1 kHz. The measurement of off-axis rejection with white noise also hides important properties. Also, I'm pretty sure the sensitivity of the Rode NTG4 + is wrong, as I have more confidence in the manufacturer's datasheet than in this test (NTG4 + should be 8.5dB less than the NTG5).
Still, the sound comparisons are useful.
Everything was wrong except the thumbnail.
@@SoundSpeeds that’s possible. I stopped watching after the sensitivity part. 😅
@@MarcReichert You have to love autocorrect, Rode being changed to ridden is funny
@@SoundSpeeds Allen, I'm a big fan of your work. I'd love to introduce you to my audience of audio-curious folks. Would you object to a livestream conversation on my channel about why these tests were so wrong, and generally unhelpful in choosing a mic?
It should be noted that I love Caleb and learn a ton about video and lighting from his channel. But these audio tests were obviously missing the mark.
My sennheiser mk 600 will work for the next 10 years at least .but will still watch your video .
Daang love that studio backdrop design 👌
The Sennheiser MKH416 is very well respected and no wonder it has been used for decades by pros. Thanks for making this video.
I think a front to back and front to side difference would be more useful than raw numbers but since you gave us the data we can calculate that ourselves if we want so thank you for that! My reasoning is once you tweak your gain based on the output from the front of the mic, how many DB quieter it is from the side will give you an idea of off axis rejection. If a mic has lower front output, you'll have to turn up the gain more than a mic that has higher native outtput to compensate, which will also raise the levels received from the side.
Glad someone else had this same thought. For example the Rode NTG4+ had a low -11.1db for sensitivity, so the -23.6db from the back is really only -12.5db less than from the front, when you boost the NGT4+ up to nominal levels the back-facing sound will also be boosted, so you have to account for the sensitivity as well. Comparatively the NTG5 had a base sensitivity of 5.0db, and a read sensitivity of -20db, meaning the rear rejection is a relative -25db compared to the front. This would completely rearrange the values.
It's possible the numbers shown were rearOrSideSensitivity - frontSensitivity, but the video makes it seem like they're just the raw sensitivity from the directions.
I think Azden is a really underappreciated manufacturer. Most of the stuff they make is rock-solid.
Great video. I wish you had given the Sennheiser MKH 50 a try, too.
Watching this on my iPad means that all recordings sound the same 😁 But thanks for a really great video and observations!
I feel like this video (and the summary of which mics are good for what scenario) is the detailed explanation of what most filmmaking TH-camrs are thinking when they say “it depends” lol. I’m going to have to watch a couple more times to spot everything, although the Mk 416 conclusion is consistent with what I’ve always heard about “best shotgun mic”.
That said, I always appreciate when someone actually gives their opinion instead of dodging the question, thanks Caleb for a great video!
Also, I am a HUGE FAN of the studio background! Very creative and gutsy choices, like a splash of film noir with that lamp!
PS congrats on your new mic!
As each microphone has different sensitivity, you should measure the ratio between front and rear/side view of the mic, not the nominal values
also, your Bluetooth speaker has own frequency characteristic, with can affect your test (if for example it cuts lower frequencies and enhance mids)
I said the same thing to myself. If a mic is very sensitiv...,of course it will pick up more from behind - regardless of the quality of the rejection abilities. That would mean...put the speaker in the front...gain normalize all mics (is that a thing ?) to the same recording levels and than test the rejection from behind.
I was thinking the same thing too! But I guess since he included the values we can do the ratios to figure out the actual rejection amounts for each mic.
Actually I went ahead and ran the numbers for rejection from front to side and front to rear and here’s what I got. Looks like the most drop off is obviously from the Rode NTG5
Decrease in dB from front to side:
Rode ntg5 24.4
Azden SGM-3500L 20.5
Sennheiser MKH 416 18.9
Rode ntg3b 17.7
Deity S-Mic 2 17.4
Azden SFM-3500 17.2
Rode NTG8 14
Sennheiser MKE 600 12.2
Deity S-Mic 2s 9
Rode NTG4+ 8.6
Rode NT5 4.5
Octava MK-012 4.4
Decrease in dB from front to rear:
Rode ntg5 25
Sennheiser MKH 416 17.9
Rode ntg3b 17.8
Azden SGM-3500L 17
Azden SFM-3500 16
Rode NTG8 15.7
Sennheiser MKE 600 13.9
Rode NTG4+ 12.5
Rode NT5 10.9
Deity S-Mic 2 7.2
Octava MK-012 6.9
Deity S-Mic 2s 3.2
@@MarandMedia is that good if you don't want to hear yourself catching your breath in a run and gun film?
Awesome comparison. I personally love my MKH 416! I plan on reviewing it soon. This video gave me some ideas of shotgun mics that I want to test out! So thank you!!
You're videos teach me so much, I'm not sure where I'd be without your videos Thank you so much for your hard work!
Thank you for the kind words! Glad you enjoy them!
RODE M5’s in stereo cross pattern: Great natural stereo sound but also clear in mono (narration) if the stereo tracks are consolidated and centered. I’ve noticed most content creators seem to lack knowledge on how sound works and have little DAW experience. I would never spend +$200 on a microphone for field recording because after proper EQ and compression, you will be surprised how technique wins every time, regardless of the mic design. I’m referring to strictly field recording though.
I'm glad you started off with the disclaimer about this being a test to your specs because the right mic is so specific to each individual need. Great video but unsurprised that the 416 came out on top. It's been The King of shotguns for over 30 years now - and for very good reason. Enjoy it!
Ya man. I've had the MKH-416 for a few years. I basically never need to EQ anything and is well-suited to almost any situation. You can't do better for an all 'rounder than the MKH-416.
that lamp in the background with the shadow is sooo good! great video!
a HUGE help! you've helped me so much with my set up and I'm thinking of getting that NTG5, love the sensitivity, especially for ASMR. Thank you!
The NTG5 actually has the most rejection as well as sensitivity 😱
Comparing the level at the fron vs the side and rear you get a much higher dB decrease than all the rest. You can see the results below. I feel like knowing this it might have ranked much higher. Overall the top 4 here are also the obvious top 4 when looking at your tests.
Side Rejection from front in dB
Rode ntg5 24.4
Azden SGM-3500L 20.5
Sennheiser MKH 416 18.9
Rode ntg3b 17.7
Deity S-Mic 2 17.4
Azden SFM-3500 17.2
Rode NTG8 14
Sennheiser MKE 600 12.2
Deity S-Mic 2s 9
Rode NTG4+ 8.6
Rode NT5 4.5
Octava MK-012 4.4
Back rejection from front in dB
Rode ntg5 25
Sennheiser MKH 416 17.9
Rode ntg3b 17.8
Azden SGM-3500L 17
Azden SFM-3500 16
Rode NTG8 15.7
Sennheiser MKE 600 13.9
Rode NTG4+ 12.5
Rode NT5 10.9
Deity S-Mic 2 7.2
Octava MK-012 6.9
Deity S-Mic 2s 3.2
I agree with this logic, you really have to take in their sensitivity into consideration in understanding how much they are actually rejecting. If a mic is 10 db lower in sensitivity clearly it should naturally be rejecting 10 db less but will you have had to turn it up anyway by 10 db to get it at the same level?
I really like the exposure of your videos. especially in the last few months. great quality.
I bought the NTG4+ a while ago based on TH-camrs recommendations, but I just didn’t like it. As you concluded it’s not very sensitive. Ended up getting the Deity s-mic 2 instead and it’s much better
I love my MKE 600, glad to see it ranked well. Highly recommend picking up a used one on eBay.
MKE 600 is good, but not for indoor. Great for the price for outside.
Like you, I’m pleased with the MKE 600. I picked up a couple of used ones on eBay. I run each of them through its own DBX 286S. Also use a dbx 231S for equalization.
also interesting about the SENNHEISER MKE600 is, that it can be used both ways: phantom powered, or with an internal battery.
Been waiting for this thumbnail ever since your teaser video a couple weeks ago on Instagram! So solid 😍
Love the a-roll lighting. Kinda film noir style. Suggestion: start adding a quick wide behind the scenes shot at the very end of each video to show your lighting setup and camera positioning
FINALLY. I've been hoping you do an updated mic video.
oliur here ????
A fair assessment given your requirements. Well presented. Enjoyable and informative, thank you.
The quality of this video is just stupid good! Very good stuff!
I bought a used 416 a couple of years ago and it makes me genuinely happy to use it because of the quality it produces.
I love how thorough your tests are and making sure there's a constant. We're looking to upgrade our fleet and you really answered that question. Your work in this video just got you a like, comment, and subscriber.
Oh man. I wish you'd done this 9 months ago. I ended up buying a Rode NTG2. It's great, but I'd have loved to really see this comparison before I'd bought. Great job Caleb!
Great comparison Caleb. The 416 seems to be a classic for decades. Thus I am wondering how the 80x0 Sennheisers which were engineered just a couple of years ago stack up against it.
I had a matched pair of Rode NT5's for years that I absolutely loved. My big problem with them was the lack of a switchable pad on the mic itself. They were absolutely amazing to use as overheads on drums for genres like Jazz where you don't necessarily want to close-mic the toms. They were just too sensitive for my liking on instruments. All they needed was a built in pad to make them perfect.
Sennheiser MK 8050 cuts well with the MKH 416 if you need one for exclusively indoors
I use my 416 as a snare drum overhead. I do not close like any of my drums. The 416 runs through one of three different AI assisted gates like the Oxford Drum Gate. The rear and side rejection coupled with the low end proximity effect is a pleasant surprise while the using the 416 for drums. The microphone emulation version of the 416 is my other main overhead. My Townsend digital microphone sits just above my head and serves as the Tom and kick microphone. Again using the Oxford drum gate to dampen down and diminish the high end. The 416 emulation version in the universal audio software sounds unbelievable.
Thank you for this a lot! We need a break from these recent crazy camera releases and refresh our concern on audio department! Great video i really need this!
We’ve been needing this for SO LONG! You’re the best person to do it, 100% killed it! I’m curious...a lot of audio guys I work with on sets swear by the Schoeps microphones for any audio, both on set and in an interview setting. Any reason why those didn’t make the lineup?
WAAAAY too expensive. $2600? No thank you.
I'm not surprised by the results. I absolutely adore my 416.
**Very** thorough! This is a service to the community!
Thanks for including the vocal "clarity" snippets: it allowed me to make my own subjective judgement. :)
I think your tests are excellent at exposing the issue of "best" in many areas. It's really about the "best tool for the job" as one can see the different strengths and weaknesses of each.
It would be interesting to extend your tests, using the same mics, for different use cases. Examples might be, indoor dialog, on camera, outdoor dialog, outdoor reach. This is very much why a good sound person often has a "tool kit" of microphones so they can pull out the right one for the environment. To make it even more fun, after you do the tests and commentary, perhaps have Curtis Judd provide his own as well showing how two sets of ears might evaluate the same test results.
Good Day. This video is very interesting to watch and some good mic comparisons. One note I would like to add and this is coming from a sound engineers perspective so don't take it too harshly. The sensitivity section for me if you want to improve this test should rather be replaced with the SNR or signal to noise ratio. This is more of a testament to the mics than sensitivity. there are loads of tutorials on how to measure this and it will also equalize all the mic tests for you so that it can be standardized metrics to measure.
This video was so helpful and well laid out, many thanks and kudos, the chapter separations and the charts at the end of each really made it super effective.
I have the Sennheiser ME66 and I believe it’s quite similar to the MKE600, I couldn’t be more happier considering it kicks around used for about 150-200. Great comparisons!
I'll have to check that one out too!
Awesome comparison tests between so many mics these kind of videos are so helpful 💚
Very well performed test: compliments! Love the Sennheiser as wel. Bought the NTG3 because of the price difference. But your test made me rethink. Thanks again! Very well done.
I love my Rode NTG3, but I use it for exterior work. I use the AT4053b inside. Wonderful mic, and not expensive!
Would the deltas between dB measurements from the front, and dB measurements of sides and rear be a better measure than just comparing each mic's side rejection and rear rejection to get an overall sense of how each mic might handle rejection? Loved the side by side testing - very helpful!
I was about to post a comment saying the same thing. If the mic has “bad“ sensitivity, it sill obviously reject more noise than the ones with “good”.
The best set designs on TH-cam! 👌
I'll have to watch the first minutes again coz that's all I was thinking about.
As an FYI, there's a huge room node in your opening scene around 125hz. If you put a 31band EQ and notch out 125hz by about 3-6dB, that'll clean up that room resonance. It sounds like a reflected frequency.
One metric I wish you covered was distance. Rejection is great (I needed to know this too), but I've seen folks unhappy with the budget options because when you move just slightly away from the mic the tonality changes.
Another reason I love the NTG3. Very forgiving mic. Pics up two voices in a two person set up very well.
Definitely want the on camera video version of this asap.
Thank you!! I'm a newbie and I hate how my voice sounds super sharp and crispy. My S and F are awful since have a lisp. Really interested in the Røde NTG3B. Such a warm boomy storytelling sound
You should try a Sontronics STC-1 that stands very well beside the Oktava MK-012. In terms of sensitivity, adding an inline mic preamp like the Tritonaudio Fethead Phantom (that adds almost 20dB to a condenser mic) could be a great choice in order to keep modularity in your mic toolbox. A mic with 3 capsules (omni, cardioid, hyper cardioid) and 2 different levels of sensitivity, can cover 90% of situations. I'm not a big fan of mics with interference tubes (aka directional mic) because they often sound "boxy". Except for the Senn. 416, a great performer without any doubt. If you can, try the Schoeps CMIT-5U as a reference mic. Final question: did you mention HOW did you captured these audio tests? I mean the quality of preamps of any digital recorder can really turn a good mic into a bad one. Thanks for your effort.
Thank you! I just ordered the Azden SGM 3500L.
Very cool video. Not to be the math nerd police, but I noticed the NT5 should have had 22 points instead of 15 at the end. I knew something was off when the NT5 got 12 points for sound quality and somehow only 15 overall so I went back to double check.
Sir, you are on your level at creating this hyper-relatable videos for people who like to create content/film etc. At the top.
Just came here to say that the thumbnail is really cool.👏
Thank you!!!
Thumbnail be cool.
Hey nice video as always!
For indoor recording you should have probably tested more small diaphragm mics with either hyper or super cardioid pattern like the Audix scx1-hc or the Audio Technica at4053b.
But I guess you can never go wrong with the 416 ;)
I'm surprised he was looking at shotgun mics for indoor use. Caleb, what were you thinking???
I purchased my AT4053b used, and my oh my, I immediately fell in love with the sound. No worry about room reflection problems.
I first bought a Sennheiser ME66, and maybe I got a bad version (used) but I hated that mic!
Love your lighting in the video - especially with the use of the cookie window simulation.
Just here to say thank you. You've really provided more insights on which mic I should buy based on my needs.
I wish Audio tecknica was on the list as well. And better and more natrual speaker would used used for sound quality and outdoor test to , to see power of long guns .
Hi mate, excellent video - thanks for making it. Don’t know if you’re aware of the SE Electronics SE8 - which I bought earlier this year to boom over dialogue and works AMAZING. It is super sensitive, extremely low noise (for pencil condenser) and has a nice flat curve that delivers a rich sound even at boom distance. I looked at the RODE M5, RODE NT5 and other mics too and found the SE8 to be the best. Thanks again for the terrific content you create. Cheers.
Great job Caleb, love these kinds of comparison videos with a lot of different options!
Just a thought from someone from an audio background: the fact that the NT5 and the Oktava have wider polar patterns probably plays into their hands in the sound quality test. A cardioid polar pattern microphone in a space with great acoustics is probably a lot better for natural-sounding dialogue over any shotgun mic. That being said, those same cardioid mics probably would be much worse if recorded in an echo-y space, where the shotgun mics would in turn do a lot better since they generally reject much more room echo. So for anyone looking to record clear sound, a wider polar pattern is probably not going to cut it if you are not able to control the space well enough.
You made this real easy for me. I'll buy them all!
Buy it. Store it.
@@dslrvideoshooter motto
Just a friendly reminder that if what you care about is not having hiss in your recordings, you shouldn't just worry about the sensitivity: the SNR/EIN spec for the mic is often the more important spec, assuming you're using reasonably good preamps. If you're using crappy in-camera preamps, sensitivity might be important to prevent hiss.
These are all xlr mics.
All require phantom power. Which cannot be provided by most DSLRs or mirrorless cameras. So we can rule that out.
Condensers: the noise that you hear is most likely to be the self noise. The lower the self noise of a particular mic, the cleaner it will be. Because condensers do not require as much gain as dynamics (for a studio setup like this, even a Focusrite Scarlett Solo which costs about 120 bux can provide more than enough gain required to any of the mics). So your point is absolutely correct
I love to see the focus on audio! Not nearly enough of this going around on the popular TH-cam video gear channels. Great job as always, too, clean, organized, thorough, to the point - I would expect nothing less. That said, please let's see a comp next of real, professional, serious microphones without all these youtuber hype microphones from rode and deity thrown in. I'm talking Sennheiser MKH 50, MKH 60, MKH 8050 and 8060, Sanken CS3-E, Neumann KMR-81, DPA 4017, Schoeps CMIT5U, and Schoeps CMC641. Those are all serious microphones used commonly in professional settings! It would be very interesting to see someone like you who is so proficient at making these types of videos take it to that level - if you pulled it off, there really wouldn't be much of anything else comparable on mics like those compared all together anywhere else
gave you a thumbs up. one of the few youtube reviewers who actually gave us your opinions on the various mics you reviewed. a whole majority of the youtube reviewers took the easy way out and just ask the viewers to form their own opinions. sheesh, what's the point of a review if the reviewer ask viewers for their opinions. they always give the lame excuse that it all depends on their voices. True , but they know their voice best and should just form an opinion on which mic suits THEIR voice best.
Love your videos and really appreciate the time you’ve put into this, but I’m left scratching my head at how a cheap Bluetooth speaker with a completely non-natural response curve, placed directly in front of a shotgun mic is any indication of audio quality. I get that you’re trying to standardize but you would have been better off booming these overhead and recording yourself even if there were slight variations in the takes because then we’d be able to see what they sounded like on an actual human voice. Obviously, the best methodology would be to boom all of them overhead at once to record, but then you’d need 12 inputs on your interface. I feel like you set out to validate your choice of the MKH 416 which, why wouldn’t you, it’s a legendary microphone and sounds great on your voice. Glad you found your mic but would love to see how these microphones compare with actual dialogue.
MKBHD getting free advertisement through his merchandised T-Shirt.
yep ..i was looking for this comment
Great comparison. I love the Oktava for its richness of sound and the clear harmonic content that it can reproduce. Which capsule did you use? I’m guessing, cardioid. I choose whichever capsule might reject most in the room I’m in .... a bit like having 3 mics!
Thanks! I used the cardioid.
Didn't watch when you originally posted but shopping for a mic now. Thanks for this. You're always on point. Happy new year!