Alternative to Neumann KM184
Jordan F.
Looking to get a hi-hat mic, but I tend to be a purist when it comes
to freq. response. Anything have the great resolution of a KM184 with
a very flat freq. response?
Jordan
Winter
--
Winter
El Mundo Bueno Studios
A World of Good Music
"Jordan F." <j...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:17f9bd62.01080...@posting.google.com...
Fill
>
>
I would say an sm81 is not at all "flat". I don't mic hi hats, but I think
you'd find an earthworks mic (which one's are they still making?) closer to
what you're talking about. The km84 is less bright than a 184 and sounds better
to me. If money is no object, schoeps and david josephson make some very nice
mics that I wouldn't waste on a hi hat.
P h i l i p
______________________________
"Whenever a friend succeeds, a little something in me dies."
- Gore Vidal
Clay Stahlka
Clay Stahlka
Sweetwater
"Winter" <wint...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%71b7.368$eU4....@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
Lyle Caldwell
--
Lyle Caldwell
Psionic Media, Inc.
"Clay Stahlka" <clay_s...@sweetwater.com> wrote in message
news:tmpdec8...@corp.supernews.com...
Mark Plancke
Hmmm, just a guess.... Neumann KM84.
Mark Plancke
SOUNDTECH RECORDING STUDIOS
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
http://SoundTechRecording.com
Right now the recording game is crawling with wannabees. Lots of
profiteering can be done at their expense, by making flimsy crap and
pitching it as "just as good as, or a suitable alternative to" something
that's really good and has stood the test of time. - Steve Albini
definition
without any hesitation..
Brad5195
alternative for a nice mic that is a lot less money. Obviously the KM184 is
what it is, but it is considerably more money than an AT4041.
Brad Lyons
Mark Plancke
Hey Brad
This was this original question.
>but I tend to be a purist when it comes to freq. response.
>Anything have the great resolution of a KM184 with a very
>flat freq. response?
No mention of price as far as I can see.
Lyle Caldwell
--
Lyle Caldwell
Psionic Media, Inc.
"Mark Plancke" <Ma...@Soundtechrecording.com> wrote in message
news:gskqmtorhm15n35eu...@4ax.com...
Kenneth C. Bell
Fill <moth...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010804222133...@mb-mk.aol.com...
Was in a similar dilema, but from the money side (not enough for a pair
of 184's) and went with the Earthworks SR77. Main use is for a coincident
XY pattern (classical and combo jazz recordings). Ran me about $900 for the
matched pair. Should get them in shortly and well let you know what I
think.
Corey Bell
LeiDeLi
> a very flat freq. response?
Earthworks.
Cardioid version: SR71 on closeout right now at the website: www.earthwks.com
for $335 !! I have two. Check them out.
Peace,
LeiDeLi
DJ-ALT
184 with a -10dB pad and the ability to switch capsules. Also, the Octave
012 is another option for much less $$$.
Regards,
DJ
"Jordan F." <j...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:17f9bd62.01080...@posting.google.com...
Mark Plancke
>AKG C460B or 480 uls with the CK1 capsule. A bit more versatile than the KM
>184 with a -10dB pad and the ability to switch capsules. Also, the Octave
>012 is another option for much less $$$.
Too bad they sound like poop. The KM84 is flatter than any AKG small
diaphragm mic I can think of (although the CK28 cap is pretty flat)
and can do the capsule switching mojo thing along with a -10db pad.
And.... here's the kicker, it sounds good in a wide range of different
applications and takes EQ like there's no tomorrow, unlike some
TLM103's I know. <bg>
ScotFraser
>>to freq. response. Anything have the great resolution of a KM184 with
>>a very flat freq. response?>
A KM140 if you're really a purist about flat response, although I don't see
why flat response is an issue with high hat miking. Also the Schoeps CMC/MK4 is
basically interchangeable with the 140.
Scott Fraser
Scott Dorsey
>"DJ-ALT" <artatt...@frontier.net> wrote:
>
>>AKG C460B or 480 uls with the CK1 capsule. A bit more versatile than the KM
>>184 with a -10dB pad and the ability to switch capsules. Also, the Octave
>>012 is another option for much less $$$.
>
>Too bad they sound like poop. The KM84 is flatter than any AKG small
>diaphragm mic I can think of (although the CK28 cap is pretty flat)
>and can do the capsule switching mojo thing along with a -10db pad.
The C480, though, is a huge improvement over the C460.
Personally, I'd pick Schoeps, Josephson, or B&K omnis over all of them.
Or maybe the Sennheiser MKH-20.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
ScotFraser
>184 with a -10dB pad and the ability to switch capsules.>
More versatile (vis a vis the pads, capsules & other accessories,) and nowhere
near as flat, at least in the case of the 460.
Scott Fraser
Jay Kahrs
>to freq. response. Anything have the great resolution of a KM184 with
>a very flat freq. response?
I almost never mic a hi-hat but when I do it's usually an SM57 for rock stuff
or a 451 for everything else.
---
-Jay Kahrs
Owner - Engineer - Producer
Mad Moose Recording Inc.
Morris Plains, NJ
http://www.madmooserecording.com
Bob
<< Or maybe the Sennheiser MKH-20.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>>
Bob Turney
http://www.vividsonics.com
DJ-ALT
only one C460B/CK1. Maybe there's something wrong with it. I've measured
it's frequency response and it's similar to my KM184's, with a bit less
pronounced bump in the high end. Anyway, ...............
Respectfully,
DJ
"Bob" <iluv...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20010806012204...@ng-ft1.aol.com...
Scott Dorsey
>I'll certainly bow to the more experienced here. I own
>only one C460B/CK1. Maybe there's something wrong with it. I've measured
>it's frequency response and it's similar to my KM184's, with a bit less
>pronounced bump in the high end. Anyway, ...............
The C460 measures better at low levels than at high levels, and it seems
to have some sort of strange distortion problem on the high end that will
not show up on a response plot but would show up on a distortion product
plot. The C480 fixes both of these problems, which are with the electronics
and not the capsule.
DJ-ALT
it hasn't been in high level intensive situations. There was an occasion at
another studio that
it was being used pretty hard, but was being driven by a Focusrite Green mic
pre. I've personally never cared much for this pre and there was definitely
some wierdness in the high end. I was perhaps a bit quick to assume it was
the preamp, but looks like it may have been the mic or a combination of the
two.
Best regards,
DJ
"Scott Dorsey" <klu...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:9kmqj3$fmj$1...@panix2.panix.com...
Jordan F.
Jordan
iluv...@aol.comnospam (Bob) wrote in message news:<20010806012204...@ng-ft1.aol.com>...
Dave Martin
--
Dave Martin
DMA, Inc.
Nashville, TN
"Jordan F." <j...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:17f9bd62.01080...@posting.google.com...
: How neutral is the MKH series?
:
Scott Dorsey
>How neutral is the MKH series?
I think they are a little bit funny in the lower midrange compared with the
Schoeps, B&K, or Josephson Series Six, but the top end is amazingly accurate,
and they are the lowest noise microphones around. Freakishly quiet.
I keep them in my kit and I use them quite a bit. I use the Josephson 606
a lot too, and the B&K 2615/4033 combo.
Matt
>>Looking to get a hi-hat mic, but I tend to be a purist when it comes
>>to freq. response. Anything have the great resolution of a KM184 with
>>a very flat freq. response?
>
Nothing sounds better than a couple of old, cracked cb-700 hi-hats
miced with an AKG C1000 through an ART Tube MP....man.....gives me
chills just thinking about it....:)
david
<klu...@panix.com> wrote:
An omni mic for a hi hat??
David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island
Roger W. Norman
--
Roger W. Norman
www.SirMusicStudio.com
Ro...@SirMusicStudio.com
301-585-4681
"guys, it takes a lifetime to just get just a BIT closer..."
George Massenburg
"Matt" <guita...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b6f6bf7.48622144@news...
Luke Kaven
drum-miking technique. I've settled into using an omni over the
ride/hihat/snare (with ride hits most on-axis) paired with a KM184 on the
other side. It seems to give a nice sense of kit-space, and what it picks
up from the other side of the kit does not clash against what the KM184 is
getting. I've been using an Oktava omni, which I think is a nice-sounding
mic in any company. It sounds especially pleasant with the splash of a
sizzler. I liked that better than a KM86, but I'd like to try the B&K,
Schoeps, Josephson too. There is an article at the DPA "microphone
university" site about using a pair of omnis in this application. I'd like
to experiment sometime with a pair of omnis overhead in a jecklin disk as
some have written about here.
Luke
david <ih...@spamo.com> wrote in message
news:070820010243251245%ih...@spamo.com...
> In article <9kku1f$ioc$1...@panix3.panix.com>, Scott Dorsey
> <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
[...]
Scott Dorsey
david <ih...@spamo.com> wrote:
>In article <9kku1f$ioc$1...@panix3.panix.com>, Scott Dorsey
><klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> Mark Plancke <NewsG...@SoundtechRecording.com> wrote:
>> >"DJ-ALT" <artatt...@frontier.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>AKG C460B or 480 uls with the CK1 capsule. A bit more versatile than the KM
>> >>184 with a -10dB pad and the ability to switch capsules. Also, the Octave
>> >>012 is another option for much less $$$.
>> >
>> >Too bad they sound like poop. The KM84 is flatter than any AKG small
>> >diaphragm mic I can think of (although the CK28 cap is pretty flat)
>> >and can do the capsule switching mojo thing along with a -10db pad.
>>
>> The C480, though, is a huge improvement over the C460.
>>
>> Personally, I'd pick Schoeps, Josephson, or B&K omnis over all of them.
>> Or maybe the Sennheiser MKH-20.
>
An omni mike for overheads so you don't need to spot the high-hat.
FJPers
>> miced with an AKG C1000 through an ART Tube
I just sold my 2 C1000's. I was so disappointed in tose mics. They seemed to
make everything that they were used on sound bad. Nothing like the SM81's
which is what i had been told they compare too.
So, why not a pair of 81's if you don't have KM184's? They are pretty
affordable and sound excellent in my opinion and in the opinion of many
other's.
Frankie
ScotFraser
Schoeps, B&K, or Josephson Series Six, but the top end is amazingly accurate,
>>
This was exactly our impression when Kronos was buying new mics. We tried the
MKH50, Schoeps CMC5 with hyper cap, & KM150. The MKH was the first one
eliminated & the only real contest was between the Schoeps & Neumann. This was
for miking strings at about 3 feet distance. On the other hand the MKH40 has
sounded incredible on African percussion, Kora & distant orchestral dates.
Scott Fraser
Jordan F.
> --scott
Yes, but what if you want utmost control over each item of the kit?
Jordan
steve
Just like a dentist drill being raked across a blackboard?
Steve
Scott Dorsey
That's why mike stands have adjustments. You get your control by adjusting
the position.
Spotting the high-hat doesn't give you much control anyway, since the high-hat
leaks into everything.
Monte P McGuire
FJPers <fjp...@aol.com> wrote:
>So, why not a pair of 81's if you don't have KM184's? They are pretty
>affordable and sound excellent in my opinion and in the opinion of many
>other's.
Well, they too sound funny in the high end and in the overall clarity
department, but a lot less so than lesser mikes. They're also
probably a bit more rugged than better sounding mikes, so it's
somewhat of a tradeoff.
I guess the choice would be between slowly climbing the ladder towards
great sounding mikes or going there in one leap and bypassing stuff
inbetween. It depends on your pocketbook and whether the difference
makes any sense in the context of the rest of your gear.
Regards,
Monte McGuire
mcg...@world.std.com
Jordan F.
lot louder for 4 bars in the middle of a song, or bring down the toms
for a section, I have to mic each piece.
klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news:<9kp8tn$2bn$1...@panix3.panix.com>...
Lyle Caldwell
considered communicating with the drummer?
--
Lyle Caldwell
Psionic Media, Inc.
"Jordan F." <j...@global2000.net> wrote in message
news:17f9bd62.01080...@posting.google.com...
Scott Dorsey
>I'm talking about mix control. If I want to bring out the hi-hat a
>lot louder for 4 bars in the middle of a song, or bring down the toms
>for a section, I have to mic each piece.
That's true. The problem is that you can't completely isolate everything,
so when you adjust the high-hat level, you're always going to be changing
the tonality and position of the rest of the kit audibly.
It drives me up the wall to hear this kind of thing going on, although
drum kits are usually covered up enough in the mix that it's not as
offensive as when it's done with Miles Davis' horn.
Anyway, if your goal is to spot the high-hat, I'd first look at something
like a Sennheiser 441, to try and get the tightest pattern at all cost.
Another possibility is to use something that is deliberately harsh, like
a C1000, and cut the low end off on it, then just add a tiny bit into the
overall mix. The idea being that you avoid altering the rest of the
balances as much as possible.
Zildijan actually used to make a small diaphragm condenser specifically
designed to pick up high hats with a minimum of leakage. I haven't seen
one in years.
Mike Rivers
> I'm talking about mix control. If I want to bring out the hi-hat a
> lot louder for 4 bars in the middle of a song, or bring down the toms
> for a section, I have to mic each piece.
Why not just teach the drummer the song?
--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mri...@d-and-d.com)
Steve
way down in the mix as the overheads picked it up just fine and sounded more
natural. Proper compression on the overheads can often fit the hat in where
you want it. Of course, as mentioned, the best way to accentuate, or
creatively use the hat, is by hitting it like you're supposed to.
Steve
Hlabs Montreal
(on a bit of a posting blitz! - excusez moi)
"Mike Rivers" <mri...@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr997230056k@trad...
Jordan F.
> In article <17f9bd62.01080...@posting.google.com> j...@global2000.net writes:
>
> > I'm talking about mix control. If I want to bring out the hi-hat a
> > lot louder for 4 bars in the middle of a song, or bring down the toms
> > for a section, I have to mic each piece.
>
> Why not just teach the drummer the song?
Hehehe.. well, I'm doing rock/pop, and so there's an element of improv
and spontaneity. I give the drummer a basic outline of what I'm
looking for, and later on, if he happens to do something interesting
on the hi-hat that I may want to beef up a bit, I have the freedom to
do so.
Jordan
Jordan F.
something
> like a Sennheiser 441, to try and get the tightest pattern at all cost.
> Another possibility is to use something that is deliberately harsh, like
> a C1000, and cut the low end off on it, then just add a tiny bit into the
> overall mix. The idea being that you avoid altering the rest of the
> balances as much as possible.
A 441 on a hi-hat... that's an interesting idea. How much do those
things run now-a-days? I'd like to stay within the $600-700 range if
possible.
>
> Zildijan actually used to make a small diaphragm condenser specifically
> designed to pick up high hats with a minimum of leakage. I haven't seen
> one in years.
Interesting... wonder what kind of quality it was.
hank alrich
> I'm talking about mix control. If I want to bring out the hi-hat a
> lot louder for 4 bars in the middle of a song, or bring down the toms
> for a section, I have to mic each piece.
Damn, and all this time I've been using a _drummer_ to do that!
--
hank alrich * secret__mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
Steve
j...@global2000.net (Jordan F.) wrote:
IMO this is best handled by the drummer. He can provide a level of
dynamics that you can't do simply by raising and lowering the volume at
mixdown time. His method will have tonal change nuances that are
existent, as well as natural. There is really no natural sounding way to
do that at mixdown that I've heard of,(I'm sure if I'm wrong I'll get
corrected here).
Steve
Bob Ross
> I'm doing rock/pop, and so there's an element of improv
> and spontaneity.
???WHAT???
Jordan F.
OK, jazz-influenced rock/pop :)
david
<klu...@panix.com> wrote:
> In article <070820010243251245%ih...@spamo.com>,
> david <ih...@spamo.com> wrote:
> >In article <9kku1f$ioc$1...@panix3.panix.com>, Scott Dorsey
> ><klu...@panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Mark Plancke <NewsG...@SoundtechRecording.com> wrote:
> >> >"DJ-ALT" <artatt...@frontier.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>AKG C460B or 480 uls with the CK1 capsule. A bit more versatile than the
> >> >>KM
> >> >>184 with a -10dB pad and the ability to switch capsules. Also, the Octave
> >> >>012 is another option for much less $$$.
> >> >
> >> >Too bad they sound like poop. The KM84 is flatter than any AKG small
> >> >diaphragm mic I can think of (although the CK28 cap is pretty flat)
> >> >and can do the capsule switching mojo thing along with a -10db pad.
> >>
> >> The C480, though, is a huge improvement over the C460.
> >>
> >> Personally, I'd pick Schoeps, Josephson, or B&K omnis over all of them.
> >> Or maybe the Sennheiser MKH-20.
> >
> >An omni mic for a hi hat??
>
> An omni mike for overheads so you don't need to spot the high-hat.
> --scott
Obviously, it depends on the drummer, the room, the producer to get
away with that.
Your suggestion about a 441 is interesting, but it is so damn big, and
drummers are normally pretty surrounded by mics. Personally, I like
condensors on the hat. I use a 451. An experienced pal ran out of mics
on a location recording and stuck an AT 4033 on a hat and said it
reminded him of a km-84.
For years I didn't print a hat track. I always do now.
Scott Dorsey
>FJPers <fjp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>So, why not a pair of 81's if you don't have KM184's? They are pretty
>>affordable and sound excellent in my opinion and in the opinion of many
>>other's.
>
>Well, they too sound funny in the high end and in the overall clarity
>department, but a lot less so than lesser mikes. They're also
>probably a bit more rugged than better sounding mikes, so it's
>somewhat of a tradeoff.
A friend of mine has fiddled with the capsules on the SM-81 and has
tried removing some of the baffling in front of the diaphragm. This
makes them much more delicate and easy to pop, but it also flattens
the top end out quite a bit. Which just goes to show that it's a tool
designed for a specific job. It's not in the same class as the KM184,
but it's also designed for something different.