I've used the MKE 600 on a feature film. Our film was mixed by a pro, who complimented the quality of the recordings. So, the 600 is worth the savings.
I have the 600 what I have heard called the "poor mans 416". I have no complaints about it. From your comparisons, the outdoor was the biggest difference with the 416 edging out the 600. Post processing was great. I could barely hear any difference. My only other comment would be that you can just call out the number of the mics( 416 or 600) without the letters. We know which is which. Great job, thanks for the video.
@@matango1979 Honestly, it's been a couple months since I listened to the video. He was either talking about quality of sound or the blocking of peripheral sounds while outside testing. What I got from that was that there was little to no difference in sound quality between the mics while inside. As a VO, all my work is inside a treated area so not having to pay an extra $600 for the 416 works for me.
The 416 is an RF Condenser and the 600 is an electret, the RF Condenser has better moisture protection. As for the sound difference, the 416 seemed a bit brighter. I own the 600 and at work we have the 416...they are both good microphones. The 600 has both battery and phantom power while the 416 only has phantom power, in this case it would depend on your workflow and if you would need the flexibility in power. If you record a lot of sound outside in varying conditions, aside from pouring down rain, the 416 would make more sense as it has a bit of moisture protection.
In a previous life, I used the 416 for location recording and it's a true workhorse. Heavy duty build quality, excellent sound, very much worth its reputation and cost. In my UA-cam life, I've got the 600 for the main reason that it's a much more affordable mic with great sound and build. The sound differences are small but noticeable, but the price point of the 600 is what makes it such a compelling choice.
Take the two microphones to a blind test. Even if someone is able to hear any difference I think its even harder to have a consistent meaning of which is "better".
600 is a little more brittle however has less comb filtering than the 416 when indoors. 416 is the preferable choice outdoors or in a well treated room. Place the ports up when indoors to minimize phase issues.
there's a bunch of reasons the 416 has the reputation it does. In a studio test, both will pick up the sound accurately and reproduce it well but in professional scenarios (location sound recording outdoors for example) the 416 is clearly better - I'm listening on HD6xx cans via an RME babyface pro RS and the 416 has more body and depth with an overall richer sound but the 600 still sounds fantastic and for an indie production or a run and gun setup it would be totally fine. I rarely see a 416 on set these days - mostly schoeps on the end of the boom and very often the mini ones.
Interesting that you mention the Schoeps. We only use it on a TV serie production in a studio. Outdoors only sometimes the MKH 416 but mostly now the MKH 8060.
I’ll have to go back and listen with headphones. I keep reading that folks say the 416 is crisper/more highs. I am hearing a different - more full lower mid range (not mud though). Both sound excellent. You can get a used 416 in excellent condition for the $600-$700 range.
Yeah, overall, the 416 does sound better and it should for that price but depending on the application and what it is, you are using it for it may not make a difference, especially if you’re just getting content that will be viewed on a cell phone
Wasn't looking for a new channel to sub to but after you came back to finish this months later it's the least I could do! Really appreciate the comparison since I'm about to make a purchase between the two. There's definitely more low end extension (not louder bass, but more of it) a sharp presence peak on the 416, plus the improved off-axis rejection was noticeable. During the outdoor tests I originally preferred the 416 but now I'm not sure they were gain matched outside until the blimp test? (the 416 sounded louder so I was biased towards that, but I could be wrong) Once you got to the blimp test the 600 sounded much louder without the harshness and I might even prefer it! The 600 felt like it had this vintage charm to the sound, not as harsh and more natural and I preferred it in both the blimp test and garage test. Thanks again, great video!
Thank you so much! It's comments like this that make the whole video feel worth it and to keep creating content on here. Thank you again your comment means so much!!
We don't, we were going to make an office tour soon but the audio treatment isn't the greatest, it's mostly for visuals. But I just have sound panels on the ceiling and the corners of the room. Bass traps help and outing anything on the ceiling and having a carpeted room makes a huge difference. If you have a hard surface you can lay a rug down and that will help a lot. Thanks for your comment!!
You did a great job of bridging the gap between these two mics with a little post-processing. I think the 416 is a little richer and more detailed in the mid to high end prior to processing. The 416 is built a little better ie. is made of copper, there may be some differences internally also (! have seen a scratched 416 but not a broken one, for a mic that has been around for 49yrs that says a lot), and I believe handles proximity and plosives a little better. These differences a minimal. Are they worth double the price? to a professional working with high budgets absolutely. But for most professionals, particularly those starting out, it makes way more sense to invest that extra money into other areas that could potentially add far greater value, particularly as the differences in sound can be closed to a point where the sound is almost indistinguishable as demonstrated here.
10:36 Honestly sounds great in there for documentary or fiction/drama purposes. I'm presuming a ton of set audio we've become accustomed to hearing is the 416 or 600 in wild environments like a garage or street.
Ooh. :) I'd like to see a comparison between the AT875R and the MKE-600, especially in terms of picking up environmental noise and sibilance. I bought a Synco d-2 because so many in the voice over industry claimed it's comparable to the MKH-416 but it's not better than my At875R.
i ave the at875r its a great mic but i wouldn't say its THAT much better than the RODEE video mic NTG. Plus, with a wireless lav setup you can turn the mke600 and the Rode NTG into a wireless boom mic
@@Granthuffman Ooh I'm not a fan of Rode mics, but thanks! I'm a Voice Actor, so I use mics for voice overs. And, again, sibilance and environmental noise are factors in me considering mics.
That's amazing to hear! I'm so glad it was helpful! If there's anything else you'd like us to dive into audio wise let us know!! Thanks again your feedback means the world!
I bought the 416 a couple of years back with the intent of having the best audio, now I need a second one for a podcast setups, and I refuse to pay for the 416 considering the small difference in audio quality with the 600... Thanks for the video!
You can't tell the difference. I literally have the 600 in my Sweetwater cart at the moment. I wanted the 416, but damn $1000 when the 600 sounds similar to me. 600 it is for me. Thank you for testing the outdoors. I think I'll get the blimp as well with it for my horror outdoor movies.
Thank you so much for the comment and thank you for watching. I'm glad this video brought some value to you! Yeah the blimp I have here is one from movo as well and makes a huge difference in windy environments.
Great comparison. I use the 600 to record the majority of the interviews on my channel, after learning that the Shawn Ryan Show was using them. I think it sounds great but every time I hear a comparison, I realize how much more detailed the 416 sounds. Not enough difference to justify price for what I do. Particularly when there are huge shows also using the 600.
The only reason I prefer the 416 is the internal RF bias. I live in a place with mixed climate (humid summer, ...) and any normal condenser mic will make a strange noise at one time or another due to a circuit problem. Not a problem with the 416. But if it's just for the sound quality, the mke 600 would have been great.
Have owned and used both. If you can afford it or otherwise justify it, get a 416. However, the 600 gets you most of the way there for a fraction of the price. The only in between step would be a Rode NTG-3 imho, however the Rode NTG4/4+ is also a solid mic.
The naked 600 sounds like the 416 with a foam windscreen - slightly muffled or wooly in comparison. Which means the 416 has slightly more clarity and a more natural sound (though the distinction is not always noticeable). I have both, and use 600 most of the time.
I have te 600 and use the 416 a lot on boom on film and video gigs. The main difference between the two is the soundcoloring of the off axis "noise". They both are absolutely phantastic directly on axis but the price difference shows in the naturality of the sound that is off axis, the 416 is a lot more homogenous thna the 600. If it's worth the price difference? Depending on the production budget and environment I'd say absolutely. It's just that little difference that makes the sound editors life a littl;e easier, in a controlled environment where you can pretty much ensure constant on axis recording, it's not really worth it IMHO. Either way, both Microphones are excellent and for the price performance, the 600 is absolutely perfect.
great comparison. I ended up getting the 416 to stop looking into comparisons for the rest of my life. But, bro, what the heck is your Chanel stuck at short of 800 subs ??? is "the algorithm" this messed up ??? please share your thoughts about that.
It is very funny: In the garage I cant distinguish these both, but outdoor and in your Studio the 416 is better, if you have a direct competition. On the other side, a 330€ shotgun for immediate to go, without a recoder, direct into the camera, costs you 330 instead of 1000 plus a zoom F6 for 650€ To start, the 600 is great. But if you have the problem, if the Maybach or the Mercedes S 600 is better, you are in another universe to appreciate that luxury.
This is true but I don't assume everyone would be using the FX6 either, so I opted for the cleanest preamps I have access to, this is way I thought it was important to mention what I was recording into. But using a clean recorder give a better idea of the comparison, if you didn't like the sound of either example you most likely wouldn't like it directly into a camera either. I hope that makes sense!
personnaly i would say the only difference i can hear with the 600 is with the supplied windshield. the windshield of the 416 seems to have been more engineered to be transparent as possible. other than that, they sound identical to me on my... sound setup... if we could call this like that :D
Good video. I wish you could have put mic in studio a little further to mimic how it would be used in interview. Mic probably won’t be that close. But thus is an amazing video.
Yes if you curious most my videos are on the MKH 416 a bit further back. I didn't think they sounded too different about 5 inches back or out frame, but your right that would change it a bit. But I think the characteristics are just lessened a bit on each further back
The MKH series mics are much more resistant to moisture and humid environments than the MKE series. So if you are going to be recording outdoors, the MKH is superior. And the 416 is quite an old design. Sennheiser's newest MKH shotgun, the 8060, might be a good comparison, but of course is more expensive.
Boy, this is a tough comparison. I think I can hear a little more "natural" sound, with the 416. Maybe a little brighter but not tinny. However! I To me they're pretty close and as far as bang for buck, I'd certainly go with the MKE 600.
@@absorbproductions but at open space differnce is not small. noise rejection and low end and hi sensivity of 416 is much higher at large distance and less noise..
You are right ...unfortunately MKH-416 is industry standard and You need to have It if you want to be Sound guy in the industry. You didn't mention how MKE-600 works in the high humidy environment. ....like ME66
Yeah I wouldn't know how it would be a sound guy in the industry. But I agree a lot of people would most likely recognize the 416. Also I haven't had any experience in humid conditions either. Is the ME66 supposed to perform better in humidity?
That was never the question, of course it does. The question is: does it win by enough to justify the price being 3 times as high? You can buy 3 MKE-600 and treat yourself to a burger or an ice cream or both, for the price of one MKH-416 - depends a bit on spot price, but that's the range. So if the choice is 416 for sound and a worse lens, or having to shoot a scene using the 416 in a noisy environment instead of lav mics and body packs, is it STILL justifiable? That is the way you gotta think about it, not simply what is better. Personally I'm not sure, I might go for a cheaper shotgun and get a set of bodypacks with decent lav mics.
The only difference I could pick up is that MKH-416 is very sliiiiiiiighlty better are rejecting side and back sounds. but even so, I wouldn't pay the extra buck just for that. The MKE-600 Is just as good.
I love my MKE600 it was a good price, works great as an on camera mic for my XA50, and works great on a tripod plugged directly into my laptop using the AA battery. The MKH 416 is a better mic but it is such a small difference that it’s hard to notice unless you really listen for the difference.
So, here's the deal... MKH 416 is a better mic. It sounds richer and it gets you closer to the professional final results just as it is. The real difference comes to live using these two mics on field. The 416 is quieter and and better suited for a long term use as a field mic.. it is 3x and more the price of MKE 600, and for a reason. The outside test in windy condition in not referencal. Those are NOT the "wind" protection that came with the microphones, those are just some regular on mic pop filters. Never ever record sound outside without at least the basket. Cheers
I got a ntg4+ running into a tascam recorder made for fujifilm cameras. I’m not really impressed with the ntg4+ and would like to up my audio quality. Does anyone here know if the mke600 would be a step up?
It's really subjective. I own both, used to own the ntg3 and a 416. Which Tascam recorder model are you using? The ntg4+ is an excellent mic. A lot of times the quality of the preamp/recorder is going to affect the sound being recorded by the mic.
@@adnan_velic If you are unhappy with the Rode, you might be pleasantly surprised by the Sennheiser. The MKE600 sounds amazing for the price. In my experience, and plugging them into a mixer like a Sound Devices MixPre, they both sound professional. The Sennheiser may sound closer to the sound you are looking for, however. It's definitely one of those "no regrets" purchases.
No professional is going to buy the MKE600. If you're a content creator or don't make a living out of this then sure, it's a great mic. But as soon as you go outdoors or in humid conditions the 416 (or now the 8060) is king. Weather conditions aside, the 416 has better sound than the 600, and also less self noise. But the main reason is that it's built like a tank, hence the higher price. When it comes to mics, my recommendation is always buy the best you can afford as they will last forever. Everything else in your chain can be replaced every few years.
I guess it depends on what kind of professional you are referring to. There are several professional Podcaster and video interviewers that are using the 600 for in-studio work (The Shawn Ryan Show being one of them). I personally think they sound and function great for that role and I have been using them for the same application; for the interviews on my channel. I definitely agree the 416 sounds better with more detail.
@@runningintohistory You're right. When I said pro, I was thinking of people shooting film outdoors who can be caught in bad conditions. Poor choice of wording from my end. Yes, they're absolutely fine for podcasting, they sound great. I just wanted to explain why the 416 is better.
OMG! What shitty situation. The MKH-416 DOES sound better BUT not by much. So if you wanted the absolute best quality for your video project you would have to get the MKH-416. I just wish a company could provide the same performance for like $750 and not a grand.
it doesn't matter how it sounds on you're voice I have a lot of shotgun microphones sennheiser mkh 416 , 40, 50, 60, 70 I have dpa 4017 4018 with preamps a b and c I have a 4099 they are all used for different jobs
I've used the MKE 600 on a feature film. Our film was mixed by a pro, who complimented the quality of the recordings. So, the 600 is worth the savings.
That's awesome yeah the 600 I think punches above it's price for sure.
I have the 600 what I have heard called the "poor mans 416". I have no complaints about it. From your comparisons, the outdoor was the biggest difference with the 416 edging out the 600. Post processing was great. I could barely hear any difference. My only other comment would be that you can just call out the number of the mics( 416 or 600) without the letters. We know which is which. Great job, thanks for the video.
poor mans 416 is a bad name. I feel offended
Could you elaborate on the difference outdoors? Are you talking about weather sealing or something else?
@@matango1979 Honestly, it's been a couple months since I listened to the video. He was either talking about quality of sound or the blocking of peripheral sounds while outside testing. What I got from that was that there was little to no difference in sound quality between the mics while inside. As a VO, all my work is inside a treated area so not having to pay an extra $600 for the 416 works for me.
The 416 is an RF Condenser and the 600 is an electret, the RF Condenser has better moisture protection. As for the sound difference, the 416 seemed a bit brighter. I own the 600 and at work we have the 416...they are both good microphones. The 600 has both battery and phantom power while the 416 only has phantom power, in this case it would depend on your workflow and if you would need the flexibility in power. If you record a lot of sound outside in varying conditions, aside from pouring down rain, the 416 would make more sense as it has a bit of moisture protection.
In a previous life, I used the 416 for location recording and it's a true workhorse. Heavy duty build quality, excellent sound, very much worth its reputation and cost. In my UA-cam life, I've got the 600 for the main reason that it's a much more affordable mic with great sound and build. The sound differences are small but noticeable, but the price point of the 600 is what makes it such a compelling choice.
Yeah it's really hard to beat
Take the two microphones to a blind test. Even if someone is able to hear any difference I think its even harder to have a consistent meaning of which is "better".
To my ear the MKH-416 has noticeably more presence in the mid-range and high frequencies. Basically more clarity, which sounds better to me.
600 is a little more brittle however has less comb filtering than the 416 when indoors. 416 is the preferable choice outdoors or in a well treated room. Place the ports up when indoors to minimize phase issues.
Interesting, I didn't know the side ports matter which way they face 🤔
Thanks for the info!
@@absorbproductions It's really the room acoustics that determine the way the ports should face. Generally up is better.
@@schoepsms you mean the ridges on the side should face the ceiling in order to lessen phase issues?
Thank you for a great job
Thank you!😁
there's a bunch of reasons the 416 has the reputation it does. In a studio test, both will pick up the sound accurately and reproduce it well but in professional scenarios (location sound recording outdoors for example) the 416 is clearly better - I'm listening on HD6xx cans via an RME babyface pro RS and the 416 has more body and depth with an overall richer sound but the 600 still sounds fantastic and for an indie production or a run and gun setup it would be totally fine. I rarely see a 416 on set these days - mostly schoeps on the end of the boom and very often the mini ones.
Interesting that you mention the Schoeps. We only use it on a TV serie production in a studio. Outdoors only sometimes the MKH 416 but mostly now the MKH 8060.
Excellent comparison! You did it very thoroughly, thank you so much!
You are very welcome 😁 I'm glad you liked the video
I’ll have to go back and listen with headphones.
I keep reading that folks say the 416 is crisper/more highs.
I am hearing a different - more full lower mid range (not mud though).
Both sound excellent.
You can get a used 416 in excellent condition for the $600-$700 range.
Yeah, overall, the 416 does sound better and it should for that price but depending on the application and what it is, you are using it for it may not make a difference, especially if you’re just getting content that will be viewed on a cell phone
This video was very well done, thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for the comment!
Wasn't looking for a new channel to sub to but after you came back to finish this months later it's the least I could do! Really appreciate the comparison since I'm about to make a purchase between the two.
There's definitely more low end extension (not louder bass, but more of it) a sharp presence peak on the 416, plus the improved off-axis rejection was noticeable. During the outdoor tests I originally preferred the 416 but now I'm not sure they were gain matched outside until the blimp test? (the 416 sounded louder so I was biased towards that, but I could be wrong) Once you got to the blimp test the 600 sounded much louder without the harshness and I might even prefer it!
The 600 felt like it had this vintage charm to the sound, not as harsh and more natural and I preferred it in both the blimp test and garage test. Thanks again, great video!
Thank you so much! It's comments like this that make the whole video feel worth it and to keep creating content on here. Thank you again your comment means so much!!
Do you have a video on how you treated your room?
We don't, we were going to make an office tour soon but the audio treatment isn't the greatest, it's mostly for visuals. But I just have sound panels on the ceiling and the corners of the room. Bass traps help and outing anything on the ceiling and having a carpeted room makes a huge difference. If you have a hard surface you can lay a rug down and that will help a lot.
Thanks for your comment!!
The 416 sounds very crisp/clear in comparison to the 600. The 600 seems to be more mid/bass heavy.
Yes agree the 416 was more natural sounding in my opinion.
You did a great job of bridging the gap between these two mics with a little post-processing. I think the 416 is a little richer and more detailed in the mid to high end prior to processing. The 416 is built a little better ie. is made of copper, there may be some differences internally also (! have seen a scratched 416 but not a broken one, for a mic that has been around for 49yrs that says a lot), and I believe handles proximity and plosives a little better. These differences a minimal. Are they worth double the price? to a professional working with high budgets absolutely. But for most professionals, particularly those starting out, it makes way more sense to invest that extra money into other areas that could potentially add far greater value, particularly as the differences in sound can be closed to a point where the sound is almost indistinguishable as demonstrated here.
10:36 Honestly sounds great in there for documentary or fiction/drama purposes. I'm presuming a ton of set audio we've become accustomed to hearing is the 416 or 600 in wild environments like a garage or street.
I think the 416 was a little more clean sounding and crisp but a little EQ would fix that with the 600.
Yeah you can really stack these against each other with a little post knowledge
Ooh. :) I'd like to see a comparison between the AT875R and the MKE-600, especially in terms of picking up environmental noise and sibilance. I bought a Synco d-2 because so many in the voice over industry claimed it's comparable to the MKH-416 but it's not better than my At875R.
i ave the at875r its a great mic but i wouldn't say its THAT much better than the RODEE video mic NTG. Plus, with a wireless lav setup you can turn the mke600 and the Rode NTG into a wireless boom mic
@@Granthuffman Ooh I'm not a fan of Rode mics, but thanks! I'm a Voice Actor, so I use mics for voice overs. And, again, sibilance and environmental noise are factors in me considering mics.
Fantastic video dude! Loved how in depth you went. This is totally helping me navigate the crazy microphone learning curve!
That's amazing to hear! I'm so glad it was helpful! If there's anything else you'd like us to dive into audio wise let us know!! Thanks again your feedback means the world!
i have two mke600 and no regret
I bought the 416 a couple of years back with the intent of having the best audio, now I need a second one for a podcast setups, and I refuse to pay for the 416 considering the small difference in audio quality with the 600... Thanks for the video!
We were in the same boat! We actually picked up a few mke 600s because the sound difference is so minimal 😅
You can't tell the difference. I literally have the 600 in my Sweetwater cart at the moment. I wanted the 416, but damn $1000 when the 600 sounds similar to me. 600 it is for me. Thank you for testing the outdoors. I think I'll get the blimp as well with it for my horror outdoor movies.
Thank you so much for the comment and thank you for watching. I'm glad this video brought some value to you! Yeah the blimp I have here is one from movo as well and makes a huge difference in windy environments.
This video is awesome ❤
You’re awesome! Thank you,🙏
The average John / Mary , don't hear the difference between the 416 /600 , so I went for the MKE 600 , and also use a Sennheiser ME64
416 is a little brighter, but nothing a small eq wont change. 600 is a value champ and pro level!
Each of those microphones has it's use!!!
Great comparison. I use the 600 to record the majority of the interviews on my channel, after learning that the Shawn Ryan Show was using them. I think it sounds great but every time I hear a comparison, I realize how much more detailed the 416 sounds. Not enough difference to justify price for what I do. Particularly when there are huge shows also using the 600.
The only reason I prefer the 416 is the internal RF bias. I live in a place with mixed climate (humid summer, ...) and any normal condenser mic will make a strange noise at one time or another due to a circuit problem. Not a problem with the 416. But if it's just for the sound quality, the mke 600 would have been great.
This is very good to know. I'm in Hawaii.
Have owned and used both. If you can afford it or otherwise justify it, get a 416. However, the 600 gets you most of the way there for a fraction of the price. The only in between step would be a Rode NTG-3 imho, however the Rode NTG4/4+ is also a solid mic.
Thank you for the review and comparison!
Thank you so much for the comment! Glad this was helpful!
The naked 600 sounds like the 416 with a foam windscreen - slightly muffled or wooly in comparison. Which means the 416 has slightly more clarity and a more natural sound (though the distinction is not always noticeable). I have both, and use 600 most of the time.
I have te 600 and use the 416 a lot on boom on film and video gigs.
The main difference between the two is the soundcoloring of the off axis "noise".
They both are absolutely phantastic directly on axis but the price difference shows in the naturality of the sound that is off axis, the 416 is a lot more homogenous thna the 600. If it's worth the price difference?
Depending on the production budget and environment I'd say absolutely. It's just that little difference that makes the sound editors life a littl;e easier, in a controlled environment where you can pretty much ensure constant on axis recording, it's not really worth it IMHO.
Either way, both Microphones are excellent and for the price performance, the 600 is absolutely perfect.
Probaly a stupid thing to ask but how does the senal mc24 el compare to these?
I'm not familiar with the microphone so we wouldn't know for sure how they stack up.
Thanks for this video! Great job!
Thank you for the compliment 🙏 Glad you liked it!
great comparison. I ended up getting the 416 to stop looking into comparisons for the rest of my life. But, bro, what the heck is your Chanel stuck at short of 800 subs ??? is "the algorithm" this messed up ??? please share your thoughts about that.
It is very funny: In the garage I cant distinguish these both, but outdoor and in your Studio the 416 is better, if you have a direct competition.
On the other side, a 330€ shotgun for immediate to go, without a recoder, direct into the camera, costs you 330 instead of 1000 plus a zoom F6 for 650€
To start, the 600 is great. But if you have the problem, if the Maybach or the Mercedes S 600 is better, you are in another universe to appreciate that luxury.
This is true but I don't assume everyone would be using the FX6 either, so I opted for the cleanest preamps I have access to, this is way I thought it was important to mention what I was recording into. But using a clean recorder give a better idea of the comparison, if you didn't like the sound of either example you most likely wouldn't like it directly into a camera either.
I hope that makes sense!
personnaly i would say the only difference i can hear with the 600 is with the supplied windshield.
the windshield of the 416 seems to have been more engineered to be transparent as possible.
other than that, they sound identical to me on my... sound setup... if we could call this like that :D
Good video. I wish you could have put mic in studio a little further to mimic how it would be used in interview. Mic probably won’t be that close. But thus is an amazing video.
Yes if you curious most my videos are on the MKH 416 a bit further back. I didn't think they sounded too different about 5 inches back or out frame, but your right that would change it a bit. But I think the characteristics are just lessened a bit on each further back
416 sounds better and has less problem with bright sibilants. 600 sounds much like my ME66
The MKH series mics are much more resistant to moisture and humid environments than the MKE series. So if you are going to be recording outdoors, the MKH is superior.
And the 416 is quite an old design. Sennheiser's newest MKH shotgun, the 8060, might be a good comparison, but of course is more expensive.
Boy, this is a tough comparison. I think I can hear a little more "natural" sound, with the 416. Maybe a little brighter but not tinny. However! I To me they're pretty close and as far as bang for buck, I'd certainly go with the MKE 600.
what lens did you use on the fx6 for the outdoor test?
The A cam on the fx6 was the gmastwr 50 1.4 and the be cam of the wide was the sigma 24-70mm 2.8 on the a7iv I believe
mke 416 is a little bit pricey and little bit more sensitive especially at low end. difference is 5-10 % and price is 3x time (300 %)
Yes I agree the price difference doesn't seem as different as the quality
@@absorbproductions but at open space differnce is not small. noise rejection and low end and hi sensivity of 416 is much higher at large distance and less noise..
You are right ...unfortunately MKH-416 is industry standard and You need to have It if you want to be Sound guy in the industry. You didn't mention how MKE-600 works in the high humidy environment. ....like ME66
Yeah I wouldn't know how it would be a sound guy in the industry. But I agree a lot of people would most likely recognize the 416.
Also I haven't had any experience in humid conditions either. Is the ME66 supposed to perform better in humidity?
@@absorbproductions ME66 usually fails miserably in humid condition.
Oh okay good to know I'll keep humidity information in mind for future content on microphones
MKH 416 sound a bit better, but the MKE 600 is actually pretty good. Im buying the MKE 600 because of you lol. Save me some cash.
Thank you for the watch and comment! I'm sure you will not be disappointed with your MKE 600!
416 wins right away in sound right off the bat hearing the two.
That was never the question, of course it does. The question is: does it win by enough to justify the price being 3 times as high? You can buy 3 MKE-600 and treat yourself to a burger or an ice cream or both, for the price of one MKH-416 - depends a bit on spot price, but that's the range. So if the choice is 416 for sound and a worse lens, or having to shoot a scene using the 416 in a noisy environment instead of lav mics and body packs, is it STILL justifiable? That is the way you gotta think about it, not simply what is better.
Personally I'm not sure, I might go for a cheaper shotgun and get a set of bodypacks with decent lav mics.
The only difference I could pick up is that MKH-416 is very sliiiiiiiighlty better are rejecting side and back sounds. but even so, I wouldn't pay the extra buck just for that. The MKE-600 Is just as good.
I agree the value in the MKE 600 makes since for most
I love my MKE600 it was a good price, works great as an on camera mic for my XA50, and works great on a tripod plugged directly into my laptop using the AA battery.
The MKH 416 is a better mic but it is such a small difference that it’s hard to notice unless you really listen for the difference.
So, here's the deal... MKH 416 is a better mic. It sounds richer and it gets you closer to the professional final results just as it is. The real difference comes to live using these two mics on field. The 416 is quieter and and better suited for a long term use as a field mic.. it is 3x and more the price of MKE 600, and for a reason. The outside test in windy condition in not referencal. Those are NOT the "wind" protection that came with the microphones, those are just some regular on mic pop filters. Never ever record sound outside without at least the basket. Cheers
I had a question, what is the basket? I was going to record with the MKE 600 outside for an interview. Anything helps.
BRAVO MAN!!!!!
Thanks for watching 😁
I got a ntg4+ running into a tascam recorder made for fujifilm cameras. I’m not really impressed with the ntg4+ and would like to up my audio quality. Does anyone here know if the mke600 would be a step up?
It's really subjective. I own both, used to own the ntg3 and a 416. Which Tascam recorder model are you using? The ntg4+ is an excellent mic. A lot of times the quality of the preamp/recorder is going to affect the sound being recorded by the mic.
@@CampCrystalLake hey! The tascam recorder I use is the ca-xlr2d-f.
@@adnan_velic If you are unhappy with the Rode, you might be pleasantly surprised by the Sennheiser. The MKE600 sounds amazing for the price. In my experience, and plugging them into a mixer like a Sound Devices MixPre, they both sound professional. The Sennheiser may sound closer to the sound you are looking for, however. It's definitely one of those "no regrets" purchases.
No professional is going to buy the MKE600. If you're a content creator or don't make a living out of this then sure, it's a great mic. But as soon as you go outdoors or in humid conditions the 416 (or now the 8060) is king. Weather conditions aside, the 416 has better sound than the 600, and also less self noise. But the main reason is that it's built like a tank, hence the higher price. When it comes to mics, my recommendation is always buy the best you can afford as they will last forever. Everything else in your chain can be replaced every few years.
Just dropping a random comment in this section so I can come back later
I guess it depends on what kind of professional you are referring to. There are several professional Podcaster and video interviewers that are using the 600 for in-studio work (The Shawn Ryan Show being one of them). I personally think they sound and function great for that role and I have been using them for the same application; for the interviews on my channel. I definitely agree the 416 sounds better with more detail.
@@runningintohistory You're right. When I said pro, I was thinking of people shooting film outdoors who can be caught in bad conditions. Poor choice of wording from my end. Yes, they're absolutely fine for podcasting, they sound great. I just wanted to explain why the 416 is better.
I use my MKE 600 for everything instudio work outdoors etc so i don’t agree 🤷🏿♂️
I know a freelance TV professional that uses the mke600 as his main shotgun mic. Actually, now that I think about it, I know two.
thanks bro from Jamaica mke 600
I feel like the 416 have a overall more realistic and comfortable sound
Yeah I agree
das 416 klingt selbst via Laptop speaker besser. Die Stimme ist wärmer und voller.
I don't know....I have owned 416 for a couple of years and I am getting tired of it. Rode videomic Go 2 is actually better for the studio via Type C
Can you explain ? Interesting
OMG! What shitty situation. The MKH-416 DOES sound better BUT not by much. So if you wanted the absolute best quality for your video project you would have to get the MKH-416. I just wish a company could provide the same performance for like $750 and not a grand.
MKE 600 is a bit more lively. Don’t want to say bright because there was still warmth.
Why don't you describe it with colors or with your emotions next time? lol. I hate it when people does this.
i got sennheiser mkh-416 for $300, it is used. but i think you can get mkh-416. so it is worthed mkh-416. you just need to find used one
you sure it's genuine? mics don't lose their value like that, and there are tons of fake 416s on the market.
@@TheXone7 dont worry. i already check, and it sound awesome. all of the inside is using gold. i already check it.
@AnnoyinglyCharming nope man. it is used. dont you know jakarta people are rich.
Yes. Save your money. Get a Deity S Mic 2.
I'd love to compare the S mic 2 up against these!
The 600 sounds muffled in comparison to the 416, the 416 sounds absolutely transparent, fantastic sound.
That's not been my experience with the 600 at all.
I would add a fact that there are lots of fake 416s out there (at least there were in 2000s
Pause
😂😂😂😂😂 stop it
U cute
it doesn't matter how it sounds on you're voice I have a lot of shotgun microphones sennheiser mkh 416 , 40, 50, 60, 70 I have dpa 4017 4018 with preamps a b and c I have a 4099 they are all used for different jobs
Eh, it doesn't matter what you have, no one cares. And this isn't about what you seem to think it is.