8050/8040 for reality/doco work?

[soundslikejustin]

I did some more testing over the weekend, before I give up on 8050 for run-and-gun type stuff (I do love the sound of the mics, btw, it's just I have found them to be problematic for anything other than sit-down interviews and I want a little more out of my mics than that...) and found the 'wind noise' the mic hears when moving it back and forth on the end of a pole might have more to do with the mount than the foam on the end.

My tests: listening straight from the 744t with 24dB/octave @ 80hz low cut. 50dB gain. MZF 8000 low cut set to off (-3dB @ 16hz), I also tested without the low cut module.

Mounted in the Rycote Extended Mono Ball Gag, with the Schoeps hollow foam on the end, waving the mic produced wind ruffle that peaked about -28.

Mounted in a Cinela OSIX 1 (designed for a Neumann), waving the mic still produced wind ruffle, but only just pipping -40db!

Handling noise was still around, but nowhere near as bad.

I've also found:

the snap-in clip holding the xlr (from the connbox) on the bottom of the Rycote mount accentuates handling noise. Any boom noise is transmitted into the cable, and any cable noise (I have a cabled boom, and the cables moving through the air is enough - see below) is transmitted into the mic.

If the connbox wires even come into the lightest contact, there will be a thunk, and they are lengthy enough that they rest on the rear windbasket, so wind noise caught by the basket is transmitted into the cable. You can loop the cable up a bit, but then they rest on themselves, and vertical movement causes them to tap into each other again.

Air moving across the lyres, windbasket or naked shockmount itself is enough vibration to be transmitted into the mic. The Cinela doesn't suffer from this as much as the wire hoops are very thin, and therefore don't 'catch' as much air..

The Schoeps teardrop is much better than the foam supplied with the mics, but using the cinela with the supplied foam is still better than using the rycote with the schoeps teardrop.

I'll be using the Cinela from now on, if I can get the z-8000 unit (designed for the mkh8000 with the XLR, not the MINIX-8000) I'll give that a go as well. This unit doesn't seem to recommend the use of the MZF-8000 filter though. Time for a phonecall, I think.

[ncsoundmixer]

I too have noticed that cinching my K-Tek poles' XLR cable in the Rycote Invision cable clip will introduce and accentuate handling noise rather than attenuate it. I find that allowing the cable to run "free" from the opening on the boom pole to the connection on the back of the mic helps to keep the mic in suspension on the lyre and moving freely.

I also make sure that the XLR cable in not twisted and is free from tension before I connect it to the microphone.

[Boomboom]

Anyone tried the 8050 with a SD 302 mixer and "tamed" the low end problem using the 80/180 filters ?

[Derek H]

If only Sennheiser would make a more boom pole oriented filter module I think these would get much more use on set. ..too bad Sennheiser doesn't seem to be listening too closely to our smaller market.

Even better would be a variation model with an attenuated low frequency response like Schoeps has available with their CCM series. Boy, can't wait for that product to never happen just like the 8030 figure 8...

[soundslikejustin]

Anyone tried the 8050 with a SD 302 mixer and "tamed" the low end problem using the 80/180 filters ?

Read above, used the 744t's even harder low cut and still didn't knock the handling noise out. The wind noise extends into the mids with the Rycote Extended Mono mount.

[Jaymz]

Boy, can't wait for that product to never happen just like the 8030 figure 8...

I know

[Tom Visser]

I've noticed an increased handling noise with my 8050 compared to other mics, but I certainly never thought in my mind that the 8050 was "unusable". I just adjusted for it and give boom ops a heads up to be a bit more gentle with their handling, and that seems fine. I will definitely be more keenly aware of the issue and try to do some more comparisons as I'm able too. I do have to say that I don't like the fact that the mic is so gain hungry compared to other mics, but fortunately my preamps are clean and able to handle it. I am quite disappointed by the fact that there is still no 8030 yet. When purchasing the 8050 (and my previously owned 8040's), it was with the assumption that there would eventually be an 8030 for M-S jobs... I'm looking to expand my mic collection some time in the future, and have been eying the 8070 and suppose the 8060 too, if it is better than my current short gun. I have also had my interest peaked by the Super CMIT. All of these mics support AES42, something I'd like to experiment more with. I guess it will come down to Super CMIT or 8070 for me... which is better in challenging situations, and the rest of my kit will fall in behind that choice... 8060 + 2 MZD8000 or Schoeps digital microphone preamp + capsules.

[Boomboom]

I asked just in case the filters were acting different between the 744 and the 302... I don't know since I've never tried the 744 (or 788 or 702 or...)

But that quite made me make an opinion. At that price point, you go with "proven stamped" stuff ...

Thanks

[soundslikejustin]

I've had a chat with the very nice people of Cinela. They recommended using an OSIX suspension (obviously), and a Schoeps LC-60u to cut off the bottom end, as the MZF8000 doesn't do enough, and few field mixers low cut can achieve 18db/octave below 60hz. If you need more to roll off proximity, you'd have to do it at the mixer. Now, if sennheiser could come out with something closer to the Cut1, they would own the market. Side by side with a friends CMC641, they sound very similar, but at 1/3 of the size, 1/5 the weight and 1/2 the price (new), the 8040's a nice option. The pattern is a bit better on the Schoeps and it has a small boost around the 4-8k region that the sennheiser doesn't, but apart from that (and the booming, untamed low end of the senn), it's tricky to tell them apart.

[Marc Wielage]

Any other suggestions? I could swap out the 416 for an alternate shotgun (CS3 or CMIT) but there isn't a weight saving in that. How do the other shotguns fare indoors compared to the 416? Or indeed the short shotguns?

Indoors, I think you're generally better off with a hyper or supercardioid, but it depends on the room. Opinions vary widely.

I'm not familiar with the 641 Reid. What kind of mic is it?

Schoeps CMC 6-series preamp with a MK41-series supercardioid capsule, sometimes euphemistically called a "Schoeps 641" for short:

http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/cmc6

http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/categories/Superniere

For microphones in this price range ($2000+), I would definitely "try before you buy." I love the Schoeps for indoor work, but there's lots of good mikes out there.

--Marc W.

[RadoStefanov]

Mounted in a Cinela OSIX 1 (designed for a Neumann), waving the mic still produced wind ruffle, but only just pipping -40db!

Handling noise was still around, but nowhere near as bad.

Can you snap a photo and share it here.I am curious to see how the MKH8000s look with the OSIX1.

Also how long is from the xlr connector to the end of the mount.

[soundslikejustin]

I'll take a photo when I can. I used the osix 1 because Cinela suggested that using the low cut module with the x-set 8000 might be unbalanced. Looking at the photo you posted in the other thread, the 8040 with the low cut connected reaches past the end of the mount by about the same distance as the Neumann. If you don't have the low cut, I guess you could use an extender xlr barrel, or (as I'm doing) get the digital module and it'll fit perfectly.

[RadoStefanov]

Thanks.

I wonder why they don't have specs for the MKH8040/8050 with the digital module.

I also saw a mkh8060 mount that they made based on the osix1.

Do you have the mkh8060 that you can try on your osix 1?

[Scott Smith]

Yeah, it is really disappointing that Sennheiser missed the mark on this one. While the mike has a rather smooth response, the lack of a decent low-cut filter is pretty much a deal-killer for boom use. They sound great on music though!

--S

[Paul Graff]

I realize this is a resurrected old thread, but since I didn't see it last year I'll weigh in. I have a couple of 8050s. I like the Invision mount and tame the low end easily with Fusion 12's adjustable EQ. With a 442 or 302 I use the Schoeps LC-60 U; the SD low cuts are not adequate, imo. With wireless boom I use the PSC Universal power supply (it can do -12dB @100Hz):

http://www.professionalsound.com/specs/univ_mic_ps.htm

Could also use the LC-60U there, or depending on your transmitter, cut the low end there as well.

All that being said I ditched the 416 many years ago for Sanken CS-3e and have been very happy with it for doc use. I think it is the best all-around mic, especially in a noisy environment. It also sounds MUCH better than a 416 indoors. CMIT is also a viable choice. I could see using the 8050 on a doc, but it would depend on environments we were shooting in and framing habits/choices of the DP. I love the 8050 for interviews, but usually go to Schoeps CMC6/MK41 if there are two people being interviewed together. I can't speak to the 8040 as I have not used it.

Paul

[soundslikejustin]

Thanks.

I wonder why they don't have specs for the MKH8040/8050 with the digital module.

I also saw a mkh8060 mount that they made based on the osix1.

Do you have the mkh8060 that you can try on your osix 1?

Nope, I don't have the 8060. The OSIX 8060 is just an OSIX 1 with the XLR mounted slightly forward, and a stiffer set of isolators.

[Matt]

Wow. What sort of ham-fisted boom ops are you all using? I'm joking, but seriously, I've never had problems with my 8050's low end like you are describing. At first it took some getting used to, but the InVision mount with a Softie for outdoors stuff has worked well for me. I also use it indoors as fast cueing of the boom wont be tamed by a B5. I also just use the low cut on my mixer.

It is a rich, warm sounding mic (due to the low end no doubt) with some nice articulation of the midrange. Not as dark as an MKH50. It also has a better dynamic range than the MKH50. No -10db pad switch (which makes the MKH more hissy when engaged). I always seem to need to engage the pad on the MKH mics after it is too late and I've gotten distortion. Really impractical for doc work when you get one shot at it. I own a 40 and a 50 capsule. I primarily use the 50. The 40 just doesn't ever have enough reach for my taste. I did successfully use it once between two people in a sit down interview, but rarely need it otherwise. I don't own a low cut.

Beware that the zeppelin rig rycote makes has a low resonant frequency that requires a low cut module. I learned this from Glen Trew.

The Sanken CS3e has more self-noise than the 8000 series. It is a noticeable difference. However, the near legendary reach and isolation it has can be beneficial in challenging situations.

I'd rent both and try them out before buying.

-Matt

[Matt]

Wow. What sort of ham-fisted boom ops are you all using? I'm joking, but seriously, I've never had problems with my 8050's low end like you are describing. At first it took some getting used to, but the InVision mount with a Softie for outdoors stuff has worked well for me. I also use it indoors as fast cueing of the boom wont be tamed by a B5. I also just use the low cut on my mixer.

It is a rich, warm sounding mic (due to the low end no doubt) with some nice articulation of the midrange. Not as dark as an MKH50. It also has a better dynamic range than the MKH50. No -10db pad switch (which makes the MKH more hissy when engaged). I always seem to need to engage the pad on the MKH mics after it is too late and I've gotten distortion. Really impractical for doc work when you get one shot at it. I own a 40 and a 50 capsule. I primarily use the 50. The 40 just doesn't ever have enough reach for my taste. I did successfully use it once between two people in a sit down interview, but rarely need it otherwise. I don't own a low cut.

Beware that the zeppelin rig rycote makes has a low resonant frequency that requires a low cut module. I learned this from Glen Trew.

The Sanken CS3e has more self-noise than the 8000 series. It is a noticeable difference. However, the near legendary reach and isolation it has can be beneficial in challenging situations.

I'd rent both and try them out before buying.

-Matt

[Toy Robot]

I too have noticed that cinching my K-Tek poles' XLR cable in the Rycote Invision cable clip will introduce and accentuate handling noise rather than attenuate it. I find that allowing the cable to run "free" from the opening on the boom pole to the connection on the back of the mic helps to keep the mic in suspension on the lyre and moving freely.

...

Interesting. I'll have to give this a shot.

[devin golub]

Mkh 60...its good all around.

[chriswoolf]

Many microphone/preamp combinations nowadays suffer from an excessively wide LF bandwidth. That isn't a "fault" - it is just a fact of modern electronic coupling. The expectation of the manufacturers is that users will add in some sort of suitable LF tailoring. Some provide that at the microphone (Schoeps CMIT), others in a optional filter (MKH8000), and some expect that it should be done at the front end of the preamp - later in the chain is unwise since overloads can occur in the first stages.

The filter needs to be a steep cut version - third order or higher. The 6dB/oct roll-off type is intended for proximity effect compensation which is a different affair.

No microphone suspension can wholly remove the lowest frequencies of handling noise since they inevitably have an LF resonance point at which they ~amplify~ noise rather than isolate it. Hence ~all~ suspension systems should be used with bandwidth tailoring that rolls off the LF above the resonance point (or, actually from about 2.5x f_r if we are being technically precise). Often this is the default bandwidth of a system, but if it isn't you have to do something about it yourself.

If you don't have a suitable steep-cut filter to do this Rycote are now selling a lead - the Tac!T - which is a phantom-powered, phantom-passing in-line filter with an 18dB/oct cut at about 60Hz. Stick that in the mic feed and it will cut handling (and wind) noise on difficult-to-handle mics very simply.

Chris Woolf