While this comparison isn't "nature sound" it really illustrates what
I mean by the me66 sounding thin...
http://dvinfo.net/articles/audio/tanaka2.php
the 416 is definitely a step up.
I've checked out the mkh416 and decided to go with it. it's obviously
well used and looks a bit worn but still sounds very good.
cheers
Paul
On 19/10/2007, at 12:57 PM, Paul Jacobson wrote:
> sounds like it's worth investigating further in that case...
>
>
> On 19/10/2007, at 12:26 PM, umashankar wrote:
>
>> of course the 416 is an upgrade. it is a huge upgrade from the me66.
>
>
>
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|