Would the Oktava MK012 Hyper be a good replacement mic for the stock mic on the pd170 for echoing churches?

I use a wireless for the groom and and iriver for the readers which work well but the stock mic sounds bad.

Would the Oktava sound any better than the stock mic mounted on the pd170?

I am not familiar with the PD170. However, I own a couple of MK012's. I use them in the studio for acoustic instruments.

Because of their frequency response, which is boosted slightly in the 4K range, I would not think that they would be a good choice to reduce echo. They might magnify the echo, as most echo comes from hard surfaces that reflect higher frequencies.

This is just my experience.

Thanks for the answer. I wonder what mic should be used to reduced echo in a large church and be mounted on the camera. Maybe a omni would be better? Would the AT3032 be a better choice?

Thanks for the answer. I wonder what mic should be used to reduced echo in a large church and be mounted on the camera. Maybe a omni would be better? Would the AT3032 be a better choice?

I'd consider a hyper but perhaps not the Oktava. While I haven't used one, I hear they are sensitive to handling noises. Perhaps an Audio Technica AT4053a or AKG300 with CK93 capsule would be better.

You'll probably like the sound better with a replacement mic, but in terms of echo reduction don't expect too much. After all, a mic's job is to convert the sound waves that show up at the pickup into voltage variations. To the mic, echos are just as legitimate as any other sound waves.

The real answer is to increase the relative volume of the primary sound, which means get closer to it. Additionally, if you have a directional mic, there are probably some placements that would give you less echo than others while still aiming at the target sound. If it has to be camera mounted there isn't much you can do with miking technique.

I started using a AKG300/C93 hyper a my primary on cam mic some months ago and while there is some echo for certain churches overall it does give a better sound quality than any shotgun I've used. I also use at least 2 to 3 wireless systems so the on cam mic is more for the ambient sound in the church but overall I've been very pleased with the mic. I don't think there is really a "perfect" mic to use as an on camera mic in a church.

Don B

Thanks everyone for the input. :-)

The sound man at the music store recommended the NT2

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=356832&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

but I doubt I can mount it to the camera. Maybe I would mount it near the alter and run a cable? But I don't know if it would work much better or be worth it.

Thanks everyone for the input. :-)

The sound man at the music store recommended the NT2

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=356832&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

but I doubt I can mount it to the camera. Maybe I would mount it near the alter and run a cable? But I don't know if it would work much better or be worth it.

The NT2 is a shotgun and a generally good mic BUT shotguns are at their worst indoors and the reason they're not recommended in an indoor or reflctive environment is their poor handling of echos arriving from the sides and rear, tending to colour them rather than suppress them. The NT2 would be a nice addition to your kit, just not to solve the specific propblem you asked about here.

I think the NT2 is a studio mic??? If you hit the link it shows a fat mic. This is the mic the sound man recommended.

I am leaning towards the AKG300, but the price of the Oktava is tempting and I read a good review about it in a long thread on this site.

Thanks for helping.

I think the NT2 is a studio mic??? If you hit the link it shows a fat mic. This is the mic the sound man recommended.

I am leaning towards the AKG300, but the price of the Oktava is tempting and I read a good review about it in a long thread on this site.

Thanks for helping.

Sorry - a senior moment there - was thinking of the NTG2 shotgun

This comes from a "later", similar thread but Paul Cypert has given the same basic opinion of the Oktavas for field use:

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=49048

Well, I bought it and I am returning it. It sounds good but the AT835b sounds better IMO. And the Oktava picks up a lot more handling noise when mounted on a camera.

Richard,

Oktava mics are some of the "least expensive" mics on the market (although there are cheaper ones). Having said that, I own a couple. They can be fairly good when used in an environment that doesn't carry sound (like a studio) or when you are trying to capture the ambience (read that echo) of the room.

I don't hesitate to use them to pick up the cripsness of an acoustic guitar or similar instrument. But this very quality is what probably makes them a poor choice for a situation where you want to minimize echo.

BTW, one method for beating echo is to turn down the input gain and turn up the output volume. The higher the input gain, the more sensitive the microphone is and the greater the area in which it will pick up sound. This is the same technique used to prevent feedback in live sound production.

Another way to help beat echo is to place a sound absorber (foam or similar) on the opposite side of the mic from the sound source.

Twenty-five years from now, old Oktavas will probably be sought after for their recording qualities. It's funny how those things work.