Hi Syd--
I've used NT3's in numerous outdoors applications but not the NT4.
The specs suggest they're similar. Humidity: not unusually sensitive.
Toughness: excellent. Tone: Bright, but definitely strong below 80Hz
so I use a special cable with roll-off -6dB at 80Hz when using in
exterior locations. Inherent Noise: I feel better than the specs
suggest. I.E. in a pinch I used a NT3 as the center mic in M-S with
an AKG 414 (gained-up for distant toads) and I was shocked that NT3
only added a slight amount of noise above that of the AKG which is ~
12dB I think. The only real question I had with pondering the NT4 is
why does it cost so much more than two NT3's? If it's that much
better than 2-NT3's in quality, that would be terrific cuz at $160,
I've never used a better mic than the NT3. Let us know if you give
the NT4 a try!
Rob D.
= = =
>Syd Curtis wrote:
>>
>> Hello Naturerecordists,
>>
>> Anyone out there who has used the Rode NT4 Stereo Condenser mic., and can
>> comment on it - especially as to how it stands humidity, which is sometimes
>> a problem with otherwise excellent microphones?
>>
>> MusicLab in Brisbane are the most helpful commercial firm (of any sort of
>> business) that I've dealt with. In a couple of days they fixed my 36 yr-old
>> Uher recorder to satisfy my whim to record an Albert's Lyrebird in the same
>> place and with the same recorder and Uher mic where I made my first lyrebird
>> recording on 22.06.68. (Wish me luck for tomorrow morning!)
>>
>> And when I was collecting the Uher, MusicLab volunteered the advice that
>> the NT4 is an excellent mic, and modestly priced for such high quality.
>> With such a recommendation from MusicLab, I sit up and take notice.
>>
>> Be glad of any advice, especially with reference to the specifications
>> copied below, which I lack the technical knowledge to understand.
>
>I took a quick look at the specs and also looked at the equivalent
>Sennheiser mono Cardioids.
>
>The Sennheiser MKH is quieter and more sensitive by a fair amount. The
>ME is about the same mic noise levels, but still maintains a fair lead
>in sensitivity.
>
>It's worth noting that this mic will handle up to 143 dB, considerably
>louder than the Sennheisers. We don't ever have need of this sort of
>thing out nature recording as we are never close enough to see high
>sound levels. But it does point out something about the design
>expectations for this mic. It's designed for recording fairly loud
>sounds well, which is appropriate for it's intended studio usage.
>
>The mechanical design worries me just a little the thin stalks the two
>capsules are on constitute a weak point. Though if outside we will
>probably have this in a wind enclosure.
>
>As far as weather, I've seen nothing on that. It sure would be nice if
>manufacturers would include environmental tolerances in their specs.
>
>Good luck on your quest with the Uher.
>
>Walt
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|