I'm in the market for a new lightweight FOB stand for my active microphones. Basically I had no idea which one to get, so I ordered the three that best fit my needs based on their descriptions and compared them. In the hopes that this information is useful to someone else, I'm posting my findings here.
This is what I got:
(https://s31.postimg.org/ycma0oj3v/stands01.jpg)
From left to right:
- Manfrotto 1052BAC (https://www.manfrotto.us/black-alu-ac-compact-stand-78-3-sections-2-risers) (68 EUR)
- Muraro MU010AB (http://murarolightstand.com/en/product/compact-light-stands/mini-compact-stand/) (54 EUR)
- Manfrotto 1051BAC (https://www.manfrotto.us/black-alu-mini-compact-stand-ac-69-4-sections-3-risers) (58 EUR)
Footprint
Most of the bands/venues I tape let me set up inside the fenced-off FOH area, usually directly in front of the soundboard. Therefore, one of my main requirements was a stand that's stable enough to support my active mics, while still having a small enough footprint to fit into the limited space there.
Since the legs of all three stands can be variably extended, I measured the distance between legs at maximum and minimum settings for each.
| Max. | Min. |
Manfrotto 1052BAC | 70cm | 96cm |
Muraro MU010AB | 60cm | 78cm |
Manfrotto 1051BAC | 50cm | 62cm |
So, when it comes to footprint, the 1051BAC is hard to beat at 50/62cm. However, the MU010AB is pretty close at 60/78cm. The footprint of the bigger Manfrotto is OK in its minimal position, but at 96cm max., it's too bulky for my applications.
The picture on the right shows the footprint difference.
|
(https://s32.postimg.org/8wpxxbd05/stands02.jpg)
|
Height
As we all know, with stands, size (or height) matters. And again, with the variable legs, the height of the three stands vary. Here are my measurements.
| Max. footprint | Min. footprint |
Manfrotto 1052BAC | 224cm | 238cm |
Muraro MU010AB | 221cm | 226cm |
Manfrotto 1051BAC | 201cm | 207cm |
Unlike both Manfrottos, the Muraro even has a leg setting that makes it even taller, up to 251cm. This setting is shown on the first picture (center stand). However, in this setting, it also appeared to be the least stable (but still stable enough for a pair of SD microphones). While the Manfrotto 1052BAC should work well for FOB taping, the 1051BAC is just not tall enough (at least for my tastes). At a max. height of 251cm, the Muraro is the clear winner in this category.
Stability
No big surprises here. The big footprint of the 1052BAC make it the most stable, while the short legs of the 1051BAC make it the least stable and most suspectible to tipping over. The Muraro's stability is somewhere in between the two Manfrottos. However, I guess all three stands work inside areas that are protected from the crowds (like inside the FOH area). It's just that the 1052BAC and the Muraro are noticeably more stable than the small Manfrotto. They just make me feel more secure. The 1052BAC's long legs may be a tripping hazard, though.
Transport size & weight
The following table shows the closed lengths of the three stands together with their weights.
| Closed length | Weight |
Manfrotto 1052BAC | 87cm | 1.22 kg |
Muraro MU010AB | 68cm | 1.15 kg |
Manfrotto 1051BAC | 68cm | 1.04 kg |
All three stands are exceptionally light (at least compared to every stand I've owned before). The small Manfrotto is unbeatable in this category, but the Muraro is really close and actually feels like the most compact out of the three due to the way it folds. I like the way the Manfrottos fold together, though. It's literally impossible to squeeze a finger when handling the stands.
|
(https://s31.postimg.org/t4mnzpgfv/stands03.jpg)
|
Conclusion
Before ordering, I was a bit biased towards the Manfrottos. And they deliver in terms of build quality. However, the footprint of the 1052BAC and the short height of the 1051BAC are a bit disappointing. The Muraro, on the other hand, probably has all the height I'll ever need and looks like a solid stand overall. While its build quality is probably not on the same level as the Manfrottos, it's far from feeling cheap. And it's damn compact, while still being the tallest of the three stands. Therefore, I think I'm gonna go with the Muraro. I found out about this brand by chance and I must say I'm happy that I did. It sure looks to be a good alternative to the Manfrottos. The only drawback is that the Muraro is not air-cushioned, but I don't think this is a problem with SD or active mics due to their low weight. However, Muraro is also selling an air-cushioned version of the same stand at 6 EUR more. |
Thanks for the overview. I think this is the type of test we all would like to do, but really dig in our pockets to accomplish it. Good information moving forward from my cheap stands.
Thank you for the comparisons of the three stands with photos and measurements!
Great write up and test. Especially with photos, thank you.
we have the Manfrotto 1051BAC and agree that its' 7 foot height relegates it to wink wink stealth set ups or FOB for GA shows. We've only used it about 5 times since buying it almost 2 years ago.
OTH, the flat storage scenario is nice and of course, works out great for photographers/videographers as they have to carry multiple stands.
Very informative comp, Sebastian. Thank you!
Very interesting comparison. I love the 1004BAC myself, but at 106cm its footprint would be too large for you.
I'm considering using using my 099B extension pole in the future with my Impact Back Light stand (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/253077-REG/Impact_LS_3S_Two_Section_Back_Light.html) base when doing a light weight / low footprint setup. With a heavy weight, it should be fine to hold my CM3s, and will get them up to 235cm (over 8') at full extension, with a footprint of only 60cm. Previously I have only used the Impact base for my carbon fiber DPA stand, but I'm thinking this might work with the 099b as well.
Quote from: voltronic on July 08, 2016, 04:27:08 PM
I'm considering using using my 099B extension pole in the future with my Impact Back Light stand (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/253077-REG/Impact_LS_3S_Two_Section_Back_Light.html) base when doing a light weight / low footprint setup.
I've done this exact setup many times with a single set of mics (SDCs or actives) and it works fine with a few caveats:
1. It obviously won't be as stable as a tripod stand and is not ideal for a high traffic area. If you can isolate it from the crowd, preferably inside the soundboard cage, etc, that would be ideal. It will not stand up to drunks or wooks grabbing it like a stripper's pole.
2. If you can gaff-tape or bungee-cord it to something it will increase stability substantially. I've also been successful parking my gear bag between, and on, the feet and wrapping the shoulder strap snugly around the pole.
Quote from: Fried Chicken Boy on July 08, 2016, 05:01:15 PM
Quote from: voltronic on July 08, 2016, 04:27:08 PM
I'm considering using using my 099B extension pole in the future with my Impact Back Light stand (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/253077-REG/Impact_LS_3S_Two_Section_Back_Light.html) base when doing a light weight / low footprint setup.
I've done this exact setup many times with a single set of mics (SDCs or actives) and it works fine with a few caveats:
1. It obviously won't be as stable as a tripod stand and is not ideal for a high traffic area. If you can isolate it from the crowd, preferably inside the soundboard cage, etc, that would be ideal. It will not stand up to drunks or wooks grabbing it like a stripper's pole.
2. If you can gaff-tape or bungee-cord it to something it will increase stability substantially. I've also been successful parking my gear bag between, and on, the feet and wrapping the shoulder strap snugly around the pole.
Thanks - it's good to know this works. Good tip on the bag strap also.
I only do classical recording, so the usage I have in mind for this is for a typical large orchestra + choir setup, where the main pair would be spaced omnis above / behind the conductor. Sometimes the choir is a little too far away for the main setup to get them well, so I'd put another pair of mics closer to the choir. This is where the small footprint of the backlight stand base becomes nice, as the orchestra and choir has to file in and out, and the 1004BAC is really easy to trip over. I would likely use my CM3s for the choir which are extremely light, and I'd be setting them up with a Shapeways clip in an INV mount like this, so the whole thing should be fairly stable. I'd probably gaff the legs down to the stage floor and also add a couple sandbags as insurance.
Quote from: voltronic on July 08, 2016, 08:12:54 PM
I'd probably gaff the legs down to the stage floor and also add a couple sandbags as insurance.
As a more portable alternative to sandbags: Collapsible water bottles (with carabiners attached) also work nicely as counterweights.
They weigh next to nothing, take up almost no space in your gear bag and you can easily refill them at sinks.
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dsporting&field-keywords=collapsible+water+bottle+2l
Quote from: if_then_else on July 09, 2016, 07:15:58 AM
Quote from: voltronic on July 08, 2016, 08:12:54 PM
I'd probably gaff the legs down to the stage floor and also add a couple sandbags as insurance.
As a more portable alternative to sandbags: Collapsible water bottles (with carabiners attached) also work nicely as counterweights.
They weigh next to nothing, take up almost no space in your gear bag and you can easily refill them at sinks.
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dsporting&field-keywords=collapsible+water+bottle+2l
Neat stuff. I've seen regular water bottles used as counterweights suspended from the bottom of a tripod, but never thought of the collapsible ones. They could even go inside the pockets of a photo weight bag (what I typically use).
Quote from: voltronic on July 09, 2016, 09:13:30 AM
Quote from: if_then_else on July 09, 2016, 07:15:58 AM
Quote from: voltronic on July 08, 2016, 08:12:54 PM
I'd probably gaff the legs down to the stage floor and also add a couple sandbags as insurance.
As a more portable alternative to sandbags: Collapsible water bottles (with carabiners attached) also work nicely as counterweights.
They weigh next to nothing, take up almost no space in your gear bag and you can easily refill them at sinks.
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dsporting&field-keywords=collapsible+water+bottle+2l
Neat stuff. I've seen regular water bottles used as counterweights suspended from the bottom of a tripod, but never thought of the collapsible ones. They could even go inside the pockets of a photo weight bag (what I typically use).
This is a pic of the lightstand base I use with my Manfrotto 099B extension pole. The pipe insulation foam is shock/vibration-absorbing. There are two collapsible water bottles (2l) and two water bottle pouches with regular water bottles.
^ That's a pretty slick setup - thanks for sharing!
Good info. Thanks for sharing.