Schoeps - decisions, decisions...

[aracu]

I like the MK 41 capsule because it is probably the cleanest off-axis of the entire Schoeps line.

That's one of the most highly regarded mics for recording film dialogue.

[Recording David]

Originally Posted by naturalstudio

Ok - I'm thinking I might just hire a pair of Schoeps for an upcoming recording and see if they are to my liking.

Can anyone recommend a good rental company in the UK that has Schoeps stuff (particularly the CMC6 w/MK2 capsule)...?

Hi Douglas - Ioco are the main Schoeps delaer in the UK. They are VERY helpful. I'm sure that if you are serious about buying the mics they will lend you a couple of different caps to try out (which is what they did for me). They go above and beyond in customer service too - last time they sent a pair of my CMC6 bodies back to Germany for service they lent me some brand new ones for free. Very highly recommended.

http://www.ioco.ltd.uk/

[boojum]

You might want to get in touch with DSatz on this board. He has a lot of experience with Schoeps.

[massimo]

by the way, can anybody comment on sonic differences between the CMC5 and CMC6 bodies? (I own two CMC5's - should I upgrade, if this is really an "upgrade"?)

thank you
best regards
Massimo

[liuto]

CMC5 has a gentle high pass at 30Hz with 6dB/octave, CMC6 at 20Hz but with steeper 12dB/octave. That means that below 10Hz you should expect more sound from a CMC5 again as the slope is much more gentle.
But other than that there should not be a huge difference to care about.
Regards
Hermann

[tamasdragon]

Are those dpa's really worse than the schoeps'? I have always fell in love with dpa mics "honesty". Even love the off axis response from them. I've never felt that schoeps are better, but I have tried them side by side very long ago. Should try it again?
Tamas Dragon

[tamasdragon]

I'm curious. If I choose the mk2 capsule over the mk2h, can it be fine for stereo orchestral recordings? (Considering for main pair, so might be not placed so close to the source). So is that high end boost really necessary? Or this is where mk2sg capsule come into the picture?
Tamas Dragon

[Don S]

Originally Posted by tamasdragon

I'm curious. If I choose the mk2 capsule over the mk2h, can it be fine for stereo orchestral recordings? (Considering for main pair, so might be not placed so close to the source). So is that high end boost really necessary? Or this is where mk2sg capsule come into the picture?
Tamas Dragon

I was a little dissapointed with the 2H as a main pair for an orchestra. Schoeps gives a warm, musical presentation, but I thought it lacked reach and detail on larger ensembles. There are times this is indeed a benefit. I remember a community chorus behind a professional orchestra. The lack of detail helped the chorus tremendously! However, if it's a detailed sound with reach into the ensemble you're looking for, I would go with DPA 4003/4006 with the grids and APE(equalizer balls).
I have heard recordings with the mk2S used and yeilded good results.

[tamasdragon]

Wov, it's getting more and more exiting. In some of the previous post, someone said that the dpa fails to give the real quality to an orchestra (sound phasey, etc.), and now you say dpa is a better choice. Well, let's see, others who compared the two?
Tamas Dragon

[Don S]

Originally Posted by tamasdragon

Wov, it's getting more and more exiting. In some of the previous post, someone said that the dpa fails to give the real quality to an orchestra (sound phasey, etc.), and now you say dpa is a better choice. Well, let's see, others who compared the two?
Tamas Dragon

The post about "phasey" DPA was refering to the 4011 in ORTF, not comparing omnis. Very few engineers use the 2H as mains for large orchestral situations(diffused fields). Chamber music and smaller is were they shine! IMHO! I'm glad to see that the 4006 TL is making some waves. It's been on my list for a while.

[tamasdragon]

Yes you're right, that wasn't omnis. I'm just amazed by that the 4011 was phasey in an ortf situation. I always felt and thought that dpa is better than this. I'm really curious, because I have used other dpa's in ortf, and none of them were phasey. I'm shocked.
Tamas Dragon

[hughesmr]

Originally Posted by tamasdragon

I'm curious. If I choose the mk2 capsule over the mk2h, can it be fine for stereo orchestral recordings? (Considering for main pair, so might be not placed so close to the source). So is that high end boost really necessary? Or this is where mk2sg capsule come into the picture?
Tamas Dragon

There are times you need the rise for reach. I do a lot of organ recording and the MK2S is the mic of choice of all the Schoeps omnis for me. Also, I just finished a local community orch + chorus doing complete Messiah ... 24-piece band + 60 singers and 4 soloists. Got it all with two CMC6-MK2S out front in 80cm A/B + a gentle spot on the soloists. Three mics in all, great results.

As others have said, another advantage of the MK2S rise is that, even if you need to use it in nearfield apps, you can EQ out the rise. that's better than adding a rise (with added requisite noise) to something recorded with MK2.

[Don S]

Originally Posted by tamasdragon

Yes you're right, that wasn't omnis. I'm just amazed by that the 4011 was phasey in an ortf situation. I always felt and thought that dpa is better than this. I'm really curious, because I have used other dpa's in ortf, and none of them were phasey. I'm shocked.
Tamas Dragon

Not sure why he was getting a phasey sound. I haven't seen many people who prefer the DPA in ORTF. Personally, I would reach for Schoeps (MK4) first. Maybe the phasey sound was the accuracy that he was not used to hearing.
Another for the MK41. Get a pair of these in the "sweet spot" and they will amaze.
Ben at Fifth Circle is getting a pair of the new sennheiser 8040. Maybe a review will be coming soon?

Don

[fifthcircle]

I use both Schoeps and DPAs for ORTF work here and like both for different reasons. In general, given a choice, I'll usually grab the Schoeps first, but the DPAs are certainly nothing to sneer at. We have DPAs hanging in the hall in one of the main places I work and they work great there.

My complaint about DPA is that it is so true and precise that you loose some of the impact in a recording. Putting them in ORTF isn't phasy to my ear, but rather crisp and clean in a way that if you aren't careful can get boring. They image great, but I feel like some of the front to back imaging gets lost as a result. The Schoeps give me a bit more "interest" going into the ensemble.

I would probably never own a pair of omnis as my only pair of mics. I use the Scheops MK2 and MK5 capsules for omnis and they have their good and their bad points. The MK2 is very dark and sometimes doesn't reach into the ensemble the way you'd want. It responds to EQ very well, though. The MK5 works great as a diffuse field omni, but that brightness can present problems with some ensembles.

In general, I rarely use just an A-B pair of omnis. I don't usually like the way it images and for small groups it can be a major problem. In bad rooms, you don't necessarily want a mic that will pull in that bad room sound.

If you like omnis, I'd rather get a subcardiod as I think it is much more versatile. You can't go wrong, though, with a pair of cardiods.

And yes, I have a set of the Sennheisers on order. Should get them soon, but I don't have any recordings scheduled for awhile that I can try them out on... I'll post my thoughts when I get them and can play with them.

--Ben

[summer_room]

Originally Posted by liuto

CMC5 has a gentle high pass at 30Hz with 6dB/octave, CMC6 at 20Hz but with steeper 12dB/octave. That means that below 10Hz you should expect more sound from a CMC5 again as the slope is much more gentle.

Quote from the schoeps homepage:
"The CMC 5 rolls off below 30 Hz, while with digital recording in mind, the CMC 6 is essentially flat to 20 Hz."

Can anyone explain, why the low bass roll off is better for digital than the other (or why 30 hz is better for analog)?

Thanks - jon.