I'm looking for a really good *stereo* microphone to be used on my PDX10.

The microphone should be suited at least for

1) outdoor use including recording of the sounds of nature - waves, birds, grashoppers (high frequency), thunder (low frequency), talk and so on. It can get windy. It can get humid (sea, fog, rain) but obviously I'll try to keep the microphone as dry as possible.

2) indoor use for documentary work (talk, occasional music etc).

THE QUESTIONS:

- Would the Audio-Technica AT825 stereo field recording microphone be good for my purposes as it's name suggests? Or is there a better alternative available somewhere?

- The AT825 is 30-20000Hz and with optional roll-off (-6 dB / octave) at 150 Hz. Is it too good or too bad for the PDX10?

- How much water and fog does the AT825 condenser mic tolerate?

- Does it fit on the microphone holder well and does it stay out of the picture? (and what if I add a 0,7x or 0,5x wideangle?)

- Does it record any annoying handling noises when on the camera? (i.e. does it require a special shock mount? Which *on-camera* mount would you recommend?)

The AT825 is a very good stereo mic for wide ambient pickup. It does require at least a mini furry windscreen for outdoor use, the foam screen that's supplied with the mic is totally inadequate for anything above air conditioner drafts.
It will also work for music although with its very wide field you really are forced to get the whole ambient picture of everything in front of the mic and around the sides too. Because of this, it's really inadequate for even basic isolation of specific voices for interview recording, it's truly a wide-angle mic.
With any mic located on the camera, especially one with such a wide field of reception you're going to pick up camera noises and the operator's hands.
You may want to consider the AT835ST. It's a stereo mic in a shotgun-style physical body. It would probably be more suitable for on-camera mounting, but it would still be as susceptible as any camera-mounted mic to handling noise. It's also considerably more expensive than the AT825.
Both of these mics can fit the standard holder, but you'd have to add a thin layer of material around the mic for a snug fit.
You may also want to consider a more directional mono mic and then adjust for psuedo stereo when editing. This will give much better isolation of specific sounds.

Ralf, I asked some of those very questions a couple of months back and was "told" there weren't any good stereo and stereo zoom mics on the market. Now I read from Jay, "The AT825 is a very good stereo mic for wide ambient pickup;" and, "you may want to consider the AT835ST...a stereo mic in a shotgun-style physical body." Doh. Does anyone have any more to say about stereo and stereo zoom mics?

Zoom mics just aren't very useful, and there aren't any good ones.

2- Stereo mics are useful for certain applications, like recording ambience. You don't have to mess around with 2 microphones to get stereo. For a lot of video work, a mono shotgun would be more useful. But maybe not in this situation. If stereo adds something for your content, then I'd go for it.

Ralf, is the on-board stereo mic on the PDX10 any good?

Glen
The PDX is a pro camera, it doesn't come with a stereo mic.

Frank
There are "zoom" mics but they're either cheap crap or expensive . Zoom I'm assuming would be a variable polar pattern. The change in polar pattern can be accomplished by changing a capsule or having 2 capsules and mixing the output. A variable pattern usually goes from omni through cardoid to figure 8.

I know of variable polar large diaphram , side address mics but not small diaphram end address. At any rate they'd be expensive.

A mic with an omni. cardoid and hyper capsule would be a manual zoom.

No matter how many times the question is asked and the words are twisted the answer remains the same.

Actually, the PDX does have a built-in stereo mic, just beneath the lens. It also comes with the shotgun. I wouldn't say the built-in mic is good for anything but the absolute last choice, when there is no choice, or when you're putting around the house in your skivvies and you just don't care.

Yes, the PDX10 has built-in stereo microphones (it's an upgraded consumer model with XLRs and DVCAM). They are really good instrument mics for the camera... They are located 0,3 inches from the manual zoom ring and pick upp all handling noise very well.

As the camera is slighly front heavy I have to support it at the front. My fingers will thus usually cover the front stereo mics. No external sounds, just handling noise....

There are "zoom" mics but they're either cheap crap or expensive...No matter how many times the question is asked and the words are twisted the answer remains the same.Okay. When you threw in the word, "expensive," I got the picture. :-))

I'm using the on-camera Sony ECM-NV1 mono shotgun at the moment, but I fear that it's frequency response will not be good enough for the planned use. I would need to record up to 20 kHz and record reasonably low (50 Hz and so) frequencies too. So the NV1 needs to get replaced.

Part of the sound will be off axis, and ambient sounds are important too. One exception though - I would perfer avoiding handling noise.

All this could be done with a good mono mic but I would prefer a stereo mic because stereo sound creates a bit more natural atmosphere: moving picture really needs moving sound (you'll know if you have heard any 5.1 sound and then switched to stereo and then to mono...). In tele zoom, of course, it's not a big deal.

I can't use two mono mics (two hands only, and a tiny 1000 g camera like the PDX10 is not the correct "platform" for two 300 g mics)

I could get a separate more directional mic If I need, but now I'm after a more life like (stereo) representation of the sound field.

The AT825 would have been just fine, but it seems to record too wide.

Have you any other suggestions besides the AT835?

I think the 835ST (remember, the "ST" is important) is probably what I'd recommend with the discussion so far. It's really a totally different mic than the original 835b, not just stereo added, but a more modern design like the 4073a.
Cost of the 835ST is in the high $600's to slightly over $700 depending on your source. The 835b mono is a little over $200.

BTW, an 835ST with a thin, dry lube condom over it will protect it quite well from the humidity, salt, and moisture you mention. I use the thin black rubber hair bands you see at Walmart to secure the condom to the mic. If it's tight, very little impact on the overall quality.

Rock on!

"Yes, the PDX10 has built-in stereo microphones (it's an upgraded consumer model with XLRs and DVCAM). They are really good instrument mics for the camera... They are located 0,3 inches from the manual zoom ring and pick upp all handling noise very well."

O0ps! I thought they'd have done away with that.

I had a TRV900 and the mics picked up very tic and fingertap.

Such is the nature of a beast that's trying to be pro AND consumer. It's funny to me that this cam could be more pro if certain buttons were simply DONE AWAY WITH, like "Back Light", or "Fader", or even "EditSearch". Just plain silly, not to mention perfectly obtrusive. Oh, alright, I'd be dancing in the aisles if they had installed a stepless exposure wheel.
OK, I'm done. Thanks.
:-]

Any 835ST reviews anywhere? Audio clip?

I did a review for the DMN on the 835ST a while back. It's a great mic. Don Davis, a well known voice over artist uses one for all his voice over work, he does a lot of work for McDonalds, Disney, Six Flags, Jimmy Dean, Sarah Lee, and other big name companies. Does them out of his home studio these days.

Thanks. Is it directional at all, or does it pick up from the rear?

Frank here are some interesting links

ftp://ftp.jagunet.com/pub/users/tford/Articles/Mic_Reviews/01.1_AT835ST_&_AT815ST.txt

ftp://ftp.jagunet.com/pub/users/tford/Articles/Mic_Reviews/92.4_Stereo_Mics.txt

Have a peek at the AT spec sheet. the polar patterns in the bottom of the page will give you the rejection at the sides and rear. It actually looks preetty good. For more detailed graphs (but harder to read) click on the english spec link at the bottom of the page. that'll get you a PDF file of a more detailed desciption.

Frank, it's quite directional, and rejects well from the rear. In doing the review, I did it at a live shoot for the Broadway show "My Way." Therefore, I did a 'real world' review vs a scientific one. I bought the mic after having seen it being used on a film I was scoring part of for Steven Seagal. It was being used for live capture, and I thought it odd they were using a stereo mic. That's pretty rare. Anyway, it did a great job for me, even though I was using it as a backup in the test. I think there is still a stream of the "My Way" promo at http://www.encoreattractions.com. My web connection is slow in the hotel, so I didn't go there to look.

Looks pretty versitile and inexpensive for what it does.

1- Another option is to get the Ambient Emesser, which can turn your favorite mic into a M/S (mid-side) setup like the Audio Technica stereo shotgun. The AT shotgun is much cheaper though.

http://coffeysound.com/store/ambient.html List price $650USD.

2- I was wondering about the on-board stereo mic because you might be able to use it to record just ambience without moving the camera. However, it's no good if you are handling the camera and it might pick up motor noise, so that's probably a bad idea.

What's the web company info link to the 835ST?

So would I need an XLR adaptor with the 835ST?

http://www.audio-technica.com/prodpro/profiles/AT835ST.html

"Includes a 24" (0.61 m) cable (5-pin XLRF to two standard 3-pin XLRM connectors) "

My mistake, I thought i posted the AT link.

At any rate, while it's inexpensive for what it does it's still $570 plus shipping from B&H.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=215893&is=REG

Glenn, Bryan, thanks for the links.

Glenn, I read that, "Includes a 24" (0.61 m) cable (5-pin XLRF to two standard 3-pin XLRM connectors)," on those 2 links Bryan posted, but I was wondering if an XLR adaptor is required.

Glenn, I read that, "Includes a 24" (0.61 m) cable (5-pin XLRF to two standard 3-pin XLRM connectors)," on those 2 links Bryan posted, but I was wondering if an XLR adaptor is required.

Adapter to what? XLRM should be XLR Male, which should be the right connector nearly all the time.

If you need to adapt from XLR --> miniplug (mic input) or some other input, I think you need something like a Beachtek. On the AT site it looks like the mic needs phantom power. You'll also need to get levels right and to filter out "mic plug-in" power on most mic inputs. The Beachtek DXA4 (I think that's the model) provides both, and it also helps you get levels right since it volume control built in.

The 835St requires 11-52 volt phantom and at the very least would require a beach DXA6 (dual phantom) . The Rode NT4 is a stereo that runs off of a 9 volt onboard battery. It's bigger than the AT and costs about $375US. Dave Largent ( a DVINFO member) uses one.

Thanks Bryan. That makes this mic's price about $400 bucks higher.

Sorry, Glenn. My cams don't have XLRs, and I was looking for a cheap mic solution but with a strong leaning toward stereo or zoom-stereo. So the cost for me would also include an XLR adaptor, aand I see I'll need other extras for this "bare" mic. I guess I'll have to dig deep or go with Bryan's original suggestion with the Apex 191/shock mount. I think I'll be going for the stereo, though, and the new Glenbox or the Beachtek.

Frank
The AT822 is like the AT825. Works on battery and is supplied with a stereo mini cable.

Thank you very much for your informative replies. The AT835ST seems to be a quite good stereo microphone...

There is something that I do not understand though. In many threads it is said that shotgun microphones are a) very directional and only good for picking up a selected voice where there is excessive ambient noise, and b) only good for recording talk (interview use and such). It is said that they may not have as pleasing a sound as cardioid mics (read: non-shotgun) have. It is also said that shotguns have an interference tube that cancels lateral sounds by wave interference and that it cancels mostly high frequencies thus distorting any off-axis sound.

This does not sound very stereo to me. What have I missed?

I'm not a sound technician, obviously, and neither will anyone hearing my recordigs be (unfortunately, probably). Thus any differences that require years of experience to be noticed do not exist to me.

So, if I want to record a high frequency ambient sound, then is this AT835 a bad choice? Doesn't it cancel high frequency ambient sounds by its design?

Would it be better to choose a mic with two spatially separated capsules? Would that become too expensive? ( 600 $ is quite a bit of money for me... )

Ralf
Read the PDF. It shows the vaious polar patterns. I think it will answer your questions.

http://www.audio-technica.com/prodpro/addinfo/AT835ST_english.pdf

Ralf, you will have to compromise. If you want maximum rejection of off axis sound, and a bit of stereo ambience, then a shotgun mic is appropriate. If you want hi-fi sound, with no colouration of any off axis sound that gets recorded, you can't use a shotgun. You either have to be closer to your subject, or put up with more off axis sound. The options are:
[list=1] a fixed XY stereo cardioid, like the AT822 or AT825 or Rode NT4, but they will pick up all the sound at the sides (more than 180 degrees acceptance angle). 2 separate cardioids angled at less than 90 degrees, which will give you a narrower stereo field. Ideally (but most expensive), a hypercardioid and a figure of 8 microphone, giving M/S stereo. This way, you can control the amount of off axis sound in post production. You may find these articles interesting:
http://www.tape.com/Bartlett_Articles/stereo_microphone_techniques.html
http://www.tape.com/Bartlett_Articles/stereo_recording_procedures.html[/list=1]

Patrick

The AT835ST has a line-cardioid element (front/middle) and a bi-directional element. It is a shotgun format microphone capable of mid-side stereo and internally matrixed left-right-wide stereo (wider than AT825 at 1 kHz) and left-right-narrow stereo. I would love the possibility of choosing a more directional pattern (L/R narrow) when ambience is not needed and a wide pattern when I want a wider stereo image. It might be a compromise, but it might also be just good enough for me.

So it is a shotgun microphone that is "wider" than a stereo cardioid (isn't that a contradiction?)...

The polar patterns in the PDFs for AT825 and AT835ST are for 1 kHz only... What about 500 Hz, 2 kHz, 5 kHz, 10 kHz and 18 kHz (near 20 kHz)? Can I find more accurate graphs anywhere?

What I fear is that the high frequencies from left/right are somehow lost/cancelled/distorted when using the AT835ST "wide stereo shotgun"...

... maybe because of the "shotgun" construction of the mic (the "interference tube")? I'm not sure. There is a bi-directional 8-element for the sides after all. So is this AT835ST wide only for low/mid frequencies? Or does it record any near-decent high freq. at the sides? I can't find these mics in any local shop so I cannot compare.

The question really is: Is a bidirectional + line-cardioid combi capable of HiFi or near-HiFi sound?

-slighly confused now-

What about
Sennheiser MKH 418-S

http://www.sennheiser.com/sennheiser/icm_eng.nsf/root/products_mikrophones_wired_broadcast_05284

The user manual of the MKH 418-S was quite informative. Thank you. I start to understand the basics of these mics now :)

So, the the line-cardioid mic (for the mid/front channel) has an interference tube that makes it more directional by eliminating lateral sounds, especially the higher frequencies. Thus it will record "high frequencies" only directly in front of it ("line"?) and "other frequencies" from a cardioid shaped area...

The bi-directional element (the side channel) records all frequencies from both right and left.

Because X/Y stereo is created by combining these two channels, then the higher the frequency the more it moves towards the sides unless it is right in the front, right?

Thus "high frequencies" would be *heard* either from left or right or front but not from, say, 45 degrees? This would distort the sound to some degree unknown to me. As I have not really studied how well ones ear can localize high frequenciens, I do not know how bad this is. Anyway, it now seems logical that stereo shotguns just might not record HiFi...


------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, if I want true HiFi stereo then I really need the AT825 although it will be more prone to handling noise (than AT835ST in L-R-narrow mode) that could easily destroy the quality of the recording (especially when the mic is mounted on the camera).

If I would use bass roll-off to avoid part of the handling noise then the low frequencies would be partially lost, but the overall quality might be more acceptable. Unfortunately not all camera handling noises are low frequency (clicks and such)...

So the choices with the AT825 would be:

1) good stereo sound, bass light, lots of handling/camera noise
2) good stereo sound, better bass, even more handling/camera noise




The AT835ST on the other hand would not give such a good stereo sound because the sound localization would vary much more depending on frequency.

It would, however, produce "cleaner" sound without so much handling/camera noise and possibly without cutting low frequencies with a bass roll-off. Thus it might still sound better than the "HiFi" alternative. Especially if one cannot detect the "high frequency problems" too easily. (Is it so?)

Thus the AT-835ST might still be the mic producing the best overall quality stereo audio for camera-mount applications. The 825 would be better if I had someone else take care of recording because it should be kept well in front of the camera...



This is starting to become complicated now, and I feel that this thread might not lead anywhere anymore. One would just need to try the mics and listen to learn how prone to handling noise the 825 actually is compared to the 835 ST...

On another thread I found this exceptionally good link: http://www.jtv.be/JTV/info/sound/sound.html

Having read what Shure and Alan Barker have written about shotgun microphones I have no trouble in choosing between the AT825 and the AT835ST (and the suggested Sennheiser).

I want natural stereo sound. Thus I need the 825.

If the sound source is too distant I walk closer.

Case closed.

- - This thread was very useful. I learned a lot. Thanks to all the contibutors. - -

Just curious what you mean by "HiFi"?

Well, with HiFi sound I meant this time that

- it is a good and full (frequencies, amplitudes, directions) representation of what the ear can hear on location. With one exception: sounds from the rear should be ignored, because I don't want to record myself or the camera. There is a limit to the price I can afford, though.

- it contains even the 16kHz - 20kHz frequency range (many mics only have up to 16 kHz) and that high frequencies above 10kHz can be heard at a natural relative level without sacrificing human voice and talk.

Without a DAT this is a bit problematic because the frequency response of the camera itself is less than optimal (no, I cannot afford a DAT right now). Cameras freq. resp. http://www.jtv.be/JTV/info/sound/sound.html

- human voice sounds natural

- the resulting stereo sound feels natural with no coloration of sound from the sides. If there is some colorization of off-axis sound then the sound is not hifi, IMO. Mono sound is not HiFi because it completely lacks an important part of the sound - direction.

Where do you see that the M-S mics fall short?
If you do go with one of the X-Y mics, let us
know how the mic is.
I use an NT4 and have been happy with the
localization it provides.

And no; I don't want surround sound because it is far too complicated to record (lacking skill and there are better things to do in life) and edit and the equipment costs *far* too much.

And the show seems to go on...

I also looked at the Shure VP88. It's a stereo mic (M-S with internal matrixing option and an internal shock mount!) that has a cardioid mid element. Thus no coloration of off-axis sounds. Excellent, right?

http://www.shure.com/images/response/fvp88_large.gif
and
http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/vp88.asp

It is both heavy (417g) and expensive (can get it at $800) and so it fits best on a big camera and a big budget (well, that's relative, but for me it is *very* expensive). But comparison is always good.

So how would that one compare to the AT825?
http://www.audio-technica.com/prodpro/profiles/AT825.htm
l
I mean, how shoud I interpret the differences in the frequency responses?

"Where do you see that the M-S mics fall short?"

Do they? I have nothing against M-S mics.

Explanation:

I don't care what sort of technology has been used to achieve a certain sound quality. It is the result that matters.

The AT835ST is a shotgun microphone. Thus the mid element does not hear high frequencies from the sides but it does hear lower frequencies. That must affect the sound... Tell me if I'm wrong. Shotgun mics are a bit problematic, too, if the sound source is moving or if the mic is moving - because of the side slots - or so I have read.

I haven't compared any mics because I only have the default Sony ECM-NV1 and no other microphones. I have to travel 2 hours by trains to find shops that offer some alternatives to test. That would be a whole day of mic shopping...

I don't want to do any "learning by buying". That's why I'm discussing this matter here despite of my limited knowledge in the field of mics.

The Shupe VP88 is not a shotgun mic, but it is a M-S mic. I would be very interested in it if I could get it a bit cheaper (and not $800)...

It's been awhile since I was shopping for a
stereo mic, prior to getting the NT4, but I
vaguely recall that I looked into the Shure
and that it didn't seem like it was all that.
Perhaps something about high self noise,
but don't quote me.
I do recall hearing that the NT4 is the best
stereo mic under $1000.

I did take a look at Rode NT4. It's quite nice, too. However, when compared to the AT825 mic the Rode NT4

- has about the same price

- has the same polar response

- has a similar frequency response with the exception of high frequencies. The curve slopes down faster for NT4 than it does for AT825. My camera seems to have enough of "high frequency roll-off" (probably too much?), so I prefer the AT825 that has a flatter response there. Shouldn't I ? Again, tell me if I'm wrong. Note that I was trying to record high frequencies here, so the fact that NT4 reaches lower (20Hz vs. 30 Hz) is not that big a deal.

- weighs two times more (NT4=480g, AT825=240g)

So the AT825 seems to be a better deal

... unless there is some big difference in the quality of the sound that cannot be seen in the numbers and graphs...

(and why is it so light? Both Rode and Shure weigh 2 x more...)

Can anyone explain to me how to interpret the self noise and signal/noise ratio?

The AT825 has 70 dB S/N ratio at 1 kHz, wile Rode NT4 has 78 dB. Isn't it so that 10 dB means double the noise? Thus the AT825 would have almost twice as much hiss?

I will be recording quiet sounds mostly, closer to 20 dB than 120 dB... And I want those high freq. quiet sounds on tape if possible...

Does the "self noise" affect this somehow? Or the sensitivity?

The NT-4 will definitely be quieter, and also more sensitive. That's how it gains an extra 8db of signal to noise ratio, by winning in both those categories. 6db is a doubling, so this is a significant advantage of the Rode.
It's true that the high frequency response of the Rode appears to roll off more significantly than the AT, but if this high frequency content is lost in the hiss with the AT or if your camera can't effectively record that high anyway, I'd go with the Rode.
The main complaint with the Rode would be the weight and shockmounting it to a camera. I have used an NT-3 in an AT8415 mount on a static boom. It's not super secure and I'd be very careful about active booming, but for horizontal mounting on a camera it should be fine.
Neither mic is that easy to wind protect unless you buy something specifically made for that mic. It can be done with off the shelf materials, but it takes some experimentation due to their larger wider heads.

I've used the Rode NT4 mounted on my camera. In quality terms it's probably a good match for the audio spec of your camera. I use an AT8415 Shockmount, with a flash shoe adaptor. It does make the camera very top heavy, but it is usable. Rycote make a windgag that fits the NT4.
I chose the Rode, instead of the AT825 or AT835, because there were favourable reviews by musicians using it to record music. (Look at the Rode site).
Patrick

I got the Rode because I wanted it for quiet
situations, where high sensitivity would be required.
It is *very* sensitive to wind noise. The foam windscreen
that it comes with is nowhere near effective in the wind.
Patrick, have you used that Rycote? Any help in
locating which windgag, such as model name/number?
Anyone had any luck making a homemade furry, or
is special acoustic material required?

Dave,
The Rycote windgag is called the "Mini windjammer for the Rode NT4". It cost me 35 UK pounds.
I have found it reasonable for ordinary outdoor use, ie. light wind. It is not effective if it is really windy.
Patrick

Ralf
Don't drive yourself nots over specs and other peoples opinions. Listen to the mics yourself.

Many people will cavalierly throw out a mic that cost 2 or 3 times the mics we started discussing.

I really don't think the term HiFi belongs in this discussion. HiFi is more reflective of the whole audio chain than just a microphone.

I for one know that Dave listens to mics with his ears rather than his budget or the microphone specification.