Basenji Boy
2008-06-04 01:48:46 UTC
I recently added a Sennheiser MKH-50 to complement my Sennheiser 60. I
wanted to graduate to a dedicated boom mic for interior dialog/
interviews and wanted to relegate the 60 for outdoor work. I just did
two days of interior interviews with the 50, and while I like it, I
don't love it.
I do a wide mix of "lifestyle" shows, long-form network and
independent docs, EPK, commercial spots shot on film or video, and
corporate marketing pieces. I've had an MKH-60 for over 15 years and
never had a single problem with it on any location I've been on, which
ranges from winters in Minneapolis at -15F to 100F sweltering
humidity in the Bahamas, so I appreciate the ruggedness and
reliablility of the Sennheiser MKH mics.
The MKH-50 does seem to have a scooped response with boosted bass and
treble. I do value the "pull" and intelligibility it has, but as
others have noted, the pull is chiefly derived from the bass response
of the mic. In real world of the locations I shoot in I am going to be
using at least the 50mHz on-mic cut if not more just to deal with AC
and other ambiance. I also don't see a need to record the very lower
freq's of my talent's voices. There's not much below 70Hz that I want
to record.
The intelligibility seems to come from the boosted treble response. It
doesn't sound particularly "natural" to me. There's a large range of
response in the midrange that seems to be missing. When I listen to my
tracks on a studio monitor I hear two seemingly separate signals: a
bassy track and a treble track of the same voice.There's not enough
middle range to please me. But, the editors have a clearly
intelligible track with definition and punch that cuts right through
the ambiance.
As I get older I think I'm yearning for the smooth midrange response
and warmth of the Scheops CMC641/Cut 1 and Neumann KMR81i. I've used a
Scheops less than a handful of times, but was quite impressed with its
"natural"-ness. What I heard with my own ears seemed to be the same
thing that the Scheops put on tape.
I also spent several months booming an 81i back in the day cutting my
teeth on a film project and loved this mic's response as well. I think
the realism of these mics is really calling to me in the sense of
bringing back the sound as my ears hear it.
I don't think I can quite swing an outright purchase of both a Scheops
and a Neumann right now, as I've just purchased a boat load of other
gear, but has anyone else been in this situation, using mics that are
real-world performers but seem to lack some of the natural sound and
warmth of other mics? What were your decisions?
wanted to graduate to a dedicated boom mic for interior dialog/
interviews and wanted to relegate the 60 for outdoor work. I just did
two days of interior interviews with the 50, and while I like it, I
don't love it.
I do a wide mix of "lifestyle" shows, long-form network and
independent docs, EPK, commercial spots shot on film or video, and
corporate marketing pieces. I've had an MKH-60 for over 15 years and
never had a single problem with it on any location I've been on, which
ranges from winters in Minneapolis at -15F to 100F sweltering
humidity in the Bahamas, so I appreciate the ruggedness and
reliablility of the Sennheiser MKH mics.
The MKH-50 does seem to have a scooped response with boosted bass and
treble. I do value the "pull" and intelligibility it has, but as
others have noted, the pull is chiefly derived from the bass response
of the mic. In real world of the locations I shoot in I am going to be
using at least the 50mHz on-mic cut if not more just to deal with AC
and other ambiance. I also don't see a need to record the very lower
freq's of my talent's voices. There's not much below 70Hz that I want
to record.
The intelligibility seems to come from the boosted treble response. It
doesn't sound particularly "natural" to me. There's a large range of
response in the midrange that seems to be missing. When I listen to my
tracks on a studio monitor I hear two seemingly separate signals: a
bassy track and a treble track of the same voice.There's not enough
middle range to please me. But, the editors have a clearly
intelligible track with definition and punch that cuts right through
the ambiance.
As I get older I think I'm yearning for the smooth midrange response
and warmth of the Scheops CMC641/Cut 1 and Neumann KMR81i. I've used a
Scheops less than a handful of times, but was quite impressed with its
"natural"-ness. What I heard with my own ears seemed to be the same
thing that the Scheops put on tape.
I also spent several months booming an 81i back in the day cutting my
teeth on a film project and loved this mic's response as well. I think
the realism of these mics is really calling to me in the sense of
bringing back the sound as my ears hear it.
I don't think I can quite swing an outright purchase of both a Scheops
and a Neumann right now, as I've just purchased a boat load of other
gear, but has anyone else been in this situation, using mics that are
real-world performers but seem to lack some of the natural sound and
warmth of other mics? What were your decisions?