Did I mention the other day that I got a long-distance phone call from Dublin? That’s in Ireland. The caller was David Browne, who is the developer of the M600 microphone mount (NOT a shock-mount, he’s quick to point out).
At any rate, I was very impressed that he’d take the personal time to give me a jingle and talk about his favorite subject these days: the superbly machined M600 mic mount. Click HERE for my most recent post on this piece of hardware. There are even more back-links in THAT blog about where this whole story originated (like many things in my world — on the VO-BB)
I had posted a two short sound-files using my less-expensive workhorse mic (the AKG C3000B) with it’s standard shock-mount… and then the new M600.
On David’s urging, I promised to go back and use the M600 with my Sennheiser MKH416 P48. David was willing to concede that "your mileage may vary" using his uniquely-designed mount, but that the MKH might show a more decided difference in sound quality vs. the — can we call it cheap? — plastic mic-mount that comes packaged with the Senny.
I was busy with a medical narration this weekend. I used the M600 for the entire job, then chose one line from the copy to also record using the plastic mount that comes with the MKH. Here are the comparison soundfiles in .wav format.
FIRST, THE MKH USING THE PLASTIC MOUNT
NOW, THE MKH USING THE M600 MOUNT
Are the clips too short to tell anything? I can’t really hear a difference…but like I said before, I’m not a production/audio engineer. Maybe someone monitoring this thread can pull my soundfile up for a better analysis than I can give.
There are admittedly impossible-to-control variables in a comparison like this. But aside from head/mouth positioning issues (which I tried to minimize), the main variable that changed was the mic mount itself. All other settings were identical.
Here’s the deal folks — I’m gonna hafta buy one of these things. Maybe it’s the placebo effect, or the self-fulfilling prophecy that I "feel" better about the sound coming from the M600-mounted mic, because I expect it to sound better (due in no small part, I’ll wager, to the elite cost of the product). Regardless, if I subjectively "feel" better about the stuff I’m working with in my own studio, I believe my confidence will also shine through in ethereal ways that are beyond scientific explanation.
My take is that the M600 will make a significant difference in the quality of sound on enough of my projects to justify it’s purchase in the long run.
At least that’s what I’m telling my wife.
Now, I really need to package this thing up and take it back to the nice folks at LasVegasProAudio. Maybe they’ll let me keep this evaluation model at a few dollars in savings ’cause it’s got a mark or two on it. LasVegasProAudio is quoting $225 USD for the M600.
CourVO
![View Dave Courvoisier CourVO@CourVO.com [LION]'s profile on LinkedIn](http://www.linkedin.com/img/webpromo/btn_myprofile_160x33.gif){kind=small}
Yeah I can’t hear it. Other than your differing inflection it just sounds like a 416 to me. Maybe because the 416 is already tolerant of a variety of mounts (stand, shock, boom, camera)?
I think there is a practical application for this type of mic mount, but I doubt it’s ability to radically change the sound recorded. Like a lot of what we do, it’ll come down to which subtle differences you prefer.
Though I did appreciate this warning from the Enhanced Audio site:
“WHAT IT DOESN’T DO: As a super rigid mic mount, the M600 would be ineffective at eliminating induced mechanical noise, such a thump on the stand or a big bumps on the floor that could be transmitted up the stand. Shock mounts are designed to mechanically isolate a mic from thumps and bumps, the M600 does not do this. The M600 is not a “replacement” for a shock mount, it is an alternative. Do not use the M600 mount where mechanical noise is a large issue! The M600 can accommodate microphones up to 65mm diameter.”