MKH 416 with a MKH 50 would have been a more appropriate comparison - also similar in price. Both are very standard in the industry. AT 4053b is a good mic, but not the norm, by any means. Also, it suffers from more RF noise, especially if you aren’t using quad-star mic cables. Another thing to note: you state there is no discernible benefit to using the AT4053b vs the 416 (based on sonic quality), but if you need to record two people with one mic, you’ll be glad to have a hyper- or super-cardioid condenser vs the 416, as the is NO WAY you’ll have useable audio for a two person interview with the 416. Finally, as a professional sound engineer, let me share that I do hear a very discernible difference, mostly in the way the mics represent the space they are in. The AT4053b sounds like the source (your voice) and the reverb in the space are one. They sound like the mix represents the space you are in. The MKH 416 does better in some circumstances, but the reverb that is rendered on this mic does not sound natural. It sounds like a spring reverb, and sounds disconnected from your voice. If I were mixing these two with video, I would choose the AT4053b, since it would sound more like the space I was looking at (another reason why your test is flawed: without seeing you speaking in the space, there’s no way to decide which mic is most appropriate). We rarely choose a mic based on sound along. It’s always “which one sounds most appropriate to represent the space and the voice?” A mic can sound amazing but sound nothing like the space you are in, so it confuses the listener.
Interesting regarding room-voice connection, I’ve been using the universal audio c-suite plugin to remove noise in real time. I was going to add synthetic reverb but sounds like this isn’t the best way to go. If you are recording solo dialogue for live stream near a window with passing vehicles and occasional leaf blower at 90° angle, would that change your choice? Presumably the mkh 416 would do much better than the AT4053b at rejecting that noise, and I don’t have the option to delay the recording or re-record a live stream so at the mercy of whatever happens outside the window. I was impressed that I never heard comb filtering in the mkh 416 samples btw.
@@ramalamadd1All those sound like good options. Often, we speak about “ideal” options, but the reality of our space dictates what we can actually achieve. I use Izotope RX10 stuff for my dialogue repair, but we each use our own tools. I do find that noise reduction can sound very unnatural if used beyond simple noise floor leveling. As far as your hypothetical room setup, it would depend on what is behind/above you as you record. The reason a 416 can sound funky indoors is the comb filtering (as you mentioned in your reply). This creates a strange representation of the room sound. That said, if rejection is your highest priority, the 416 MIGHT be your best choice, but so would a high-quality lab mic (you may sacrifice sound quality for rejection potential). If dialogue quality is your top priority, then you might start looking at using acoustic strategies to control the sound of the room (absorbers and diffusers), then choose the best sounding mic. For example, a well placed comforter will be more effective at controlling outside noises than a 416 off-axis.
Great stuff! I love when those myths are debunked. Apparently you don't need to spend those extra bucks just because the pros say so. Save them for something that makes a real difference! You deserve many more views, and eventually you'll get 'em
Thanks Slavik! Very interesting. While I haven't tested my MKH-416 against many hypercardioid mics - I can say my seven year old 416 is a workhorse. Even if I have to do significant cleanup in Izotope RX7 (custom voice de-noise and/or de-reverb) the mic always delivers.
Jon, your using the 416 is what got me to re-think this whole assumption in the first place! Like many others, I've been saying the same thing about shotguns and indoor interviews for years without giving it another thought. But after your recommendation and hearing the audio in your interviews, I had to investigate and am so glad I did!
Thanks for the video! It's nice to hear comparisons being made in a wide variety of environments including less than ideal environments with lots of reflections. I am curious about your testing methodology. When you performed these tests, did you align the capsules instead of placing both mics the same distance away from your mouth? My understanding is that MKH 416's capsule is located around the center point of the mic, whereas AT4053B's capsule is located at its tip. Considering both the mic length and capsule location, AT4053B should have an advantage of being able to be placed much closer to the subject than MKH416. For this reason, I was expecting to hear fuller sound, with enhanced proximity effect on the AT4053B but it doesn't seem like that was the case here, which leads me to think that you may have aligned the capsules.
The mics were placed equal distance to me, so the capsule part of the Sennheiser was indeed slightly further away. And yet it still sounds really good, yea? BTW I just got a Sound Devices Mix-Pre 3 II with NoiseAssist and it's a total game changer for interviews where you can't shut off HVAC or hums or the inevitable lawn mower outside.
Is it nonsensical to get a 4053b for voiceover artists where the mic will never be more than 6 inches away from the actor? A huge number of voiceover people use the MKH416 but no mentions of the 4053b.
Thank you for taking the time to make this. I’ve been searching for a video like this for weeks to compare indoor vs. outdoor of the mkh 416
Glad it was helpful!
MKH 416 with a MKH 50 would have been a more appropriate comparison - also similar in price. Both are very standard in the industry.
AT 4053b is a good mic, but not the norm, by any means. Also, it suffers from more RF noise, especially if you aren’t using quad-star mic cables.
Another thing to note: you state there is no discernible benefit to using the AT4053b vs the 416 (based on sonic quality), but if you need to record two people with one mic, you’ll be glad to have a hyper- or super-cardioid condenser vs the 416, as the is NO WAY you’ll have useable audio for a two person interview with the 416.
Finally, as a professional sound engineer, let me share that I do hear a very discernible difference, mostly in the way the mics represent the space they are in. The AT4053b sounds like the source (your voice) and the reverb in the space are one. They sound like the mix represents the space you are in. The MKH 416 does better in some circumstances, but the reverb that is rendered on this mic does not sound natural. It sounds like a spring reverb, and sounds disconnected from your voice.
If I were mixing these two with video, I would choose the AT4053b, since it would sound more like the space I was looking at (another reason why your test is flawed: without seeing you speaking in the space, there’s no way to decide which mic is most appropriate).
We rarely choose a mic based on sound along. It’s always “which one sounds most appropriate to represent the space and the voice?” A mic can sound amazing but sound nothing like the space you are in, so it confuses the listener.
Interesting regarding room-voice connection, I’ve been using the universal audio c-suite plugin to remove noise in real time. I was going to add synthetic reverb but sounds like this isn’t the best way to go. If you are recording solo dialogue for live stream near a window with passing vehicles and occasional leaf blower at 90° angle, would that change your choice? Presumably the mkh 416 would do much better than the AT4053b at rejecting that noise, and I don’t have the option to delay the recording or re-record a live stream so at the mercy of whatever happens outside the window. I was impressed that I never heard comb filtering in the mkh 416 samples btw.
@@ramalamadd1All those sound like good options. Often, we speak about “ideal” options, but the reality of our space dictates what we can actually achieve.
I use Izotope RX10 stuff for my dialogue repair, but we each use our own tools. I do find that noise reduction can sound very unnatural if used beyond simple noise floor leveling.
As far as your hypothetical room setup, it would depend on what is behind/above you as you record. The reason a 416 can sound funky indoors is the comb filtering (as you mentioned in your reply). This creates a strange representation of the room sound. That said, if rejection is your highest priority, the 416 MIGHT be your best choice, but so would a high-quality lab mic (you may sacrifice sound quality for rejection potential). If dialogue quality is your top priority, then you might start looking at using acoustic strategies to control the sound of the room (absorbers and diffusers), then choose the best sounding mic.
For example, a well placed comforter will be more effective at controlling outside noises than a 416 off-axis.
@@J_HNP appreciate the insight very helpful!
Great stuff! I love when those myths are debunked. Apparently you don't need to spend those extra bucks just because the pros say so. Save them for something that makes a real difference!
You deserve many more views, and eventually you'll get 'em
Thanks Slavik! Very interesting. While I haven't tested my MKH-416 against many hypercardioid mics - I can say my seven year old 416 is a workhorse. Even if I have to do significant cleanup in Izotope RX7 (custom voice de-noise and/or de-reverb) the mic always delivers.
Jon, your using the 416 is what got me to re-think this whole assumption in the first place! Like many others, I've been saying the same thing about shotguns and indoor interviews for years without giving it another thought. But after your recommendation and hearing the audio in your interviews, I had to investigate and am so glad I did!
Thanks for the video! It's nice to hear comparisons being made in a wide variety of environments including less than ideal environments with lots of reflections. I am curious about your testing methodology. When you performed these tests, did you align the capsules instead of placing both mics the same distance away from your mouth?
My understanding is that MKH 416's capsule is located around the center point of the mic, whereas AT4053B's capsule is located at its tip. Considering both the mic length and capsule location, AT4053B should have an advantage of being able to be placed much closer to the subject than MKH416. For this reason, I was expecting to hear fuller sound, with enhanced proximity effect on the AT4053B but it doesn't seem like that was the case here, which leads me to think that you may have aligned the capsules.
The mics were placed equal distance to me, so the capsule part of the Sennheiser was indeed slightly further away. And yet it still sounds really good, yea? BTW I just got a Sound Devices Mix-Pre 3 II with NoiseAssist and it's a total game changer for interviews where you can't shut off HVAC or hums or the inevitable lawn mower outside.
Appreciate this analysis. Thank you!
Is it nonsensical to get a 4053b for voiceover artists where the mic will never be more than 6 inches away from the actor? A huge number of voiceover people use the MKH416 but no mentions of the 4053b.
If it’s that close I would get a pop filter, as the 4053b is more sensitive to splosives
great video! thank you