Stereo mic recommendations please (for in-camera ambient location/field recording)

[Matt James Smith ?]

I'm really surprised how little choice and info there is out there in terms of stereo mics suitable for video cameras.

I like the look & sound of the Rode Stereo Videomic X, but it's expensive and hard to get hold of (new and used) and I'm struggling to find alternatives.

What I need:

• 3.5mm option so I can record stereo to channels 3 & 4 on my C200 (while recording shotgun and lav to ch1 & ch2 via XLR).
• Single unit - a matched pair (e.g. 2 x NT5) would be too much setup and doesn't allow 3.5mm option.
• Decent windjammer/deadcat available
• Good shockmount/suspension available
• Good sound quality
• Ideally the option to use XLR cables as well as 3.5mm so I can use phantom power and long wires when I need to (e.g. gigs)

Rode's SVMX and NT4 are the only mics I've found that obviously fulfil all the above. I'm not mad about the form factor of the NT4 or its windshield and shockmount options. I'm sure Audio Technica and other brands make alternatives to the NT4 but I can't find much helpful info out there - most stereo mic info is geared towards either indoor music recording or sound-only field recording.. 

The simplest option would be to go with a Rode Stereo VideoMic Pro and live with the average audio quality, but samples I've heard from it aren't very exciting (open to being convinced otherwise).

The other option is to look at which sound recorders (Zoom, Tascam, etc) have good quality XY mics and 3.5mm line-out (I need it to be able to record direct to the camera) so any advice there appreciated (I'm still rocking a Roland R26 but it doesn't have line-out and the built in XY is pretty average sounding IIRC).

Thanks for any help or advice!

 

[PannySVHS]

Good question, the right one for our friend and sound master @IronFilm

[bjohn]

4 hours ago, Matt James Smith ? said:

The other option is to look at which sound recorders (Zoom, Tascam, etc) have good quality XY mics and 3.5mm line-out (I need it to be able to record direct to the camera)

Whatever you do, don't buy the Zoom F1. I made that mistake; I started using it with a binaural mic and then switched to Zoom's M/S module (since I like using M/S stereo), but the sound quality is just not up to snuff; certainly it pales in comparison to my Sound Devices MixPre with good mics.

I know you said the Rode Stereo Videomix is too expensive for you, but one of the most interesting new camera-mountable stereo mics is the Sanken CMS-50. It's pricey but this looks like the most promising single stereo mic solution I've seen.

[Matt James Smith ?]

54 minutes ago, bjohn said:

Whatever you do, don't buy the Zoom F1. I made that mistake; I started using it with a binaural mic and then switched to Zoom's M/S module (since I like using M/S stereo), but the sound quality is just not up to snuff; certainly it pales in comparison to my Sound Devices MixPre with good mics.

I know you said the Rode Stereo Videomix is too expensive for you, but one of the most interesting new camera-mountable stereo mics is the Sanken CMS-50. It's pricey but this looks like the most promising single stereo mic solution I've seen.

Wow that's an expensive mic! But it's good to know that form factor can produce top notch results. I'll take a closer look at cheaper alternatives with that short-shotgun style (Audio Technica have at least one) as that would suit me better than the weird shape of the NT4. Thanks.

[bjohn]

40 minutes ago, Matt James Smith ? said:

I'll take a closer look at cheaper alternatives with that short-shotgun style

What I like about the Sanken is that it's an entire M/S rig inside a reasonably small shotgun mic. I built a similar rig for myself some years back using a Sennheiser 8050 supercardioid as the mid mic with an Ambient Emesser (figure 8 mic) clipped on top. That works really well and is very portable (and fits into one of Rycote's smallest windjammers) but there's something to be said for an all-in-one solution.

The big selling point for M/S is its versatility: you can use just the mid channel for interviews or if you want some ambience you can bring it in with the sides. And you can use it to record ambient sounds for B-roll etc.

I can't actually use camera-mounted mics as my camera has a cooling fan that's loud enough to be heard on most recordings with a camera-mounted mic; instead i carry a separate tripod and mount my rig and recorder on that.

[bjohn]

At the cheaper end of the scale, a little-known option is the Wooden Camera VX mic, for about $300 US:

https://woodencamera.com/pages/vxmic

Might be worth checking out. I haven't tried it myself but have been tempted a few times since it's quite affordable.

[Matt James Smith ?]

1 hour ago, bjohn said:

At the cheaper end of the scale, a little-known option is the Wooden Camera VX mic, for about $300 US:

https://woodencamera.com/pages/vxmic

Might be worth checking out. I haven't tried it myself but have been tempted a few times since it's quite affordable.

Woden Camera making something inexpensive?! I’ll have look for samples…

[bjohn]

10 minutes ago, Matt James Smith ? said:

Woden Camera making something inexpensive?! I’ll have look for samples…

I wouldn't be too optimistic...the Zoom F1 might actually sound better, as bad as it is. But if you are after a low-fi retro sound it might be an option!

[newfoundmass]

It really depends on how much you're looking to spend. I've used a Zoom H1 into a camera before, and currently use two Tascam TM-2X into my GH5 and G85 for sporting events where I want crowd noise. Both those two are pretty budget friendly and are "good enough" though I'd love to eventually upgrade. 

I've heard good things about the Sennheiser MKE 440 and is probably what I'll end up upgrading to. Audio Technica also has the AT8022 and the more expensive BP4025 but there aren't a ton of reviews out there for them. 

[Trek of Joy]

10 hours ago, Matt James Smith ? said:

I'm really surprised how little choice and info there is out there in terms of stereo mics suitable for video cameras.

I like the look & sound of the Rode Stereo Videomic X, but it's expensive and hard to get hold of (new and used) and I'm struggling to find alternatives.

What I need:

• 3.5mm option so I can record stereo to channels 3 & 4 on my C200 (while recording shotgun and lav to ch1 & ch2 via XLR).
• Single unit - a matched pair (e.g. 2 x NT5) would be too much setup and doesn't allow 3.5mm option.
• Decent windjammer/deadcat available
• Good shockmount/suspension available
• Good sound quality
• Ideally the option to use XLR cables as well as 3.5mm so I can use phantom power and long wires when I need to (e.g. gigs)

Rode's SVMX and NT4 are the only mics I've found that obviously fulfil all the above. I'm not mad about the form factor of the NT4 or its windshield and shockmount options. I'm sure Audio Technica and other brands make alternatives to the NT4 but I can't find much helpful info out there - most stereo mic info is geared towards either indoor music recording or sound-only field recording.. 

The simplest option would be to go with a Rode Stereo VideoMic Pro and live with the average audio quality, but samples I've heard from it aren't very exciting (open to being convinced otherwise).

The other option is to look at which sound recorders (Zoom, Tascam, etc) have good quality XY mics and 3.5mm line-out (I need it to be able to record direct to the camera) so any advice there appreciated (I'm still rocking a Roland R26 but it doesn't have line-out and the built in XY is pretty average sounding IIRC).

Thanks for any help or advice!

 

Interesting topic. I've been looking for something to capture ambient sound as well. The Rode Stereo Videomic X is at the top of my list too. But yeah, not easy to come by these days. Everything else that mounts on cam is low budget stuff. I've also been considering using the zoom H3VR until I can find the X, but using it in the field while shooting looks like a bit of a challenge LOL!

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1434530-REG/zoom_zh3vr_h3_vr_360_vr_audio.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=Cj0KCQiA15yNBhDTARIsAGnwe0Uv0Np2mQoQNyITewv0KPjHEsczvXVA9vdTPe30B27cIBfELOBKyQEaAg1yEALw_wcB

Hopefully some other options pop up here.

Cheers

Chris

[BTM_Pix]

30 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

I've also been considering using the zoom H3VR until I can find the X, but using it in the field while shooting looks like a bit of a challenge LOL!

I did a quick thing about it when I first picked one up. Nothing special in terms of testing, just putting it on top of the camera while recording some fixed position wallpaper stuff.

The audio in the video in the thread is from its down mixed live binaural line output straight into the camera (it can produce this output simultaneously whilst its recording the individual tracks of each capsule to the recorder).

The original files are downloadable so you can try it with their software to experiment with the re-positioning aspect.

It is an interesting device to supplement other microphones rather than replace them but I'm hoping at some point that Zoom produce a higher end one with better capsules.

 

[kye]

@Matt James Smith ? I have several pieces of advice..  they're a little controversial, but well intended.

Firstly, don't believe ANYONE on the internet, even me, when discussing "quality".  
Only trust your own ears by listening to samples taken by competent people in real situations similar to what you will do.  
I produced music as a hobby for over a decade, and have been into hifi ($250k+ systems) for over two decades and made a lot of components from scratch (DACs, preamps, amps, speakers, acoustic treatments, etc), so I have a solid basis in the technical aspects of what is going on as well as understanding theory vs practice vs snake oil vs psychoacoustics.
I went through a phase of researching microphones and while I watched/listened to dozens of video "reviews" of various products, I didn't find a single review where the person understood even the first thing about audio, or what is important.

Secondly, don't confuse audio quality with audio frequency response.  
This seems to be a common thing with "reviewers".  They compare two microphones, they like the EQ on one better than the other, and declare that the quality is better on that one.  This is bullshit.  EQ is so easily adjusted in post that it's practically a non factor.  Judging the sound from a mic without processing it is like saying the iPhone has better quality than an Alexa because the Alexa footage looked all grey and dull-looking.  

Understand what matters for your context.
If you are making recordings that will be used within a larger mix, processed, and will only form the background to a visually driven piece then obviously you won't need (or be able to appreciate) as much quality as if you are producing nature videos with long sections of straight binaural audio.

Best of luck!

[Jimmy G]

14 hours ago, Matt James Smith ? said:

I'm still rocking a Roland R26

Hi Matt,

I am curious as to what type of sound environments (i.e. do/have you take/taken to taking SPL measurements of your locations?) you'll be looking to record in, it should help better inform community response.

I bring the matter of "better understanding one's sound environment" up as it helped me decide on how to move forward with a mic choice for my nature/wildlife recording adventures for the upcoming year. I recently resurrected my Roland R-26 (which had found light usage due to noisy handling issues when trying to use the internal mics) for use with an XLR stereo mic. That choice was the Audio-Technica BP4029 mid-side mic...which, quite literally, just arrived yesterday!

Spec-wise, at...

Mid: 72dBSPL,1kHzat1Pa;
Side: 68 dB SPL, 1 kHz at 1 Pa;
LR stereo: 70 dB SPL, 1 kHz at 1 Pa

...it's not the quietest mic on the market (i.e.~23dB self-noise) but my mostly suburban/exburban/rural recording locations are ambiently noisy enough that I'm not too concerned (based on scouring the internet for audio samples) with its expected satisfactory performance.

I cannot, as yet, comment on the performance of this combo as first tests await the arrival of a 10.5' RØDE RT4-DXLR 5-pin-to-dual-3-pin stereo splitter cable to supplant the (inadequately too-short for handheld use) supplied ~30" splitter cable that came with the 4029. Ha!

As the BP4029 can send signal as either mid-side or separate mid and side channels, and since the R-26 can either accept the mid-side stereo signal from the mic or decode the separate mid and side mic signals internally or record the separate mid and side channels as-is (which then can be manipulated in a DAW), there's a lot of versatility to be had and I will be running a bunch of tests to see if there are preferable setups for my usage.

Anyhoo, just sharing some information on what decision worked for me, I hope it's of some help for you.

Best, 🙂 Jimmy G

 

[Emanuel]

Speaking of really affordable offers, here's also this bargain at the low-cost side:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Deity-Microphones-Dual-Capsule-Camera-Mount-Smartphones/dp/B08D5XNRJT/

David above-mentioned up there has hinted here the brand BTW :- )

[Matt James Smith ?]

10 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I've heard good things about the Sennheiser MKE 440 and is probably what I'll end up upgrading to. Audio Technica also has the AT8022 and the more expensive BP4025 but there aren't a ton of reviews out there for them. 

Yes I've done a bit more research and the two AT's you mention seem to be the best option in the same price range as the Rode SVMX and NT4. I like the look of them but like you say there's not much info out there on their quality. Also need to make sure there's a decent furry option. The big issue though is as far as I can see they're phantom power/ XLR only, which means I couldn't use them straight to camera if I also wanted to record dialogue etc.

[Matt James Smith ?]

10 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Interesting topic. I've been looking for something to capture ambient sound as well. The Rode Stereo Videomic X is at the top of my list too. But yeah, not easy to come by these days. Everything else that mounts on cam is low budget stuff. I've also been considering using the zoom H3VR until I can find the X, but using it in the field while shooting looks like a bit of a challenge LOL!

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1434530-REG/zoom_zh3vr_h3_vr_360_vr_audio.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=Cj0KCQiA15yNBhDTARIsAGnwe0Uv0Np2mQoQNyITewv0KPjHEsczvXVA9vdTPe30B27cIBfELOBKyQEaAg1yEALw_wcB

Hopefully some other options pop up here.

Cheers

Chris

Yeah I'm currently trying to figure out which recorder has the best XY mics built in, and how simple it'd be to mount it with a line-in to the camera, but I'm loathe to complicate my kit any further seeing as the C200 has 4 tracks and good preamps. 

[Matt James Smith ?]

10 hours ago, kye said:

@Matt James Smith ? I have several pieces of advice..  they're a little controversial, but well intended.

Firstly, don't believe ANYONE on the internet, even me, when discussing "quality".  
Only trust your own ears by listening to samples taken by competent people in real situations similar to what you will do.  
I produced music as a hobby for over a decade, and have been into hifi ($250k+ systems) for over two decades and made a lot of components from scratch (DACs, preamps, amps, speakers, acoustic treatments, etc), so I have a solid basis in the technical aspects of what is going on as well as understanding theory vs practice vs snake oil vs psychoacoustics.
I went through a phase of researching microphones and while I watched/listened to dozens of video "reviews" of various products, I didn't find a single review where the person understood even the first thing about audio, or what is important.

Secondly, don't confuse audio quality with audio frequency response.  
This seems to be a common thing with "reviewers".  They compare two microphones, they like the EQ on one better than the other, and declare that the quality is better on that one.  This is bullshit.  EQ is so easily adjusted in post that it's practically a non factor.  Judging the sound from a mic without processing it is like saying the iPhone has better quality than an Alexa because the Alexa footage looked all grey and dull-looking.  

Understand what matters for your context.
If you are making recordings that will be used within a larger mix, processed, and will only form the background to a visually driven piece then obviously you won't need (or be able to appreciate) as much quality as if you are producing nature videos with long sections of straight binaural audio.

Best of luck!

Yes this is what's making me consider the lower end (& cheaper) Rode Stereo vm Pro. Like you say once it's in the mix and just ambient with visuals, quality may not be a huge issue. I do however want to shoot some extended ambient-sound only scenes, with fairly static/ uneventful visuals, that will be shown in a cinema space. The footage will be 4K RAW derived so I'd like the audio quality to not be obviously incongruent. But ultimate quality is definitely not vital. I'm just trying to find the sweet spot and I'm not sure about the RSVm Pro - the X sounds significantly bettering online tests to me. I get what you're saying about EQ etc but there's no question the X is a big step uo n quality from what I've heard.

[Matt James Smith ?]

7 hours ago, Jimmy G said:

Hi Matt,

I am curious as to what type of sound environments (i.e. do/have you take/taken to taking SPL measurements of your locations?) you'll be looking to record in, it should help better inform community response.

I bring the matter of "better understanding one's sound environment" up as it helped me decide on how to move forward with a mic choice for my nature/wildlife recording adventures for the upcoming year. I recently resurrected my Roland R-26 (which had found light usage due to noisy handling issues when trying to use the internal mics) for use with an XLR stereo mic. That choice was the Audio-Technica BP4029 mid-side mic...which, quite literally, just arrived yesterday!

Spec-wise, at...

Mid: 72dBSPL,1kHzat1Pa;
Side: 68 dB SPL, 1 kHz at 1 Pa;
LR stereo: 70 dB SPL, 1 kHz at 1 Pa

...it's not the quietest mic on the market (i.e.~23dB self-noise) but my mostly suburban/exburban/rural recording locations are ambiently noisy enough that I'm not too concerned (based on scouring the internet for audio samples) with its expected satisfactory performance.

I cannot, as yet, comment on the performance of this combo as first tests await the arrival of a 10.5' RØDE RT4-DXLR 5-pin-to-dual-3-pin stereo splitter cable to supplant the (inadequately too-short for handheld use) supplied ~30" splitter cable that came with the 4029. Ha!

As the BP4029 can send signal as either mid-side or separate mid and side channels, and since the R-26 can either accept the mid-side stereo signal from the mic or decode the separate mid and side mic signals internally or record the separate mid and side channels as-is (which then can be manipulated in a DAW), there's a lot of versatility to be had and I will be running a bunch of tests to see if there are preferable setups for my usage.

Anyhoo, just sharing some information on what decision worked for me, I hope it's of some help for you.

Best, 🙂 Jimmy G

 

The BP4029 looks really very nice (a cheaper alternative to the Sunken CMS-50 mentioned above) and if I was going all-in on sound-only field recording I'd definitely be looking closer. But for now it's a bit pricier than I'd like and it doesn't have a direct 3.5mm option. 

I'm starting to think my requirements limit me to to the Rode's - SVM Pro, X and NT4. 

BTW spl measurements are out of the question 😉 - I'm turning up to places I don't know and shooting on the spot. It's mostly external suburban/rural without heavy machinery or nearby vehicles etc so mid-range levels I assume.

[Matt James Smith ?]

11 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

I've heard good things about the Sennheiser MKE 440 and is probably what I'll end up upgrading to. 

BTW I have to say I really haven't liked what I've heard from the MKE440 at all. I may be biased because I had an MKE 400 (the mono version) a long time ago - it was cute but it was useless.

My main audio kit is all Sennheiser though - if they did a mid-range stereo option I'd jump on it, but I've concluded the 440 is very much an expensive low-end mic. May take a second look just to be sure though ...

[Matt James Smith ?]

2 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Speaking of really affordable offers, here's also this bargain at the low-cost side:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Deity-Microphones-Dual-Capsule-Camera-Mount-Smartphones/dp/B08D5XNRJT/

David above-mentioned up there has hinted here the brand BTW :- )

Yeah I looked at that one. I was hoping Deity might do their own version of a Rode SVM (seeing as Rode have nicked a fair share of Deity's designs!) but the Duo seems to be intended as a front/back mic and I assume they're not a 'matched' pair that can be mounted at 90 degrees to simulate a figure-8/binaural type effect.

On that note though I have vaguely considered making a binaural rig thing with a stereo pair of omni's going to a 3.5mm, atop the camera. I think handling and camera noise would be an issue though unless I came up with a really elaborate rig.