Jump to content

Has anyone used an Oktava MK012??


tvaudioman

Recommended Posts

I have the MK012's and they are ok for drum overheads and the like but not so great on dialog. I went through a number of the Russian mics to find a pair that sounded close. The Audix has more reach, sounds good on dialog with less gain, is more uniform from mic to mic and is my go to for uncertain int situations. Obviously, cmc641 is the king but also needs to be treated as royalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have four of the Oktava MK012s, with cardioid capsules. All four mics were hand-selected by me to match. All four of the preamps have been modified for improved highs and transients. I also have some super-cardioid capsules for them. I find that the super-cardioid capsules have a little less highs than the cardioids (which is borne out by Oktava's published response curves).

The Oktavas, with a cardioid capsule, sound surprisingly close to a Schoeps under controlled conditions. However, on a typical location, putting both up and comparing, I find that an Oktava doesn't come close to a Schoeps. I've used them together on a couple of occasions -- once in a room with tight acoustics and once in a more echo-prone space -- and I've been disappointed by the Oktavas both times.

Why the disparity between studio tests and actual location use? I imagine a lot of it has to do with the stellar off-axis response smoothness of the Schoeps.

My conclusion about the Oktavas is : They are an excellent mic for studio use and, for music recording, will hold their own against much higher priced, big-name mics. As a dialog mic for location work, they don't come close to the better mics available.

I do, however, keep a couple of Oktavas in my location kit as "stunt doubles" for my Schoeps (although I seldom break them out).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Philip, I simply meant that the schoeps needs to be more properly cared for. I wouldn't let mine get wet, dropped, abused, insulted or left unattended (just like a royal), the consequences might be too harsh. I don't worry about the Audix and I don't use the mk012 for dialog just as backups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Philip, I simply meant that the schoeps needs to be more properly cared for. I wouldn't let mine get wet, dropped, abused, insulted or left unattended (just like a royal), the consequences might be too harsh. I don't worry about the Audix and I don't use the mk012 for dialog just as backups.

I understand that's what you mean and while I don't advise abusing Schoeps they are in fact less fragile than a mic like an Oktava.

philp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would anyone recommend the oktavas for SFX recording? I'm always tempted to buy a matched set from sound room with all capsule types so I can experiment with spaced omnis, ortf, ab and other fun stereo techniques.

But maybe their self noise makes them a bad candidate for this? I suppose it depends on what you're recording!

Any thoughts on Oktava for SFX?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

After a fair bit of use I also think (as mentioned before) cost/ quality its decent enough, 'you get what you pay for etc...'.  There's a definite place for a mic like this in the bag for risky/ messy mic damaging set ups.  I think most would agree not to get it on the cheap instead of a Schoeps etc... (I have an MKH 50) but in addition to I have certainly found a use for it.

 

I definitely get what people have mentioned about 'range issues' - in simple terms If you get right up lips close to the mic it of course gets very hot, but only a very slight move back and it takes a big jump to being quite weak - not in a way I'd put down to a standard proximity effect. With all this in mind, used it on a shouty scene once while keeping some distance, did the job quite well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
I've just got my lovely looking stereo matched pair through the post! :)
 
I am now sending them back.
 
They were bought through the official Oktava site and I have checked all the possible signs as to whether they are fakes. They are supposedly genuine.
 
They sound lush and are great for indoor use I don't think anyone can deny and for the price ARE value for money in context. But externally, even using two different varieties of windshields by Rycote they are rendered completely unusable by anything more than the slightest wind. Waving a hand gently near them kicks up a low end noise even Skrillex would be proud of. Their handling noise is through the roof and without an entirely enclosed room with a significantly more expensive shock mount than the mic themselves they are frankly unusable. There's always a lot to be said for a practiced and skilled boom arm, but there are so many options at this price point, these are not the mics for location sound. Might I add that the official Oktava mounts are strung so tightly that they offer next to no shock resistance. Rycote lyres, their betters or don't bother.
 
 
I'd argue they are not suitable for location sound in or outdoors without significant windshielding, an ant sneeze would create an unusable low end rumble on these mics.
 
Let's kill the myth people. It's been a lovely thought that such a cheap mic is suitable and option for our profession but as stated by many others, they have a place, it's in an enclosed well shockproofed studio that doesn't have any wind movement AT ALL.
 
Sorry for the downer on what is an otherwise great entry level STUDIO BASED microphone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Oktava 012 are infamous for wind/handling noise (amongst other well known 'issues'). If you're read anything at all prior to purchase, don't say you weren't warned.

"What is an otherwise great entry level STUDIO BASED microphone?"

> Sorry, there aren't any in that price range. Typically, the 012 is not a bad sounding mic for interiors though, in the right hands. The $600 AT4053 or Audix SCX-1 are the next least expensive of  'pro' quality. A pro quality shock mount and windscreen is still necessary no matter what mic one uses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.  That is true.  But it was extremely difficult to use the Oktava before the lo-cut module, and even with it, wind protection is still a major issue - even for interiors! (Not to mention the lo-cut filter increases the noise floor).  You just can not swing the boom quickly regardless of what windscreen you're using. 

 

You also have to get a decent shock mount.  The included "mount" is not suitable for our types of application.

 

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'd argue they are not suitable for location sound in or outdoors without significant windshielding, an ant sneeze would create an unusable low end rumble on these mics.
 
Let's kill the myth people. It's been a lovely thought that such a cheap mic is suitable and option for our profession but as stated by many others, they have a place, it's in an enclosed well shockproofed studio that doesn't have any wind movement AT ALL.
 
Sorry for the downer on what is an otherwise great entry level STUDIO BASED microphone.

 

 

Ok, let me kill your myth. I've used Oktavas on TV drama series for three years now, where quality production sound is a must. My main mic is a CMIT 5U for exteriors and some interiors, but in some rooms I'll take always go for the Oktava instead, because believe it or not, it sounds better. If it didn't work well for me, I'd have bought an MK41/CMC6 long ago. But I haven't. I myself rarely use a cardioid/hyper for exteriors but even there, if you can't deal with its wind/handling issues then you won't have much better results with an MKH8050 or even an MK41. You get what you pay for, so don't expect a 300 € mic to perform better than a Schoeps on a boom. But you can get good results if you try around a bit. Soundwise, like John write, I think it's comparable to using only Trams for your lavs and then trying out a DPA. You might not wanna go back after that. Same with an Oktava, it sounds great... until you put it next to an MK41.

 

My Oktava is in a Rycote Lyre suspension, with a standard foam on it and when lots of movement is required, I put a fake fur sock on top of the foam. Very little sound coloration, no more wind issues.

As for the rumble, I'll just say if you don't know how to engage a low cut filter on your mixer/recorder, maybe you should do some homework before "killing the myth".

 

Sorry for the downer, but the Oktava is the best bang for the buck mic for location sound I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a time and place to use the Oktavas. I haven't used mine as extensively on dramas as Christian has, but they do make killer plant mics just because of their size. I used a pair on a TV gig, the introduction of a new roller coaster, as ambient mics on the loading platform in baby ball gags hanging from roof joists. They are pretty swell as an add-on lectern mic in doc situations where you can't get a feed. I bought 4 of them many years ago to use doing car crashes at IIHS since they were so inexpensive. The client had been using dynamics and you couldn't really hear much but mic self-noise and then a thud. We could put Oktavas in the flying debris zone without worrying about replacement costs. Oddly, several dynamics had been struck and destroyed by flying headlight trim, bumpers and hunks of grille but in a couple of years I never lost an Oktava.

 

Incidentally, I purchased my mics long before Rycote made anything like the lyre mounts and Oktava pop screens and shock mounts just looked cheesy and were far too expensive. Beyer Dynamic WS101 pop screens work fine on them as do Rycote baby ball gags of the right size. I never had any trouble using Shure A53M donut mounts with them although at the price I paid for my multicapsule Oktava kits, the Shure shock mounts and Beyer pop screens ended up costing almost as much as the mics.

Best regards,

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its hard for me to believe that nobody here has mentioned that Michael Joly mods these and, in addition to the electronics upgrades, he beefs up the resistance to handling noise.  Its a $120 upgrade that makes this a much more usable mic than what some have concluded.

 

It was mentioned a few times above. A great mod and very much worth the small price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a pair of Oktava's for $99 from Guitar Center about 10 years ago [they had a sale] because people weren't familiar with them.I had to go thru about 20 of them to find 2 good ones. They have saved me as crash mics..but the dialogue before and after was great.Also,they were not so suseptible to moisture as my Schoeps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Joly Mods are available here:

 

http://www.oktavamod.com/

 

Michael Joly Engineering / OktavaMod
1336 Phinneys Lane
Hyannis, MA 02601
http://www.oktavamod.com/about
email: ContactMe@OktavaMod.com
 
Mr. Joly also sells hand-picked & tested Oktavas which I suspect will sound better than the random ones you might find at a Guitar Center.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've worked on location with several pro sound guys (I am not a sound guy) in the past year or so who used the Oktava over whatever other choices they had.  These were interior shoots with static subjects (talking to cam/interview type deals).  One sound guy mentioned he had some mod done (maybe the one mentioned above?) that brought purchase price up to $550 or so.  Think he mentioned the noise floor, so not the best for going straight into cam (i.e. use a mixer!).

 

As far as I know the best "low cost" (4-$700) that are continually recommended are AT4053, Audix, and to a lesser extent that Oktava and the one I have, the AKG SE300/CK93 (modular system).   AKG sounds ok to me, nothing amazing, but then again, nothing to compare to.  It was REALLY cheap though (under $400 for both pieces).  Should I have gone with another? Who knows. I don't use it that often and it works fine. What more can you ask for?  I've even used it outdoors even though it's a hyper, because in an A/B test with the only other boom-style mic I had at the time, the ME66, the AKG was a little quieter as far as picking up ambient outdoor-ness, even though ME66 is a shotgun pattern (I know there probably many ME66 haters out here but at the time I bought it it was THE low cost shotgun to get. That's why everyone seems to have one).   Also have an AT815b super ridiculous long shotgun that was gifted to me that I've used a few times, have not tried outdoors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have used Joly modified MK012's for the past four years and stand by them. They don't quite have the reach and picking up a super cardioid is on my list this year but they are absolutely wonderful microphones. Btw, the mic floor noise is pretty much eliminated with the mod but they tend to need a little extra gain in general, if you have a Nomad or Maxx no worries though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...