DPA-4060 vs DPA-4006 The Battle, recording made by Onno and Gaston

[d_fu]

Hi Onno,

Originally Posted by wuwei

Now you can hear what I heard during setting up.

Are you referring to this particular recording? I don't see any speakers. Or are you referring to your research that led to this particular setup?

This is how it has always been with the Big recording companies, where ever they had to make decisions about quality, this standard should be closely maintained......

With all due respect, IMHO there are many possible listening setups of high standard (without necessarily being "standardized"), including headphones, and the days of the big monolithic recording companies are over... On all the setups I've tried, I preferred the 4006. Chances are that I would also prefer them if I were to listen with your speakers.

If you have anything to remark, have the courtesy to follow these simple rules, opinions about taste should be left out, to my opinion

I really don't understand this... There is no absolute truth as far as "sound quality" is concerned, is there? What else can we state but personal opinions or taste? This entire thread is about opinions, comparing two setups. Please explain what you are referring to...

Daniel

[bove]

Originally Posted by wuwei

There are various ways to skin the cat!, I have asked my friend Gijs Treur a old friend from my Polygram past to design a special stand for this type of microphone following my ideas about shape . So he designed a special setup to be mounted on top of an allready existing stand of aluminium, of Manfrotto, on top of which I had him design a heavy plastic plug in which I had the idea of putting up a Tbar 41 centimeter ,wide as experimented in my acoustic reflection free measuring room, and later on used in my field tests on recording sites.

Sounds interesting, but how do you securely attach these little microphones to the Tbar?

[just.sounds]

Picture :-)

The cable is pushed in a narrow gap and secured with a plastic ring wich has also a gap but can be turned so the gaps are not on top of each other.

[bove]

In case anyone else is also curious about this, I called DPA today to ask about mounting these little microphones to a microphone stand, and they recommended the DMM0011 Magnet Mount. From what they told me, the magnets are very strong, and will hold to the top of the mic stand (where you would normally thread a mic clip.)

You can attach the capsule to the middle of this clip, or you can attach the cable to one of the four spots on the sides, and have the capsule overhang a bit.

[just.sounds]

The magnets are indeed very strong but they need a little bit of flat surface to do their work right.

[videoteque]

Magnets near microphones is not a no no??tutttutt

???

[wuwei]

Originally Posted by videoteque

Magnets near microphones is not a no no??tutttutt

???

Anything close to a mike is dangerous.It is not a magnetic issue! The mike is back-electret based, no clever designed electronics, just impedance balancing Like a score close to a mike is horrible. A classical-music performer close to the pick up mike will create an enevitable horror story. Recording in the famous Concertgebouw here in Amsterdam is a story on its own. It is a big hall,in the performing act the soloists always have a tendency to stand close to the audience being afraid to lose contact, which works against you! It is by far easier to let the stage work for you to build up a nice relationship between presence and ambiance, that is why I use these 4060's in a pair, or couple, 41 centimeter apart, nothing else, I did the samething in Boston Symphony Hall.

Music is organized noise.

[just.sounds]

Originally Posted by videoteque

Magnets near microphones is not a no no??tutttutt

???

I never tried it, i'm also sceptical but i guess if DPA makes the clamp themselves they should have tested that.

[Mac Hath]

Hi,

Just came across this interesting thread, and thought I'd offer the following...

I use 4060's for recording organ, choral, and chamber ensembles (not all at the same time!), and I find them quite satisfactory.

For mounting, I came up with a exceedingly cheap and effective method, which allows modification, pointing, and a degree of vibration isolation, by winding a black pipe cleaner around the mic cable just behind the mic catridge, sort of twisting the pipe cleaner and mic cable together for about 2 inches (5cm) (gently, so as to avoid kinking or stressing the mic cable), and then wrapping the other end of the pipe-cleaner around the rod or other support used to separate the mics (in a spaced array). For those unfamiliar with pipe-cleaners, they are common at US craft supply shops and can be seen here: Pipe cleaner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Works great, allows pointing of mic (not such a big deal with omnis), and puts nothing of substance out near the mic cartridge that might disrupt the soundfield.

Just tossing this out there to add to the collective knowledge.

Mac

[Gaston69]

Hi Mac,

Do you have any pictures?

Gaston
Acoustic Music Recordings

[boojum]

@Onno - a couple of questions. First, the 41cm spacing. This is about what Williams specifies for an SRA of 70 degrees. How have you arrived at this spacing?

And, second, are you using the Quad electrostatics or dynamics?

I have a pair of electrostatics and appreciate their detail over dynamic speakers. Is this your motivation, too?

Thanks.

[piano]

Hmmmm.... I have a pair of 130 volt 4003 omnis.

Unlike most here, I preferred the A's - the lower priced 4060's. I like the high end lift.

There is a bigger difference than I thought there would be.

[tamasdragon]

I like A better. For me it "renders" the space aroung the performers better.

Both sample are good imho, but this time, the little mics won for me.

TD

[Audiop]

Originally Posted by boojum

I have a pair of electrostatics and appreciate their detail over dynamic speakers. Is this your motivation, too?

Thanks.

Are you sure it's the ESL thingy and not the dipole thingy that you appreciate?


/Peter

[boojum]

Originally Posted by Audiop

Are you sure it's the ESL thingy and not the dipole thingy that you appreciate?


/Peter

@Peter -

I do not have the ESL's but do truly find the electrostatic more detailed (arrgggh, more vague terms) over dynamics. I have run them alongside a pair of KEF 104/2's and like them better for their detail. Is it the dipole effect? Hmm, no, I think not as I have stood close and far with the same result. My non-engineering head suggest it is better phase coherence but that is just a LibArts guess. The technical folks on this board would know way better and perhaps could help.

I have to have them rebuilt and will be shipping them back to the mfr in January or February for an overhaul and "revoicing" which means replacing the diaphragms. They are SoundLab Pristines. Very nice. I got them at a real steal or I would not have bought them. I have never heard anything better. Sound Lab - The finest in electrostatic loudspeaker technology

[dtf]

Hi,

the good thing about ESL's in general is the much faster handling of the membrane, resulting in an improved impulse response. The Quad ESL 63 were revolutionary in such a way, that they behaved as a point source, due to the signal being distributed with a delay over the panels. Lack of bass could easily be "repaired" with a subwoofer.

The dipole characteristic is not necessarily a source of any improvement, if I am not mistaken, it's inherent to the design. Though the nulls at 90 / 270 degrees are quite practical in regards to side reflections in the room. The Philips Classics teams, which Onno was part of, used to bring along self-built diffusors which they placed behind the speakers. They had something similiar in their listening rooms, a diffusor/basstrap in the corners.

Best,
Dirk

[boojum]

Originally Posted by dtf

Hi,

the good thing about ESL's in general is the much faster handling of the membrane, resulting in an improved impulse response. The Quad ESL 63 were revolutionary in such a way, that they behaved as a point source, due to the signal being distributed with a delay over the panels. Lack of bass could easily be "repaired" with a subwoofer.

The dipole characteristic is not necessarily a source of any improvement, if I am not mistaken, it's inherent to the design. Though the nulls at 90 / 270 degrees are quite practical in regards to side reflections in the room. The Philips Classics teams, which Onno was part of, used to bring along self-built diffusors which they placed behind the speakers. They had something similiar in their listening rooms, a diffusor/basstrap in the corners.

Best,
Dirk

SoundLabs has a diffuser they recommend to be placed behind their speakers which sits at the apex of the arc and absorbs the sound from the speakers back side. I may build one for mine as the ones SL sells are pricey. SL divided their membranes into increasingly logrithmically smaller panels which somehow allows it to produce more bass than most ES's. I had the ESL's in my house and was very disappointed: no reasonable volume level. If I could be content with low volume listening they would have been OK. At higher volumes the panels arc and self-destruct. Not a problem with SL's which can produce quite loud levels and without a sub woofer. They are tasty. I will ship them off for repair in January or February for sure. I have been too long without them. I drive them with two mono-blocked hafler DH500's, each producing ~1,200 watts.

Enough of a thread hijack. Apologies to all.

[boojum]

FWIW - I will be recording a local chorale here in town on the 13th. I will run 4006 TL's with 4061's immediately underneath. The spacing will be ~40cm a la Williams recommendations. I will post a short clip with the understanding that this is an amateur group of seniors. Do not expect Fred Waring or the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. The rest of the chain is a SD 788T. I master with SAM 10.21.


Cheers