Posted by Toby on 02/14/06 10:23

"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3KidnVLXaYY9B23eRVn-pg@comcast.com...
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 20:10:04 -0500, Toby wrote
> (in article <43efdc13$0$69626$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>):
>
>>
>> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:QLKdnSMS0OaGwnLeRVn-qg@comcast.com...
>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 08:42:02 -0500, Toby wrote
>>> (in article <43ef3ad8$0$41511$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>):
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:grGdnVi8Wu8qn3PenZ2dnUVZ_tCdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 09:04:04 -0500, Toby wrote
>>>>> (in article <43edee8b$0$69614$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com>):
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <mv@movingvision.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:19tE0xMyRL7DFw6j@movingvision.demon.co.uk...
>>>>>>> In message <11up6l9boh80aff@corp.supernews.com>, Richard Crowley
>>>>>>> <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> writes
>>>>>>>> <mv@movingvision.co.uk> wrote ...
>>>>>>>>> Been making programmes for TV and all sorts for over twenty years
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> I've found the short shotgun Sennheiser such as the 416, K3 ME80
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> K6
>>>>>>>>> ME88 to be the most useful and broad spectrum mics ever used.
>>>>>>>>> Never
>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>> a problem using them indoors or any other environment, even for
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> most
>>>>>>>>> quality demanding broadcasters and quite frankly I quickly learned
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> to invest my professional integrity in what they might say over at
>>>>>>>>> r.a.m.p.s. Their World is far from definitive!!
>>>>>>>>> -- John Lubran
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, Mr. Lubran, we all respect you. It should make no
>>>>>>>> difference that the r.a.m.p.s people are listed in IMDB
>>>>>>>> as credited with hundreds of high-profile productions.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whatever Richard, whatever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been doing this for 20 years, and the ME-80s and 416s have
>>>>>> always
>>>>>> worked just fine. Maybe not the best of all possible worlds, but
>>>>>> they've
>>>>>> never let me down--it's always been good enough for TV, even some
>>>>>> fairly
>>>>>> high-class docos.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Toby
>>>>>
>>>>> For interiors?
>>>>
>>>> Inside and outside. Again, I stress that we are generally looking for
>>>> intelligibility, not world-class feature-film sound. There is often no
>>>> time
>>>> to switch between mics when following a subject during her/his daily
>>>> routine. We go with a general-purpose mic, and the 416 is usually what
>>>> we
>>>> use, although we used to go with the ME-80 + K3U power supply when the
>>>> cameras didn't have phantom powering.
>>>>
>>>> That has been the case with every network for whom I have worked --CNN,
>>>> CBS,
>>>> NBC, ABC, Reuters, BBC, ARD, ZDF, et al. Nobody bothers with
>>>> hypercardioids
>>>> in the conditions we work under.
>>>>
>>>> Toby
>>>
>>> Oh! News. That's different. That's not what we're talking about. News is
>>> run
>>> n gun survival mode. When you aren't jammed by your news situation and
>>> actually have time to set up properly, a hypercardioid for interiors
>>> (and
>>> by
>>> interiors I'm talking about office and residential spaces) a hyper is an
>>> audibly obvious winner.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>> This could be so, however I just finished some work for a very
>> high-budget
>> doco-drama where all the interior interviews were miked with a 416. The
>> crew
>> that came from Germany were loaded with equipment, but nobody thought it
>> necessary to pack along a hypercard. I'm also a musician, and I admit
>> that I
>> prefer recording on a Neumann U87 to a Shure SM-58, and I don't think
>> there
>> is any question that the 87 sounds better, but that doesn't mean that the
>> 58
>> won't give decent results, especially on a low budget.
>>
>> Toby
>>
>>
>
> Hey Toby,
>
> A Schoeps hyper (cmc641) is about the same price as a 416, so the U 87
> vs.
> SM58 anecdote doesn't really fit.
>
> "Nobody thought it necessary" could have been the producer's choice. Just
> because they're a crew from Germany doesn't mean they know a lot about
> mics.
> There are uninformed people in this business everywhere.
>
> It's not unusual for me to get questions like "Is that as good as a
> shotgun",
> couched in ways that I know really mean, "Why aren't you using a shotgun?"
> Or, "Shouldn't you use a Lav?" Well, no I shouldn't.
>
> Stay uninformed if you like, but do yourself a favor and try a Schoeps
> cmc641. You'll hear the difference between it and a 416.

Hi Ty,

I trust you that the Schoeps would give a better result in the situation,
and I sympathize with the predicament in which ignorant people look down
their nose on the better alternative. I simply want to point out you can get
adequate dialog with a shotgun in interior situations. These guys from
Germany are a top documentary crew, who regularly work on
multimillion-dollar productions. They know their stuff, and apparently the
416 worked fine for them for interior interviews, as they were carrying
enough equipment to choke a horse, and certainly could have carried an extra
mic if they had felt it necessary. The ZDF magazin is chock full of
equipment of every sort, and they brought everything they wanted over on the
plane. Again I am not questioning that the Schoeps might not have given a
superior result, I'm only pointing out that the 416 gave a completely
adequate result for a million dollar docu-drama by one of Germany's most
famous documentarists.

Toby

[Back to original message]