first schoeps pair for stereo recording: the best solution

[klaukholm]

Originally Posted by d_fu

Depending on the organ and the repertoire, you may lose some sub bass this way - but if an ORTF sounds beter in a specific situation, you can always add a bit of LP filtered bass from one or two omnis.

The recordings I am thinking of had less than ideal situations. One included very loud brass and the other one was in a awkward space to record in.

[fifthcircle]

Originally Posted by John Willett

I agree with what you say that it is a standard and universal cardioid mic., just I'm surprised that you don't agree with the fact that it is a little bass-light. Yes, I know all directional mics roll off the bass earlier than omnis and that an omni has at least an exra octave in the bottom end.

We aren't talking omnis here- also compared to your favorite 8040, the MK4 is light... In my experiences, however, in many situations, there is too much going on at the low end with the 8040 and I find a need to equalize it out or switch to a microphone that isn't adding so much down below.

With my Sennheiser hat well and truly "off" I would say that the best SDC cardioids are the Schoeps, DPA, Sennheiser MKH 40 and 8040, Neumann KM 140 and maybe a Gefell (model I forget). All these mics have different characteristics and different strengths and weaknesses and you choose what works best for you.

I do hope this sets the record straight.

Nice to see your "hat off." Sometimes I wish it happened more often...

The MK4 was the first quality cardiod that I felt works in all situations. As much as I like the other mics in your list here, I would not call them all purpose. The DPA is probably the closest to the Schoeps in that regard. Neumann 140, Sennheiser MKH40 and 8040 all have issues that can get in the way of all purpose situations. I use all of these regularly and if I had to make a suggestion of something that works everywhere- I'd say Schoeps is your best bet. For specific applications, there may be some better choices, but the Schoeps will work well everywhere without compromise of sound.

--Ben

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by fifthcircle

Nice to see your "hat off." Sometimes I wish it happened more often...

Actually it's off most of the time and what I post comes from what I use, believe and like.

Just because I happen to like Sennheiser MKH has nothing at all to do with the fact that I work for Sennheiser - in fact I tend to tone down what I really think as people will take it wrongly.

My passion is good music and recording it in a way that captures the passion of the performance in the acoustic it is performed and the equipment I choose, I choose because it does that job best to my ears.

[hughesmr]

Originally Posted by klaukholm

The recordings I am thinking of had less than ideal situations. One included very loud brass and the other one was in a awkward space to record in.

One organ recording I know of that uses subcards only was that Michael Murray Vierne disc on Telarc at St-Ouen in Rouen, France. Nothing but MK21. St-Ouen is a huge space, 7-8 sec reverb tail, with a Cavaille-Coll organ that can really pump out the bass energy.

[luigichelli]

looking at the freq response plot (yeah i know, i know.... :P ) we can see that mk4s are very flat in the higher octaves.....could this be a problem in a placement near the reverberation radius? mk21's plot reminds more to an mk2h, more suited for this application.

[bove]

You really should try a few pairs out. Then, when you pick one, you will feel great about your purchase!

When I was looking for a first pair of nice microphones, I had the dealer send me a pair of Schoeps with MK2, MK21, and MK4 capsules. After trying them all out on a few groups I record in a venue I frequently use, using a variety of positioning, and listening to the results, I chose the MK21.

[Plush]

By the way, may I just say that I do not hold the Naxos organ recording I mentioned as a great example of a great recording. I actually think that the sound I got was too close and too loud. It was 20 years ago. I probably was stoned when I did it. I know we were drinking. . .

However, it does sell huge numbers and it has been reviewed well.

Just wanted to say. . .

[7rojo7]

If you get the 21s, get 3, I have 3 21's and 3 5's.
I use them often like this: 5's cardioids xy over an omni (xyo) and 3 21's as LCR (ABC?) 'flankers' (spots for the winds, front line).
I sometimes use Brauner Phantom V's (I have 3) in place of the 5's when I can't fly anything (opera)(main array infront of the podium, spots in the back, fly 3 21's above the stage or if the lights buzz too much, at the lip of the stage).
I have the CCM(n°)lg versions of the Schoeps which have lower headroom but are quieter and easy to fly.
Placement is the key. A laser measure is helpful
I always 'ping' my setups to calibrate any eventual delays
The xy over omni works where you would normally put a tree. the flankers are placed in front (a meter from the podium at musician's height) of the ensemble in conjunction to the main array, these get delayed to the main array.
As for the difference between omnis and cardioids for main arrays? If you have a very live space, cardiods work better. The inverse square vs. directionality, critical distance is the determining factor.
Wide omnis can also be used 'back to back' to make a 'stereo omni', add another wide omni down facing over the orch and you have a 'coincident' Decca tree, nice experiment. I prefer the 'xyo'. I use this sometimes for drums as well, the secret is how much omni to use.
Apart from classical music, the CCM5lg's are bangup for 3 mic drums xy over the kit and the omni in front about a meter.
break a leg.

[Peacock]

Originally Posted by fafalio

i have decided to buy a pair of schoeps for stereo recording.
i will record overall string quartet or duo piano-classical voice.
for you what is the best capsule to start?
consider probably sometimes i will record in good acoustic, sometimes not so good.
thanks a lot.
best regards Alessandro.

We like the mk21. Its clear but dark too. Simply a great capsule.

[vitreouswindows]

Not wishing to hijack the thread, has anyone compared the Schoeps, DPA, and Shure KSM 137 mic? I never associated Shure with anything nearing the calibre of Schoeps and DPA, but I'd heard some surprising responses from experienced professionals about the performance of the KSM 137. Apparently they patterned it after the Schoeps. Any experiences here?

[boojum]

FWIW, I faced the same dilemma. I decided on Schoeps because they had the best rep out there among folks who were recording remotes. I have not been disappointed with them in the past year. They are very kind to strings and voices. I have not done much with them on piano. They were my first "pro" mics and I fed an SD 722 with them, straight. It works, it is light, easy to operate and works well in the field.

Had I the luxury and purse I may have gotten a top-flilght pre-amp for the Schoeps but what I have gives me good sound. And the folks who get the recordings are pleased.

I sure would like to hear a comparison between the Shure and the CMC64's, though. Anyone know of any??

Cheers

PS - Next time you see Pavarotti singing, note the mics. ;o)

[Plush]

Yes, of course, I have done many comparisons of the Shure KSM 137 and 141 series to Schoeps. Shure based the 137 (cardioid) and the 141 (switchable cardioid/omni) on the current Schoeps CMC64 and CMC65.

The Shure is a copy of the Schoeps. I know this because I was involved in the development and refinement of the voicing of the sound of these Shure mics which are built near my house. I kept telling them to make it a less bright sound than the prototypes. They did follow the suggestions.

The differences are that the Shure has a much thinner diaphragm and is a little bit brighter sounding than the Schoeps. Also, you cannot switch capsules on the Shure mics.

Shure KSM strengths include super fast response to transients, neutral sound and a transformerless class A mic amplifier. (a la Schoeps) The cardioid pattern is very good in the sense that off axis sound is rendered well tonally.
The omni pattern on the KSM 141 is a true omni pattern and not one derived from two capsules. The switchable omni/cardioid on the 141 is made with a baffle. (again
a la Schoeps) The Shure mics are made in Wheeling , IL by Americans---made in USA. There are NO CHINESE PARTS at all.

The Shures are very good mics indeed. You can do top quality work with them.
I particularly like them for percussion, timpani, bell tree and glock. They shine on marimba, xylo. and ringing things. As a main pair, they are the poor man's Schoeps.
On massed strings you cannot go wrong with them. Piano pick-ups sound nice with them.
Try them and see.

On the down side, you get good mics for what you pay but the Shures are not of true Schoeps quality. Schoeps have more refinement in the sound and more flexibility as a mic system.

[Jim vanBergen]

Originally Posted by boojum

PS - Next time you see Pavarotti singing, note the mics. ;o)

Maestro Pavarotti. We will miss him. I was recording opera at NYC's Lincoln Center they day after he passed last year, and all my singers were devastated.

But yes, he always....always used Schoeps.

[David Spearritt]

But yes, he always....always used Schoeps.

I think a lot of this decision was driven by the small, neat, grey, very unobtrusive and beautiful mechanical arrangement of the stalk mountings which were ideal for TV production demands of being as "out of the way" as possible and not to disturb the visuals. Also the twin stalk, for redundancy on those night of night's recordings like the 10 tenors, was also impressively unobtrusive.

This is a big part of Schoeps use in such cases.

[Stefanizzi]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

I think a lot of this decision was driven by the small, neat, grey, very unobtrusive and beautiful mechanical arrangement of the stalk mountings which were ideal for TV production demands of being as "out of the way" as possible and not to disturb the visuals.
[...]

Yes David, you are right: the visuals had primary importance.

Regards

[desotoslo]

Originally Posted by Plush

Rubsam, Van Geest and myself were scheduled to fly to Oberlin Ohio to do the work.

Wow, cool. I went there. Finney Chapel or Warner Concert Hall?

David