Mics for Rooms with Echo: Cardioid vs Hypercardioid
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лип 2024
- Conventional thought among indie filmmakers is that a shotgun mic is the mic that will get you the cleanest dialogue audio when shooting indoors. But if you talk to most audio engineers, they’ll say that shotgun mics have some pretty serious problems in rooms with echo and that a hypercardioid mic is usually a better choice. And now I’ve recently heard one filmmaker suggest that a cardioid condenser mic may be better than a hyper cardioid in rooms with echo because it picks up less of the echo from behind the mic. In this episode, we put that idea to the test in my own nightmare of an echo chamber!
This episode shot with the following:
-----------------------------
RODE NT1A Cardioid Condenser Microphone
geni.us/6jTqhj
-----------------------------
Audio Technica 4053b Hypercardioid Microphone
geni.us/LWeH
-----------------------------
RODE NT5 Cardioid Condenser Microphone (smaller and more convenient for film and just over $200 USD)
geni.us/LRlI
-----------------------------
Tascam DR-60D Audio Recorder
geni.us/yNyO
-----------------------------
Mic Boom Stand (On-stage Stands):
geni.us/0EBFszJ
-----------------------------
Panasonic GH4:
geni.us/15yPmX
-----------------------------
Atomos Ninja II HD Recorder
geni.us/H7qseJ
-----------------------------
Olympus 45mm f/1.8 micro 4/3 Lens
geni.us/62se
-----------------------------
Nikon D600:
geni.us/KrdgMf
-----------------------------
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AF-D Lens
geni.us/BjRP9
-----------------------------
Music copyright Curtis Judd 2014
Ethics statement: Some of the links above are Amazon.com, B&H Photo, or other affiliate links.
I realize this is an older video, but the shotgun phenomenon is actually very easy to explain. Think of a shotgun as a long telephoto. It compresses distance. The background is brought closer to the subject. What you're hearing as reverberation is actually a mix of first-order reflection (short echo) and reverberation (those first-order reflections bounced from wall to wall).
It's not what's coming into the side tube which is skewing the phase of the audio with indoor shotgun use. It's the "overshoot" from the mic picking up the reflective surfaces behind you and moving them "closer" (louder) just like what happens when a telephoto compresses distance. That's why it sounds "phasy" becuause that is exactly what is happening. The reflection time is so short that it doesn't read as an echo, it reads as a phase/comb filter effect.
That's why the hyper/super/cardioid mics solve the problem to varying degrees. They reject less reflection, yes. BUT they do not compress the audio signal as much distance-wise, so the wall/corner/floor behind the subject isn't getting as compressed into the audio signal.
There are MANY ways mics behave like lenses, and several ways they don't. But if you think of an Omni as a wide angle, and a Shotgun as a long telephoto, and everything else that falls between as a focal length analog, you will get at least a basic idea of what problems a mic will solve.
Thanks Bruce, very helpful!
@@curtisjudd You're welcome. you're running a great channel. Not many audio-centric channels feature a/b comparisons of these mics, because on the music production side their use is mostly in niche categories. Spot-mic'ing orchestral soloists, etc. I am a composer/sound designer, so I have my feet in both ponds.
Thank you so much. This is a beautiful physics-based analogy. And it is beautiful and true at the same time because it relies on physics laws.
Thanks. I loved it.
beautifully explained, thank you
Comparing a shotgun mic to a telephoto lens is the best explination I have ever heard.
For any question I might have on any topic, almost certainly you've already done a video on it! Thx a lot for that, Curtis!
Thanks TheElFuppo!
Thanks for the great comparison, this was very helpful since I am currently trying to improve my sound quality and hearing it for myself is 100 times better than reading articles about it, this video was worth a million words!
Thanks, glad it was helpful!
yeah man it was really good. i actually own a good cardioid, so feel more confident for using it for indoor interviews especially in roomy rooms
Great comparison. Not sure if it was intentional, but you nicely matched the sound of the mic to the shot. Both mics serve their purposes. In location audio, you sometimes want to capture the room sound with the dialog to make the viewer feel the sense of space, especially with long shots in film. People will claim this sounds more natural because it is. For interview or narration style with close ups, eliminating the room sound matches the shot much better, especially if you're not showing the entire space or location ambience is not important.
Although, I do agree with what others said about the location of room reflections in relation to the polar pattern. I had one instance where I used a cardioid capsule on a mic and it made the room sound more pronounced than the hypercardioid I had. The cardioid was not desirable in that situation.
Thanks for the insights! I agree, different mics for different situations.
Yeah I want to see the review with the Nt5 !!
this solidified everything I've been experiencing with the mkh416, I thought that this mic would be my absolute final mic because every time I heard it it was absolutely perfect but in all of those cases they were recording in very well controlled booths with not much echo. In my room which doesn't even have that much echo to begin with picks up sooo much echo from this mic. Definitely going to be going the cardioid way next.
Be prepared, cardioid mics will still pick up reverb. The best solution is to get that mic within 4 inches of your mouth.
This was very informative and helps me out quite a bit. Thanks for this comparison.
Personally, if seemed fairly night and day with each mic. The Cardioid mic sound very rich and warm vs the Hypercardioid had a slight echoy and almost tin sound in comparison.
I definately vote Cardioid.
Thanks!
Exactly. If I want richness with an echo and reverb, it's a lot easier to add it in post, than it is to take it away. Rejection is key here.
Yes. NT1 sound compressed with less echo feed back. But still colored the voice with room sound. This is important advice as I do not wish to use plugin reverb on my music recordings. Only the room sound. Including vocals. Ty
👍
The term you're looking for is reverb, not echo. Echo is a sound reflection that takes longer than .1 seconds to reach the listener (or microphone) when compared to the direct sound. Reverb is a reflection that takes less than .1 seconds to reach the listener (mic) respective of the direct sound. Speed of sound at sea level is around 340 m/s (depending on room temperature) So if you do the math you need at least 17 meters from you to a reflective surface in order to hear an echo. (sound leaves your mouth, travels 17m reflects off a wall, travels 17m back to your ear .1s later.) Odds are the room you're in isn't large enough to produce echo, but is probably fairly reverberant. Hope my comment was helpful! :-) Other than that, pretty good video. Personally I prefer the cardioid over the hypercardioid because it seems to pickup a little bit more of the room, and helps it sound a bit more natural. Thanks for the video!
+Drew Jenkins Thanks Drew!
+Drew Jenkins More accurately, I believe the term you should be saying is Reverberation which is different than the word Reverb. Reverb is defined as an effect coming from an amplifier device.
+MAC Motions correct you are. I just shortened reverberation to reverb like I would if I was chatting with someone. Reverberation is the more accurate term. Thanks.
Drew Jenkins it’s not clear what mic do you prefer.
I'm just having fun seeing a bunch of people have a civil conversation about technical stuff. I didn't know what the technical difference was between echo and reverberation. Thanks for the information!
the difference is the sibilance more than the reduction of the echoing
+TORMY VAN COOL yes definitely different microphones in terms of sibilance.
thanks!!
Interesting video. I’d love to see an updated one & if your thinking has evolved on the subject, and what are good options to solve that echo issue in untreated rooms for indoor dialogue.
Sound blankets do wonders for managing reverb in a room: ua-cam.com/video/uzyEaVYCk3s/v-deo.html
Great test !! I think that in this comparison the Hypercardioid mic works best and seems clearer to the ear. But more expensive I would assume :/. If you look at the diagram of both you notice how the minor rear lobes of the cardioid pattern add up the same lobe of the rear pickup sensitivity of the hypercardioid in proportions. The difference is in the front pickup patterns mainly.
Thanks Allan! Appreciate the feedback.
Your test is clear, the cardioid had less room echo. And others mentioned they felt the hypercardoid sounded fuller or more like a normal voice. Generally one can add reverb in post, but if you capture it, its harder to eliminate. So I favour the cardioid. I think you have to also mention that ambient recording is needed (30s or so). As for motion as in an actor walking, then I think you have a couple choices, a lav for walk & talk, or a boom operator with a cardioid (not always there for indie shoots). Of course you could always have a X-Y stereo record on your portable recorder for ambient foley sounds during motion (foot steps, open doors or drawyers, zippers, etc.). ~ I will try my cardioid for next indoor shoot.
+Robert Shaw Great points! Thanks!
Cardioid has much less echo than the Hypercardioid Microphone for indoor dialog with multiple hard surfaces creating echoing. The RODE NT1A Cardioid Condenser Microphone however did not have as much low or high frequencies compared to the Audio Technica 4053b Hypercardioid Microphone. IF you want to only record the isolated voice of the talent, Cardioid wins. If you want some ambient sound/noise and atmosphere in addition to the talent, Hypercardioid is a better choice.
Thanks Romeo
Romeo and Curtis , I am looking to improve my audio quality and I am considering Senheiser MKH 8040 or 8050. The room I record in is somewhat sound treated, with non-treated ceiling and a carpet on the floor (walls have some acoustic panels), but still has noticeable reverb and my current shotgun (Rode NTG4) is not giving me the results I need. So, which one would you recommend, 8040 (cardioid) or 8050 (super-cardioid)? Thanks in advace!
@@curtisjudd see below please. thx!
@@ekredel Hi Kresimir, I know this isn't what you asked but I don't think either of those microphones will solve the problem. I suspect that more acoustic treatment will help more than anything.
@@curtisjudd Thanks for answering. Being your big fan and having watched many many of your videos, I had a hunch you were going to write something like this. :)
I was trying to see if I can squeeze some more quality out of the current setup by introducing a more appropriate mic since I got an offer for sound treating my ceiling (with not so expensive materials) that is higher than the cost of the mics I mentioned. also, mic will (hopefully) last for a long time, and work in other rooms as well. I am a bit reluctant to invest in a space that I rent and do not own....just to let you know my line of thought...
The Rode NT1 is superior in your torture chamber of sound test... I prefer your type of test as opposed to others in the foam lined sound booth! Would love to see your review of the Rode NT5 and to see Nikon's reply to your suggestions. Great Stuff As Always!!!
Thanks Stephen!
Thanks for doing this video. This is definitely something that needs to be explored. I know as indie filmmakers (as a whole) we have gravitated towards shotgun mics - but is their best application only to be mounted on a hot shoe for documentary "man on the street" type shooting? In a controlled environment, would a small diaphragm mic work better? I have the AT2035 - which is a large diaphragm, but sometimes its cousin, the AT2020, comes packaged with the AT2021 which is a small diaphragm mic, which has a thin shape which resembles a shotgun mic. Unsure how that would perform on a set, but this is exciting stuff to explore! :)
Thanks Dave!
Thanks for this comparison. I'm researching inexpensive mics for location filming. Coming from a background in audio recording I found it perplexing that hypercardioid mics seem to be the go-to for film. The difference here is exactly what I expected. Cardioid is clean and tight and a blank canvas for post-production. The shotgun mic is, well... ugly.
👍
I noticed that the hyper echo was much higher and drew attention to itself while the cardiod echo sounded more ‘blended’ natural with the voice
Good insight, thanks for that.
Sounds like the Rode NT-1 has a little bit less reverb than the AT. However, the NT-1 is a large diaphragm condenser, good for voice-overs in an isolated booth, but with the large diaphragm, it mercilessly picks up EVERYTHING, which can make it very hard not to pick up reflections (although in this case, it doesn't sound so bad since it looks like you're some distance from your walls). Try a smaller cardioid condenser, it might be more forgiving. I work in a small in-house media department where we recently got the AKG Blue Line series. The good thing about that set of mics is that it has an interchangeable capsule system, so it's a bit more economical. The full mics are about $400 on B&H, but the beauty is that if you don't like the sound of one polar pattern, for half price ($200) you can swap out the capsule and try another polar pattern, rather than buying an additional $400 mic. At first, b/c of what I learned on the internet, I tried the hypercardioid head for indoor booming on a recent shoot and still got a bit of reverb (it was a large office lobby where I shot it), and despite what I saw on UA-cam about taking out reverb with parametric EQ, it didn't quite work out for me. Next time I'll try the cardioid head on the mic and see if that's better.
I agree! In fact, we compared the AKG Blue Line to some other small diaphragm condenser microphones here: ua-cam.com/video/q-b_1gOYOEQ/v-deo.html
This is so interesting Curtis. I have become intensely interested in this question of choice of shotgun vs hypercardioid vs cardioid for indoor dialogue since I very nearly ruined a high-stakes gig by incorrectly selecting a MKH416 for a rverberant space with resulting horrible phasing. The day was saved by redundancy audio captured on a cheap lav mic! I now own a MKH8050 hyper and the AT8053b hyper but I’m also starting to appreciate the qualities of straight cardioid. Case in point - this test ^. Through good headphones what I hear is maybe slightly less echo on the cardioid (from the lack of rear pickup not capturing roof echoes?) but also nicer quality sounding echo on the cardioid - to my ears anyway. I’ve just ordered the amazing little Line Audio CM4 cardioid and on the lookout for a vintage MKH406 cardioid, both of which I’ve heard and liked.
Hi Doug - thanks for sharing your experience and insights! Best wishes on sourcing the vintage MKH406. 😀🎤
@@curtisjudd thanks buddy and thanks for the tips on the MKH8050. I bought mine based on your reviews. I love the sound it gets for it's tiny weeny size and light weight! ...not to mention the incredible frequency response specs. At 50KHz, it picks up sounds only my Golden Retriever can hear!!
To this day, this still the only video that does this comparison. I’ve since switched from my hypercardioid to cardioid capsules on my Oktava MK-012 for indoors and am liking the results.
I was hoping that you could do a test video like this using the Oktava MK-012 and the Sennheiser MKH-50 since (from what I read on social media) the 50 is the most recommended mic to use in reverberant spaces. If the Oktava does better, I may not feel the need to buy the 50.
I gave away my mk-012 so I can’t do a comparison presently. But if you’re happy with the results you’re getting, that’s great!
The rode one is warmer and less ambient than the AT. So for clean conversation I do think it is better. Really nice illustration here. For other applications tough I might prefer the reverb of the AT mic. Even through my cheap bluetooth speakers the difference is quite marked.
+rimmersbryggeri I agree. Ideally having options is best.
A comparison between the AT4051b, the AT4053b, and the Rode NT1A would be nice... Would be good to hear the two AT mics side by side as a comparison in this case because the mic capsules are swappable. You can buy either mic and purchase the additional capsule and at the swap of a capsule have hypercardioid or cardioid in the usually more convenient pencil mic format. That NT1A does do a nice rendition with your voice. The AT mics of this series are voiced for flat response at 12" or greater and usually keep a gorgeous amount of low frequency content.
I agree, would be a nice comparison. Unfortunately don't have the budget for the additional capsule at the moment, but will keep it in mind. Thanks!
I believe the bubble on the rear of a hypercardioid mics polar pattern is out of phase from the front. Which means it attempts to cancel a sound coming from the back if it's the same as the sound going into the front. This makes it pretty ideal for live performance since there's speakers all over the place. For indoor dialogue, I think finding the most directional cardioid you can find would produce the best results due to the phasing issues that can occur with more than one direction of capture.. but this is just my theory.
The Sonic Experience Thanks!
audio technica has more room than rode. for indoor i prefer a mic that have more focus and less room. i have buy an octava mk12 for indoor but hypercardioid capsule sounds bad compare to cardioid capsule. anyway im using an old sennheiser mkh 405 and im happy with it. thanx for your intelligent job Curtis. its a valid lesson for us
👍
Great review as always! Hypercardioid sound is more crisp and clear and because of that we hear more echo.
Rode is a bid muddy sound and thats why we hear a bit less echo , but still can hear a lot echo so i am not shure that cardioid fix that problem. I have vocal booth for vo , but for my videos also have that issue in recording room.
Good insight, thanks for that.
can you step underneath the fan above, turn it on to full speed and then test the mics. That is my current audio recording scenario. I have lot of ceiling fans running at full speed. Plus my talent is live broadcasting in the room itself via ceiling speakers.Looks like lavalier and cardoid mics will work great.
Curtis, i'm trying to decide what type of mic to buy for a noisy environment that I talk in for programming or tutorial vids, kinda like this one but with a TV and kids screaming in the background.
I don't really think dynamic's "reject room noise" more, i think people think that just because you gotta boost the gain more. could you help me pick a type? or a mic? shopping for 100$ or less.
i've been looking at the XM8500, and SM58. they're both dynamics, but i'm wondering if maybe I should just find a cardiod condenser instead.
I find that mic technique is what generally makes the difference between dynamic and condenser microphones. With dynamic microphones, most people work up closer to the diaphragm than on condenser mics which results in a more favorable signal to noise ratio. So in those practical terms, it often does make a difference - less background noise.
Hey. I want to use 1 boom mic to capture my voice and the guitar amp on the floor. What type of mic should i get?
Hmm, omni-directional? But it will pick up all of the reflected sound as well so if your room sounds good, that'll be great. If not, probably best to use two mics. Best wishes!
I have a Cardioid Neumann TLM102 and the Sennheiser MKH416, that i use for corporate videos and Direct sound for movies and audio dubbing.
whenever I have to dub, I find that its better for the overall sound of the scene to record with the MKH416 better than the TLM102, the second its just to clean and to perfect, and does not capture the identity of the room as delicately as the MKH416 does
I tried your experiment and the TLM102 gets less reverb and room identity than the MKH416, but i don´t think i would be able to do this as often since some people move a lot and the Condenser Cardioid mics tend to be allergic to movement and vibration.
I recommend both mics for field work and audio post production
Rodolfo Vivanco Thanks Rodolfo, good to hear your experience!
I think you can tell a difference. Pretty nice idea.
+joshua3113 thanks
No thank you. Consistently the go-to channel for all things audio. Believe me, I've been looking at them all.
Thanks for making this video mate. I reckon the cardioid sounded much better with less reverb. This being the case, would you say one could use the RØDE NT-USB in place of the NT1A to capture audio?
Hi, both the NT-USB and the NT1A have cardioid polar patterns so they'll be about the same. The difference is USB output for the NT-USB and XLR output for the NT1A.
Thank you.
I used Super to Hyper for indoor dialogue much. It provided more reach than Cardioid counterpart.
Some users used Oktova for these purpose too.
For top notch I know on this kind of mic. It should be Schoeps CMC641 Super-cardioid SDC which is very very expensive one but it's one of the most regard as golden sound quality.
Thanks Chanon. Maybe some day I can buy the Schoeps. ;-)
I used to have a Schoeps MK4 regret selling 😢
AudioTechnica AT4053b ❤👍🏻 FIRST CLASS MIC
👍🎙️
Would be awesome to see this test again with the same mic with different capsules... Like the Oktava with cardioid and hypercardioid.
Thanks Dan. I gave away the Oktava. What I have found from experience is that there isn't a HUGE. difference between cardioid and hyper cardioid microphones in terms of their ability to capture less reverb in particularly reverberant rooms. The more effective approach is to use sound blankets or some other similar method to manage sound reflecting off of the surfaces of the room.
@@curtisjudd Thanks, Curtis!
Hi, thank you for the video. I have a movo mic that makes echo sound sometimes. Do you have any suggestions how to reduce it (not editing software).
+Marina Ross Americaandmore (Americaandmore) Is it the microphone or does the room that you record in have natural reverb (echo)? It is most likely the room and here's one thing you can do (no editing required): ua-cam.com/video/xWmo5jlH3FI/v-deo.html Good luck!
thank you. the problem is not a room echo. mic itself echo. any ideas?
+Marina Ross Americaandmore (Americaandmore) Hmm, any samples online I could listen to?
Well, I think I figured it out. I don't know what was wrong with it. I changed audio mix settings by turing down the internal mic and leaving external on. It works fine now. Im so happy! Thank you for your help!
+Marina Ross Americaandmore (Americaandmore) Yay! Good job and happy recording!
Great content. I didn’t hear echo on either the mics. The Audiotechnica sounded a little harsh where the Rode was more warm.
Hmm, maybe try some headphones?
I have a question about using cardioid and hyper-cardioid mics in ORTF setup. I wanted to make outdoors recordings with this kind of setup. Could it make any problems in the final stereo image, when it is used not same patterns mics in f.e. ORTF setup?
Could sound unbalanced.
@@curtisjudd Thank you !
Curtis, i have a mini-numann TLM103 for recording vocals etc. Would something like one of the Audio Technica 4053b cardoids do a better job in a fairly echo room (basically a smaller version of the room you're in here) with hard walls wood floors etc - for voice in a video.
Hi, no I don't think so. In my tests, cardioids placed up close do a little better because hyper and super cardioid mics have a big tail on the rear of the mic which picks up a bit of the room. I think you'd be as well or better off with the TLM 103. Better yet, sound blankets will mellow out the reverb in the room: ua-cam.com/video/uzyEaVYCk3s/v-deo.html
Yes, cardioid RODE NT1a does have more "tighter" ambiance in a sense less echoic than the hyper cardioid AT 4053B, I has read somewhere about the differences between this two polar types that saids the same, if in a hall recording use a cardioid mic to minimized echo, I think this video confirmed such theory.
+pantaitube thanks for your insight!
+Curtis Judd Yes, I think all these infos are timely as I has just started to get serious with better videos via better audio that for a non commercial guy on budget I has just ordered a cardioid type K&F CM-500 which will be for indoor halls, forums and outdoor stage events while later on will get another budget hyper cardioid model for outdoor individual speech interview situation such as in a public rally so as to cut out surrounding noise to have better speech intelligibility of the subject in that kind of video.
+Choong best wishes on your film projects. Better sound is one of the best things you can do to improve your production value.
I know this video is a bit old. But the thing I learned was top-notch. As always, thanks, Curtis, I would like to see more mic comparisons related to indoor voice recording. Because I recently picked up Rode NTG5, some say it's all in one mic for indoor and outdoor. Can you do a comparison between Oktava, Audio Technica and Sennheiser indoor mics?
Thanks Yashi EL. Noted!
@@curtisjudd Thanks Curtis
Not only does the Rode NT1A sound warmer and have better bass and overall clarity, but the AT 4053b has a very noticeable increase of sibilance. I'm sure there's use cases for other cardioid microphones that aren't strictly "cardioid" patterns, but based on this one demo, I'm personally inclined to stay far away from the other cardioid patterns that microphones offer!
Most production sound mixers for film and TV will use super-cardioid mics indoors. The polar pattern and voicing are generally independent factors.
Would placing a small sound panel behind the microphone reduce reflections coming from the rear lobe of a super/hyper cardioid microphone, or would that adversely affect the sound quality in other ways?
That is a very good question that is worthy of an experiment. I'll add that to my list! Thanks!
I know this an old thread... But absolutely it would. In fact I think it's probably one of the most useful things you could do with one of those usually totally pointless reflection filters that you mount behind a mic. One of the biggest challenges in this usage is just dealing with the sheer bulk and weight of the ones I've seen. But it would in some ways create a "best of both worlds" type scenario. I'm actually quite surprised that no one has created a small super-cardioid mic that sits inside a small super lightweight rear sound absorber to keep most of the reverberation from entering the rear node expressly for this purpose. There's certainly enough video being shot in reverberant rooms to show that there's a market for one.
@@LeeRoyFreedom I know I'm super late to this party but there is a reason why such a product doesn't exist. The rear node is meant to cancel things like reverberations and background. As loud noises enter the rear node and front of the capsule simultaneously, they will cancel out relative to their SPL. Refer back to the diagram in this video, sound coming from the rear node is significantly reduced in DB. So if a truck slams on its breaks and the screeching is heard through the front capsule at 30db, and the rear at 20, they'll cancel and only allow 10 DB of that background noise through.
If you filter out the rear entirely, then the background noise of the trucks braking at 30 DB will in no way be mitigated.
Just my $.02.
In this particular comparison, I thought that the Rode NT1A was the better overall performer with regards to handling the room acoustics, although I preferred the tonality of the 4053b (purely subjective opinion).
There is one thing, though, that I think would have made this comparison even more interesting. I wonder how a large diaphragm dynamic mic would have compared, such as an Electro Voice RE20. Curtis - with condenser mics being generally more sensitive, do you think that a quality dynamic mic would have been a viable option in this particular scenario?
Hi Shawn, thanks. Dynamic mics rely on the sound source being quite close. I usually work with my RE20 within about 6 inches. Once you start drifting beyond that, it's hard to get enough signal. But, it is worth a try to hear for sure!
My best shotgun is an ATR2100 ... it gives me a rich sounded when mounted on a boom pole
👍 booming is one of the biggest things one can do to improve the quality of sound.
Interesting. Thanks for doing that test. The NT1A is miles better at reducing the room. For a small dia condenser mic have you tried the Superlux S241? Supposed to be very good for the money.
+JonoSlatter Voiceover I'll have to check that out, thanks!
Need advise. I'm making an indoor ASMR video so should I be using Sennheiser MKH 416 or Audio Technica AT4053B?
I'd probably opt for the Sennheiser, but both could do the job. The Sennheiser has more high frequency response so sounds "crisper" which is often desired for ASMR recordings.
I think Rode cardioid mic, get less echo than Audio Technica hypercardioid with echo at lo-mid frequencies, but Rode get less in Hi frequencies. Maybe, both together with lo-mid cut in audio technica hypercardioid could be interesting. (I will set the Rode as the principal mic, and getting hifrequencies in AudioTechnica)
Interesting idea, thanks Erick!
It does make a difference I listened on a phone to my ear mind you but I heard much more ambience and reverberation from the Audio Technica Hyper Cardioid in that set up than the Rode 😁 I've worked as a sound technician for live shows, but not recording/broadcasting. Dynamic mics are less susceptible to feedback than condenser microphones. The Rode NT1A is a Studio Condenser but you can get Live Condensers. At first listen, the Rode didn't seem to pick up too much bleedback from the hard surfaces considering its designed for studio use. I own a zoom h6, it has interchangeable microphones. May have to invent a multipurpose microphone for streamers that are content creators
👍
I honestly could not tell the difference between the two,,
I wonder if it makes sens to include low noise out in front of you a few feet
to distinguish which of the mic's have a better ability to cancel out the noise.
thnks for the post
Joe
+Jose Garcia Thanks! I agree that it will be hard for most people to tell a difference.
Hellow Curtis
Maybe its time to rebuilt this review using your AT 4053 agains the rode NTG2 and the Oktava MK012.
Its could be nice to ear the difference between polar patterns in the same place with small Diaphragm condenser mics (Cardioid - hypercardiod) vs Shotgun.
Finally talking about shotguns, I just bought my first MKH416 and outside is fantastic, but well, indoors as all we know is not the best option but for some reason, my MKE600 with a Super-cardioid polar pattern produce a fantastic indoor sound against the MKH with the Hypercardioid - Lobal polar pattern.
Hi Nacho, thanks for the idea. I’ll add it to the list.
I see this is old, but in case you never tried the NT5, I'd be happy to lend you one. They are great and cheap. I primarily use Telefunken M60s with switchable cardoid and hypercardoid for most of my indoor work but the NT5s can swap in just fine.
Thanks Darren! I have an NT5. Pretty good mic.
It seems to me that, as in all things audio, the type of mic you use depends on your environment and what you are trying to capture, so perhaps for different scenarios a hypercardioid works better than a cardioid and visa-versa. In other words, if you have a room that sends more reflections from the side and fewer reflections from the rear then a hypercardioid would be a better choice, whereas a room with more reflections from the rear and fewer reflections from the side would favor the cardioid.
My 2c
+Bob Adams Yes, good point.
yes a hyper has a rear lobe, but usually not as huge as the one in your diagram. But the difference here is the AT mic has much more presence. the echo is about the same in both.
👍
I found that for voice overs, a Cardioid would most likely sound better over a Hypercardioid, however for recording certain instruments I feel the hypercardioid would provide a better sound.
I might be wrong as I haven't tried, but that's what I feel ^-^
Thanks for your thoughts!
I don't know if you'll see this, Curtis, but I think Nikon really took your letter to heart.
👍
Seems like a hypercardioid with inclusion of a small mic isolation shield directly behind the mic would be the best solution if you want a narrow focus forward and to reject the rear. Would be nice if you could find one to clamp on the camera tripod though..
👍
+Curtis Judd, one question - do you record in HD? if not what definition do you record for your UA-cam videos?
Depends on the video, but usually 4K or HD and then conformed to HD.
Thanks, I am having a lot of questions as I am planning for videos but don't have those expensive gadgets :( for mic.
Don't worry. Skill is more important than gear. We'll teach you how to make good sound with less expensive gear.
very helpfull! but I don't understand if a cardioid can be a better choise also for filming indoor scenes.
I've to shoot a film where is a lot of indoor (no set, some location like friend's house, hall, basthroom ecc),. I know I'd know how much echo the rooms have.
My experience since I shot this is that super-cardioid is generally the best overall polar pattern for indoor dialogue in most situations. Here's a review of several: ua-cam.com/video/q-b_1gOYOEQ/v-deo.html
hh a little nikon rant.i was looking for dslr for shooting videos.after all my education and customer reviews a on nikon and canon.i decided to buy panasonic g6.anu thoughts on the g6 curtis?
I wish I had a Panasonic G6! Looks like a great little camera and what I would recommend over most DSLRs for someone getting started in video/filmmaking.
Hi Curtis, I'm struggling to make a decision re: mic choices. I have a few scenarios and was hoping you could steer me in the right direction. 1.) filming in a classroom 2.) filming in a gym 3). filming in a 12ft x 12ft room (with sound absorption on wall and floor) and 4.) vlogging out in the community. I currently have a Panasonic HCV 770 camcorder and was considering the possibility of mounting a Rode NTG2 on it (maybe with a TASCAM dr60 and/or a Beachtek adapter). This may be overkill for vlogging. I considered getting a Rode VideoMic Pro for vlogging (and then not use the adapter or recorder for that particular scenario). Do you think the Rode will pick up my voice from behind the camera when I am vlogging? If I got the Rode NTG2 I was thinking I might be able to use it on-camera and as a boom mic. I plan to use the TASCAM when recording in a gym or classroom, as well as in the 12ft x 12ft room (with some sound absorption). I will occasionally have one or two other people talking with me when I film in any of these scenarios. I was thinking about setting up two boom mics for those situations. I am a one man show so I am limited in my options. I could get a handheld mic and just use one boom too. Just not sure what's best. I don't want to spend a ton of money but I also don't want to get adequate enough equipment. I know that's a tall order of feedback I'm requesting. Any help would be FUR-bulous :)
Hi! Wow. That's a tough one and just about everyone will have a different opinion on the best way to tackle all of those scenarios. For the vlogging scenarios, you could always turn the microphone, whichever you end up choosing, around 180 degrees so that it will pick you up. It won't pick you up very well if you're behind the camera otherwise.
Perhaps a lavalier mic will work well for you?
Thanks Curtis! That may be the most flexible option to best meet my needs for most scenarios on a budget. I'll stay posted to your videos. They offer lots of unbiased information in straight, matter of fact detail. I greatly appreciate your efforts and thanks for such quick feedback! Just sub'd. CATchya Later ^..^
Thanks BossPawsTV! Best wishes and happy recording!
Giddy-Up!
Wow. What is interesting is that you used the RODE NT1A at about 12-18 inches away - when it was designed for microphone-in-view, close-to-mouth use. For its intended use, the RODE NT1A has significant rejection of off-axis noise, more so than the AT 4053b. So in this test, where the RODE NT1A was used on a boom, hidden from view, if its inherent noise-rejection qualities gave it a significant edge against the AT 4053b. I wonder if the cardioid dynamic Shure SM-57 with Wind Screen can be also used like the RODE NT1A in this scenario on a boom pole off view. And if it would be superior to the AT 4053b in rejecting both room noise and sound reflections for recording indoor dialogs on a boom.
Thanks Romeo. Interesting. My experience with dynamic mics is that distance makes it tough to pick up much of anything unless you use tons of gain, more than most preamps can supply.
Have you try the NT5 in this echo room? Does it sound great? I'm choosing a budget boom mic for recording dialogue in a echoy room and It's hard to do sound treatment. Thanks!
Yes, it isn't much different than these two here. If there's a lot of reverb, the best thing to do is put some blankets in the room in front of the hard, flat surfaces that are not in the camera frame.
The type of microphone which does the best at rejecting reverberation is dynamic microphones. But you have to be within about 6 inches max. So if you're ok with a microphone in the frame, something like a Shure SM7B can work nicely.
Curtis Judd Unfortunately all the hard surfaces is in the frame and the mic can’t be in the frame. I have NTG3 and a set of deity connect with W lav pro, and the reverb makes me crazy...and the sound treatment I can do is this room is limited...
@@joe51317 I'm sorry. Perhaps another location? Perhaps a rug on the floor? Perhaps some way of introducing set design which involves softer surfaces? Wish I could help more - just trying to share my experience.
@@curtisjudd Thanks! I'll try my best!
Hi Curtis, I watched this video and wondered if you (or anyone) has thought of putting a foam cone around the hypercartioid mic. (Much like the cones a Vet puts around a dog's neck after a surgery.) Do you think that would help isolate the mic from the echo?
Here's a possible solution, Yule - www.probroadcastsupply.com/pocket-sound-booth-psb-oval-microphone-ambience-reducer-psb-oval/ - It's the "Pocket Sound Booth". I never did purchase one of these, but have known about it for years - for $40, it would be worth a try for isolating echo like you mentioned.
Yes !! It does work funny I experimented with that theory yesterday hehe, it works to an extent I would say , albeit your cardiod mic and not omnidirectional
Thanks YuleTompta Bruce Avilla *****. I have heard some audio engineers caution against the use of soft foam because it tends to absorb higher frequencies but not lower frequencies. But in practical terms, it may help, maybe echo is mostly higher frequency sound? Interesting idea Yule.
all cardioides must have a bean shape polar pattern, but that requirement is generally done with a 1khz fundemental, what isn't obvious is the dramatic change in the pickup pattern with a change in frequency, cardioides start to look like hypercardioides generally around 8khz, so allot of noise can still reflect into the back of a cardioide capsule (even though most diagrams wont show this), if those reflections are room abience you can cancel that out in the mic by capturing the room and imposing that signal into your primary mic 180 degrees out of phase with it, its easier with a specific source aka in front of the speaker so a boom will capture allot more room as a primary mic but using phase of room (b seccondary mic) against room (a primary mic) can be done, I sincerely hope this helps, heres a link to what i mean static1.squarespace.com/static/539f291ae4b06c9050b29a0d/t/541b5d5ee4b0a6db3132ada8/1411079518807/x1-polar-pattern.jpg?format=750w
omnicrutch Thank you, that does help a lot! The technique of removing the ambience is, I presume, the technique that some of the de-reverb plugins use.
NT1A less essing, nicer sound overall, probably less room sound. Really sounded nicer. Not sure if it's the pickup pattern. Would be nice to know what the new (NT1 ?) rode mic with almost perfect flat response would have sounded like.
Yes, I'd like to get my hands on that new NT1 and give it a go.
I'm a sound engineer and longtime broadcast producer. Polar pattern only describes the SHAPE of the pattern and is only one consideration in this untreated-room scenario. Equally, if not MORE important is the SIZE of the pattern. Not every cardioid mic is equal in this regard. Take the case of the Shure SM7b, a cardioid mic. If I put my SM7b and another cardioid mic... for instance, my AKG C1000s (without polar pattern converter)... 6 inches from my mouth, the pattern will behave in similar ways, but the AKG will pick up FAR more room sound than will the Shure. Why? You realize why as soon as I move both mics further away (but still on-axis.) You will notice the signal from the SM7b drops off MUCH more quickly with distance. This is why, during the COVID lockdown, when artists would perform from their untreated living rooms, so many were using SM7b's for vocals, as they famously pick up far less room noise than other cardioids studio mics.
Thanks Gary, great point.
Hi Curtis,
If you are casually listening to your UA-cam video, both mics. sound very similar. However, on closer observation, the Rode mic. seemed to me more pleasing to my ear. The Audio Technica mic. had a slightly "harsher" sound. In conclusion, both mics are adequate and sound good but the Rode mic. is the winner in this test by a small margin.
I agree, small difference but noticeable. And with the NT1a being less than 1/2 the price of the Audio Technica... I actually think it comes down partly to the voice you are recording--everyone's is a little different and on my voice, the RODE sounds better. But on some others that I have recorded, the AT sounds great--not so harsh like on my voice.
+Curtis Judd - Actually you are now discussing the frequency response, not the pick-up pattern. As those folks who record vocals will tell you, that some cardioids are better for female vocal range and others the male. A flat frequency response from 20-20kHz cardioid would probably be the truest recording if you were using just one. Ive though about this issue, and really that's what EQ is about in post, correcting the frequency response.
Robert Shaw You're absolutely right, I drifted into talking about frequency response. And I completely agree, EQ is a great tool for "correcting" for frequencies responses and voices that may not be a great match.
One note on polar patterns and frequency response; they are related from the standpoint that the pickup pattern varies quite significantly at various frequencies on most shotgun microphones. With hypercardioid microphones In particular, higher frequencies tend to be picked up in a much more directional pattern than lower frequencies (e.g., on the RODE NTG4+, 16kHz is very directional whereas frequencies in the 200Hz and lower range are picked up in a cardioid-like pattern. See the polar pattern graph at RODE.com: cdn1.rode.com/ntg4plus_datasheet.pdf Just an interesting phenomenon.
+Curtis Judd Well bass frequencies are the easiest to capture. Low frequencies are felt more than they are heard, some folks will put a mic behind a piano to capture the bass. So not have directional capture on low frequencies may not be as bad as it sounds. High frequencies need direct line of sight as they will be dampened/blocked. That's why they put treble speakers up in the air and bass speakers low to the ground (bass vibrates along floors, walls, cabinets etc.).
Thanks for the insights!
Hmm UA-cam compression a d judging sound, would it be possible to put the recording of both mics on sondcloud or so thing similar so wage knoepw what we get is actually what you intend us to hear, and not what UA-cam deems good enough. Thanks for a great video
Yes, have started doing this for newer videos. Unfortunately, I don't have these files all these years later. Thanks for the suggestion!
Curtis Judd np thanks for the swift reply
Is it common to boom a cardioid mic like that? cause it actually sounds pretty good. I think I will try this with my Lewitt 440.
Usually not but mainly because large diaphragm mics are quite heavy so they need a substantial boom arm.
@@curtisjudd So, beside the weight factor it can work? And, would it need to be boomed as close as possible or can you boom just like you would any small diaphragm condenser mic?
@@steven_charles The closer you get it, the better the signal to noise ratio. Just outside the top of frame is best.
If you shelf off the highs about 6db from 4khz and up, the rejection of these two mics sound identical. i personally prefer brighter sounding microphones for dialogue, so using the NT1A and then having to boost highs to get a desirable tone doesnt make sense (since the boos will accentuate whatever line noise was recorded with the dialogue).
Thanks Demetri.
and thank you for your wonderful videos!
I have to disagree. I totally agree that the majority (90%?) of the difference between the sound of the two mics in this example is simply due to their different frequency response curves,. But even after seeking to minimize that... there is still a bit more rejection of the reverberant sound across all frequencies from the cardioid mic. It certainly doesn't make it disappear. But I clearly hear a small (15-20%?) reduction after attempting to compensate for the frequency response differences and level matching the two samples... as I expected to.
I loved the audio on this video when recorded on the cardioid mic... I was thinking about getting a shotgun mic (Rode Ntg 2 condenser) but now I'm in doubt.. anyone who tested the two on a room with reverb, can share the experience with me?
I'm in doubt about the NTG2 in general. It was my first shotgun microphone but it requires a LOT of gain so it has that working against it as well. I actually find that the differences are not that huge between cardioid and super/hypercardioid. They're all a tradeoff and they all pick up reverb in rooms with lots of it. Most production mixers for TV and film opt for super-cardioid, non-shotgun mics and use lavaliers for backup. Best wishes!
Please don't get the NTG2, you'll curse your life. Get the NTG3 if anything.
Agreed, or the NTG5 or the DEITY S-Mic 2. There are a lot of other better options in 2020.
To my ears the Hypercardioid sound a little more open and natural. An A/B comparison with the same microphone with different polar-paterns would be more ideal. Like +Bob Adams says, you need to use the rejection angles of the microphones for different situations. The Hypercardioid design lets you reject at two angles or rather two sources, and the the Cardioid lets you reject a single source.
+miguelitolitolito Thanks, interesting insight.
Sounded like they were picking up different echoes from different frequencies, subjectively I prefer the warmer sound of the cartioid over the tinny sound of the hypercartioid but I if I were trying to judge objectively I'd say I'm hearing a similar amount of echo overall. I wonder if there is any solution that could make use both microphones to produce a cleaner signal.
Good ears! I'd say it is time to get some sound blankets into that space: ua-cam.com/video/uzyEaVYCk3s/v-deo.html
Hi I want to record a group talk show type of video in a room and I don't have the money to lav mic all of them, what would you recommend
Dynamic stand mics for each instead.
@@curtisjudd so it's not possible to use maybe multiple cardioid or super cardiods not one for each person, but enough to cover the area that they are in?
@@barrykeenam142 Yes, you can. A boundary microphone might be a good choice for that. But note that you will pick up a lot more room sound.
MY solution is to buy the 4051b-EL element for the "4053b" mic. I'm selling my 4053b-EL element on Ebay!
BTW, the 4051b is a cardiod pattern.
Thanks, good info!
Guys cardiod or hyprecardiod for home recording?? cant decide betwen t.bone SC400 and t.bone SC600! Please any help , i would be very grateful
My take is that either will work, but if you're recording at home in an acoustically untreated room, a dynamic microphone may be a better option than a condenser microphone. Best wishes!
@@LearnLightAndSoundSessions Betwen cardiod and super whats better for home recordng??
@@LearnLightAndSoundSessions do you the t.bone microphones?
Neither is better. They're just different. The more important consideration is dynamic microphone or condenser microphone. The T.bone SC400 and SC600 are both condenser microphones. Unless your recording space has bass traps and other acoustical treatment, I would instead recommend a dynamic microphone like the Audio Technica AT2005: ua-cam.com/video/EHgSC3C0pTw/v-deo.html
I am aware of them, yes, they are very affordable large diaphragm condenser microphones.
I've watched a lot of youtube videos on microphones and recording techniques and THIS video convinced me to finallly start looking into a Cardioid mic for my shoot which is mostly indoor dialog settings. Searching around, I ended looking at the Sennheiser K6/ME64 mic which is a cardioid electret.
I knew that real-world testing is a must before I can commit some $500 to a microphone. So I started planning the next day to stop by a Sennheiser mic dealer and a Neumann mic dealer. The mistake was that I stopped by the Neumann mic dealer first. After hearing the Neumann and falling in love with its sound, I didn't even bother stopping by the Sennheiser dealer. Equipped with my Zoom H4n and a HD25-1 headphone I tested a small condenser cardioid model from Neumann, the KM184 (about $850 www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/210676-REG/Neumann_KM_184_MT_KM_184_MT_Microphone.html) which is mostly used to record instruments. It was, like the comparison done here, produced a result with minimal echo. I didn't really compare the cardioid (I should have) with the hypercardioid version as I was already set on looking for a cardioid. I did try the Neumann TLM102 which is a large condenser cardioid and though the sound was much more transparent and overall livelier, it was still prone to echos compared to the small condenser KM184. Anyway after testing the KM184 on an indoor room similar to the setting that I mostly will be recording, I decided on the spot that this was the right microphone for the task and brought it home.
Initially I was unsure of the result as nobody has mentioned using the KM184 for dialogues or vocals (even Neumann's own website doesn't say anything about it for vocals), but for the type of indoor dialog videos I do (similar to yours, just on different topics), I think it's the right mic to use.
I just had my first take using the KM184 yesterday and I was totally pleased with the results. The room I was recording at has full glass on two walls and full wood cabinet on the other two walls. The subject spoke with the glass behind him, and the result we got was extremely nice, crisp and detailed. The microphone is really small (22mm dia and shorter than a sharpie) and using some manfrotto arm (mediacdn.shopatron.com/media/mfg/2747/product_image/0e3f6a7977989c4a39f0643521479b22.jpg?1413742757) was able to position the tiny mic right precisely where I need it to be without it being recorded by the camera, right around 1ft from the subject, boomed, shooting about 45 degree down.
I recorded directly to the Zoom H4n with the Zoom providing phantom power and was thrilled with the result. I really don't have a basis of a comparison other than the result was crisp, detailed, and very articulate (the speaker didn't really have the best voice -- he has a tendency to mumble on the lower mid frequencies). Transients is very fast and the focus on the vocal is spot on with a precise presence. It's not a vocal as in a singer's mic as it would be too sharp and clinical, not enough lushness and warmth from the mic. But for UA-cam videos such as this where we are trying to explain a product to viewers, listening through laptop speakers, I think the raw recording is spot on. I emailed a friend who's a pro mastering engineer and he gave me the thumbs up so I guess I'm not alone.
Anyway the video is being edited at the moment but I'd be happy to share the end result video to you if you're interested. The audio section is mostly raw unprocessed, we liked it the way it came out from the Zoom H4n WAV files.
In all, thank you for the superb series on microphone and tests. I do like the Michael Joly modded NT5 from your blind test video, but I think you really should look into the Neumann KM184. It's much cleaner and crisper than the Michael Joly NT5 from what I hear in the video, though the recording setting may have something to do with it. I also think that the KM184 would be nice for your vocals and the type of videos you do, explaining details and some technicalities, it wouldn't hurt to have an added level of crispness and focus on the vocals.
Cheers!
Oh, I probably can come back another day to test the KM184 cardioid with the KM185, its hyper-cardioid version. Some day I would do that and share the results. Just to add more data points on the cardioid vs hyper cardioid debate.
Headfonia Store. did you ever finish editing the video with the neuman km184? I would like to see it. I am considering purchasing the mic for indoor dialogue.
Thanks for the detailed info! Would love to hear the finished piece.
The hypercardioid sounds more "thin" , compared to the cardioid that sounds "fuller". Maybe the hypercardioid didnt pickup as much frequencies because of the phasing issues with longer interference tube.
Possibly, or perhaps because it is voiced differently.
I hear no difference at all as far as echo goes under these specific conditions. If the distance to the microphones was bigger, or if the room was different, it might be another story. I like the large diafragm NT1a better for your voice - it sounds terrific, I think, but I'm not sure that has anything to do with the polar pattern.
I agree, not a big difference when both mics are about 12 inches from the person speaking. They may sound different when backed farther from the talent.
great video. cardioid sounds better
👍
RE20 works for me in my NYC apartment.
Close mic does nicely for managing noise, yes.
I prefer hypercardioid, it sounds more like the real voice ... and also I guess the difference of Mic wan't because Hypercardioid or not, more is because the way RODE design Mic, add more bass in it.
Good points--thanks!
+Yi Xie - I think you have to separate the frequency response (which also varies Shure SM57 is a great cardoid but it emphasizes the mbid-range and has poor bass) versus the pick-up pattern of the mic. The cardoid pattern simply has less reflection, since no sensitivity to whats behind it (i.e. wall reflections). This also suggests if a hypercardioid is placed far enough from a wall behind it, it should not add reverb/echo.
In short, Its unlikely a shorgun mic will ever sound good in untreated rooms (and even then its still the wrong environment), Either a large sound stage or outdoor use only... As a sound engineer I've often used the "wrong mic" for certain tasks so take what i said with that grain of salt also
👍
there is a difference in the quality. i prefer the rode one more.
Thanks Roger!
in fact, i mistook your earlier test as a cardoid. no wonder there wasn't much of a difference. now i am trying to convince my boom operator friend that there is a difference.
Curtis Judd i don't have much of a budget for audio at the moment. i am considering between the audio technica pro 37 and rode m3. which would u think is a better cardioid mic?
***** Spec wise, the RODE M3 looks more interesting to me--battery option and less of a presence peak in the higher frequencies. Let us know what you end up with and how it goes!
just bought the m3 this evening. was picking between the nt5 and m3 and i thought i just give it a try. have an interview to do in a few weeks time so i thought of giving this a try. its going to be in an office space so it shld do better than my videomic pro.
Nothing happened, Nikon’s stance on video remains the same haha
Sadly.
@@curtisjudd have to somewhat disagree; Nikon Z series seem a pretty good 1st gen for video.
@@doubledark2 I have a Z6. I haven't spent enough time with it, evidently, but I was not impressed with the first several tests I did with it. I use it extensively for still photography and love it for that.
Broooo it’s older Linus
Ok 😀
yep, hypercardioid much more echoe
👍
the audio technica is a little bit brighter
I agree!
It's a small diagram condenser where the Rode is a large diagram. They have whole different tonal characteristics. :)
the SHADE on Nikon. DEAD
I use a Z6 for still photos. 😀
first
Congrats!