Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Profile Information

  • Location
  • About
    Sound Design, Trailer Music
  • Interested in Sound for Picture

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi Tyranor, sorry for the late reply. I eventually went with the MixPre 6. I ordered it to try it out and was also negotiating regarding a used 744t at the same time which I would have liked to directly compare with the Mixpre 6. However, that didn't work out in time so I just went with the MixPre 6. To be honest, for me the MixPre 6 has a lot of advantages over the 744t; size, weight, number of inputs, powering options, capability as usb interface, price and guarantee (if you aren't buying used that is) to name a few. If you are looking at other SD Recorders, this might be different though; but for me it was either a used 744t or the MixPre 6. As has been mentioned before, the default limiter settings are not really that great for capturing loud sounds; but because of the quality of the preamps, it's not too difficult to avoid hitting the limiter. For what it's worth, for FX recording I'm currently using a Sennheiser MKH 8060 (shotgun) and a Sennheiser MKH 30 + MKH 8050 (MS). The MKH 8060 is great for focussed/ directional mono recordings and the MS setup is a convenient and relatively small/ light solution for stereo fx recordings, if you don't mind the necessary post processing.
  2. Sorry for the confusion regarding the term. It's about the Rycote WS 10 Kit, at about 50% of the price.
  3. Hi everyone, I'm currently looking into buying a used MKH 8050 which I'm mainly buying to use for MS recording with a MKH 30 in a Rycote MS blimp. I could buy just the MKH 8050 or also get a dedicated used Rycote blimp for it (of course for additional cost). Getting the blimp later on will be more expensive; either because I will have to buy a new one instead of used or because of additional shipping costs. However, I'm not sure if I need a dedicated blimp for it, since it's main purpose will be MS recording; in case I want to just use the 8050, I could also just use it in the MS blimp. The only upside of a separate blimp seems to be the size/ weight, since the 8050 blimp will be a bit smaller/ lighter than the MS blimp (I will use this for fx recording; so I don't really think there is a downside to always recording the additional side-track anyway). Do most of you have a separate blimp for every mic/ mic-setup? From your experience, is it going to "bite me in the ass" later on, if I don't get the blimp? Thanks in advance!
  4. Hi Grant, thank you for your input; the recorder I'm currently using/ testing is a Sound Devices MixPre 6. I quickly recorded something and uploaded a raw/ unprocessed as well as a processed (compressed and louder) version of the recording; excuse the handling noise. I don't think there is anything wrong with my recorder or the mic and my posts here have probably made it sound worse than it actually is. I'm simply wondering if, since the 8060 has less self-noise than the 416 and a hotter output, there are any benefits of keeping the 416 over the 8060 - less self noise is always good if it doesn't come at the expense of something else. Yes, so right now I'm using the Sound Devices MixPre 6 and the MKH 416; I don't think the 416 is a bad mic at all. I'm only wondering if, assuming this would be possible, I could swap the 416 with the 8060 (for the price difference between the two mics), would I really be losing anything (because I would certainly have the advantage of the lower self-noise of the 8060, as you mentioned)?
  5. Yeah, that's possible. Here is a list of their gear with comments (it's from 2016 though) https://www.boomlibrary.com/blog/advent-day-18-2016/ Well, now I already have the 416. But I think I will try to exchange it for the 8060, because I think the lower self-noise is going to be more beneficial in the long run and I don't really see that many advantages of the 416 when compared to the 8060...the only thing I'm worried about is what thennanymoh mentioned above: I've not read about this elsewhere (and it also depends on what "really loud" means), but this could be an issue that the 416 probably doesn't have. However, this also sort of supports what Werner Althaus wrote. For a lot of loud and punchy stuff, maybe the 416 is better than the 8060 afterall; when recording outside, the higher self-noise of the 416 might not be an issue afterall, and for recording really quiet stuff or ambiences, probably neither the 416 or 8060 are really suited.
  6. Yes, I bought it new, but for a reduced price (roughly 300€ off), so I shouldn't loose too much money in case I try to sell it some day. But I can't give it back or trade it for an 8050, only the 8060 would be available for that (maybe). The 8050 seems to be quite different than both the 416 and the 8060 and could be an interesting addition or replacement in the future (or well, whenever a good deal comes up ). FWIW, the Boom Library guys also use the 416. ;) But I can definitely see how the 8050 is geat for Sound effects recoridng, especially with that frequency range.
  7. Thank you for that reply; my impression also has been that for loud, punchy and in-your-face stuff, the 416 is a very good choice; but I'm not sure if the 8060 would be maybe just as good, but with the additional bonus of lower self noise. For recording ambiences, a different (stereo/XY/MS/ORTF) setup with a pair of different microphones that have lower self noise will be better suited of course; although maybe the 416 could be used in a MS setup.
  8. Only listening to self-noise; the NT1A is known for its low self-noise (5.5 db(A) IIRC) and I wanted to know how that sounds compared the 416s 13 db(A) and how drastic the difference is Because sometimes the numbers can be misleading as there are other factors that might contribute to how noisy a mic sounds. To me it seemed that the majority of the noise that makes the 416 sound quite a bit noisier than the NT1A (as it also is on paper) is produced in the low-end. To be honest, in most cases it won't be anything that can't be cleaned up in post-processing, but getting the best/ cleanest recording in the first place is always desirable.
  9. Thanks for the interesting answers! as Mattias Larsen mentioned, the 416 seems to be a very popular choice among sound designers for sound effects gathering. There are plenty of sound effects libraries that were recorded with a 416 (although not necessarily only with a 416), so to me it never seemed to be an unusal choice to be honest. A few examples for sounds I'm recording: Hits/impacts (such as shutting a door, punching/ hitting a trashcan etc.), additional sounds such as screeches, falling rocks etc., but also some quieter and more textural sounds (dripping water/ dirt, lighting a match, …) ...so also sounds that might be better categorised as Foley. But they are all sounds that will be processed, mangled with and layered in a daw (sometimes with synthetic Elements) to create sound effects. A shotgun is nice for recording outside because it's easier to isolate one specific sound source; I wouldn't use the 416 to record ambiences or anything like that of course. I think that usually the self-noise of the 416 shouldn't be an issue when recording outside, since even if it's possible to get really close to the source, the surroundings will be picked up to a certain degree. But in case the 8060 is just a more modern/ improved version of the 416, that sounds very similar and does pretty much the same things just a bit better, then it would make sense to replace the 416 with the 8060. And I already own the 416, but I might have the option to exchange it with a 8060 without losing any money (except the additional cost for the 8060). And I agree that I will have to extend my microphone selection, but since they are rather similar, owning the 416 and the 8060 probably doesn't make a lot of sense.
  10. Hi everyone, I currently own/ use a Sennheiser MKH 416 for sound effects recording. Despite being a classic, proved and durable microphone, some might say that it's technology is outdated and that it's quite noisy compared to newer similar models - especially the MKH 8060, which is often considered as the successor of the 416. I've read a lot about the comparisons between those microphones, the pros and cons etc. (mostly related to dialogue recording) and I'm wondering if it would be worth to replace the 416 with the 8060 (in the sense that it's not possible to own both but the 416 could be returned and exchanged with the 8060 for the usual surcharge, as the 8060 is a bit more expensive than the 416). A lot of people seem to recommend getting the 8060 nowaydays instead of the 416, and owning both doesn't make a lot of sense in my case (I'm not a professional, so a backup mic is not vital; I'm usually recording with one microphone only). The main concern for me is the self-noise, as this has been bothering me the most...comparing the 416 with a NT1A really makes the self noise of the 416 very obvious (although this comparison could probably make a lot of mics sound bad regarding self noise). From what I've gathered, these seem to be some of the pros of the two micophones when directly compared: 8060: + Less self noise (11 db(A) instead of the 13db(A) of the 416) + Hotter output (combined with the lower self noise this could probably make a very noticeable difference) + Better roll-off/ off-axis + Smaller/ lighter + Better indoors 416: + Very durable, "bullet proof" (although maybe the 8060 is too?) + Better rejection/ directionality + Not as sensible to handling noise + Not as sensible to wind + Well-established/ proved Is there an obvious choice for sound effects recording? Am I missing some relevant differences between the two?
  11. Yes, unfortunately they didn't bring this function to the MixPre series; otherwise the MixPre 6 would probably be perfect. From what I've read so far the "Kashmir"-preamps seem to be indeed very good (so there maybe wouldn't be that much difference to the 7 series in that regard); in fact good enough so that things can be recorded relatively quiet and boosted afterwards without creating too much noise...so usually the limiters shouldn't have to be engaged anyway.
  12. I don't necessarily disagree with this sentiment; however, I also don't think that the 7 series is being replaced by the new MixPre series. I'm sure there are a lot of more modern/ newer options and alternatives out there for people who have been in this business several years and have used one of the 7 series Recorders, so they might switch to newer models (by other brands). But for someone like me, basically starting out and only looking at sound quality for a very specific application, it seems as if the best option still is to buy a used and proven recorder that has been used for this very specific application by a lot of people over several years; especially if those used recorders are available for the price of a MixPre 6 or 10, or F8n, which probably wouldn't be as suitable for what I want to do anyway. Regarding the limiters of the 7 series, I think the point is rather that people actually like making use of them for sound effects instead of trying to avoid them.
  13. I'm completely with you on that, however I'm not doing this professionally, I'm an amateur and at the moment this is "only" a hobby that may or may not lead to something different. I've been recording with handheld recorders mostly so far and just recently found a good deal on a MKH 416 and am now looking to buy my first proper recorder. And as you also mentioned, since I'm not very experienced, my skills (or lack thereof) will most likely be the bottle neck, not the recorder. However, I don't want to buy a cheap/ low-end unit that I will have to replace after a few months or a year; the cost of gradually improving equipment and the hassle of selling the old stuff is something I'm trying to avoid. By future proof I was mainly adressing the number of inputs, as I don't know if I ever want to use more than two microphones at the same time, then the 744 would at least give me the option to do that with something like an MP-1 - or am I missing something? But you are right that it's probably going to be either the 702 or the 744, as I've ruled the 788 out due to pricing and size, and unfortunately the MixPre 3/6 seems to have problematic limiter settings, that can't be changed. I've now seen some 702s and 744s offered in a very similar price range (lowest I've seen for both is around the price of a MixPre 6; ~ 1050 EUR). What would be a very good price for a used 702? Here is a limiter comparison of some Sound Devices recorders (unfprtuantely the new MixPre series is not included): https://www.sounddevices.com/tech-notes/788t-limiter-overview For anyone interested, I just found a comparison between the MixPre 6 and the 633 when recording loud sources and engaging the limiter that I think is showcasing the problem Peshawar mentioned. The difference is especially audible at the end with the recorded claps. The uploader apparently ended up selling the MixPre 6 due to this.
  14. Hi Glenn and Patrick, thank you for your recommendations, but unfortunately both recorders are not in my budget at the moment. I've only read good things about those recorders, so they would definitely be suitable.
  15. I just checked bblist and there is currently one for roughly the price of a MixPre 6. Most reviews and comparisons of the MixPre recorders I've seen were about speech/ dialogue, I guess that's also mainly what they are targeting with those recorders. The sound effects recordings that were done with the 7 series I've heard are great, including sounds with really loud transients. So for that application a 744t would definitely be great. However, it's been discontinued and of course is a bit clunkier and heavier than the MixPre 6 (which seems to be tiny ). Unfortunately I'm not located near Berlin, but thank your for the offer. Would've definitely liked to try it uot that way. Mainly the Sennheiser MKH 416 for now.
  • Create New...