Episode 3: Sennheiser MKH-416 vs. MXL VO:1a

I finally picked up this bad boy a few days ago and what followed was nothing short of a miracle… I immediately lifted it above my head, aimed it toward the sky like I was the dark lord himself and the 416 was the freakin’ elder wand… soon after, the heavens parted and a beam of light was cast from my 416 like a goddamn lightning bolt into the sky. OK, OK… I’m not Voldemort and the 416 is not the elder wand. It’s highly plausible I simply received it in the mail, quietly un-boxed it, plugged it in and began to whisper sweet nothings into it’s sweet, sweet capsule. Regardless, this is how I felt on the inside, for the Sennheiser MK-416 is one of just a few mics on my “holy grail” list of microphones (if anyone has 3k lying around and is feeling charitable, I’d love a Neumann U87). ::wink wink, nudge, nudge::

Now, before you get too excited, this is definitely not going to be a super technical comparison of these two mics, although I will be discussing pick-up patterns and general concepts. There are way too many incredible resources (linking Booth Junkie’s shootout of the 103 and 416 here as a really good example) out there that have already covered that ground more than sufficiently. I’m merely providing my first impressions and general thoughts at the practical differences between these microphones.

I’ve owned the Harlan Hogan mic (MXL VO:1a) for several years now and it’s been my one and only mic for all things voice over (Check out Harlan’s stuff at voiceoveressentials.com). It compliments my somewhat deep voice incredibly well and although it errs more on the budget friendly side of the spectrum at $300, I’ve always maintained it punches well above it’s weight in regards to sound and performance. Never doubt my love for this mic, for it’s true. To my ear, it sounds incredibly similar to the Neumann TLM-103 (also on my grail list), which makes sense as this mic is specifically made for voice over and was probably modeled after the Neumann. That said, I would say the Neumann has a bit more of a biting, muscular tone to it, especially in the lows and mids… whereas if you’re working up-close on the MXL, there’s a slight chance those frequencies can get a bit muddy. In fact, using Harlan’s recommended settings from his book “Voice Actors Guide to Recording at Home… and On the Road”, I employed a slight dip in the low to mid range of my graphic EQ to help alleviate this potential pitfall, to great effect. Truthfully though, it would take a good set of cans and a trained ear to notice the difference between the mics in question, we’re definitely not talking about a super obvious, drastic leap in quality by any stretch. There are, however, other differences to be found when making the jump from a budget or mid-range mic to a high end one… build quality, self-noise, etc. In these departments, the Neumann and Sennheiser are the clear winners. However, are they worth the extra $700? I guess that’s up for debate. Personally, I believe they are. These are often referred to as “forever” mics, and considering you may be using them for decades, suddenly a $1,000 investment doesn’t seem so ludicrous.

Now to focus on the star of the show: the Sennheiser MKH-416. The absolute biggest difference between these two mics is the pick-up pattern. The 416 has been a standard in the film industry for decades, and rightfully so. It’s a shotgun mic meant to cut through wind and the elements to hear voices many feet away. It’s pick-up pattern is a super or hyper cardioid, which means it picks up sound only directly in front of it, think of a focused flashlight. It’s frequency response has a pretty substantial boost on the high end (treble). These two factors together make it an incredibly clear mic and it maintains that clarity and brightness even when getting up close and personal with it. Many refer to this clarity as presence, and this thing has it in spades. Now, the MXL has a polar pick-up pattern, also known as a wide cardioid, which means it’s off-axis rejection of noise is not as great, but much like the Neumann, it tends to be a bit bassier and dark, especially when utilizing proximity effect. You can move around quite a lot in front of the mic from side to side and it will still pick you up loud and clear. The down side to this is that this mic demands that you have an incredibly quiet studio because it will pick up everything, and I mean EVERYTHING!

Now, I currently live in NYC, at least until we move to the suburbs next summer and I have to once again design a new studio, always a good time (Hope you’re available Georgethe.tech!). Anyway, I have a walk-in closet converted into a studio with relatively good sound proofing… but again, it’s NEW. YORK. CITY. Unless you’re in a heavily fortified whisper room, whilst inside a safe that’s nestled inside of a tank at a professional studio, it’s difficult to completely shut out everything. The Sennheiser 416 has dramatically reduced my noise floor as it’s off-axis rejection of ambient noise is outstanding. This makes a less than stellar recording space infinitely better when it comes to editing and mastering. Think 10-15 db’s in the worst case scenario, like a jack hammer outside your window. Of course, i’m speaking purely of sound rejection, as no mic will fix a poorly treated studio space… just as a U87 won’t make you a better voice actor. Over the years, I’ve increasingly used a less is more approach to audio editing and with this 416 my fx stack has gotten even lighter. Someday, I’ll add a Neumann to the arsenal for sure, but I gravitated to the versatility of the 416. If I want to start a YouTube channel, podcast or even take the mic out into the field, the Sennheiser gives me the flexibility to do all that without requiring the microphone to be in the shot. In conclusion, I’m super happy thus far and if it’s all the same to you guys, I’m gonna go on believing my Sennheiser MKH-416 is not only pure magic, but indeed the most powerful wand in all the land.