LARGE verses SMALL diaphragm condensers
WideGlide
because I felt I could grab a larger and flatter overall frequency response
from large condenser mics. I was happy to use large diaphragm condensers
even when small condensers would have been ok. I'll admit that I never had
any really top-end small condensers to work with. Anyhow, it seems that
across the board, a large condenser will pick up a more full range and
response, capturing good lows as well as highs. If this is the case, then
why use a small condenser mic at all? What advantage does a small condenser
have over a large? It makes sense that perhaps a smaller condenser may act
differently given the frequency (better for upper frequencies) due to its
smaller physical size. Then I started to wonder if indeed a small condenser
might be SUPERIOR at picking up higher frequencies than a large condenser,
even though they may lack in the low-end department. (i am being extremely
general here of course). Or would one say that there are some excellent
small diaphragm condensers that pick up an excellent range from extreme
highs to extreme lows? (Sorry, I don't have enough personal experience yet
with small diaphragm condensers... I've used some off-beat ones, and was not
too happy). I realize that every mic will have it's own unique sound and
character, and mics should be chosen based on that, not because they have a
"small" or "large" diaphragm, etc.
Part two... I've already sifted through many RAP posts to see the favorite
small condenser mics. Well, the Audio Technica 4051 (4053, 4049), and Shure
SM81 seem to be quite popular. SM81s seem to be somewhat of a standard for
drum overheads, but yet some have described them as being a bit "harsh".
Would anyone like to recommend any other top-end small diaphragm condenser
mics? Thanks. -wg
Scott Dorsey
Large diaphragm condensers are never very flat off-axis. This means if
you want to pick up a lot of things over a wide area, they are a lousy
choice.
On the other hand, for close-miking, the off-axis response errors can
be a good thing because it means you can change the sound a lot by
adjusting the positioning.
But the honest truth is that 90% of it is marketing bullshit.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Richard Kuschel
>From: "WideGlide" so...@no-email.com
>Date: Mon, Oct 22, 2001 3:38 PM
>Message-id: <cl0B7.36908$wS2.4...@news02.optonline.net>
Given similar quality of work, a small diaphragm microphone will have better
frequency response, better accuracy and better transient response.
Large diaphragm microphones have generally lower noise floors and greater
resistance to popping.
I use both, but if I am am looking for the most realistic sound will grab the
small diaphragm microphones.
SM-81's may be a little harsh, but it is not due to the size of the capsule.
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty
WideGlide
you want to pick up a lot of things over a wide area, they are a lousy
choice. On the other hand, for close-miking, the off-axis response errors
can be a good thing because it means you can change the sound a lot by
adjusting the positioning. >>
Interesting. I was thinking about this since I have noticed that my large
diaphragm TLM103s seem to start coloring pretty quick once you leave the
on-axis area. I have been having some trouble using the TLMs as drum
overheads being that the positioning is very critical... trying to get the
best "coloration balance" between all the cymbals and finding that magic
position, etc. It would indeed be neat to use mics that are more forgiving
in this department, and have a more accurate response over a larger area.
Well, I continue to read posts stating the SM81s are "harsh", but this
harshness may in fact to a good thing for drum overheads. Personally
(especially when I do not have the ability to conduct an extensive
comparison test), I usually go for the choice that is described as being
more "accurate" as opposed to having a specific notable color or character
that some may like and others may not. So then we come to the AT4051s...
seems quite a few people stated they like these for quite a few
applications. I realize there's the 4053 and 4049 as well, but for drum
overheads (cymbals), I'd think that the 4051s would be best of the three
ATs. 4049s (omnis) would probably not offer enough stereo separation, and
the 4053s might be too tight for a large drum set with many cymbals. Please
correct me if I'm wrong... I've never used these mics.
Then there's the Earthworks SR77... just started reading a few things about
these. More comments? I wonder how they stand up against AT4051s, etc.
I'm trying to decide what might be "best" (or at least darned good) for the
drum overheads / cymbals application. I am pretty happy with what I am
currently capturing with my TLM103s as overheads, but soon I will need a
pair of drum "room" mics, so I figured I could switch the TLMs to room duty,
and try to find a new pair of cymbal/overhead mics. Yes, I will attempt to
conduct a comparison test before making a final choice, but I'm just trying
to do a little initial weeding here. In terms of small condensers, are
there any other good choices other than the SM81s, AT4051s and Earthworks
SR77s? I wonder if the Seinnheiser and AKG models are cool... I haven't
really seen much info about them.
I do still have a pair of AKG C1000S mics that I bought maybe 6 years ago
when I first started out... I never liked them. The only reason I still
have them today is because they will accept AA 1.5 volt batteries to provide
power, and this has proven to be helpful for non-critical remote
applications where phantom power is not available (when using a mini-DAT
machine or whatever). Other than for that, they stay in the box.
More drum-overhead mic opinions please (small OR large diaphragm).
anks. -wg
Nathan Eldred
especially for the price (they are handmade in Germany). Mr.
Scheinder, the head engineer at MBHO, worked at Schoeps for many
years. They have transformer and tranformerless mic bodies with
various capsule options (small and large diaphram, as well as large
diaphram and small diapram fixed microphones. Good Luck.
Best Regards,
Nathan Eldred
Atlas Pro Audio, Inc.
http://www.atlasproaudio.com
"WideGlide" <so...@no-email.com> wrote in message news:<cl0B7.36908$wS2.4...@news02.optonline.net>...
Erik Stromstad
The Blue Dragonflies sound amazing on drum overheads. They are easy to
position, and sound great. They bring the whole kit to life, not just
mic the cymbols.
Erik Stromstad
larry killip
large mic diaphram, therefore can incur phase differences from one
side to another causing "cancelling out".
For everyday voice recording for commercials I favor a Neumann KM184.
I point the mic down toward the voice to avoid 'pops', and still the
top end shines thru.
These kind of mics can be a little too bright for some applications,
for more demanding vocal performances I still love a great large
diaphram mic.
Larry Killip
Lenz
AKG 451 small diaphragm condenser. Since that i have had the oppertunity to
record with a pair of 451's and i can only say that was a pleasent
experience. Unfortunately this model is no longer produced by AKG. So you
you have to dig up a used pair.
See ya
Lenz
"WideGlide" <so...@no-email.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:cl0B7.36908$wS2.4...@news02.optonline.net...
WideGlide
Thanks very much for the comments regarding mics. I apologize for the few
"this verses that" type posts I have put up recently. But I had a cool
dream last night that sort of justifies my desire to grab some info/comments
here via these posts...
I dreamt (seriously) that I was in a studio room with about 300 microphones
at my disposal... just about every type and brand of mic imaginable.
(probably because I was up until 3am reading old posts etc about
microphones) Tons of mics... it was ridiculous. I then started testing and
comparing the mics and was in utter bliss. Dreams can be pretty neat. But
then in the dream, after a short while, I realized that it would take me
forever to test and compare all the mics! I would never have the time to
test them all, and I didn't know which ones to test first, etc. Catch 22.
Then my alarm went off further reminding me of my time limitations. I then
came to the conclusion that it really isn't such a terrible thing to put up
a "this verses that" post here occasionally just to help narrow down
choices. In addition, it would be totally impossible to have a truckload of
mics (or any other type of gear) on hand to test anyway.
So, in sum... I much appreciate all the responses, opinions, comments,
etc... but I look forward to going back to sleep tonight.... maybe I can
catch that same dream again... oh yeah, I forgot to mention how hot my
female assistant engineer was (in the dream of course).
-wg
Ty Ford
<so...@no-email.com> wrote:
>response, capturing good lows as well as highs. If this is the case, then
>why use a small condenser mic at all? What advantage does a small condenser
Large size may actually be a problem. A bigger diaphragm is not always
better than a small diaphragm. If it were, Schoeps would be out of business.
They don't make LD mics.
A lot depends on whether you're looking for diffuse field or free field
sounds. A lot depends on how much pressure doubling happens.
A lot depends on how much the larger diapgrahm blocks the movement of higher
frequencies. (15kHz = a wavelength of 2.1 cm).
A lot depends on the physics, acoutstics and electronics of how the mic is made.
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty Ford's web site is http://www.jagunet.com/~tford.
Check it out for narration samples and audio reviews.
Ty Ford
atlasp...@hotmail.com (Nathan Eldred) wrote:
>From: atlasp...@hotmail.com (Nathan Eldred)
>Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
>Subject: Re: LARGE verses SMALL diaphragm condensers
>Date: 22 Oct 2001 20:53:41 -0700
>Organization: http://groups.google.com/
>Lines: 43
>Message-ID: <b14184ab.01102...@posting.google.com>
>References: <cl0B7.36908$wS2.4...@news02.optonline.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.32.73.110
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>X-Trace: posting.google.com 1003809221 21337 127.0.0.1 (23 Oct 2001 03:53:41
GMT)
>X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
>NNTP-Posting-Date: 23 Oct 2001 03:53:41 GMT
>Xref: news-f.iadfw.net rec.audio.pro:693158
>
>You might want to take a look at the MBHO line of mics. Very nice,
>especially for the price (they are handmade in Germany). Mr.
>Scheinder, the head engineer at MBHO, worked at Schoeps for many
>years. They have transformer and tranformerless mic bodies with
>various capsule options (small and large diaphram, as well as large
>diaphram and small diapram fixed microphones. Good Luck.
>
>Best Regards,
>Nathan Eldred
>Atlas Pro Audio, Inc.
>http://www.atlasproaudio.com
On the other hand, you might want to look at Schoeps, Sennheiser and Neumann
mics. They've been tinkering with the issue for a while as well. Then
there's Gefell...
Geoff Wood
geoff
"Lenz" <true...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9r3lmm$2re7$1...@news.cybercity.dk...
YBStudios
For me, it really depends on the sound I'm trying to get and there are other
variables like the drummer, the kit, the room, the arrangement.
If it's overheads, then I usually start out with small. If it's the whole kit,
then it's large. Even then it's a SWAG. I have used AT4050, AKG3000, AT4041,
TLM103, ATM33, MXL603, Beyer M160 and SM57's. Even used a couple of Beyer
M500's one time. Worked great.
For me it's also very difficult to choose mics and not give consideration to
the mic pre. I've gotten away from just choosing mics by themselves.
My $.02.
Wayne@Yellow Booth Studios
Montgomery, AL
"I can't hear myself in the monitor!"
"Why is that a problem?"
Aaron J. Grier
from what I understand (with instrumentation microphones at least), the
diaphragm size determines the (mic's) sensitivity and dynamic range.
for instance, the B&K 4144 (1" diaphragm) has a noise floor of about
30dB, but can't handle much past 100dB, while the Frye M1550E (3/8") has
a noise floor around 45dB, but can handle up to 150dB...
--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agr...@poofygoof.com
"No single layer of abstraction can save the world or even make
good coffee." -- Kevin P. Neal
William Balmer
"Aaron J. Grier" <agr...@poofygoof.com> wrote in message
news:tte8f68...@corp.supernews.com...
> what sizes are meant by "large" and "small?" 1/2" vs 1", or ?
>
> from what I understand (with instrumentation microphones at least), the
> diaphragm size determines the (mic's) sensitivity and dynamic range.
> for instance, the B&K 4144 (1" diaphragm) has a noise floor of about
> 30dB, but can't handle much past 100dB, while the Frye M1550E (3/8") has
> a noise floor around 45dB, but can handle up to 150dB...
BZZZZZZZZZ! Try again.
"Large diaphragm" is typically considered 1" or larger. The size of the
diaphragm has nothing to do with sensitivity or dynamic range. Many heavy
metal bands use LDC's to mic their amps at very high SPL levels. The
AT4050, for example, has a max SPL 149 dB (159 with the 10 dB pad engaged).
By contrast, the AT4031, a small diaphragm condenser, has a max SPL of 143
dB.
Diaphragm size has a lot to do with how the mic responds to off axis inputs,
though. I think that's already been covered in this thread, so I won't go
over it again.
Bill Balmer
RockyRoad
"WideGlide" <so...@no-email.com> wrote:
> Part two... I've already sifted through many RAP posts to see the favorite
> small condenser mics. Well, the Audio Technica 4051 (4053, 4049), and Shure
> SM81 seem to be quite popular. SM81s seem to be somewhat of a standard for
> drum overheads, but yet some have described them as being a bit "harsh".
> Would anyone like to recommend any other top-end small diaphragm condenser
> mics? Thanks. -wg
Neumann KM 184 (183, 185)
--
Rocky Road - in Oz
Ty Ford
If I haven't mentioned the Schoeps CMC6 with MK41 hyper capsule, I have now.
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty Ford's web site is http://www.jagunet.com/~tford.
Check it out for voiceover samples and audio equipment reviews.
Will
Ty Ford <tf...@jagunet.com> wrote in message
news:A35E22DA8F0EA77F.D4FDCA98...@lp.airnews.net...
I love my pair of Calrec CM1051's, but they have the Bass roll-off.
The CM1050 doesn't have the bass roll-off, but I've never used them.
They have a clear and neutral mid and tops, though possibly a little noisy
for too-critical applications.
Still handmade in the UK, now called Hebden Sound.
Will
ScotFraser
<< >> Would anyone like to recommend any other top-end small diaphragm
condenser
>> mics? >>
Neumann KM140's for hyper-realistic, Neumann KM84's for slightly less realistic
& a bit colored in an extremely pleasant way, AKG C451's for a very forward
presence boost.
Scott Fraser