MKH-416 vs MKH-40, Sennheiser Showdown. Sound Speeds!

If you saw my video where I recommend the MKH-40 over the MKH-416 for voice-over ( • Sennheiser MKH-416 For... ) then you may have been less than satisfied with the quick test I did of the MKH-40. When I got into post, I was too so I felt a follow-up was needed.
In this video I put the Sennheiser MKH-416 against the MKH-40 and let you listen to both as I switch back and forth. If you're a bit annoyed by the mics partially blocking my face, sorry. I wanted them in voice-over position for you to get the best impression of how they'd sound. In retrospect though, I shouldn't have performed the test this way because the 416 is designed to be used the way I'm using both in this video while the 40 would sound much better if more overhead angled downwards where it picks up less bass from the chest and more mouth and forehead. I didn't do that in this video because I didn't want to be accused or an uneven test but now... I kinda wish I would have showcased the 40 the best way. Let me know in the comments below what your thoughts are of both mics and if you think I should do a more "fair" test.
To purchase a Sennheiser MKH-40: geni.us/MKH40
Rather have a Sennheiser MKH-416? geni.us/MKH416
There's also a low profile, modular version:
amzn.to/31ZmJRX
Interested in becoming a patron? / soundspeeds
To make a donation: www.paypal.me/S...
Find your perfect voice-over microphone position!
• Finding Your Perfect V...
To read the history of the Sennheiser MKH series microphones, read this very informative article:
assets.sennhei...
Gear Commonly Used In My Videos:
Panasonic Lumix FZ-80: geni.us/SoundSp...
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7: geni.us/SoundSp...
Tascam DR-40: geni.us/TascamDR40
Sound Devices MixPre-6:
www.sounddevic...
Please note that some of the links above are affiliate links and if you purchase something using one of these links, you'll pay the same price that you'd find on Amazon if you looked it up yourself but Amazon will pay me a small referral fee for sending you there to make a purchase.
Make sure to subscribe for more content!
Have a question? Write it in the comments below or email [e-mail]
Join us on Facebook: / soundspeeds
Follow us on Twitter: / soundspeedsyt
Join my Discord: / discord
All donations received will go directly back into this channel.
If there's something specific you'd like the donation funds to be spent on, please specify in the donation notes or send me an email.

[@jasonmorris1165]

I was on the fence for these two for ADR. And went with the 40... In a room that is large (not a small vocal booth or small ADR room) the 416 does pick up the rear rooms reverb, where as the 40 did not. I rented both for an ADR session and A/B'd them and in my situation the 40 won. Although for outside sound effects the 40 isn't that great. But in a larger room the 40 for recording ADR matches production much smoother.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Great add!

[@ThisHandleIsInteresting]

That’s cause the 40 and small diaphragm mics like it are designed for interior dialogue. The 416 is designed to cancel outdoor ambience with an interference tube, whereas the 40 and 50, are truthfully, designed like large diaphragm mics (essentially voice over mics) so for voice over the 40 or 50 (mostly the 50) definitely check out in that department. Of course, they are powerful mics and pick up indoor noise as well, so acoustic treatment is encouraged.

[@SoundSpeeds]

That's right

[@bobstinker2074]

I could tell which was which as soon as I started listening for bass and sibilance. Fantastic video as usual allen

[@SoundSpeeds]

Thanks dude.

[@danielgaudet6114]

The MKH 40 is a great mic. It's unfortunate that Sennheiser discontinued it at the beginning of this year along with most of the MKH that were released around the same period (MKH 20, MKH 60 and the MKH 70). I also really like the MKH 60 as well for VO.

[@SoundSpeeds]

There still the 8040 though. The modular, smaller diameter mics aren't going anywhere.

[@WILDWILDVAPE]

Way better test than your first video! I still prefer the 416 but they sound both pretty good in this video ✌️👍 thank you for the test and follow up ;)

[@SoundSpeeds]

Sure thing. My mistake in these videos was to compare them the same way - directly at the face how most people would use the 416. The 40 is best when used overhead like on a boom pole. Then it balances much better and the true fidelity comes out.

[@50450720]

Listening to this today, in Feb 23, I've got to say that the 416 still amazes me, it's as old as the hills but still rocks. I've often thought about upgrading it to a mkh50 or a4017b, but then I hear a comparison review like this, and I ask myself why? Sure there are newer and more expensive mics, and even better mics for certain occasions, but the 416 is rarely the wrong choice for anything. And if you know how to sound treat a room with basic soft furnishings or sound blankets it can produce the goods anywhere. Long live the King 👍

[@SoundSpeeds]

👍

[@nickr5213]

Sounds great! I guessed correctly and preferred the MKH-40 in this test also! Definitely a touch richer and better with sibilance, but still a clear sound that is in the same recognizable family. However, I do feel that the 416 has a touch more of an “in your face” edge, and might do better for certain types of infomercial or radio imaging type VOs and with certain voices.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Ok. :-)

[@nickr5213]

Sound Speeds For most VO, I would for sure pick the 40, and with a little EQ, it could probably do that in your face sound just as good too! Please don’t order any more boats :)

[@snubdawg1386]

thank you for this test, exactly what i'm looking for!

[@SoundSpeeds]

Excellent. Just keep in mind that the mics are in front of my mouth as opposed to overhead boom position and that does change the sound.

[@snubdawg1386]

@@SoundSpeeds thanx for the tip ... i'm searching for a mic for voice over and mainly smooth vocals ... i tried so many mics over the years to find my holy grail vocal mic that sounds neutral and don't exaggerate any frequencies or sibilance issues and so far i like the mkh 416 the most, it has something magical like a little bit of tape sounding!? ... i will do a last shootout between the mkh416 and the mkh 40 ...i'm not sure if a cardioid condenser mic like the mkh 40 really has the same magic on my voice but i wil find out soon .... yet a voice over comparison between mkh 40 vs mkh 50 would be interesting but i guess they are very similar and it only depends on the recording situation

[@SoundSpeeds]

@@snubdawg1386 It does indeed but the 50 is probably the most common film industry mic there is. Honestly, I like it better than the 40.

[@snubdawg1386]

@@SoundSpeeds for voice over? why do you like it better? ...please make a comparison video! ;)

[@SoundSpeeds]

No, overhead booming.

[@sinocelt]

It was immediately obvious the MKH 40 was the #1 mic, because you compared the proximity effects at the start. ;o)

[@SoundSpeeds]

👍

[@ahmedadambd1939]

Interesting comparison. Few videos present the MKH40. From what I've come across, it's almost like the MKH50, but with a bit more forgiveness and relatively less "aggressive" sound. For a little while, I have been working with the Sanken CS3-e and the CSM-1. I have not yet had the time to use them well in different conditions. The rejection is remarkable. However, I wonder if it will not be adequate to also work with another microphone to learn, if necessary, to choose a given microphone for a specific voice. Schoeps are relatively more expensive and they may have some problems with humidity. So I oriented myself towards the Sennheiser. I thought of the MKH8060 and it's especially the possibility to change its capsule that could be useful over time. Then, I thought maybe the MKH40 can offer the possibility of having a good sound of a person moving a little too much in place or even a good mic for indoor (+wide angle) when being the sound mixer and the boom op at the same time. But I'm afraid to add another mic that won't have a big addition. Do you have any tips or suggestions? Thank you ^^

[@SoundSpeeds]

I think a 50 would better suit your needs. I. This video the 40 didn't perform as well as expected for a few reasons. Regardless, the 50 would complement a shotgun well.

[@ahmedadambd1939]

​Thank you for the advice

[@SoundSpeeds]

Sure thing!

[@joentell]

I heard more bass with Mic 1 and I was sure it was going to be the 416. I preferred the way Mic 2 sounded, and I was ready to be disappointed as I own a 416. I'm glad it was the other way around. I felt like the airiness came through on the 416. It could've been exaggerated and inaccurate, but it made the recording sound more alive. Now check this out. I listened on a few different speakers and I preferred the 416 on each one. I listened on headphones, I prefer the MKH-40. On headphones, the 416 sounded sibilant, and the 40 sounded more natural. On speakers, the 416 "cut through" and had better intelligibility and the 40 sounded a tiny bit boxed in and muffled.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Fair enough

[@calum89robertson]

Great vid Alan! May I ask, which of these Sennheisers would you say is best for sit-down, indoor interviews, where the mic is boomed above the interview (using a c-stand, boom caddy, boom pole etc), just out of shot. So probably 10-18 inches from the source. Room could well be untreated, large or small, and potentially not completely quiet but likely pretty quiet. I can't afford both! Or for this purpose is there very little to choose between them? The main thing I'm worried about is reverb in a boxy room if using a shotgun mic (like the MKH-416) to be honest. Or is there a better Sennheiser out there for this?

[@SoundSpeeds]

MKH-50 or MKH-8050

[@vocalrangers3001]

I thought the 416 sounded more saturated and full, while the MKH-40 sounded more natural. I honestly don't think either was bad (and for their price, they better not be!), but I do agree with your earlier video that the MKH-40 may be better for VO than the MKH-416. I have a shotgun mic that I've used for VO before (and still do, if the situation calls for it), and after doing some comparisons I think it may be the nature of shotgun mics to have a more bass heavy sound for VO, as you're generally only about 6" from the mic. The proximity effect just seems to kick in at a longer distance than cardioid mics. That being said, I also think shotgun mics have a place in VO, not only for their polar pattern but *because* of the increased proximity effect. It's certainly not for every use, but I do think it has it's place. As far as "which is better" between the 40 and 416, I don't really think there is a definitive answer. Personally, I liked the more natural sound of the MKH-40, but it's a close call. Either one would be good, and I think with a bit of post processing I wouldn't be able to tell any difference between the two. Thanks for the test, I enjoyed it!

[@SoundSpeeds]

Thanks for watching and your input!

[@dwftube]

Mic 1 is not as open at the top end but the sibilant sounds are soooo much nicer.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Now I want people to hear the 8040 and 8050

[@Josh-sx2lg]

OMG!!! I just saw this, but wow just in time! I'm saving a little for a shotgun, and I'm almost there for a NTG5, and thinking about getting it, but then I was like, well, I'm halfway the 416, so why not save some more? And I started to watch so many vids about the 416, and I noticed that even though sounds amazing, there was always a little thing that I just couldn't stand; The SSSSS! very sibilant for voice over, specially in small booths, I heard so many samples, that in this video I new from 1 min on, that #2 was the 416, cause the SSS started to get painful. And I don't want to spend any time cutting sss (I don't like the plug ins for it and deEssers that much) I want a mic that I just record and that's it, no time spend on trying to get sss out; and I have good technique, I now a lot of people that would ramp on me saying; that's performance, not the mic; but I do have good technique, currently I use the AT4040 and I don't have to go trough the audio finding the sibilants, this Mic does surprisingly well, even with its presence boost, partly is beacuse I do have a good technique..., but I did record in a studio that had the 416, and I noticed again the sibilant, and I asked the engineer and why not use a less sibilant one, and he says;" industry standard, around the world everyone is used to it, maybe in the future that will change, but as for now, this is what people think is the best, cause our ears are kind of acclimated to it".., and that's why he suggested me to get it. But I may be crazy, but I don't like to do much processing to the audio, I feel like, even if is to cut out a little of the presence boost to make it sound more neutral, the voice is affected a little bit, isn't the idea of getting the sound as perfect as possible with no need of cutting DB's to try to get it more neutral? Why not getting right straight from the source first? I felt that the MKH40 gets it right from start. (I feel sorry for those who try to force that the 416 was way better, you actually fooled many, my engineer friend thought that the #2 was the 40; he bought the 40 right away) Anyways, I'll definitely try to save for the MKH40, wow, sounds amazing, and a lot more VO oriented!

[@SoundSpeeds]

One thing I'll add is that the 40 is designed for overhead booming and sounds best coming in from above. I should have demonstrated it coming in at a 45 from above my eyes but decided instead to show them both at mouth level which skew results. You should try the 40 from a 45 degree angle coming in at hairline height and you'll really like it.

[@dantheman348]

Mic 1 seems to cut better but mic 2 sounds more pleasant at least by itself.

[@SoundSpeeds]

👍

[@zeitakulobusta]

Not sure if it's the camera angle or what but the 40 looks noticeably higher than the 416, also hard to see the angles as esp with this proximity it affects the sound noticeably ie more /less nose, palate, chest etc.

[@SoundSpeeds]

The 40 is best heard overhead - like the boom mic it is.

[@zeitakulobusta]

@@SoundSpeeds fair play but aren't they both boom mics? Plus the difference in height an angle would give a different representation of the 2. The 416, and indeed the 40 are also used for vo too so i was listening for the edge kind of differences that you can hear in that kind of close mic situation. Again hard to see but were these at a kind boom situation distance? Just interested, grateful for the comparison of course.

[@SoundSpeeds]

They are both boom mics, yes, but the 40 shines overhead. Both mics are even to my mouth or as close as I could get them. Windscreens change the sound a little too.

[@Podcastage]

First! And damn you for making me need to spend another $1000 with sennheiser!

[@SoundSpeeds]

Well... the are links in the description ;-)

[@gutpunchnews4000]

Podcastage oh Gawd. Another week you won’t be able to go to Disneyland.

[@SoundSpeeds]

@@gutpunchnews4000 Bandrew has more money than Disney. He's good.

[@gutpunchnews4000]

Sound Speeds the way Disney is being run these days that might be accurate.

[@SoundSpeeds]

@@Azumuthgaming Like Iron Man, 007 or Ariel? Interesting concept. Then his channel would finally grow. ;-)

[@SiraFilm]

What is your recommendation for an indoor interview in a mostly untreated room in which I boom the mic from the top about 50-100 cm from the mouth depending on how wide the image is.

[@SoundSpeeds]

One with a super or hypercardiod pattern. Budget?

[@SiraFilm]

@@SoundSpeeds ​ @Sound Speeds Sorry, I forgot to mention that I already own the 416. Do you think the 40 is better for my kind of work? I got some local guys to sell it for 500usd which I think is a good price or not?

[@SoundSpeeds]

A 416 will be just fine. Can't go wrong with it. A 40 would probably sound fuller and have a little less reverb if there are reflections but it's not enough of a deal to buy a 40 if you already have a 416 unless you want to have it to tweak your setup

[@SiraFilm]

@@SoundSpeeds Thank you!

[@SoundSpeeds]

Happy to help

[@larryvaughn5843]

VO guys seem to like large diaphragm mics. What is your take on them?

[@SoundSpeeds]

A lot of VO guys swear by the 416 because it is extremely crisp (focused on the mouth) and you can back off on it a bit or push it for that MKH proximity effect we know so well. LDCs are still very much a favorite though.

[@matthew.datcher]

I find it scary that you're cogent enough to unlock your phone in your sleep. It's a good thing you haven't been tossed in jail for your sleep activities.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Dude... you have no idea how scary that is to me. Luckily I haven't done more than talk in my sleep the past few years.

[@larryvaughn5843]

@@SoundSpeeds Might be best to keep your phone away from your head when you are sleeping.

[@SoundSpeeds]

I have a great solution now.

[@helmanfrow]

They have very similar tonalities but the 416 gives itself away in its sibilance. Listen to those T's and S's.

[@SoundSpeeds]

It has a distinct sound, for sure

[@nicholasmullins3693]

So what I am getting is that the MKH40 might be better for a voice actor, and the 416 for a VO artist. The 40 is smoother and more natural, the 416 cutting more and being more ear- grabbing.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Gotcha. :-)

[@nicholasmullins3693]

@@SoundSpeeds Ah! I meant to put a question mark on my statement! Didn't intend to be all decisive about it. Dang though... you've got me really wanting a 40...

[@SoundSpeeds]

@@nicholasmullins3693 To me... it's simple. The 416 is a diverse, jack-of-all-trades mic that will deliver 8/10 performance in everything from voice-over to exterior motion picture dialogue. If looking for the Sennheiser MKH sound, I prefer the MKH-40 but the 40 isn't a jack-of-all-trades like the 416. The 416 sounds good and is diverse but I like other mics for dedicated purposes like the 40 for VO.

[@giorgi7166]

i don't know if you say which was which but i know mic 2 is MKH 416 and it is waaay better than 40. It is not industry stndart for filmmaking, commercials and voice-over for no reason. just don't make a mistake to people who watchs you :)

[@SoundSpeeds]

The 416 is a jack of all trades mic. You know the phrase, jack of all trades, master of none. At the time of this video I had used the 416 on a show and it kept not working well in situation after situation but the 40 was another option and it always seemed to do better. Not because it sounded better in a controlled environment but because it dealt between with non controlled environments better. I was annoyed at the 416 and wanted to give the 40 some attention. I've since calmed down.

[@giorgi7166]

@@SoundSpeeds I don't know if 40 is better in background noise rejection but for voice-over in normal situation 416 is just better. i said this becouse you mentioned "voice-over" in your video. 40 is just good mic similar to many expensive condenser microphones but 416 has sound that is something unique especially when user has deep voice.

[@SoundSpeeds]

I understand but part of what I was doing when I got frustrated at the 416 was wild lines - voice over of lines delivered on set (or voice over for a scene) to be slipped in in post. The 416 disappointed me there to. The thing I should have done in this video is use the 40 overhead, the way you would. It sound much better when overhead micing than coming straight in. I may have to remake this video at some point.

[@larryvaughn5843]

@@SoundSpeeds A few years ago during the mixer mixer one of the post production facilities in Atlanta let some of us visit. They had an MKH 50 that they were using for their ADR mic, probably because so many people use the 50 for an interior mic.

[@SoundSpeeds]

That is true. Matching mics in ADR is very important.

[@Balegarul]

I find the 416 to sound better overall but on your voice it does sound a bit too sibilant.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Fair enough. It's important to listen and make the determination for yourself.

[@CryoftheProphet]

the 416 has a bit of a presence boost that isnt really flattering on higher pitched voices like his, though, I think a little post could take care of that honestly.

[@SoundSpeeds]

Agreed. In fairness to the 40, it sounds much more balanced if using overhead.

[@ThisHandleIsInteresting]

@@SoundSpeeds What if you used the 40 on a stand right below your mouth or in front of it?

[@SoundSpeeds]

It'll sound similar to the way it does in this video.

[@joshr3739]

I actually couldn't hear a difference between the two at all. I don't know if that's good on the mics part or bad on my ears part :D

[@SoundSpeeds]

There's a difference. How were you listening?

[@cathywymark328]

Defo a difference on HD700's. I preferred mic 2 for this test, but guessed incorrectly. Pleasantly surprised

[@doubledark2]

@@SoundSpeeds I just listened on speakers and headphones and couldn't hear a substantial difference

[@SoundSpeeds]

There is a difference. May not stand out as huge though.

[@doubledark2]

@@SoundSpeeds OK, I hard wired the speakers to the computer and again I can barely hear a difference. old ears perhaps :)