I did such a comparison some years ago and I liked the Synco so much that I sold my MKH 416 and bought a second Mic-D2 and still had a lot of money left.
The Sennheiser MKH 416 is clearly the best-sounding mic, and the differences are very apparent. As soon as you switch to Mic B, it becomes very noticeable. Does Mic B sound terrible? No! But when compared to the Sennheiser MKH 416, there is a huge difference, especially in clarity. I have seen a lot of videos where they say it sounds similar, which is not the case to my ears. Great review, Tom!
Dearest Thom congratulations on all your videos! Of impact I prefer Sennheiser 416 I like its clarity. Synco is more charged with medium frequencies that make it darker, but I was very surprised by its noise suppression capability and the quality of sound effects (water and steps) shooting. For low budget productions or semi-professional use I would say that it is a very nice product, also because we are talking about a microphone from 1000$ against 200$. Thanks for the comparison and anyway you can correct it with a slight cut to the mid bass and you get a very similar sound, to 416!
Thanks for your detailed feedback. I also agree that a lot can be achieved by adjusting the raw recording in post for those who can't afford the more expensive mic.
We own both, and there is one HUGE difference that is only apparent in certain situations. With the Sennheiser, you will likely never have to even consider RF Interference with how well shielded it is, but with the Synco (we have a pair, and both exhibit the behavior) you will. Same cables (tested with our premade Whirlwind cables as well as our custom built Canare cables), same recorder (Sound Devices MicPre3 and MicPre10, as well as Zoom F3). In many rough environments, the Syncos pick up RF and in those same environments the Sennheiser is simply immune. In short, in most situations these mics sound really similar, much more than in the interior setting at the front of this video, but in terms of build quality and shielding, the Sennheiser is worlds apart. Worth every penny for real world use. The Synco is a great sounding budget option for those who can afford the possible noise issue.
Interesting to read that you have RF issues with the Synco. I built my own Canare quad cables with Neutrik XLR connectors and have no problem whatsoever with that mic, and I also run a low power FM transmitter in a different room about 8 feet away. Using the same cable(s) I do have other condensers that pick up the RF, as well as some dynamics when using a Cathedral Pipes Durham 48v booster. Cheers!
Hard to tell what mic is "better" because they sound different. Mic A sounds like it has a low cut filter, very little bottom end, but really crispy in the highs, Mic B sounds very boomy in the low end and its picking up more handling noise, but nothing EQ and Low pass filter can't easily fix. I would say Mic A is the Sennheiser and Mic B is Synco
Yeah the Sennheiser sounds so much better. The moment you switch to the Synco it sounds like you put a thick planket in front of the Sennheiser. Obviously with a bit of EQ and Post you can make the Synco sound amazing but the Sennheiser for me has a perfect starting point, even when I will probably never own one :D
A very beautiful comparison where we see that microphone A is slightly better than microphone B. Please also include the Synco D1 microphone as it is said to be better than the D2. Thank you.
I think B sounded better... Mic A had better high end...So if we are talking about response...Mic A...But in my humble opinion B sounded better...I would like to see and outdoor test with more background noise as well as an off axis test...but still a Good video!
Right out the gate, the second you switched I knew that Mic A was the Sennheiser and Mic B was the budget mic. Obviously, A sounded WAY better. Not even comparable.
@@TomAntos The quality. The air and breath it allows on the top end. The crispyness. Mic B was too dull, not full enough. The characteristics of a cheap mic.
Jesus, it's insane how much difference quality difference there is. Is this at equal settings? I wouldn't know why people would even say they are close
I own both the 416 and D2. Yes, similar but a distinct difference. Most viewers (listeners) correctly noted the Senny "crispier" on top, with the D2 sounding a bit "duller". True. And IMO, if its necessary to high-shelf the 416 for its pronounced high end, well..... in some applications the D2 does that for you. Proximity effect notwithstanding. A few years ago I bought the 416 for VO work, and more recently the D2 because of my interest in all the buzz. They each have their place and I would not part with either one. The D2 is a great entry level mic into the world of shotgun mics. And for the price, amazingly usable. (As an aside, just by sight alone, easy to ID the Senny in the vid by the style of foam. It would have been interesting to have switched the foam screens just for shits and giggles).
I don't get it. Everyone's talking about condenser microphones being the best option for VO work, yet I see dynamic microphones in VO booths in TV studios all the time. I'm considering the MKH 416 P48 U3 to replace a pretty costly MikTek I bought years ago. Reason being the condenser is too sensitive for my medium damped room, it's hard, like it demands a pro music studio with high-end acoustic treatment. Seems like a good dynamic mic would be easier to work with under less than optimal conditions. They seem to pick up what they are meant to pick up, the voice closest to the mic. Any issues with p-pops at all?
@@Underhills For me, lots of room acoustic treatment has been my best remedy for addressing condenser mic sensitivity to surroundings. For VO work, you almost cannot overdo it. Regarding p-pops, I've never had a problem with these two specific shotguns discussed (no experience with others), and with the 416 having the capsule placed internally several inches into the mic "business" end, this seems like it may be a part of the solution. I'm always speaking slightly off axis as well to prevent moisture contaminating the capsule so this has never presented itself as a problem. With the Synco sound and appearance similarity I imagine the it shares a similar design philosophy. I have no verifiable details on this, just expressing my opinion. Cheers!
A is by far and away the best… it’s not even close. B and the lapel sound muddy and lack clarity and presence. A’s rejection is also superior. Haven’t finished the video but I would bet a) is the Mkh.
*MIC-A is clearly the Sennheiser 416, and consistently has the most warmth and all around complete sound, while MIC-B is a little too flat sounding to me for speech recording. I prefer a MIC with a slightly warmer sound in the low end for dialogue recording. I think higher transients in the higher frequencies also greatly contributes to spoken word clarity in general dialogue recording, and MIC-A clearly displays this attribute.*
Mic B sounded a bit muddy to me. Mic A seemed to have a little more air on the top end, and (in my opinion) rejected BG noise better. So I'd say A is the Sennheiser. But if you weren't comparing side by side, either would do the job!
Mic A has cleaner sound, it is more what I'd want. Mic B is basey and if you want to record music with bass or explosions, fine, for speech no thanks. I'm unsurprised to find A to be the Sennie, I've been hunting for a cheaper alternative but that has similar sound for a while now, but with no real luck. Leaning toward the MKE600 at the moment simply because the MKH416 is so damn expensive. Been doing stuff with audio gear for years, I suspect that there is something that acts as if it were bias that comes from that, but it really is experience of listening for certain things that you can and cannot fix in post easily, and also what you want out of a mic and not. I think for music the Synco might be fine with some EQ or maybe mixed with some other mic that is more high frequency biased - but as only mic for a boom for example I'd much rather have the 416.
I think the Synco sounds totally different to the MKH 416 - more midsy and less bright. I wonder if Synco did a switch of the guts of the demo mic they sent to Booth Junkie 'cos those two mics sounded identical. This synco sounds much more like a $250 mic - like a NTG4 or similar. Sounds like it's in a tube - none of the beautiful open tone you get from the Sennheiser. Disappointing. I wouldn't get one. Great review though Tom thanks!
sennheiser has loads of clarity, crystal clear high end, not overpowering low end. mic b is muffled, tones of detail lost in high end frequencies and sounds like overall sound quality is lacking. love the channel 👊🏾
What happened with the previous version of this video? I already said mic B must be Sennheizer since it sounds deeper. Where can we find out the results of this test?
The best here is mic C 🤣.... Both A and B are not impressing. Good but not "wow!" And especially on sale D2 is about 0.1X of 416, for most amateur and pro-beginners is more than enough. "A" is a bit better than "B" but there is no *10x* difference. You can make another psycological "experiment" and tell that A is Synco and B is 416, and sure many people will switch gears and prefer B, if don't know that was tricked with brand swap.
I did such a comparison some years ago and I liked the Synco so much that I sold my MKH 416 and bought a second Mic-D2 and still had a lot of money left.
The Sennheiser MKH 416 is clearly the best-sounding mic, and the differences are very apparent. As soon as you switch to Mic B, it becomes very noticeable. Does Mic B sound terrible? No! But when compared to the Sennheiser MKH 416, there is a huge difference, especially in clarity. I have seen a lot of videos where they say it sounds similar, which is not the case to my ears. Great review, Tom!
I have a bias, so I already know which one I would choose
Which one is that?
Dearest Thom congratulations on all your videos! Of impact I prefer Sennheiser 416 I like its clarity. Synco is more charged with medium frequencies that make it darker, but I was very surprised by its noise suppression capability and the quality of sound effects (water and steps) shooting. For low budget productions or semi-professional use I would say that it is a very nice product, also because we are talking about a microphone from 1000$ against 200$. Thanks for the comparison and anyway you can correct it with a slight cut to the mid bass and you get a very similar sound, to 416!
Thanks for your detailed feedback. I also agree that a lot can be achieved by adjusting the raw recording in post for those who can't afford the more expensive mic.
Agreed
We own both, and there is one HUGE difference that is only apparent in certain situations. With the Sennheiser, you will likely never have to even consider RF Interference with how well shielded it is, but with the Synco (we have a pair, and both exhibit the behavior) you will. Same cables (tested with our premade Whirlwind cables as well as our custom built Canare cables), same recorder (Sound Devices MicPre3 and MicPre10, as well as Zoom F3). In many rough environments, the Syncos pick up RF and in those same environments the Sennheiser is simply immune. In short, in most situations these mics sound really similar, much more than in the interior setting at the front of this video, but in terms of build quality and shielding, the Sennheiser is worlds apart. Worth every penny for real world use. The Synco is a great sounding budget option for those who can afford the possible noise issue.
Interesting to read that you have RF issues with the Synco. I built my own Canare quad cables with Neutrik XLR connectors and have no problem whatsoever with that mic, and I also run a low power FM transmitter in a different room about 8 feet away. Using the same cable(s) I do have other condensers that pick up the RF, as well as some dynamics when using a Cathedral Pipes Durham 48v booster. Cheers!
Hard to tell what mic is "better" because they sound different. Mic A sounds like it has a low cut filter, very little bottom end, but really crispy in the highs, Mic B sounds very boomy in the low end and its picking up more handling noise, but nothing EQ and Low pass filter can't easily fix. I would say Mic A is the Sennheiser and Mic B is Synco
I actually liked the sound from 'B' the Synco mic. It seemed more natural.
Thank you for sharing your opinion.
MKE600 has served me very well. Have owned three of those for the price of one 416.
Mic A is flatter and can cut bg noise a lot better while mic B is a bit more muffled.
Yeah the Sennheiser sounds so much better. The moment you switch to the Synco it sounds like you put a thick planket in front of the Sennheiser. Obviously with a bit of EQ and Post you can make the Synco sound amazing but the Sennheiser for me has a perfect starting point, even when I will probably never own one :D
A very beautiful comparison where we see that microphone A is slightly better than microphone B. Please also include the Synco D1 microphone as it is said to be better than the D2. Thank you.
Thanks for this New updated video. Mic A still sounds cleaner. especially in doors. Mic B sounds a lil better outside
I think B sounded better... Mic A had better high end...So if we are talking about response...Mic A...But in my humble opinion B sounded better...I would like to see and outdoor test with more background noise as well as an off axis test...but still a Good video!
Right out the gate, the second you switched I knew that Mic A was the Sennheiser and Mic B was the budget mic. Obviously, A sounded WAY better. Not even comparable.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. What would you say made Mic A sound better?
@@TomAntos The quality. The air and breath it allows on the top end. The crispyness. Mic B was too dull, not full enough. The characteristics of a cheap mic.
Mic A sounds crisp and clear. Mic B sounds muffled. I was hoping for Mic A to be the cheaper one, but I guess there's no free lunch in life.
A's clearer, through my monitors, for sure. I like my AT875R so much better than my Synco D2, for both self-noise and noise rejection reasons.
Jesus, it's insane how much difference quality difference there is. Is this at equal settings? I wouldn't know why people would even say they are close
I own both the 416 and D2. Yes, similar but a distinct difference. Most viewers (listeners) correctly noted the Senny "crispier" on top, with the D2 sounding a bit "duller". True. And IMO, if its necessary to high-shelf the 416 for its pronounced high end, well..... in some applications the D2 does that for you. Proximity effect notwithstanding. A few years ago I bought the 416 for VO work, and more recently the D2 because of my interest in all the buzz. They each have their place and I would not part with either one. The D2 is a great entry level mic into the world of shotgun mics. And for the price, amazingly usable. (As an aside, just by sight alone, easy to ID the Senny in the vid by the style of foam. It would have been interesting to have switched the foam screens just for shits and giggles).
I don't get it. Everyone's talking about condenser microphones being the best option for VO work, yet I see dynamic microphones in VO booths in TV studios all the time. I'm considering the MKH 416 P48 U3 to replace a pretty costly MikTek I bought years ago. Reason being the condenser is too sensitive for my medium damped room, it's hard, like it demands a pro music studio with high-end acoustic treatment. Seems like a good dynamic mic would be easier to work with under less than optimal conditions. They seem to pick up what they are meant to pick up, the voice closest to the mic. Any issues with p-pops at all?
@@Underhills For me, lots of room acoustic treatment has been my best remedy for addressing condenser mic sensitivity to surroundings. For VO work, you almost cannot overdo it.
Regarding p-pops, I've never had a problem with these two specific shotguns discussed (no experience with others), and with the 416 having the capsule placed internally several inches into the mic "business" end, this seems like it may be a part of the solution. I'm always speaking slightly off axis as well to prevent moisture contaminating the capsule so this has never presented itself as a problem. With the Synco sound and appearance similarity I imagine the it shares a similar design philosophy. I have no verifiable details on this, just expressing my opinion. Cheers!
A is by far and away the best… it’s not even close. B and the lapel sound muddy and lack clarity and presence. A’s rejection is also superior.
Haven’t finished the video but I would bet a) is the Mkh.
Thanks for sharing your feedback
*MIC-A is clearly the Sennheiser 416, and consistently has the most warmth and all around complete sound, while MIC-B is a little too flat sounding to me for speech recording. I prefer a MIC with a slightly warmer sound in the low end for dialogue recording. I think higher transients in the higher frequencies also greatly contributes to spoken word clarity in general dialogue recording, and MIC-A clearly displays this attribute.*
Mic B sounded a bit muddy to me. Mic A seemed to have a little more air on the top end, and (in my opinion) rejected BG noise better. So I'd say A is the Sennheiser. But if you weren't comparing side by side, either would do the job!
MIC A IS SO CLEAR , B sounds muffled
Mic A has cleaner sound, it is more what I'd want. Mic B is basey and if you want to record music with bass or explosions, fine, for speech no thanks. I'm unsurprised to find A to be the Sennie, I've been hunting for a cheaper alternative but that has similar sound for a while now, but with no real luck. Leaning toward the MKE600 at the moment simply because the MKH416 is so damn expensive. Been doing stuff with audio gear for years, I suspect that there is something that acts as if it were bias that comes from that, but it really is experience of listening for certain things that you can and cannot fix in post easily, and also what you want out of a mic and not. I think for music the Synco might be fine with some EQ or maybe mixed with some other mic that is more high frequency biased - but as only mic for a boom for example I'd much rather have the 416.
senheisser sounds amazing, but would buy d-2 anytime for the money..\
For me it was clear from minute cero = A
I think the Synco sounds totally different to the MKH 416 - more midsy and less bright. I wonder if Synco did a switch of the guts of the demo mic they sent to Booth Junkie 'cos those two mics sounded identical. This synco sounds much more like a $250 mic - like a NTG4 or similar. Sounds like it's in a tube - none of the beautiful open tone you get from the Sennheiser. Disappointing. I wouldn't get one.
Great review though Tom thanks!
a = sennheiser. results are night & day lol 😂
What makes the two microphones so different in your opinion? Thanks for watching!
sennheiser has loads of clarity, crystal clear high end, not overpowering low end. mic b is muffled, tones of detail lost in high end frequencies and sounds like overall sound quality is lacking. love the channel 👊🏾
@@kadiata Thank you for the detailed feedback and opinion!
Mic A is MKH 416 for sure ... Way better lol😅
What happened with the previous version of this video? I already said mic B must be Sennheizer since it sounds deeper. Where can we find out the results of this test?
Sorry but I uploaded the wrong video. This is the full version. Results are at the end of the video. Use the chapters to jump to the reveal. Thnx!
@@TomAntos Thanks
I like Mic A
A > B, I wish you added the Rode NTG5 to this comparison. By far my favorite mic and curious how it compares to these two.
The best here is mic C 🤣.... Both A and B are not impressing. Good but not "wow!" And especially on sale D2 is about 0.1X of 416, for most amateur and pro-beginners is more than enough.
"A" is a bit better than "B" but there is no *10x* difference. You can make another psycological "experiment" and tell that A is Synco and B is 416, and sure many people will switch gears and prefer B, if don't know that was tricked with brand swap.
Mic B sounds like s**t :D