MKH 8040 vs. 8050 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > All Things Audio

All Things Audio
Everything Audio, from acquisition to postproduction.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 17th, 2008, 08:26 PM   #1
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 14
MKH 8040 vs. 8050

Between these two mics, which would one recommend for indoors, with reflective surfaces? On a parallel topic, could a fixed position 8040 properly cover a 2-shot? Thanks.
Dan Goulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2008, 09:34 PM   #2
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
why not a scheops?

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2008, 10:02 PM   #3
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Ford View Post
why not a scheops?

Ty Ford
Which would you recommend for the environment I'm describing? (My only experience with Scheops is the CMIT5, which may not be the best choice in a closed, reflective environment.) Should I stick with a hypercardiod capsule to minimize reflections, or would the cardiod capsule be best for that? Thanks.
Dan Goulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2008, 08:44 AM   #4
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Ford View Post
why not a scheops?
Because there are a lot of other microphones that work. I know it's sacrilegiousness to say anything bad about Schoeps (actually I love Schoeps), but the pro audio world doesn't revolve around the brand. There are many acceptable and in some cases better mics than Schoeps. I've only had the 8040 long enough to do some basic testing this weekend, but so far I'm very impressed with it and think both the 8040 and 8050 are suitable as replacements for the Schoeps MK41.

Now as far as the question of which one to use? I went with the 8040 based on discussions with Glen Trew's testing of both of them, and some things Scott Farr has said about the 8050 he purchased. As I stated in an earlier thread, I'm going to see how well the 8040 works for me, if I find the cardioid pattern to wide, then I'm going to go with the 8050.

Wayne
__________________
Mics: KMR 82 i, NTG-1, MKH418S, MKH8040, SR77, QTC1, QTC40, SR30
Recorder: Zaxcom Deva 5.8 & MIX-12. Wireless: TRX900 stereo, Lectro 411
Wayne Brissette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2008, 09:18 AM   #5
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Goulder View Post
Which would you recommend for the environment I'm describing? (My only experience with Scheops is the CMIT5, which may not be the best choice in a closed, reflective environment.) Should I stick with a hypercardiod capsule to minimize reflections, or would the cardiod capsule be best for that? Thanks.
Hello Dan,

The cmc641 is the supercardioid, the cmc64 is the cardioid. I use the cmc641.

What I found interesting about your question is that it was 80xx specific. Since it's a relatively new mic, I was curious as to how it appeared on your radar given the other mics available to do the job.

Regards,

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2008, 12:08 PM   #6
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Ford View Post
Hello Dan,

The cmc641 is the supercardioid, the cmc64 is the cardioid. I use the cmc641.

What I found interesting about your question is that it was 80xx specific. Since it's a relatively new mic, I was curious as to how it appeared on your radar given the other mics available to do the job.

Regards,

Ty Ford
Although "newness" is no guarantee of superiority, I do happen to have an MKH8050 being held for me to try, and was wondering if I should attempt to get ahold of an MKH8040 as well, for comparison purposes. I'm not aware of any company that's currently offering either of these mics for rental, otherwise that would make choosing (or rejecting) much easier.

An ongoing film project that I'm dealing with involves shooting two, sometimes three actors doing improv. It would be near impossible for a boom operator to anticipate which moves to make. So far, I've put a lav on each actor, with one additional mic to pick up the room. The players don't move laterally too much, covering at most a 10-foot width. I was wondering, especially in the cases where I'm shooting a two-shot, if I would be best off using a single fixed mic with wider coverage, such as a cardioid, or putting a separate fixed hypercardioid over each player. I'm trying to anticipate which arrangement will help the post mix, or which will make it more difficult.

I would appreciate any recommendations regarding the one mic approach, and which specific mic(s) might work out best for that. Or, if the two-mic approach is recommended, which mic(s) might be best for that? (I'm open to any microphone, regardless of manufacturer.) Thank you.
Dan Goulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2008, 12:20 PM   #7
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
I don't see the benefit in a third mic to pickup the room if both actors are laved and you split track them.

I do see a problem if you try to record two lavs and a room mic to two tracks of a camera.


Regards,

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 18th, 2008, 12:53 PM   #8
New Boot
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Ford View Post
I don't see the benefit in a third mic to pickup the room if both actors are laved and you split track them.

I do see a problem if you try to record two lavs and a room mic to two tracks of a camera.


Regards,

Ty Ford
I put all mics on a separate track. (I've been using the SD744t/442 combination.) I do prefer the overall sound when mixing the overhead with the lavs. I've used a Sennheiser 415T for overhead, backed off far enough to cover a wider area, although I would expect there to be better mic choices for this form of coverage. As we are generally indoors in reflective, hard-walled areas, I'm looking for a mic that would be best suited in that capacity, or a pair of mics (for two-shot situations), that might work out well.

Also, I'm curious as to whether P48 microphones tend to be any less susceptible to RF interference than "T" powered mics. Thanks.
Dan Goulder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 06:21 AM   #9
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Dan,

Do you then time align the lavs with the overheads in post?

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 06:29 AM   #10
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Brissette View Post
I'm going to see how well the 8040 works for me, if I find the cardioid pattern to wide, then I'm going to go with the 8050.

Wayne
Make sure you test boom swing speed and handling noise. My experience with the 8050 is that due to a very sensitive LF response, you need a very good suspension mount to prevent handling noise. For some locations the LF response indicates a high pass filter like a Cut 1 may be required.

The foam pop filter that comes with the mic is not effective when the boom is moved quickly. Quick moves ruffle the diaphragm.


Regards,

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 09:39 AM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ty Ford View Post
Make sure you test boom swing speed and handling noise. My experience with the 8050 is that due to a very sensitive LF response, you need a very good suspension mount to prevent handling noise. For some locations the LF response indicates a high pass filter like a Cut 1 may be required.

The foam pop filter that comes with the mic is not effective when the boom is moved quickly. Quick moves ruffle the diaphragm.
d
I just got in the KTEK mini boom shock mount, which I'll use until the Senn. shock mount comes in. At NAB, I want to look at the Rycote setup and some other windscreens. You're right the foam windscreen isn't wonderful.

The nice thing is I plan on using the 8040 with the Deva, so I can program in the HPF and even do some notch EQ if required on the spot, so I don't have use a HPF like the cut 1.

Wayne
__________________
Mics: KMR 82 i, NTG-1, MKH418S, MKH8040, SR77, QTC1, QTC40, SR30
Recorder: Zaxcom Deva 5.8 & MIX-12. Wireless: TRX900 stereo, Lectro 411
Wayne Brissette is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 10:08 AM   #12
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Posts: 2,323
Wayne,

One thing I noticed abut the 8050 is that the frequency response is sort of smiley faced; big bottom, big top.

I can't hear the lift on the top end on voice because the lift happens higher than most voice frequencies. Don't know how that would work with someone who has excessive sibilance.

Regards,

Ty Ford
Ty Ford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 10:17 AM   #13
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Olney, Maryland
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Brissette View Post
I just got in the KTEK mini boom shock mount, which I'll use until the Senn. shock mount comes in...
I love the KTEK stuff...But, I think there is a serious design flaw with the K-SM. It uses a wider, rigid rubber mount that easily transfers the low frequency handling to the mic.

I have the same exact handling noise problem w/ the Schoeps CMT5U and the KTEK mount.

Looks like the thinner K-GPS suspension system would do a better job in NOT transferring the low-freek noise...but, I haven't tried it.
Jim Boda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 10:30 AM   #14
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 539
The K-Tek is more expensive than the Sennheiser. I suppose the Sennheiser is still the best match for this microphone? The quality would not be inferior to the K-Tek?
Craig Irving is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 20th, 2008, 10:39 AM   #15
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Irving View Post
The K-Tek is more expensive than the Sennheiser. I suppose the Sennheiser is still the best match for this microphone? The quality would not be inferior to the K-Tek?
From what I've been told by one person, the Rycote is going to be the shockmount to get with these mics. I want to see them in person, so I'm going to wait until NAB in April before I spend any more money. Although the Rycote mounts are less expensive than either the KTEK or Sennheiser.

Wayne
__________________
Mics: KMR 82 i, NTG-1, MKH418S, MKH8040, SR77, QTC1, QTC40, SR30
Recorder: Zaxcom Deva 5.8 & MIX-12. Wireless: TRX900 stereo, Lectro 411
Wayne Brissette is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > All Things Audio

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network