Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules by Klaus Heyne

[anguswoodhead]

A friend brought this to my attention today - pretty cool.

PSW Recording Forums: Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab => Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules



Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules

[IMG]******//recforums.prosoundweb.com/images/custom_avatars/318.jpg[/IMG] Klaus Heyne


The timbre of the original Neumann K47 sound is almost there in Ben Sneesby’s new K47-type capsules: good, tight, and balanced bass, a mid range signature closely related to Neumann’s, and no pointedness or breakouts in the high frequencies. With other words, a fairly well-balanced response overall, and clearly more so than with K47/M7 efforts by other independent capsule makers whose products I have tested.

While there is still a small amount of aggressive constriction in the mids, it is clearly not so dominant that it would stick out in an ugly way, as it does with some of the recent K47/M7 capsule types made by MG and Thiersch.

What, then, could still be improved in Ben’s capsules so they could be a ready-to-use, unquestioned, true alternative to Neumann’s K47 for my work (and I would not want to use a comparison to anything but the past and current gold standard in capsules)?

1. A capacity of the transducer to respond to complex, fast, signals with higher speed and without audible mid range smear,
and (maybe related to it?):

2. Adding a slight bit of that narrow, but vitally important, range of high frequencies- that inoffensive, barely noticeable amount of ‘air’ on top of the reedy and timbre-correct mid range of his capsules. Because it is that slight amount of ‘air’ that Neumann capsules have which then seamlessly connects to the mid range, that makes their capsules so smooth overall, despite the robust and prominent low mids.

A bit more about the slight midrange smear or congestion I hear:
I am not a capsule maker, and can only speculate a possible connection between a slowly responding diaphragm that is not quite capable of dissolving incoming highs and mids quickly enough to render that famous, emotionally engaging, three-dimensionality which Neumann’s K47 capsules still possess to this day, and still exclusively. I understand that the variables of diaphragm construction, preparation and mounting are many, and ideal balance points are hard to measure and translate into manufacturing parameters. Yet, the devil hides somewhere in there...

To sum it up: I found the two capsules Ben sent me to have a lot of what makes Neumann’s K47 so appealing; but, as usual, to achieve the final 10% of anything is an unpredictable, hap-hazardous, uphill battle.

Considering how far Ben has come in such a short time, I hope he will go all out in his efforts to conquer the last bit of the performance gap between his and Neumann’s K47.

Additional notes: Ben’s capsules were within the same timbral tolerance, side-to-side- and capsule-to-capsule as Neumann’s. With other words, acceptably close in a professional application.

Minor issue that I think Ben should address: the threads in the backplates are one metric size up from Neumann’s. With other words, if the capsule is to be used in a Neumann product, you should request the correct M-size screws that will work with the oversized threads.

Minor issue I don’t understand: Ben uses super-thick washers under the central lead out screws that are also a bit rough on the surface, with a potential to mar the diaphragm upon contact. Unless there is an acoustic or electric reason for it, I would change them to gold-plated washers of conventional thickness.


Test setup:

Source: my voice, as always.

Neumann-comparison capsules used against Ben’s 2 K47-style capsules:
1961 Brass K47, 1975 ivory plastic K47, NIB 2009 K47 against Ben’s two specimens, yielding four front sides altogether

Method: quickly switching back and forth between two stock KK47 heads (one with the capsule/side under test, the other with the Neumann comparator) on the same U47 (1957 model in perfect functional condition, as if that needed mentioning)

Number of tests: 12

Ben Sneesby’s 2 capsules x 2 sides = 4 front sides
(I only tested cardioid performance)
U47 stock capsules (preselected front sides) = 3


Ben Sneesby responds:

Quote:
Hi Klaus, thanks for the review and critique. (...)
The only observation I have is that the washers I use for the centre screw
are only rough on top as they are gold plated, and the underside that has
direct contact with the diaphragm is smooth as smooth can be, thus never
causing damage to the diaphragm.(...)

One more thing:
The reason I have chosen to use the m1.4 screw is that the tap to make the
threads is larger, hence less likely to break during manufacture. Also, the
larger screw allows me to tighten each screw to a set torque setting whereas
in the M1- due to its small size, torque setting of the capsule ring is not
possible.


Please feel free to post this on the site, I am happy to get some more
comments and ideas from the members. I will definitely keep working on
designs and methods to make the perfect capsule.

Thanks again

Ben Sneesby
Managing Director
: 0419 481 569 (Australian Customers)
:: (02) 6633 1463 (Factory)
:: (614) 754 0957 (USA and Canada Customers)
:: ben@beesneezmicrophones.com.au

Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

[butterfly]

A friend brought this to my attention today - pretty cool.

............as long as your names not Seigfried Thiersch

[jeremyglover]

i have yet to try one of ben's mics but he comes across as a really talented microphone designer and manufacturer. i can't wait to get my hands on one.

jeremy

[tguy]

Wow, quite an accomplishment. Nice job Ben. BTW, Klaus mentions "MG and Thiersch". Who is reffered to as MG?

[rob61]

Originally Posted by tguy

Wow, quite an accomplishment. Nice job Ben. BTW, Klaus mentions "MG and Thiersch". Who is reffered to as MG?

I'd guess Microtech Gefell.

[Teddy Ray]

MG=Gefell

[antoniosolo]

I knew there was no way Ben would keep chiming in about his capsule and not have something to back it up with. So much better than marketing hype when a guy shows up with the goods, for mics, which we all should know is something you just can't clone really.....



Cheers

[tapehiss]

Originally Posted by anguswoodhead

A friend brought this to my attention today - pretty cool.

While there is still a small amount of aggressive constriction in the mids, it is clearly not so dominant that it would stick out in an ugly way, as it does with some of the recent K47/M7 capsule types made by MG and Thiersch.
[/URL]

Is Klaus saying that current Thiersch and MG capsules are not as good as the past models?????

[drBill]

I knew I should have offed my MG mics when I had a chance.....

Oh wait a minute. I have the old capsules in mine.

Way to go Ben. thumbsup

[DONNX]

Originally Posted by tapehiss

Is Klaus saying that current Thiersch and MG capsules are not as good as the past models?????

Well I just had my U87s reskinned by S. Theirsch and my U47 capsule was made by S theirsch.

I have yet to come across anything I would prefer more

It would have been nice to hear some audio of these comparisons so its not relied soley on one man's opinion.

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by tapehiss

Is Klaus saying that current Thiersch and MG capsules are not as good as the past models?????

That would be reading something that wasn't specifically said from his words as far as my reading comprehension goes.

While there is still a small amount of aggressive constriction in the mids, it is clearly not so dominant that it would stick out in an ugly way, as it does with some of the recent K47/M7 capsule types made by MG and Thiersch.

He is specifically comparing capsules, on a molecular level.

Will you, Tapehiss, or any other gear board person compare a raw capsule specimen precisely and exactly like him? And do you have the same valued experience of context that he does? Will you use these transducers for music recording or testing for comparative sonic difference between historic K47/M7 capsule design - that is no longer in use? For myself, knowing Klaus, for these words to be "hand-to-god" truth about what MG and S.Thiersch are doing with their Capsule Design, and how it will relate to me as a recording engineer and my experience as a recording engineer, I would A) Need to have the Same Definition for "aggressive constriction of mid range" in a comparative and experience relative setting of the capsule specimen testing - only as Klaus does, and B) Have the same measurement acuity for "how dominant" the aforementioned restriction actually compares, as only Klaus does, and finally C) Share the Same definition for "ugly" as Klaus has.

I read him comparing one relative and tiny subjective part of each capsules response WITH HIS TEST PROCEDURE and ear-balling it at a "molecular level". It reads like he feels this is a problem with "the mids" which include a type of restriction to them, aggressively - and its dominance is measured by his experience and the other test specimens. Surely Klaus is not a man who needs his authority questioned, nor his valued experience debated, but to bluntly suggest "these new ones are not as good as old ones" from his descriptors, is a horrible fallacy of logic as it applies to our perspective worlds. Albert Einstein believed in relativity and so do I. I also believe each life lives in a parallel universe, based on the relative experience we take with us and enjoy along the way. I believe Klaus himself, will tell you that YOU MUST evaluate any microphone yourself in your own environment, in order to gain a more educated understanding about the product you are using.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell

For myself, knowing Klaus, for these words to be "hand-to-god" truth about what MG and S.Thiersch are doing with their Capsule Design, and how it will relate to me as a recording engineer and my experience as a recording engineer, I would A) Need to have the Same Definition for "aggressive constriction of mid range" in a comparative and experience relative setting of the capsule specimen testing - only as Klaus does, and B) Have the same measurement acuity for "how dominant" the aforementioned restriction actually compares, as only Klaus does, and finally C) Share the Same definition for "ugly" as Klaus has.

If Klaus is using words in some special sense then maybe the whole post should remain at PSW.

I am sad to hear, however, that Ben's capsule still, alas, falls 10 % short of perfection.

-R

[natpub]

The comments about MG strike me as odd, since I heard Klause say as recently as the PBS/NPR radio interview he gave that the MG M7 capsule is the exact M7 as made since the heyday of the U47. So, I am not sure if he is saying MG has changed design or what? Perhaps he would comment.


kt

[Sounds Great]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

If Klaus is using words in some special sense then maybe the whole post should remain at PSW.

Or perhaps you are just reading too much into it.

Originally Posted by RKrizman

I am sad to hear, however, that Ben's capsule still, alas, falls 10 % short of perfection.

One man's perfection is another man's tunafish sandwich.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by Sounds Great

Or perhaps you are just reading too much into it.

I hope so, as it is inconsistent with the graciousness that Klaus enforces in his own forum.

-R

[tapehiss]

Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell

That would be reading something that wasn't specifically said from his words as far as my reading comprehension goes.

I read him comparing one relative and tiny subjective part of each capsules response WITH HIS TEST PROCEDURE and ear-balling it at a "molecular level". It reads like he feels this is a problem with "the mids" which include a type of restriction to them, aggressively - and its dominance is measured by his experience and the other test specimens. Surely Klaus is not a man who needs his authority questioned, nor his valued experience debated, but to bluntly suggest "these new ones are not as good as old ones" from his descriptors, is a horrible fallacy of logic as it applies to our perspective worlds. Albert Einstein believed in relativity and so do I. I also believe each life lives in a parallel universe, based on the relative experience we take with us and enjoy along the way. I believe Klaus himself, will tell you that YOU MUST evaluate any microphone yourself in your own environment, in order to gain a more educated understanding about the product you are using.

I was asking a question, because I felt I did not fully comprehend what was said by the statement regarding modern MG capsules......... where is the "horrible fallacy" there?????? I made no assumptions, and was just trying to clearly understand. Please reread my post, there you will notice 5 question marks at the end of my QUESTION, which clearly belies your notion that I was making a statement about the condition of MG capsules.

I highly doubt Klaus would say anything in his tests takes place at a molecular level, as I feel he was just simply stating that modern MG capsules have some harsh mids when compared to old Nuemann, which I view as "not as good". And viewing harsh mids as "not as good" is far from a "horrible fallacy" IMO.

I fully respect Klaus, even though the only thing I know about him is that he is an authority on capsules and lives in the Northwest, which are two very respectable status titles IMO.

(ps. your appeal to intelligence by stating that you believe the same thing as Einstein was brilliant)

[anguswoodhead]

Let's not forget that in some people's perspective nothing can or ever will compare to a Neumann capsule no matter how good it is.

Do you think Klause will ever say anything is better than an original K47 / M7 - I doubt it.
The fact that Ben's capsule got to within 10% of that ideal is good enough to me.

Congrats Ben on making the second best capsule in the world !!!!

[tapehiss]

Originally Posted by anguswoodhead

Let's not forget that in some people's perspective nothing can or ever will compare to a Neumann capsule no matter how good it is.

Do you think Klause will ever say anything is better than an original K47 / M7 - I doubt it.
The fact that Ben's capsule got to within 10% of that ideal is good enough to me.

Congrats Ben on making the second best capsule in the world !!!!

+1....... I will own an Arabella pro in one month!!!!!!!

[cinealta]

Originally Posted by tguy

Who is reffered to as MG?

Microtech Gefell.

Originally Posted by anguswoodhead

"While there is still a small amount of aggressive constriction in the mids, it is clearly not so dominant that it would stick out in an ugly way, as it does with some of the recent K47/M7 capsule types made by MG and Thiersch."

Originally Posted by drBill

Oh wait a minute. I have the old capsules in mine.

AFAIK, approx 2005 was when Gefell switched to the new capsule material and/or capsule manufacturing technique (do not have source to attribute this info to at time of posting).

Nonetheless, it's important to note that just because Gefell may be using a different capsule material/technique currently, it does not necessarily mean it is better, or worse, than prior capsules, merely different (and subtly so at that).

[anguswoodhead]

I rang Ben and asked him about the 2 capsules he sent Klaus.
Where they 'special' or 'modified' in any way or the same as the ones that sell in his mics.

Ben said he did a run of 50 K7 capsules and randomly picked 2 out of the batch.
And without even listening to them he sent them to Klaus.

He also said that any of his mics can ship with the K7 capsule (as he calls it), which is half way between an M7 and a K47.
Personally I reckon the mics to buy with the K7 are the Arabella and the Tribute 1.

He posted this on another forum.

" Hi All,

The K7 is mechanically a cross between a K47 and an M7. The M7 as many of you would know is a glued capsule. Once the metal is drilled and cut, the diaphragm is then glued to the brass outer ring.

The main problem with this is that any anomally in the amount of glue used then becomes refferential tonally. The K47 was neumann's answer to rectify this problem, rather than glueing, the K47 takes the same basic hole depth and patterning to which the diapragm is now screwed and clamped between 2 perfectly lapped surfaces hence dramatically reducing errors.

When neumann changed from glue to screw, they also changed the diametric patterning of the outer blind holes, the K7 rather than adhering to the k47 specs is more closely partnered to the M7 diametrically as far as the blind and through holes are concerned.

cheers

_________________
Ben Sneesby "

[Klaus]

Originally Posted by natpub

The comments about MG strike me as odd, since I heard Klause say as recently as the PBS/NPR radio interview he gave that the MG M7 capsule is the exact M7 as made since the heyday of the U47. So, I am not sure if he is saying MG has changed design or what? Perhaps he would comment.

Others and I have commented on my forum that the M7 PVC capsule MG makes today does. to my ears, indeed sound quite different: the low end is curtailed, and the capsule has a slightly pinched, less pleasant, midrange, compared with MG's PVC capsules in the past (up to about 4-5 years ago, when their M7 PVC sounded every bit as thrilling as the best of the Berlin M7, to my ears.) The speculation was: while the back plate seems to be unchanged, the new PVC material now used to make the diaphragms, combined with a change in manufacturing personell-critical for this highly specialized process-may account for this.

Let's not forget that in some people's perspective nothing can or ever will compare to a Neumann capsule no matter how good it is. Do you think Klause will ever say anything is better than an original K47 / M7 - I doubt it.

I wish very much there were more alternatives to Neumann's superb K47. And I can think of a few reasons:
Considering today's corporate climate, who knows how much longer Neumann will manufacture and market that very special product? Besides, monopolies are always bad for the pocket book. Neumann's K47 is already the priciest capsule on the market.

But somehow, that capsule's secret seems to be a hard nut to crack by those who've tried. That's why I wrote about Ben's recent attempt at a new version, because he has to my ears come closest yet to capturing the reedy K47 quality- though I believe there still is work to do, as I wrote. He also seems to translate criticism into striving for improvements, rather than being offended- always a winning trait.

So, a little competition between Thiersch, one of the original contestants for the succession to the crown, and now others, like Ben Sneesby, can only be good for all of us!

Finally, a word about Siegfried Thiersch. I still use him exclusively for replacements of original Neumann M7 capsules, and for his masterpiece- the nickel K54 reskins. But Mr. Thiersch's M7 PVC have their own signature, which, to my ears are related to, but not quite in the same league as, the original Neumann or Gefell PVC product. He admits that freely, and, wanting someone to recreate the original combination- PVC and M7 backplate- I am trying to figure out whether he is interested in bringing his M7 up to the original Neumann/Neumann-Gefell standard. He certainly has spent more hours on that capsule combo than anybody active today. I have offered my support.

[DONNX]

Originally Posted by Klaus

Mr. Thiersch's M7 PVC have their own signature, which, to my ears are related to, but not quite in the same league as, the original Neumann or Gefell PVC product.

Klaus can you elaborate why you believe that the Thiersch's M7 PET or PVC capsules are not in the same league or same standard as the Neumann/Gefell capsules? What do you mean exactly? Doesn't sound as good? Not built as good? I am interested to knowing what had brought you this conclusion and statement. Is it the build quality? The lack of making it 100% identical due to part and material choices or craftsmanship? Is there a chance that the M7 Berlin you are referencing against the Theirsch has aged, stretched, or slighty cracked due to being made 50 year ago? Or did you observe the differences with a brand new Berlin M7 to a Brand new PVC Theirsch M7?

What could be done to make it "in the same league" to your standard? And what is that standard? Is there anyone else on this planet that can make an M7 just like early Berlin version or would you have to buy an original vintage one (that is if you can find one still working up to spec) to get this better league sound?

I have a Theirsch M7 PET and PVC. In the next 4-5 days, a new Neumann K47 and Maybe a M7 Berlin if it can be sourced in Germany will be arriving to me for testing. I have no other mic in the present or past, that I would say is better sonically than these M7 PVC and Mylar Theirsch capsules. But I do remember. Andreas Grosser told me he rechecks them again and does some additional tweaking after Thiersch sends the capsule to him for his microphones. So perhaps thats why I am super pleased with these capsules. Having two great mic brains working together has to be better than one I assume. To be quite honest. I can't imagine another M7 capsule or capsules sounding that much better than what I got now in my studio.

[anguswoodhead]

Originally Posted by DONNX

To be quite honest. I can't imagine another capsule or capsules sounding that much better than what I got now in my studio.

You should buy one of Ben's K7 capsules and judge for yourself DON.
Aussie dollar is weak now - when I rang Ben yesterday he said they are AU$500.

[natpub]

I always try to assume that everyone has the best intentions and heartfelt opinions on things. That said, I think there will ever be "Fanboy-dom," drone accounts (they are supposedly banned, but come on!, Some manufacturers and retailers just gotta have either drone accounts or actual drone Fanboys!!). And finally, there is the effect that anyone who just shelled out 5-10K on something usually feels a burning desire to defend it, even if they have no actual experience with an alternative being examined.

All that said, examining the facts, I gotta feel Klaus, if anyone, has very little to gain by trying to give anything here or at PSW that is anything but a "clean" opinion. Of course, it is only his opinion and taste and ears. But as I read it, it is one of the more "pure" opinions we have access to these days. I mean, there are CERTAIN magazines, forums, etc., that to me are a joke anymore these days. The reviews seem terribly biased!

Ah well, best to all.
Kurt, Austin


P.S. Klaus, there was another capsule maker, I forget his name, think he was actually from the US (not Peluso), and he had sent you a couple capsules to try, turned out they had some defects or something, then he was supposed to send you more, and I think he did, but you said you would test them when you had time, but it has been a pretty "long" time since that last post. I read this in your Forum at PSW, and have long wondered, what ever became of those capsules and that pending testing?----thanks so much, Kurt

[DONNX]

Originally Posted by anguswoodhead

You should buy one of Ben's K7 capsules and judge for yourself DON.
Aussie dollar is weak now - when I rang Ben yesterday he said they are AU$500.

Man you guys too? The dollar is bad bad bad. Ben does do great work. You are right. I ought to try one out one day. Never knock to you try it yourself. thumbsup

[anguswoodhead]

Originally Posted by natpub

I always try to assume that everyone has the best intentions and heartfelt opinions on things. That said, I think there will ever be "Fanboy-dom," drone accounts (they are supposedly banned, but come on!, Some manufacturers and retailers just gotta have either drone accounts or actual drone Fanboys!!). And finally, there is the effect that anyone who just shelled out 5-10K on something usually feels a burning desire to defend it, even if they have no actual experience with an alternative being examined.

Just to be clear here - I am not 'marketing' anything, I am just letting some forum 'mates' know as I think everyone could benefit from a little BeesNeez magic in there locker.
I don't get kick backs from sales or referrals for my internet posts etc.
I do sell the same mounts that Ben sells on my eBay store but there is nothing wrong with that.
And I really do believe that apart from a 'vintage' Neumann (and some other vintage gems) Ben's mics are the best thing available today at any price.

Oh and I also call Ben 'friend'.

BTW - I am no tech - but the K7 I have in my Tribute 1 sounds pretty cool I've gotta say.

[Martin Kantola]

Originally Posted by DONNX

Well I just had my U87s reskinned by S. Theirsch and my U47 capsule was made by S theirsch.

I have yet to come across anything I would prefer more

It would have been nice to hear some audio of these comparisons so its not relied soley on one man's opinion.

Love the work that Thiersch does, and so do all my customers! But we can all have different taste and opinions, with all due respect to Klaus I don't always agree with him.

Martin

[anguswoodhead]

Hi Martin.
I would be very keen to shoot out your NU-47 against Bens Tribute 1.
Are there any Aussies that bought your beautiful looking mic?

[natpub]

Aye, no worries, as proper, et al. Tis all good, Yes, agreed, the mics must, hmm...speak (sing?) for themselves, sans mascots, eh?



Kurt, Austin

[Tony Shepperd]

Congrats Ben!!!!!!
That's high praise coming from Klaus!!!!!!!