Hi Paul
If I may can I point you at:
http://www.astd59.dsl.pipex.com/Nature%20III.html
This is a recording I made using two ME66's onto a Sony MZ-RH1, there is a =
link to part 2 of the recording as well. The mics were phantom powered by t=
he way, see note later.
The recording has not been eq'ed in any way, all I have done is topped and =
tailed it and added a bit of a fade in and out.
The ME66 in the UK seems to be universally the 'mic of choice' for news gat=
hering and single camera work where a directional mic is required. As such =
I think Sennheiser 'roll off' the bottom end as this is where microphones w=
ould be most vulnerable to wind noise and general 'urban' low frequency's c=
ausing overload and bumping. I find they respond well to adding some LF lif=
t in post production if needed. For the type of nature recordings I do I fi=
nd them quite good and they don't break the bank either, especially as they=
can be bought for about half price on e-bay often. Which is what I did and=
got Sennheiser to give them the once over for me.
Yes an MKH60 would be nice but my bank manager and more importantly the wif=
e would tend to disagree! :-))
I have found that the K6/ME66 combination gives the lowest self noise when =
phantom powered, when using the battery the self noise increases and its qu=
ality changes. But that said you can still get some excellent results when =
using battery power, and an MZ-RH1 and two K6/ME66's make for a very compac=
t recording kit when needed.
Phil
----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Jacobson <>
To:
Sent: Saturday, 20 October, 2007 12:11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Re: is mkh416 an upgrade from me66?
Thanks for summarising the specs. I notice the datasheet for the
me-66 shows the LF response rolls off from about 750Hz, whereas the
416 is flat down to 100Hz.
Any idea what impact this has on the overall self noise spec?
Anyway it sounds like it might be worth hanging on to the ME66 until
I can compare them side by side.
cheers
Paul
On 20/10/2007, at 4:32 AM, Walter Knapp wrote:
> As far as MKH416 vs ME66 vs MKH60, the specs:
>
> MKH416 - 25mV/Pa sensitivity - 13dBA self noise
>
> ME 66 - 50mV/Pa sensitivity - 10dBA self noise
>
> MKH60 - 40mV/Pa sensitivity - 6dBA self noise
>
> As you can see, the MKH416 specs are not as good as the other two and
> the MKH60 has the best specs, particularly if you count in it's
> frequency response curve, which is pretty flat compared to the
> ME66. In
> addition, the MKH416's polar patterns have a lot of irregularities in
> them compared to the other two. It really is a older generation mic.
__._,_..___
Messages | Files | Photos | Database | Members
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format =
to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity
3New Members
1New Files
Visit Your Group
Y! Messenger
Files to share?
Send up to 1GB of
files in an IM..
Yahoo! Groups
Get info and support
on Samsung HDTVs
and devices.
Best of Y! Groups
Discover groups
that are the best
of their class...
___________________________________________________________
Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http:=
//uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html
|