Jon Gilbert Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 On the verge of buying one of these myself, are there any downsides? They look to tick most of the boxes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus Wedin Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 The off axis sound is smoother compared to the 416, it has the same (or greater) "reach" of the 416 but less harsh in the mid range and seems to have very low self noise. My first listening is all the benefits of a 416 but in a smoother more grown up package! So its a bit like the reach of an 416 with the of-axis and self noise of a mkh 60, in a smaller package? I'm also interested how it sounds indoors. When I do run-and-gun there is no time to change mic going form indoors to outdoors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Toline Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 Eric, do you only use mkh50 outdoors? I can see how the darker MKH50 would have sounded bit better on that voice. I use my 50 in every situation that I can. If I can't then I go to my Neumann 81i. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I love my MKH60 and MKH50, a lot, but someday I will try the 8000 series. And someday I'll get high wind protection for the 50 and try it outdoors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I love reading this thread but I am struck by the fact that I have almost no personal experience with most of the microphones being discussed in this Sennheiser-centric topic. With the exception of the 416, which I did use a lot in the beginning of my career (but have not used one in the last 30 years), I don't use any of these microphones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Toline Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I love my MKH60 and MKH50, a lot, but someday I will try the 8000 series. And someday I'll get high wind protection for the 50 and try it outdoors. Get the Rycote Baby Ball Gag & the furry cover for it for the 50. About $200 for the set. In fact I keep the BBG on my 50 all the time. Looks like this Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnskog Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 Just purchased the 8060 myself. After owning the sanken cs3e for a couple years, I worked on a show with a mixer who used exclusively 416s. After ABing them, I liked how the sennheiser did a better job of bringing out the dialog specific frequencies vs the cs3. I also liked how the 416 mixed with the lavs. So after that, I sold my cs3 and bought an 8060. Some might say that the Sennheiser sounds "harsh," but once that dialog is played through crap tv speakers or even larger surround speakers, the dialog remains crisp and clear in the mix! That's my 2 cents! I originally purchased a cs3e based on the suggestions of mixers I had spoken to up to that point. After using my ears, the 8060 made more sense to me. I considered Schoeps CMIT, but I was concerned that $2200 was too much to spend on a mic that might not work on a humid day. I love my 8060! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Visser Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 I purchased an 8060 and should be receiving it shortly. I leave for a doc shoot in Ecuador on Wednesday. I wanted something that sounded good for exteriors, interiors, basically everywhere for a fast moving fluid shoot where I couldn't bring a lot of gear with me and don't have much time to change rigs as there are no real "setups". I also like the compact form factor of this mic as we have to scramble through doorways of a field medical mission into operating rooms and will be visiting the locals' homes. Of course I'm bringing a backup, but will certainly be a true trial by fire of this new mic. Will be both in cities and the humid Amazon, so in my mind it was never a question of Sennheiser or other brand, just came down to which Sennheiser. For this job I'm going to use a softie setup, but will explore a WS-1 or 2 setup for film use when I return. If I like the 8060, may consider the 8070 too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 So its a bit like the reach of an 416 with the of-axis and self noise of a mkh 60, in a smaller package? Exactly . I'm also interested how it sounds indoors. When I do run-and-gun there is no time to change mic going form indoors to outdoors. Very good to my ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 Will be both in cities and the humid Amazon, so in my mind it was never a question of Sennheiser or other brand, just came down to which Sennheiser. Tom, I feel exactly the same. I got my mkh8060 after a 2 minutes test at NAB and just because I have used MKH forever. It will be very interesting to read about your experience with the 8060 when you come back. Maybe it should get published in the Sound and Picture as well. (: I barely see articles where people use newer mics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dominiquegreffard Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 So wich of these mic would you guys use in a very reflective indoor situation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan chiles Posted January 30, 2012 Report Share Posted January 30, 2012 for very reflective interiors like bathrooms I would go hyper cardioid or straight cardioid and stay away from anything with an interference tube. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
does Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 I used both microphones on a series I shot last year. I have compared extensively the MHH50 and the MKH 8050. At a certain point I even used one of each for a car dialogue. What struck me the most is that the MKH 50 has a richer, warmer sound than the smaller MKH 8050. When I can choose, I will always go for the MKH 50. On the other hand, the 8050 is , because of it's size, a perfect mic for hiding behind a prop or a table-end. It's mostly for those situations that it was used. When we had a cell-phone conversation in a Porche Carrera, the 8050 came very handy, again because of it's size. (it's a very small car) Greetings, Miguel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benr Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Huh, I havent considered the MKH-50... How would it compare to an AT4053B for indoor booming? At $1200 would it be a good upgrade from the AT4053B until I have the funds to pick up a CMC6/41? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan chiles Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Some people like the MKH50 better than the Schoeps, its a matter of taste, I love them both. I dont know the AT mic but I know you cant go wrong with an MKH50. Still hoping to hear reports on how the 8060 works on interiors, I am looking at this and the Sanken CS1e as a lightweight shoot anywhere documentary mic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Pert Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Since this has turned into a bit of a discussion on the whole Sennheiser line rather than just the 8060... I love the sound of Sennheiser. I should preface this by saying that I don't often do run and gun work but mostly low budget features and shorts where I have a boom-op when I mix, or I am booming for another mixer. I own a MKH30, MKH40, MKH50, and a MKH416. The sound of the MKH50 is my preference as long as you have the frame line to get it close enough. I love the sound of the 50 compared to the 8050. As others have noted it has a much richer and warmer sound. The 8050 sounds thin and slightly harsh to my ears in comparison. The 50 sounds amazing 1-2 ft away. It can really draw out whispers and has a very present and pleasant sound. It can even do well at 4 ft away depending on how loud the dialogue is. The 40 and 30 I use in a M/S setup, and sometimes bring out the 40 for dialogue when the situation calls for it. I also fell in love with Schoeps and have a CCM4/CCM8 M/S rig. I'd eventually like to add a CCM41 and a CMIT to my kit, I think I would use both over the MKH50 in certain situations. When I boom I work with a MKH8070 often (on those wide and super-wide shots) which is a great sounding long distance shotgun. I'd love to add a MKH8060 to my setup after hearing it, but have never worked with it - only had a brief listening. Whenever the shot allows us to get it close enough I reach for my MKH50. It sounds great on all kind of voices. I also have a Rycote Kit for it too and like to use it outdoors when the shot allows for it. I like how it doesn't emphasize footsteps on those shots on the move like the 416 tends to do. Indoors I use an Invision mount and try to use the supplied Senn windscreen, if the plosives are bad I'll slap on a Rycote softie. For run and gun work the 8060 may be a good choice as others have mentioned. When I run and gun, I don't own a 8060 so I mostly use my 416 but carry my 50 in the bag and swap it when needed (especially if you head indoors). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Pert Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Oh yeah and I don't like the sound of the MKH60. Forgot to mention that... Just sounds unnatural to my ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg sextro Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Gonna rewrite my post as bpert slipped in some good info as I was typing... I would be surprised that the mkh 50/60/70 don't more or less sound similar...but then I don't have extensive experience with any of them. Is the 8060 supposed to replace the 60 altogether? I'm interested in adding a new mic to my kit and would love to hear some opinions about the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Sjostrom Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Another vote for mkh50. Although I just love schoeps for anything, the mkh50 should be as regular as the 416. It's good in every situation. The only place I wouldn't use it is outdoors in noisy environments, that's where the cmit excels. Booming a low rumble male voice with an mkh50 is pure love on the ears. Mmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadoStefanov Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 I have not heard the MKH8050 or the MKH40. I own mkh8060 and a few mkh8040s. If I remember correctly Glen Trew was saying that the mkh50 and the mkh8050 sound very close. Might be wrong. Glen should jump in here. Oh and Bpert, to my ears the MKH60 sounds more natural and forgiving of axis then MKH416. I would love to get a CMIT5 if schoeps manage to make it smaller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
does Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Forgot to mention, the MKH50 has a low-cut and a -10 attenuator switch. Never used a 8060, so I can't comment on that mic. The cmit is indeed a wonderful mic. Did a travel documentary with that mic on the boom. Even hectic scenes on an arab market where everybody was talking and yelling, could be perfectly captured. The post guys were very pleased with the fact that there was no coloration. When moving towards a person that suddenly starts speaking, they simply could push the fader up to compensate for the first off-axis words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus Wedin Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Oh yeah and I don't like the sound of the MKH60. Forgot to mention that... Just sounds unnatural to my ears. Well, to each his own I guess. I find the 416s coloration of Off-axis sound quite annoying. I much prefer the smother, cleaner off-axis sound of the Mkh 60. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ontariosound Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 As an owner and heavy user of a dozen MKHs I again state my lack of love for the 8060. Noisier than the 60, not useable without the MZF filter (poorly designed and overpriced filter). May as well use the 416. Is there a reason that the 60 is still $500 more expensive ? BTW the tiny size and feather weight of the 8050 trumps any slight sonic richness that the 50 has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Toline Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Gonna rewrite my post as bpert slipped in some good info as I was typing... I would be surprised that the mkh 50/60/70 don't more or less sound similar...but then I don't have extensive experience with any of them. Is the 8060 supposed to replace the 60 altogether? I'm interested in adding a new mic to my kit and would love to hear some opinions about the two. I say from experience of using the Senn triplets on a 10 month soap that it was very easy to get the 50 & the 70 to match. OTOH I could never get either to match with the 60 or the other way around if that makes any sense. The 60 always seemed to have (if you'll pardon the expression) a floppy bottom regardless of how much eq I dialed in or out to try to correct the problem. I have no experience with any of the 80xx mics from Sennheiser. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg sextro Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Excellent info - thanks Eric. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.