Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
more mic thoughts and questions
66 views
Skip to first unread message
Nate Najar
May 12, 2013, 1:02:56 AM5/12/13
to
So I'm driving myself crazy comparing these mics the last day or so, but it has been really enlightening. I have the mk41 schoeps that I've had for years. I just got a B&K 4011. I realize the pattern on the schoeps is tighter than the B&K.
I have compared them in every distance and placement imaginable for close miking my classical guitar. I have to be able to close mic my instrument for much of the ensemble stuff i do.
I was initially very pleased with the B&K. The thing that bothers me about the schoeps is that when you get it to a "flat" ish distance, the low end is a little light and it does a funny thing in the lower mids. It's almost fatiguing in a way but i cannot really explain it. Some gentle eq can help a bit with that. The high end on the schoeps is gorgeous. So sweet and incredibly detailed. and of course the reach of the mk41 is incredible.
even when i bring the b&k in much closer than the schoeps, the schoeps seems to have more detail and "directness" about it and I think it's because the high end is so clean on it. The high end on the b&k is a little trashy sounding. This is compared to the schoeps of course. I imagine the B&K is very good for ensemble distance miking in a good room, but in this situation I was very surprised.
I am going nuts trying to find the perfect mic for this use. the low mid thing on the schoeps bothers me. and the lack of lows. The proximity effect just muddies up the low mids even more- The cleanest sound with this thing is about 20" out. That is too far for many of my situations.
So i need a mic i can get around 10" from the guitar and preferably get a proper sound there as opposed to having a good deal of eq. I am tempted to try and get ahold of a dpa4006 and or a schoeps mk2 but rear rejection is a plus in a lot of cases, so a cardioid voiced for close miking is ideal.
what do you think of the microtech gefell m295? or the sms2000? Anything else to consider?
thanks for your thoughts....
I have compared them in every distance and placement imaginable for close miking my classical guitar. I have to be able to close mic my instrument for much of the ensemble stuff i do.
I was initially very pleased with the B&K. The thing that bothers me about the schoeps is that when you get it to a "flat" ish distance, the low end is a little light and it does a funny thing in the lower mids. It's almost fatiguing in a way but i cannot really explain it. Some gentle eq can help a bit with that. The high end on the schoeps is gorgeous. So sweet and incredibly detailed. and of course the reach of the mk41 is incredible.
even when i bring the b&k in much closer than the schoeps, the schoeps seems to have more detail and "directness" about it and I think it's because the high end is so clean on it. The high end on the b&k is a little trashy sounding. This is compared to the schoeps of course. I imagine the B&K is very good for ensemble distance miking in a good room, but in this situation I was very surprised.
I am going nuts trying to find the perfect mic for this use. the low mid thing on the schoeps bothers me. and the lack of lows. The proximity effect just muddies up the low mids even more- The cleanest sound with this thing is about 20" out. That is too far for many of my situations.
So i need a mic i can get around 10" from the guitar and preferably get a proper sound there as opposed to having a good deal of eq. I am tempted to try and get ahold of a dpa4006 and or a schoeps mk2 but rear rejection is a plus in a lot of cases, so a cardioid voiced for close miking is ideal.
what do you think of the microtech gefell m295? or the sms2000? Anything else to consider?
thanks for your thoughts....
Mike Rivers
May 12, 2013, 9:34:23 AM5/12/13
to
On 5/12/2013 1:02 AM, Nate Najar wrote:
> So I'm driving myself crazy comparing these mics the last day or so, but it has been really enlightening. I have the mk41 schoeps that I've had for years. I just got a B&K 4011. I realize the pattern on the schoeps is tighter than the B&K.
I think that what you're learning here is that any mic doesn't always
> So I'm driving myself crazy comparing these mics the last day or so, but it has been really enlightening. I have the mk41 schoeps that I've had for years. I just got a B&K 4011. I realize the pattern on the schoeps is tighter than the B&K.
sound the same no matter how you use it. The trick is to find the mic
and position that gives you the sound you like best. Which might not be
the same for every song, in every room, or for every guitar. It's why
people have more than one mic, and sometimes take the time to experiment
with what they have at the time they're recording.
--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com
Peter Larsen
May 12, 2013, 10:30:06 AM5/12/13
to
Nate Najar wrote:
> I have compared them in every distance and placement imaginable for
> close miking my classical guitar. I have to be able to close mic my
> instrument for much of the ensemble stuff i do.
Try to borrow a KSM 137 or 141. It is not without vices, but it is great at
> I have compared them in every distance and placement imaginable for
> close miking my classical guitar. I have to be able to close mic my
> instrument for much of the ensemble stuff i do.
focusing at what is in front of it, kinda like a SM57 as condenser mike.
Factory response curve is ok for first attempt at eq'ing and correcting thus
at least improves its somewhat "short" ambience-rendering.
> So i need a mic i can get around 10" from the guitar and preferably
> get a proper sound there as opposed to having a good deal of eq. I
> am tempted to try and get ahold of a dpa4006 and or a schoeps mk2 but
> rear rejection is a plus in a lot of cases, so a cardioid voiced for
> close miking is ideal.
> what do you think of the microtech gefell m295? or the sms2000?
> Anything else to consider?
My understaning is that we're talking concert sound here - I'd try a
properly loaded SM57 or a MD421, not the newest version. 421's can be a bit
troublesome if you need high gain before feedback. But that probably is
where you were before starting your quest so try the KSM as pr. above,
preferably without having to buy it first, you may or may not like it.
> thanks for your thoughts....
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
hank alrich
May 12, 2013, 11:09:04 AM5/12/13
to
Nate Najar <na...@natenajar.com> wrote:
> Anything else to consider?
Josephson Series 4.
--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
> Anything else to consider?
Josephson Series 4.
--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
Nate Najar
May 12, 2013, 11:13:13 AM5/12/13
to
On Sunday, May 12, 2013 9:34:23 AM UTC-4, Mike Rivers wrote:
>
> I think that what you're learning here is that any mic doesn't always
>
> sound the same no matter how you use it. The trick is to find the mic
>
> and position that gives you the sound you like best. Which might not be
>
> the same for every song, in every room, or for every guitar. It's why
>
> people have more than one mic, and sometimes take the time to experiment
>
> with what they have at the time they're recording.
>
>
well you're absolutely right Mike. And I want to be clear, I'm talking diminishing returns here, but it is still (at least to my ears with my monitoring) a very noticeable difference. and It is my sound so I want to present it as close as my intent as i can.
>
> I think that what you're learning here is that any mic doesn't always
>
> sound the same no matter how you use it. The trick is to find the mic
>
> and position that gives you the sound you like best. Which might not be
>
> the same for every song, in every room, or for every guitar. It's why
>
> people have more than one mic, and sometimes take the time to experiment
>
> with what they have at the time they're recording.
>
>
The 4011 sounded remarkably more "real" and, well, better than a 414 and a THE cardioid. But the detail and focus of the mk41 is noticeably better. And not by a little bit. This is with a variety of placements and distances.
So I do want "one mic" that I use for my box in studio recording situations. It used to be the mk41 but since I got my new guitar last year it hasn't been the right mic. My old guitar was much quieter and a little thinner sounding so a close placement yielded a good recorded sound. The newer box wants distant placement (and even then the lack of low end on the mk41 is undesirable) but that's too far considering the amount of spill I'm likely to deal with. I am tempted to go omni, but I could really use rear rejection in many cases- I suppose it may be time to try the mk5.
and thanks as usual for taking the time to comment and advise!
N
Nate Najar
May 12, 2013, 11:18:41 AM5/12/13
to
On Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
>
> Try to borrow a KSM 137 or 141. It is not without vices, but it is great at
>
> focusing at what is in front of it, kinda like a SM57 as condenser mike.
>
> Factory response curve is ok for first attempt at eq'ing and correcting thus
>
> at least improves its somewhat "short" ambience-rendering.
I understand those are loosely based on the schoeps mk5 actually, but that may be internet rumor....
>
> Try to borrow a KSM 137 or 141. It is not without vices, but it is great at
>
> focusing at what is in front of it, kinda like a SM57 as condenser mike.
>
> Factory response curve is ok for first attempt at eq'ing and correcting thus
>
> at least improves its somewhat "short" ambience-rendering.
> My understaning is that we're talking concert sound here - I'd try a
>
> properly loaded SM57 or a MD421, not the newest version. 421's can be a bit
>
> troublesome if you need high gain before feedback. But that probably is
>
> where you were before starting your quest so try the KSM as pr. above,
>
> preferably without having to buy it first, you may or may not like it.
>
This is for studio recording. And to be honest, in many cases I may use the re15, but there are plenty of times (most times actually) I will want the extra level of detail of these higher end condensers.
the mk41 is almost just right but not quite. I am wondering, do the other schoeps capsules have that same lower mid thing that the mk41 does? because it drives me batty, but the highs on that thing are incredible.
I think this 4011 is going back to the dealer. No point in spending the money if it isn't what I want. and it's an older b&k so it would be hard to find a match for it for stereo stuff...
It may or may be not worth mentioning, home recording is done with a prism orpheus. Studio recording is usually done on an mci528 console and radar.
thanks!
Nate Najar
May 12, 2013, 11:21:06 AM5/12/13
to
On Sunday, May 12, 2013 11:09:04 AM UTC-4, hank alrich wrote:
I'll ask the dealer to send one over. maybe an e22s also?
> Nate Najar <nate*at*natenajar.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Anything else to consider?
>
>
>
> Josephson Series 4.
>
I used to have a pair of them and I sold them to peter larsen when I needed some cash! I remember liking them but it's been a few years and I stopped using them when i got my schoeps.
>
>
>
> > Anything else to consider?
>
>
>
> Josephson Series 4.
>
I'll ask the dealer to send one over. maybe an e22s also?
Scott Dorsey
May 12, 2013, 11:38:57 AM5/12/13
to
Nate Najar <na...@natenajar.com> wrote:
>
>the mk41 is almost just right but not quite. I am wondering, do the other schoeps capsules have that same lower mid thing that the mk41 does? because it drives me batty, but the highs on that thing are incredible.
I don't experience a lower mid thing with the Schoeps used in the far field,
>
>the mk41 is almost just right but not quite. I am wondering, do the other schoeps capsules have that same lower mid thing that the mk41 does? because it drives me batty, but the highs on that thing are incredible.
so I think what you're experiencing is the internal rolloff not quite matching
with the proximity boost at the distances where you're using it.
And I don't have a solution for that other than to tell you to move it around.
>I think this 4011 is going back to the dealer. No point in spending the money if it isn't what I want. and it's an older b&k so it would be hard to find a match for it for stereo stuff...
Consistency on those mikes is great. But I agree, the microphone is not
sufficiently different than the schoeps to be useful to you for other things,
if you don't find it to be an improvement on the guitar.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Scott Dorsey
May 12, 2013, 11:40:25 AM5/12/13
to
or the Josephson series 6, or something like that. Forget everything you
know about placement with the omni.
hank alrich
May 12, 2013, 11:43:29 AM5/12/13
to
Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
> Nate Najar <na...@natenajar.com> wrote:
> >
> >the mk41 is almost just right but not quite. I am wondering, do the
> >other schoeps capsules have that same lower mid thing that the mk41 does?
> >because it drives me batty, but the highs on that thing are incredible.
>
> I don't experience a lower mid thing with the Schoeps used in the far field,
> so I think what you're experiencing is the internal rolloff not quite matching
> with the proximity boost at the distances where you're using it.
>
> And I don't have a solution for that other than to tell you to move it around.
And as soon as you do that you'll be dealing with the differences if
> Nate Najar <na...@natenajar.com> wrote:
> >
> >the mk41 is almost just right but not quite. I am wondering, do the
> >other schoeps capsules have that same lower mid thing that the mk41 does?
> >because it drives me batty, but the highs on that thing are incredible.
>
> I don't experience a lower mid thing with the Schoeps used in the far field,
> so I think what you're experiencing is the internal rolloff not quite matching
> with the proximity boost at the distances where you're using it.
>
> And I don't have a solution for that other than to tell you to move it around.
room sound with changes of mic position. At some point this process can
become lose-lose. <g>
> >I think this 4011 is going back to the dealer. No point in spending the
money if it isn't what I want. and it's an older b&k so it would be
hard to find a match for it for stereo stuff... >
> It's easy to match them....pick any two off the line, and they are matched.
> Consistency on those mikes is great. But I agree, the microphone is not
> sufficiently different than the schoeps to be useful to you for other things,
> if you don't find it to be an improvement on the guitar.
> --scott
for Nate's usage.
hank alrich
May 12, 2013, 11:43:30 AM5/12/13
to
sensitivity for really close micing of stout sources.
Nate Najar
May 12, 2013, 11:46:08 AM5/12/13
to
Scott,
Are you using the mk41? It is the only schoeps capsule I have real experience with.
On the B&K I thought about getting another to have a stereo pair for general things, but the electronics on the current dpa's are different. So I would need one from the same 'era' roughly to get a match.
Curious to note, the freq plot that was included with my B&K shows (measured at 30cm) ruler flat except a rise around 10k and (this is the strange part) a sharp lift of 2db from 100hz down to 40hz. I wonder if this was intentional for one reason or another? The current dpa4011 shows ulcer flat down to 40hz at 30cm on the "published" specs.
The biggest thing about this whole situation is that I was so surprised how trashy the high end sounded on the 4011 compared to the schoeps.
Are you using the mk41? It is the only schoeps capsule I have real experience with.
On the B&K I thought about getting another to have a stereo pair for general things, but the electronics on the current dpa's are different. So I would need one from the same 'era' roughly to get a match.
Curious to note, the freq plot that was included with my B&K shows (measured at 30cm) ruler flat except a rise around 10k and (this is the strange part) a sharp lift of 2db from 100hz down to 40hz. I wonder if this was intentional for one reason or another? The current dpa4011 shows ulcer flat down to 40hz at 30cm on the "published" specs.
The biggest thing about this whole situation is that I was so surprised how trashy the high end sounded on the 4011 compared to the schoeps.
Matt Faunce
May 12, 2013, 12:29:18 PM5/12/13
to
<http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/read/mic/> I would try moving the
Schoeps closer and angling it 90 deg. from the guitar to lessen the
proximity effect. In which direction, up, down, right, left, etc., I
don't know, but you might find a direction that is magic. (Like my last
post, I'm speaking from theory, not experience. But hey, you've already
got the mike, and if it's easy enough to try...)
--
Matt
Peter Larsen
May 12, 2013, 12:45:16 PM5/12/13
to
Nate Najar wrote:
> On Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
[ksm 1417137]
> On Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:30:06 AM UTC-4, Peter Larsen wrote:
> I understand those are loosely based on the schoeps mk5 actually, but
> that may be internet rumor....
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
Peter Larsen
May 12, 2013, 12:48:00 PM5/12/13
to
Nate Najar wrote:
> I used to have a pair of them and I sold them to peter larsen when I
> needed some cash! I remember liking them but it's been a few years
> and I stopped using them when i got my schoeps.
And I *do* like them - breaking my budget and ending up with two pairs is
> I used to have a pair of them and I sold them to peter larsen when I
> needed some cash! I remember liking them but it's been a few years
> and I stopped using them when i got my schoeps.
one of the wiser things I ever did - but I also have a pair of KSM 141's,
and their low midrange is better, the Josephsons are cold-clean and
sometimes slightly "metallic", the Shures have better "body" and "gnarl" on
a ooncert grand's low strings, and they could be as "just right" for guitar
as they are for cello and - surprise, surprise - church organ as omnis.
> I'll ask the dealer to send one over. maybe an e22s also?
Peter Larsen
PStamler
May 13, 2013, 1:59:57 AM5/13/13
to
I reviewed the KSM137 and KSM141. In cardioid position they're supposed to be equivalent, but I didn't find them so -- I much preferred the KSM137.
Onward -- have you tried a Microtech Gefell M930? It's a large-diaphragm mic that behaves more like a small-diaphragm mic.
Also, here's an off-the-wall possibility. See if you can borrow a Neumann KM 84 and point it at your neck. Not the guitar's neck -- your neck. I've found that the KM 84 can sound much less colored when the instrument is off-axiw. Also, when close-miking using the KM 84 (or KM 85) try scooping out about 1dB at 1.8kHz.
Peace,
Paul
Onward -- have you tried a Microtech Gefell M930? It's a large-diaphragm mic that behaves more like a small-diaphragm mic.
Also, here's an off-the-wall possibility. See if you can borrow a Neumann KM 84 and point it at your neck. Not the guitar's neck -- your neck. I've found that the KM 84 can sound much less colored when the instrument is off-axiw. Also, when close-miking using the KM 84 (or KM 85) try scooping out about 1dB at 1.8kHz.
Peace,
Paul
Nate Najar
May 13, 2013, 11:25:06 AM5/13/13
to
Spoke to the dealer. He's going to call redding and see about getting me a bunch of capsules to demo. No one seems to stock this stuff which makes it "special order" and thus non returnable!
Anyway, I asked for an mk4, mk5 and mk2 to demo. But now I'm thinking of the 21 and 22 also... What do you think?
Anyway, I asked for an mk4, mk5 and mk2 to demo. But now I'm thinking of the 21 and 22 also... What do you think?
hank alrich
May 14, 2013, 9:58:04 AM5/14/13
to
Nate Najar <na...@natenajar.com> wrote:
> Spoke to the dealer. He's going to call redding and see about getting me
> a bunch of capsules to demo. No one seems to stock this stuff which makes
> it "special order" and thus non returnable!
Some years ago when the prices jumped I bought my pair w/Mk4's. Wanted
> Spoke to the dealer. He's going to call redding and see about getting me
> a bunch of capsules to demo. No one seems to stock this stuff which makes
> it "special order" and thus non returnable!
Mk41's. There were none in the US at the old price. Been very happy with
the Mk4's for many uses.
Ty Ford
May 14, 2013, 11:09:25 AM5/14/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 12:29:18 -0400, Matt Faunce wrote
(in article <kmofpu$m64$1...@dont-email.me>):
> Nate, I'm thinking of Don Pearce's proximity effect web page.
> <http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/read/mic/> I would try moving the
> Schoeps closer and angling it 90 deg. from the guitar to lessen the
> proximity effect. In which direction, up, down, right, left, etc., I
> don't know, but you might find a direction that is magic. (Like my last
> post, I'm speaking from theory, not experience. But hey, you've already
> got the mike, and if it's easy enough to try...)
+1
Regards,
Ty Ford
Try my blog; http://tyfordaudiovideo.blogspot.com/
Try my audio sample archive: http://tinyurl.com/796z25d
Try my gear reviews: http://tinyurl.com/79q797r
(in article <kmofpu$m64$1...@dont-email.me>):
> Nate, I'm thinking of Don Pearce's proximity effect web page.
> <http://www.soundthoughts.co.uk/read/mic/> I would try moving the
> Schoeps closer and angling it 90 deg. from the guitar to lessen the
> proximity effect. In which direction, up, down, right, left, etc., I
> don't know, but you might find a direction that is magic. (Like my last
> post, I'm speaking from theory, not experience. But hey, you've already
> got the mike, and if it's easy enough to try...)
Regards,
Ty Ford
Try my blog; http://tyfordaudiovideo.blogspot.com/
Try my audio sample archive: http://tinyurl.com/796z25d
Try my gear reviews: http://tinyurl.com/79q797r
Frank Stearns
May 15, 2013, 12:33:21 PM5/15/13
to
Nate Najar <na...@natenajar.com> writes:
-snips-
>what do you think of the microtech gefell m295? or the sms2000? Anything =
>else to consider?
The Gefell 940s, 930s, and 300s have been the backbone of my kit for several years
now.
The 940 never cease to amaze. It's a hyper, but with very few affectations. I
actually like it better than the cardioide M930, though the 930 is no slouch and is
quite good when you're in close and need a wider section pickup. It's a fabulous
close piano mic.
The 300s are small diaphragm cardioide, sometimes slightly dark, but one of the best
string microphones I've used in that price range.
I have not used the 295, so I can't offer a comparison.
As always, YMMV.
Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.
-snips-
>what do you think of the microtech gefell m295? or the sms2000? Anything =
>else to consider?
The Gefell 940s, 930s, and 300s have been the backbone of my kit for several years
now.
The 940 never cease to amaze. It's a hyper, but with very few affectations. I
actually like it better than the cardioide M930, though the 930 is no slouch and is
quite good when you're in close and need a wider section pickup. It's a fabulous
close piano mic.
The 300s are small diaphragm cardioide, sometimes slightly dark, but one of the best
string microphones I've used in that price range.
I have not used the 295, so I can't offer a comparison.
As always, YMMV.
Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.
0 new messages