rec.arts.movies.production.sound

I think most people go with the MKH 50 just because it has the
hypercardioid label. However, the pattern MKH-40 is much closer to the
Schoeps MK41 capsule than the MKH-50 is. Personally, if desiding
between the 40 and the 50 for interior boom pole use, now that I have
used them both a lot, I would choose the MKH-40.

Glen Trew

On Nov 29, 2:02 am, "Dave Hurley" wrote:
> I have both 40 and 50....40 is great...wider/looser, in patern..but still
> pulls it in....use it every day interior only.
> cheers dave h"Rob" < ...@ > wrote in message
>
> news:37e3a696-431f-4d84-b0d0-c85380589833@ ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Anyone using (or used) an MKH40 instead of a 50 on their pole for
> > interior scenes? The 50 seems to be more popular, but on a lot of
> > reality gigs where you're booming two or more people in a
> > conversation, I sometimes prefer a cardioid mic because it allows you
> > to be a bit "looser" and is more forgiving if you're off-axis for a
> > word or two while you were too busy mixing your lavs with your spare
> > hand. I also like it for 2-person interviews in which the subjects are
> > sitting side-by-side because you can float the mic in the middle and
> > it still sounds good for both subjects.
>
> > Anyway I'm looking to pick up one of these mics and I'm wondering if
> > the MKH50 is a bit too narrow for the applications I described? Or do
> > you think the MKH40 is a bit limiting in its uses because you have to
> > get so close, which can sometimes be tricky in unscripted reality tv?
>
> > Thanks for the input!
>
> > Rob