Personal View site logo
Cinema gear deals, direct from factories - Gear deals and Gear deals section. Also check Cameras, lenses, software, gear deals.
You support is vital for us. To keep this place ad free and independent, select one of the options below.
Donations are going to community support costs, hosting, etc. Your support allows to improve and expand this site.
Aputure Deity Shotgun
  • Expensive, and do not see any reason to prefer it to MXL and alikes.

  • 17 Replies sorted by
  • https://www.learnlightandsound.com/blog/2017/1/5/aputure-deity-shotgun-microphone-review

    In the comparison against like-cost mics by Curtis, including cheaper ones, the Deity sounds inferior IMHO.

  • MXL is still available, from affordable shotguns, it is good option with good sensitivity

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/999092-REG/mxl_mxl_fr_333m_shotgun_microphone.html

    They hiked price while changing model number and sell it in US only, plus cancelled almost all sellers

  • MXL is still available, from affordable shotguns, it is good option with good sensitivity

    But has anyone been claiming it is as good as a 416??

    They hiked price while changing model number and sell it in US only, plus cancelled almost all sellers

    Why on earth would they do that?! :-/

  • But has anyone been claiming it is as good as a 416??

    Except Aputure themselves for this mike also no one is claiming it. I do not see any reason not to get NTG3 instead (if you smart and look for deal can get one for around $400-430, add to this that Aputure is almost impossible to sell).

    Why on earth would they do that?! :-/

    I have no idea. Shotguns are very small niche for MXL. I think their main idea was to hold recommended prices.

  • Btw another chance to get 416 at almost same price

    Sennheiser MKH 416 Short Shotgun Interference Tube Microphone with Zoom F8 Multi-Track Recorder Kit for $1499

    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1302267-REG/sennheiser_sennheiser_mkh_416_shotgun_microphone.html

  • Oh! That is kinda tempting. Hopefully they'll bring out the same discount for a Zoom F4 package as well.

    Though I'm planning to wait for Tascam's response before leaping on buying a Zoom F4.

  • Seems overpriced for Chinese shotgun, no matter their claims.

  • good comparison to Sennheiser MKH 416 and Rode NTG-2 https://wavreport.com/2017/02/25/review-aputure-deity-shotgun/

  • I can't believe that someone thinks that pointing a mic at a speaker, and comparing to the original music file is in any way representative of the mic performance! The sound of the speaker system and room reflections is what you will hear, not just the sound of the mic. Time for this guy to go back to the basics of understanding audio.

  • @caveport

    Well, you are wrong here. Speakers used are good, under good I mean +-3db at the 1-1.5 meter impulse response measurement in 150hz to 20Khz. Due to simple physics up from around 400Hz reflections add only small part with close mike and such room.

    It will be really cool to measure mike response for each of angles and do it in sound treated place, but we are not ready yet.

  • No, I'm not wrong. I have extensive experience in this area. I worked for our national broadcaster as an audio engineer and have done years of broadcast audio using all kinds of mics and have been involved in studio acoustic design. Vitaliy, you need to stop this kind of misinformation. That speaker test is fundamentaly flawed and is seriously misleading. Even the walking around the mic to demonstrate the polar pattern pickup was not distance controlled. This video is not a test, it's an opinion.

  • No, I'm not wrong. I have extensive experience in this area. I worked for our national broadcaster as an audio engineer and have done years of broadcast audio using all kinds of mics and have been involved in studio acoustic design.

    Let's use this knowledge. I am for you to help design better tests.

    Did you made professional speakers and mikes measurement?

    Vitaliy, you need to stop this kind of misinformation. That speaker test is fundamentaly flawed and is seriously misleading. Even the walking around the mic to demonstrate the polar pattern pickup was not distance controlled.

    Let's move from attack mode to simple explanation to people who read this.

  • OK.

    Yes I did do speaker measurement tests. The correct process is to do speaker tests in anechoic room. Not always available to most people.

    To do this kind of test one needs a control test with a calibrated measurement microphone (or other 'control' microphone to compare to) using a frequency sweep generator from 20 - 20KHz. Then use the microphone one is testing and compare the two recordings. This will reveal any frequency bumps or dips. Both recordings will sound different to the original source as speaker colouration and bass driver/midrange/tweeter axis offset in the cabinet will change the frequency response as the measurement microphone distance is varied.

    It is not uncommon for speaker systems to have up to 10% overall distortion, and that is ignoring the frequency response, phase response and transient response issues.

    A similar process is required for the off axis measurements. It is essential to keep the distance to the sound source absolutely precise as frequency response changes over distance due to the effects of sound transmission through the air. Even the air temperature will affect the results!

  • The correct process is to do speaker tests in anechoic room. Not always available to most people.

    Now most frequently used method is impulse response, and not frequency sweep. It requires some math after measurement, and is much faster.

    Considering anechoic room. You can make pretty accurate measurements above certain frequency for speakers without it (again considering few other things).

    To do this kind of test one needs a control test with a calibrated measurement microphone (or other 'control' microphone to compare to) using a frequency sweep generator from 20 - 20KHz. Then use the microphone one is testing and compare the two recordings. This will reveal any frequency bumps or dips. Both recordings will sound different to the original source as speaker colouration and bass driver/midrange/tweeter axis offset in the cabinet will change the frequency response as the measurement microphone distance is varied.

    Yes, you use calibrated microphone for speaker measurement. Actual microphone is not expensive, it is calibration and persistence that add to price a lot. Like Brüel & Kjær stuff. I can tell you a lot about measurement mikes, as owned and tested multiple.

    Due to math if you keep all else during both measurements intact it does not matter that small inconsistencies speakers have (I can add some assumptions here, but it'll be not useful for readers, it is not hard to find).

    Both recordings will sound different to the original source as speaker colouration and bass driver/midrange/tweeter axis offset in the cabinet will change the frequency response as the measurement microphone distance is varied.

    Absolutely.

    It is not uncommon for speaker systems to have up to 10% overall distortion, and that is ignoring the frequency response, phase response and transient response issues.

    10% distortion happens usually at the low frequencies, just due to physics of drivers (high distortion, like 5-7% can happen in cross range also usually with first order filter and certain tweeters). Can happen in overload mode, but it is nor relevant here.

    I think you mean that normal combined microphone and preamp noise an distortion are lower compared to speaker. Hence it is not good idea to use such approach to measure them. But no one plans to do it.