Sennheiser MKH 416

HiFiASMR

Endgame 🏆
Expert
Professional
Joined
Jul 2, 2024
Messages
285
Reaction score
33
41kCKbKgl4L._AC_SX679_.jpg
Pretty shocked by the conversion of the Sennheiser MKH 416 frequency response. This microphone is an industry standard for a reason. Some characteristics of it that are hard to see on spec sheets is it's not really prone to proximity effect and has a narrow pickup pattern. It has 13dBa self noise which is kind of high so there is audible hiss usually especially if compared to an ultra low noise microphone. I've considered buying it several times but I think the Neumann TLM 103 sounds even better!
graph - 2024-08-21T000956.837.png
Screenshot 2024-08-21 000239.png
Screenshot 2024-08-21 000215.png

I have to admit when listening to audio samples of this mic, it's not as flat in the upper mids as advertised. I noticed it in many audio samples. In a mix especially I don't feel like htis mic sits in a mix cleanly. The upper mids sound colored. I don't know if colored would be the colored term? Fatiguing? This measurement below shows a little bit of waviness in the region that I hear fatigue. It bothers me. It also has subtle self noise so I wouldn't recommend using it.
Screenshot 2025-03-30 010721.png
 
Last edited:
HiFiASMR said:
Self noise is awful stfu
Click to expand...
Actually, it's not. This is clear from the comparison in the video and reinforced by the consensus in the comments section, where the AT875R was consistently preferred over the MKH 416 in the blind A/B test.
 
Sebastian B said:
Actually, it's not. This is clear from the comparison in the video and reinforced by the consensus in the comments section, where the AT875R was consistently preferred over the MKH 416 in the blind A/B test.
Click to expand...
74 dba self noise is unusable for critical listening.
 
HiFiASMR said:
74 dba self noise is unusable for critical listening.
Click to expand...
You are citing its signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) value, not its self-noise. It indeed has an SNR of 74 dB, which is actually quite good. However, its self-noise is around 20 dBA, which is also quite good. For comparison, the MKH 416 has better values with an SNR of 81 dB and a self-noise of 13 dBA, but the AT875R still offers strong performance for its price. Add in the fact that they are virtually indistinguishable in the blind A/B test in the video, with most in the comments section actually preferring the AT875R. Admittedly, I mistook the MKH 416 for the AT875R in the blind test, and so did many others in the comments section.
 
Sebastian B said:
You are citing its signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) value, not its self-noise. It indeed has an SNR of 74 dB, which is actually quite good. However, its self-noise is around 20 dBA, which is also quite good. For comparison, the MKH 416 has better values with an SNR of 81 dB and a self-noise of 13 dBA, but the AT875R still offers strong performance for its price. Add in the fact that they are virtually indistinguishable in the blind A/B test in the video, with most in the comments section actually preferring the AT875R. Admittedly, I mistook the MKH 416 for the AT875R in the blind test, and so did many others in the comments section.
Click to expand...
Self noise spec and signal to noise spec translate to the same thing. Dumbass. 20dba is terrible.
Screenshot_20241224_114616_Chrome~2.jpg
 
HiFiASMR said:
Self noise spec and signal to noise spec translate to the same thing. Dumbass. 20dba is terrible.
View attachment 1489
Click to expand...
You’ve obviously confused the two metrics. Yes, they effectively describe the same performance characteristic from different perspectives, but they are not numerically interchangeable.

Additionally, you’re relying on recommendations from a manufacturer whose goal is to convince people to buy their microphone over a competitor's, rather than simply using your own ears to decide. However, when you conduct a blind A/B test between the two microphones, there is little difference.

Here is another video with an A/B test, and as you can hear, the MKH416 does have a slightly lower self-noise, but just barely. At slightly lower volumes, the difference is imperceptible, and at louder volumes, the self-noise from the MKH416 is still easily perceptible and hardly louder than the AT875R.

 
Most cheap small diaphragm condensers have high self noise. You even wanting this cheap shit shows you have low standards. You can link to as many videos as you want it still has terrible self noise. And you should assume so for most mics of this type price and brand.
 
Last edited:
HiFiASMR said:
Most cheap small diaphragm condensers have high self noise. You even wanting this cheap shit shows you have low standards. You can link to as many videos as you want it still has terrible self noise. And you should assume so for most mics of this type price and brand.
Click to expand...

In the blind A/B test of the first video, there’s no audible difference between the self-noise of the two microphones, and in the other A/B test, the MKH416 has only a slightly lower self-noise.

Also, your "endgame" headphone is the Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro—a headphone infamous for high distortion, sluggish transient response, and poor resolution. If you actually had "high standards", you’d be using something like the Audeze LCD-5, EQ’d to your preferred target, not clinging to the deeply flawed DT 990 Pro. I enjoy mine too, but I’m not blind to its shortcomings. Likewise, the slightly higher self-noise of the AT875R doesn’t stop it from being an excellent microphone I’d happily recommend.
 
Last edited:
Attached are some samples i found in discord.

One is a 416 and one is a cheap mic C414 25mm Bai Fei Li.

Please give some thoughts.
 

Attachments

Back
Top Bottom