www.neumann.com
Forums:
Email:









Neumann KMR 81i vs. Sennheiser MKH-416, 415 for VOICEOVER???
Author: dls
Date: 09/05/2005
My quandry: Which mic do you think is better for VO work, the Neumann KMR 81i or the Sennheiser MKH-416, 415.

part b: in your experience, are there any real differences between the Sennheiser 415 and 416 for VO?

thanks!

-David  
 
Reply
Re: Neumann KMR 81i vs. Sennheiser MKH-416, 415 for VOICEOVER???
Author: Thomas Hall
Date: 09/06/2005
Do you have a specific reason for choosing a short shotgun for VO work? What kind of VO work are you talking about?

I prefer the TLM-170 or the MKH-40 for ADR vocals, and I think most people prefer a variety of large capsule condensers (U-87Ai particularly) for commercials, promos, narrantions and that sort of thing. For animation, the selections are all over the place, depending on voices, producer and engineer choices and what a contracted room has in its cabinet.

While the MKH-41x mics are very good, they are shotguns, and inherently less accurate off axis than some other choices (much less inaccurate than some other short shotguns, btw). They are sometimes set up for VO, but more often for Foley and of course, for live dialog. I watched someone try to use a 416 for a walla group one day with really no success.

All of my 415s are "T" powered, but only 2 of my 6 416s are "T" powered (the rest are phantom). With the evolution of equipment, I find that the 415s, while still fine mics, are generally sitting in the cabinet while the 416-Ps are out in the work world.

Cordially,
Tom  
 
Reply
Difference 415/416?
Author: Peter Kautzsch
Date: 09/06/2005
What exactly *is* the difference between the 415 and 416, technically and soundwise? I really love the sound of my 416T and always prefer it to any 416P - it has that subtle silkiness which produces the classical film sound, and i haven't perceived this silkiness in any 416P or 60 so far.
If I want something to sound like on-location sound, I always use the 416; and one can have a lot of use artistically of the off-axis inaccuracy.  
 
Reply
Re: Difference 415/416?
Author: Mike Pappas
Date: 09/06/2005
Hi Peter,

I think you have hit the nail right on the head. The off axis response of the 416/816 series is something that all of us who have spent years working with them have come to know and use to our advantage. When moving to MKH-60/70 or KMR81/82 the off axis response is so different (smooth) that your auditory brain has a hard time figuring it out.

It took me a couple of years to adapt to the very different off axis response of the KMR80/81 and MKH-60/70 products, but the benefits of having a real high fidelity shotgun microphone was worth the effort.

Mike Pappas  
 
Reply
Re: Difference 415/416?
Author: Peter Kautzsch
Date: 09/06/2005
When I started film sound, I had the opportunity to try out both the 416 and the more "neutral" or "natural" 60. While the 60 was slightly better suppressing off-axis camera noise in living room size rooms, it actually took up more noise outdoor (with the same position to the camera, and quite independent from different positions in the room!). I then bought a used 416T not only because it was really an occasion, but also because it does (especially with an analogue Nagra) a lot of "post-production" routine jobs already on location.  
 
Reply
Re: Difference 415/416?
Author: David
Date: 09/13/2005
Mike and Peter. thank you for your input! the off-axis nature of short shotgun mics won't be a problem for me since, doing VO, I'll be an easy target. And as you've mentioned, I can use off-axis positioning to my advantage. I have seen photos of movie trailer guys with the 416 in many different positions... thanks, again!  
 
Reply
Re: Difference 415/416?
Author: David
Date: 09/13/2005
Mike and Peter. thank you for your input! the off-axis nature of short shotgun mics won't be a problem for me since, doing VO, I'll be an easy target. And as you've mentioned, I can use off-axis positioning to my advantage. I have seen photos of movie trailer guys with the 416 in many different positions... thanks, again!  
 
Reply
Re: Neumann KMR 81i vs. Sennheiser MKH-416, 415 for VOICEOVER???
Author: David
Date: 09/13/2005
thanks, Tom. I use a TLM103 for VO but wanted to try a short shotgun for the "Immediacy" of the sound, as in film trailers. In fact, I just picked up a used Sennheiser 416 at a very good price. I'll give it a try and report...  
 
Reply
Re: Neumann KMR 81i vs. Sennheiser MKH-416, 415 for VOICEOVE
Author: David Guerrero
Date: 02/22/2008
I use the 416 P48 for vo recording every day for commercial and promo. It has a great presence for announcer that you can't get with a TLM 170 or a U87. The 416T is thinner and I don't like it for vo. For animation I prefer a U87 or a TLM 170. I prefer the newer 87 AI's for ADR. They're really open sounding and easy to process for matching sound.

The thing with using the 416 for vo is that it has this really up front, in your face sound. It's good if that's what you want, but you can't undo that with any processing to get it more open after the fact. So for vo there are 2 mics for me: the 416 P48 for announcer and the U87 for everything else. If your on a budget I'd say the Sure SM7 for announcer and the TLM 103 for everything else.

If you want a nice in the middle between presence and openness I'd recommend the 414, which I've used from time to time, especially with dudes on vocals.  
 
Reply