Rode SmartLav+From real comments

Verdict distilled from 36 mentions across 14 aspects in comments under product review videos.

Positive sentiment53%
PROS 53%
CONS 47%

Rank based on 36 mentions across 14 aspects

View the verdict as

Buy this if...

  • You need a quick, discreet lav mic for phone-based interviews or run-and-gun shooting
  • You want one device that works directly with iPhone or Android without carrying a separate recorder
  • You're willing to add an SC3/SC4 adapter to use it with a Zoom H1/H6 or Tascam recorder

What users love

Skip this if...

  • You're on Android and need a polished official app experience
  • You need consistently hiss-free audio straight out of the box without post-processing
  • You want a rugged mic that will survive years of frequent professional use

What users complain about

Compare in seconds

Based on user comments

Best choice
1Premium
Lewitt MTP W950
Studio-quality vocal soundMinimal monitor and drum bleedTrusted for regular gig useDistracting large logoHigh price tag
Lewitt MTP W950
Studio-quality vocal sound
Minimal monitor and drum bleed
Trusted for regular gig use
Distracting large logo
High price tag
2Premium
Sennheiser MKH 8040
High Owner SatisfactionExceptional Sound ClarityGreat for Field RecordingHigh PriceNot Omnidirectional / More MuffledUltrasonic Self-Noise & Wind Rumble
Sennheiser MKH 8040
High Owner Satisfaction
Exceptional Sound Clarity
Great for Field Recording
High Price
Not Omnidirectional / More Muffled
Ultrasonic Self-Noise & Wind Rumble
3Premium
Sennheiser AVX
Reliable, plug-and-play operationClean, distortion-free audioSolid build quality
Sennheiser AVX
Reliable, plug-and-play operation
Clean, distortion-free audio
Solid build quality
4Premium
Lewitt LCT 640
Post-recording pattern flexibilityVersatile across instrumentsStrong, non-boomy low endPrice barrier for some buyersUnclear M/S and connector design questionsLacking low-mid presence on some vocals
Lewitt LCT 640
Post-recording pattern flexibility
Versatile across instruments
Strong, non-boomy low end
Price barrier for some buyers
Unclear M/S and connector design questions
Lacking low-mid presence on some vocals
5Mid
sE Electronics DynaCaster
Strong overall sound qualityVersatile onboard EQ switchesBuilt-in gain boostHigh price for some buyersUncertain added value over existing setupFiddly dip switches
sE Electronics DynaCaster
Strong overall sound quality
Versatile onboard EQ switches
Built-in gain boost
High price for some buyers
Uncertain added value over existing setup
Fiddly dip switches
6Mid
Shure Beta 57A
Smoother, clearer vocal sound than SM58/SM57Excellent on acoustic guitarDurable, long-lasting buildCan sound harsh in some applicationsAppearance not universally likedInconsistent noise rejection vs SM57
Shure Beta 57A
Smoother, clearer vocal sound than SM58/SM57
Excellent on acoustic guitar
Durable, long-lasting build
Can sound harsh in some applications
Appearance not universally liked
Inconsistent noise rejection vs SM57
7Mid
Sennheiser MD 441
Excellent sound on drums and vocalsStriking, attractive designRecognizable, notable reputation
Sennheiser MD 441
Excellent sound on drums and vocals
Striking, attractive design
Recognizable, notable reputation
8Premium
Telefunken ELA M 251
Smooth, warm characterCompetitive with top-tier micsFull-bodied, rich low endHard to distinguish from cheaper alternativesVery high pricePositioning-sensitive
Telefunken ELA M 251
Smooth, warm character
Competitive with top-tier mics
Full-bodied, rich low end
Hard to distinguish from cheaper alternatives
Very high price
Positioning-sensitive
9Premium
MXL V69M
Rivals the Neumann U67Warm, creamy tube toneAttractive appearance
MXL V69M
Rivals the Neumann U67
Warm, creamy tube tone
Attractive appearance
Best value
10Mid
Neumann TLM 193
Natural, unhyped tonePreferred over U87ai in blind testsLow sibilance / smooth highsAudible distortion noted at price pointCan sound muddy or bass-heavyCardioid-only, unlike multi-pattern siblings
Neumann TLM 193
Natural, unhyped tone
Preferred over U87ai in blind tests
Low sibilance / smooth highs
Audible distortion noted at price point
Can sound muddy or bass-heavy
Cardioid-only, unlike multi-pattern siblings
You are here
31Mid
Rode SmartLav+
Compatible with external recorders via adaptersImproved noise floor over original SmartLavWorks directly with smartphonesConfusing setup and thin instructionsPersistent hiss/background noiseNo official Android app
Rode SmartLav+
Compatible with external recorders via adapters
Improved noise floor over original SmartLav
Works directly with smartphones
Confusing setup and thin instructions
Persistent hiss/background noise
No official Android app

Who wins on what

Ranked by what users actually praise

Overall Impression

Sound quality is a step up from the original SmartLav but still inconsistent for some users. Multiple commenters say the SmartLav+ fixed the unusable noise floor of the original SmartLav, making it viable for iPhone recording. However, others still report persistent hissing that survives noise-reduction tools, and a couple describe the sound as muffled or worse than cheaper lavs for their voice, with one user returning it the next day after being unable to EQ it to a usable state.

Compatibility is broad but often requires extra adapters and app hunting. The mic plugs straight into smartphones and works with apps like RodeRec, FiLMiC Pro, and Field Recorder, and can feed into a Zoom H1/H6 or Tascam recorder via the SC3/SC4 TRRS-to-TRS adapters. However, there is no official Rode app for Android, forcing users toward third-party apps, and some report confusing input errors or dropped audio when using it with certain recorder setups or adapters.

Physical setup and long-term durability drew mixed reactions. Several users found the included instructions inadequate, particularly for threading the cable correctly through the alligator clip and getting the foam windscreen fitted onto the capsule. The mic performed well hidden under clothing for one tester, though another noted it picks up clothing rustle. A more serious complaint from one commenter was that two units broke after only light, well-cared-for use over about a year.

Outdated / Not-accurate data?