SOUND SHARK Long-Range Microphone Amplifier

the reflector is poorly molded imo. the chassis however is very nice. not what i expected.for the cost.

Our church has several meetings with group discussions in a large room. We switched to Zoom when Covid hit but have now resumed in person meetings. But several people -- older, out of state, or even overseas -- prefer to join via Zoom. The problem was picking up audio from the group in the room in a way those at home could understand it. A single mic at the front was very echoey. Passing a mic was undesirable. We had some success patching into a pair of built in crowd mics but there was still a lot of noise. The solution was a Sound Shark mounted next to a webcam on a tripod, equipped with an inexpensive USB lavalier mic.. The operator just pans to whoever is speaking. The voice clarity is excellent, even from those in the back row 30 feet from the mic. The audience at home gives rave reviews.

I currently use an AT8035 shotgun mic off to the side to mic the officiant at weddings, mostly outdoors. The 8035 isn’t the greatest shotgun of all time by any means, but I don’t need Neumann quality for live spoken voice amplification. This mic scheme is nice because it’s generally out of the way of photos and guests’ line of sight, and picks up the bride and groom as well, with way less hassle than lavs, multiple mics, etc. My setup works well, and I get a lot of compliments on it, but I’m always looking to improve, even if I could get just “one louder” before feedback.I was intrigued by the “sounds like a lapel-worn lavalier from 6ft away” claim by Sound Shark, since i often mic ceremonies from about 6 feet away and I already had the cheap but decent Audio Technica atr3350 lav, in fact the same exact mic that Sound Shark sells with their “self powered” kit (Btw, I’m not an AT fanboy- if other companies would make battery powered condensers, I’d be willing to try...). Well, it’s really not great for live sound reinforcement. In my simple A-B test the level was way lower than my usual shotgun mic, which was no surprise, but the tone was thin and far more prone to feedback when boosted to similar audio levels as the shotgun. I understand I’m not using a particularly good or powerful mic in this case, but for a $285 accessory, i expected more than i heard. The AT8035 mic is actually cheaper than the sound shark alone, and runs on 1 AA battery, which is a key convenience for mobile outdoor setups with battery-powered PA’s (which lack phantom) like I do all the time. It wasn’t a tough decision to send this back.I understand that a better mic and preamp might give better results with the Shark, but at that point you’re well over double the cost of my current simple shotgun setup, plus much more gear to set up- hence much more to potentially go wrong. I’m always looking to improve my service, and I’m not afraid to pay for it, but I didn’t hear any evidence of the Sound Shark having potential of exceeding, or meeting for that matter, what I already do.Obviously this is marketed to video folks (there’s not even a way to mount this to a mic stand in the package, luckily I’m a photographer as well so I have tripods around which did work), so perhaps there’s something more desirable for that usage, where feedback isn’t an issue. Yes the Sound Shark is a cool idea and it does focus sound, but the hoops you need to jump through don’t seem to make it an improvement over a decent shotgun.

I purchased this device in the Premium Kit form (i.e. With an included Lav mic) for a somewhat specialized application: I am documenting the experience of 5 adult ice skaters as they train for a "skating with the stars" competition, and I need to capture video/audio of them practicing and hopefully saying humorous things as they struggle on the ice. There is not time to individually mic everyone using wireless lav mics, as they tend to be rushed when arriving and leaving practice sessions, and attaching lavs properly to prevent noise from shifting clothing and breathing is time consuming. So I am using a Sound Shark instead. While it is clear that the sound being picked up when the subjects are 20 or more feet away is "remote", it is pretty amazing how well this device works. It is completely meeting my needs. I am also impressed at how well it works in shorter distance situations: very similar sound to having the subjects wearing a lav, but with no clothing noise issues, and great protection from wind noise. So I have started using it for casual interview audio too, with very good results.Unfortunately and for no clear reason the included lav mic simply stopped working after about 2 weeks. One call to the company was all it took to get a replacement sent out, which arrived 3 days later (and of course I was able to use one of my standard Lavs with the Sound Shark in the interim). They were very surprised to hear about the mic failure and seemed genuinely interested in getting the unit back to find the cause. They seem to truly care about customer satisfaction, and were very easy to work with. Based on all of this I can highly recommend both the product and the company. Five stars even with the mic issue.

It was a pleasure to meet you at Photo Plus Expo and personally express my excitement and gratitude to you for your Sound Shark. I have to say Sound Shark is truly an incredible audio capturing device. I currently work with young children who make short films as well as shoot my own films and in many instances I have used the Sound Shark on a monopod and attached to an external recorder instead of a boom mike on a boom pole to capture audio. It is especially useful in tight shooting spaces where capturing audio with a boom mike would be impossible or at times when the crew is only one person-me and I don't have a dedicated boom operator. It is also much easier for my students to use when capturing audio for their films as they are too young, physically, and inexperienced to be able to use a boom mike/pole configuration. Both my students and I love working with Sound Shark!Thank you for inventing Sound Shark!!!