Interesting Mic Chart

[Paul]

I'm sure there's disagreement on the accuracy of this:

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/low-end-theory/348611d1370783166-character-mics-mike-chart.jpg


But it does show the MK-319 as on the darker side,
and the Studio Projects C1 on the bright side, which
I would agree with.

No AT4047, but certainly that would be on the darker
side, and perhaps leaning towards color.

I would be curious where the KSM141 would go....

[HIO]

I find it interesting that two of the most popular mikes are missing
from the chart. The SM58 and the Beta 58a and yes the chart is most
definitely subjective of course.


--
Here In Oregon

Twitter: I don't tweet, I leave that to the birds.
MySpace: Then put a lock on it.
Facebook: Ever hear of the term identity theft?

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 09 Jun 2013 12:14:44 -0700, HIO <herein...@nospam.net>
wrote:

>On 6/9/2013 9:26 AM, Paul wrote:
>>
>> I'm sure there's disagreement on the accuracy of this:
>>
>> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/low-end-theory/348611d1370783166-character-mics-mike-chart.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> But it does show the MK-319 as on the darker side,
>> and the Studio Projects C1 on the bright side, which
>> I would agree with.
>>
>> No AT4047, but certainly that would be on the darker
>> side, and perhaps leaning towards color.
>>
>> I would be curious where the KSM141 would go....
>>
>
>
>I find it interesting that two of the most popular mikes are missing
>from the chart. The SM58 and the Beta 58a and yes the chart is most
>definitely subjective of course.

Also I'd quarrel with the choice of axes. Those are most definitely
not orthogonal parameters.

d

[Gary Eickmeier]

Why do they feel it necessary to make a black chart with white letters? Can
anyone see the difficulty of printing such a document with an inkjet?

Gary Eickmeier

[Peter Larsen]

Roll another dice, it looks like that is what they did.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[PStamler]

Pure horse hockey. Anyone who makes a "Dark-Bright" axis and puts the current version of the MD421 as neutral or slightly dark has no ears left. That thing has a top end that will drill holes in your temples.

Peace,
Paul

[Trevor]

"Gary Eickmeier" <geic...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:Fq8tt.33270$Gx7....@fx08.am4...

> Paul wrote:
>> I'm sure there's disagreement on the accuracy of this:
>>
>> http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/low-end-theory/348611d1370783166-character-mics-mike-chart.jpg
>

> Why do they feel it necessary to make a black chart with white letters?
> Can anyone see the difficulty of printing such a document with an inkjet?

Magazines often do that for exactly that purpose, but easily fixed if you
invert the colors in your favourite photo editor.

Trevor.

[hank alrich]

There you go listening again.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[S. King]

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 00:27:22 -0700, hank alrich wrote:

> PStamler <psta...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Pure horse hockey. Anyone who makes a "Dark-Bright" axis and puts the
>> current version of the MD421 as neutral or slightly dark has no ears
>> left.
>> That thing has a top end that will drill holes in your temples.
>>
>> Peace, Paul
>
> There you go listening again.

I would classify most of the older (original) MD421's I've encountered as
neutral to slightly dark.

Steve King

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <kp7a8t$3p2$1...@dont-email.me>,

The original 421 bears no connection whatsoever to the new 321 Mk. II.
Which is a shame since the original 421 was a great mike.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <kp2a36$6ii$1...@dont-email.me>, Paul <Quill...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm sure there's disagreement on the accuracy of this:
>
>http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attachments/low-end-theory/348611d1370783166-character-mics-mike-chart.jpg

It's sort of interesting. I think that picking two characteristics like that
is misguided because there are so many different factors that go into each
of those characteristics. One microphone could be "dark" because the top
end is sucked out, or it could be "dark" because the lower midrange is
exaggerated or it could be "dark" because the high order harmonic distortion
is lower than that of some other microphone. These are all "dark" but they
are three different things with different applications and uses.

But it IS interesting to look at charts like this because they tell you
something about how other people think about microphones. It tells you
a lot more about that than it tells you about the microphones themselves.

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 09:55:41 -0400, S. King wrote
(in article <kp7a8t$3p2$1...@dont-email.me>):

Now the 421 II is completely different. It makes me sound sibilant.

I remember being horrified when reviewing it when it first came out.

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

[geoff]

"hank alrich" <walk...@nv.net> wrote in message
news:1l49m6b.yzsyt913hc7deN%walk...@nv.net...

> PStamler <psta...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Pure horse hockey. Anyone who makes a "Dark-Bright" axis and puts the
>> current version of the MD421 as neutral or slightly dark has no ears
>> left.
>> That thing has a top end that will drill holes in your temples.
>>
>> Peace, Paul
>
> There you go listening again.

And there was me thinking my 421s were broken or my hearing was defective.
Loath them on guitar amps.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

If they are the Mk II models, they are broken by design. But if you are
using them on guitar amps, try putting them at the edge of the cone, turned
90-degrees so they are facing parallel to the speaker instead of into it.

[hank alrich]

When the bean counters and manufacturing process managers identify a
"need" to upgrade a classic tool the results are almost never satisfying
to anyone who understands the basis for the perceived excellence of the
original product.

[hank alrich]

Or use another mic. Alnost any other mic.

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>geoff <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> "hank alrich" <walk...@nv.net> wrote in message
>> news:1l49m6b.yzsyt913hc7deN%walk...@nv.net...
>> > PStamler <psta...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Pure horse hockey. Anyone who makes a "Dark-Bright" axis and puts the
>> >> current version of the MD421 as neutral or slightly dark has no ears
>> >> left.
>> >> That thing has a top end that will drill holes in your temples.
>> >>
>> >> Peace, Paul
>> >
>> > There you go listening again.
>>
>> And there was me thinking my 421s were broken or my hearing was defective.
>> Loath them on guitar amps.
>
>When the bean counters and manufacturing process managers identify a
>"need" to upgrade a classic tool the results are almost never satisfying
>to anyone who understands the basis for the perceived excellence of the
>original product.

Part of the thing about the original 421 element is that the thing was
designed to be user-repairable. In 1970, you could purchase a replacement
diaphragm for it and replace it yourself on the bench. It was all
pre-terminated and mounted, it just dropped in and you made two solder joints
to big loops rather than having to deal with tiny wires.

The thing is, by 2000 or so, customers had no idea how to repair anything,
and Sennheiser perceived the aftermarket repair facilities as competition and
had long-ago discontinued selling the diaphragm kits. So there was really
no reason for them to keep making a very elaborate and difficult to construct
capsule.

And.... well if you're changing the design anyway, why not add a whomping
huge presence peak? The marketing people say everybody likes a big presence
peak.

[geoff]

"Scott Dorsey" <klu...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:kq9js0$f87$1...@panix2.panix.com...

How do you tell a MKII model ?

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote (regarding the 421):

>
>How do you tell a MKII model ?

It should say so on the nameplate.

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:

> geoff <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote (regarding the 421):
> >
> >How do you tell a MKII model ?
>
> It should say so on the nameplate.
> --scott

It floats like a butterfly and buzzes like a bee?

Oh, wait... that's not a buzz, it's just a presence peak...

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <1l50n1e.1jaqsv730ubmeN%walk...@nv.net>,

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> geoff <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote (regarding the 421):
>> >
>> >How do you tell a MKII model ?
>>
>> It should say so on the nameplate.
>

>It floats like a butterfly and buzzes like a bee?

It's more like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpfzdupLHaE

[Paul]

On 6/25/2013 9:51 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> In article <1l50n1e.1jaqsv730ubmeN%walk...@nv.net>,
> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>> Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> geoff <ge...@nospampaf.co.nz> wrote (regarding the 421):
>>>>
>>>> How do you tell a MKII model ?
>>>
>>> It should say so on the nameplate.
>>
>> It floats like a butterfly and buzzes like a bee?
>
> It's more like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpfzdupLHaE
> --scott
>

That was cool! Never seen that before.

One brash MF, eh? haha!