Neumann RSM 191 reviews?

[meathman]

Ive heard that the Neumann rsm 191 is somewhat of a standard for fx recording. The odd thing is, I cant seem to find many reviews or info online. Also for about $5,000 is it that much better soundwise than say a schoeps ms pair or a sanken css5 for example?

Any info would be appreciated...Thanks

[Stefanizzi]

Originally Posted by meathman

Ive heard that the Neumann rsm 191 is somewhat of a standard for fx recording. The odd thing is, I cant seem to find many reviews or info online. Also for about $5,000 is it that much better soundwise than say a schoeps ms pair or a sanken css5 for example?

Any info would be appreciated...Thanks

Hi!
I'm sorry... I have never tried SCHOEPS or SANKEN, but I've worked with RSM191 in 1988-1989 and I know it well enough to say that it is a tangible and very reputable microphone. It is a lot better than other more popular NEUMANNs (both large diaphragm and small) I have worked with.

Regards

[dsteinwedel]

It's a very good 'what you hear is what you get' mic. Sometimes I think it could use a little more bottom end, but then again that's never hard to add to an effect. I haven't used the other mics you mentioned extensively so I can't compare sounds. I've used the 191 on everything from jets to flamethrowers to wind to single mic-ing my band and it always sounds great. It's also compact, rugged, and having the m/s option at your fingertips is great.

Cheers,
Dave

[meathman]

thanks dave

does that matrix box that comes with it bug you...is it large? a pain to lug around? also- can you get custom cable lengths easily made, or is it some strange proprietary neumann cable?

Thanks

Ryan

[dsteinwedel]

The matrix box has never been a problem for me. I keep it in the extra pocket of my Porta Brace. The cable is a 5 or 6 pin xlr that splits into two normal 3 pin xlrs. My manual's buried but I think it comes with a wiring diagram if you want to make your own.

Dave

[charles maynes]

I think I am about the only one with this opinion, but I do not care for the 191 variants at all- for the same money you could get a really nice Schoeps rig that will just run circles around it....


YMMV....

[meathman]

Charles,

Id agree with that statement. You could buy a schoeps matched pair and have money to spare. Ive never heard the 191 , but its hard to believe that it could possibly sound that much better than the schoeps or even the senn MKH ....

As usual, the best way of knowing is to actually try (rent) one and compare.

I forgot who, but someone was telling me that fasal, potter, nokes, and a handful of other reputable recordists swear by the 191 and it's a staple to all their rigs.

Have you found this to be true. Or are schoeps generally more common? (just curious)

[charles maynes]

Originally Posted by meathman

Charles,

Id agree with that statement. You could buy a schoeps matched pair and have money to spare. Ive never heard the 191 , but its hard to believe that it could possibly sound that much better than the schoeps or even the senn MKH ....

As usual, the best way of knowing is to actually try (rent) one and compare.

I forgot who, but someone was telling me that fasal, potter, nokes, and a handful of other reputable recordists swear by the 191 and it's a staple to all their rigs.

Have you found this to be true. Or are schoeps generally more common? (just curious)

Eric Potter uses KM's not a 191 as far as I know- John and Rob like the 191's though John and I both tend to take lots of channels and mics out when we do things...

Chris Boyes uses the 191 too- It pales to the Schoeps mics sonically though. It is convenient for a single point stereo mic, but for me the Sanken CSS5 has worked out better- mainly because it is more robust in moisture and dust... 5k for a mic is alot- especially if it is going to be knocked around alot... but again- YMMV...

any of the stereo mics are bit a side player most times- The bread and butter mics in my opinion will be the Schoeps- Sennheiser 416, Shure SM57's and some good lavs- get those first, before chasing a single point stereo mic...

[luke2008]

Hello

I have been searching for a great pair of mini or pencil mics that will become the staple of my rig in the studio and on the road. i would like to stay away from stereo mics.

Have on loan DPA 4023 cardoid 19mm which seem ok but same problem with them, Schoeps and a few others is in the studio recording very quiet foley fx such as clocks ticking, tapping of fingers, the noise floor (hiss bed) to me is unacceptable. I like to record xy with cardoid but cannot find a choice. Out of all the loaners, I have enjoyed the KM 184 which are cheaper by a landslide.

My fav mic set is my B and K 4009's. So clean with no hiss, but they are omni and not the best for mono. The difference between them and all others is huge.

Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated. Earthworks?

[luke2008]

I am sorry, it might help if I would have stated what I record. Duh!
Sound effects is my life, recording everything from loud to the most quiet fx, hence my issues.

Thanks

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by luke2008

Hello

I have been searching for a great pair of mini or pencil mics that will become the staple of my rig in the studio and on the road. i would like to stay away from stereo mics.

Have on loan DPA 4023 cardoid 19mm which seem ok but same problem with them, Schoeps and a few others is in the studio recording very quiet foley fx such as clocks ticking, tapping of fingers, the noise floor (hiss bed) to me is unacceptable. I like to record xy with cardoid but cannot find a choice. Out of all the loaners, I have enjoyed the KM 184 which are cheaper by a landslide.

My fav mic set is my B and K 4009's. So clean with no hiss, but they are omni and not the best for mono. The difference between them and all others is huge.

Any advice or suggestions would be appreciated. Earthworks?

This should have been a new thread really- - but add the MKH 8040 Stereoset to your list - I have just bought a pair of these.

[Farmerbrown2200]

a propo to the Neumann RSM 191 A-S

Can someone please tell me if it is possible to record the M and S streams UNcoded to seperate channels in camera/DAT? I am guessing we would do this by not using the matrix box that is included? Does this make sense?

The production would like to chose between the shotgun (M) and the ambiant stereo (S) in post production. If we go through the box I assume these are muxed together for eternity???



Thanks,

Andrew

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Farmerbrown2200

a propo to the Neumann RSM 191 A-S

Can someone please tell me if it is possible to record the M and S streams UNcoded to seperate channels in camera/DAT? I am guessing we would do this by not using the matrix box that is included? Does this make sense?

You can download the user manual HERE (scroll down and click on the pdf underneath "Operating Instructions RSM 191 A Set, 02/2003, Engl./Germ.").

There should no problem doing what you want.

Originally Posted by Farmerbrown2200

The production would like to chose between the shotgun (M) and the ambiant stereo (S) in post production. If we go through the box I assume these are mixed together for eternity???

No, it's not for eternity - sticking the stereo signal through an MS matrix gives you M and S again.

MS to Stereo
M + S = L
M –S = R

Stereo to MS
L + R = M
L – R = S

[Farmerbrown2200]

This is very helpful John. Our only problem is that we wouldn't necessarily have the matrix box in post... but I guess it could be done without the box as you suggest quite correctly with the formulas. I don't work with MS very often and school is some 20years in the past and getting further away every day... use it or lose it!

Thanks for the schoolin' John, it is appreciated.

Cheers,

Andrew

Originally Posted by John Willett

You can download the user manual HERE (scroll down and click on the pdf underneath "Operating Instructions RSM 191 A Set, 02/2003, Engl./Germ.").

There should no problem doing what you want.





No, it's not for eternity - sticking the stereo signal through an MS matrix gives you M and S again.

MS to Stereo
M + S = L
M –S = R

Stereo to MS
L + R = M
L – R = S

[fifthcircle]

If you record unmatrixed, you have the option to deal with the width of your image in post... If you are absolutely commited to your sound, you can save a lot of heartache this way.

From a practical stand point, the matrix is easy- mid pans up the center, sides are duplicated (2 tracks) and panned hard right and left. Lastly, flip your phase on the right side. Your sides can go up and down and vary your width of your recording. Make sure you don't have more gain, though, on the sides as you'll have pretty significant phasing problems on your stereo mix.

--Ben

[Farmerbrown2200]

For others facing the same issues, this looks very useful:

I know I could do this myself by copying tracks reversing phase etc... but I am nervous about screwing that up!

Finally, I have decided to record MS direct to camera and DAT with the 191 matrix box (and splitters), then use something like the Brainworx software to break it down into the componants as needed.

Thanks to GS and those who answered!

Andrew

[Matti]

Well, you can output the signals in non matrixed format or matrixed,
clearly marked on the box

Matti

[Farmerbrown2200]

Originally Posted by MATTI

Well, you can output the signals in non matrixed format or matrixed,
clearly marked on the box

Matti

I just got my hands on the actual mic and matix box 4 hours ago and now have time to look at it... I see the "XY" "-XY" and "MS" "-MS" settings on the box. I understand "XY" to mean "unmatrixed" at this point and the "minus" to mean reverse phase of either.

Thanks for bringing it up Matti.

Other questions? Of course!

The "low battery" light seems to come on all the time, even with a fresh battery. What's that about?

I'm on location bright and early tomorrow.


Andrew

[Matti]

I guess its opposite xy meaning matrixed and ms discrete, just listen
to find out, for me it was some 15 years ago

Matti

edit: the - settings are for reversing the phase of the 8 capsule for quicly change the
l-r image to r-l if the mic is upside down

[Farmerbrown2200]

Matti,

Having spent some time with the mic, it is now clear that XY is stereo (and NOT un matrixed as suggested above), and MS is matirxed. In other words, you can't record through the matirx box and get un matrixed output. This is in essence where my posts to this thread began, and now my questions are answered. I will record MS matrixed and decode to the componants in post as required.

Carefull what advice you give my friend! You almost had me convinced. 15 years is a long time for any of us...



A

[Matti]

Please read this!

Cheers

Matti

[Farmerbrown2200]

Yeah, I'll eat my crow now...

I have two sessions under my belt with the 191 and the MS setting consists of two seperate channels of audio from the two capsules. These two channels are easily combined or seperated in my DAW by copying and flipping the phase of the S channel, or just using the M channel when the ambiant sound is over-powering (traffic in my case).

When I did my first tests with this mic I thought the "matrix" box was necessary for listening back (kinda like the Soundfield multi capsule mics that come with a matrix box). This isn't the case and there was nothing to be nervous about. Thanks for not flaming my behind Matti.


Back to work now...

A

[eric potter]

Originally Posted by meathman

Charles,

I forgot who, but someone was telling me that fasal, potter, nokes, and a handful of other reputable recordists swear by the 191 and it's a staple to all their rigs.

funny thing - this post was quoted on eBay by a seller of a 191. so i came here to check it out!

indeed, i've used the 190 and 191 a whole lot. but i agree with charles in some ways - i've used the Schoeps more often. in general, they have a sweeter and more detailed top end, and a satisfying low, low end. the detail from a Schoeps is often what makes the effects cut through a busy music mix, or any droney background situation.

that said, the 190/191 is a clear choice for it's bump in the lower mids (or even 'upper lows'. i love it for recording a hefty sounding vehicle, or even adding weight to a vehicle that isn't that impressive in the first place. it's also a good choice for aircraft fly-overs.

it's not a quiet mic, though in terms of self-noise. not the best for ambiences, unless it's industrial. Neumann and Schoeps can be a grreat combo, though. i do that a lot.

i also use the high voltage DPA's 4003 especially for amazing ambience and spaced-omni stuff. i haev an orchestral-style set-up that i'll use for film sound ambiences, etc.

agree with charles also about the Sanken stereo - a very useful, affordable stereo mic.

[Rolo 46]

The matrix box is troublesome
The capsule is not RF
It hates humidity

MKH MS array more reliable imho.

[mixingsuite]

hey guys!

no need to worry anymore, Neumann is giving up on the RSM191 - and, as bad as it is, there will be no replacement or new M/S model...

cheers and safe your last item

m

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by mixingsuite

hey guys!

no need to worry anymore, Neumann is giving up on the RSM191 - and, as bad as it is, there will be no replacement or new M/S model...

cheers and safe your last item

m

Now all we need is for Sennheiser to produce the MKH 8030 that we have been waiting for.

Though the new Ambient EMESSER is a good alternative in the short term, I think.

[Matti]

Was happy with Schoeps pair ( film/tv documentaries ) although 8 has been discussed here

Matti

[eric potter]

also, in the field, all 5 of my Schoeps capsules have outlasted all 4 of my Neumann capsules. i gave up on my KM-100 series after the second capsule rebuild started fading again. of course, i record some ridiculous shit...