Schoeps MK-2 or MK-2h ? ? ? ? ? ?

[ABBA]

Hi!

I'm about to purchase a pair of Schoeps ( probably)
but I can't decide what capsules to choose.

So I'm going to buy them all, just to be safe.

Yeah, right...

Schoeps MK-2 vs MK-2h in
close/half distance field recordings...
What do you think?

I will mainly record classical guitar from 2-4 meters
and small string ensembles 3-10 meters.

I'm worried the MK2 will sound too dark.
I'd rather reduce some HF than add (and thus get less noise).

I've just tested the Sennheiser MKH 8020 and they are
great in so many ways but too "dark" for my needs.
They also have some peculiarities compared to other mics methinks...
But really good.


ABBA

[Gaston69]

What mic pre-amps do you use, because the darkness you experience might come from there?

Please have also a look at the email correspondence below, maybe it helps you to make a decision.



Dear Mr. Matthijsse,

you exactly see the main problem when constructing a capsule. The ideal transducer would be an omni with very small diaphragm but such a capsule will show a lot of noise. A big diaphragm will show much less noise but its frequency responce will highly depend on the angle of the incoming sound. SCHOEPS uses a 13mm active diameter of the diaphragm which turned out to be the best balance between noise and linearity.

In 1995 Onno Scholtze helped us with the fine tuning of a new capsule. The result is the MK2H capsule in our Colette series. Onno Scholtze has some of these capsules but they are not extra modified. You find them in our catalogue and on our website ( SCHOEPS omnis ).


We hope this helps you further. Please do not hesitate to mail again in case of further questions.

With kind regards


Bernhard Vollmer

Head of Quality Control & Customer Care
Phone +49-721-9432021
Mail vollmer@schoeps.de
_____________________________________________ ____________

SCHOEPS Mikrofone GmbH, Spitalstr. 20, DE 76227 Karlsruhe
Amtsgericht Mannheim, HRB Nr. 102442, Geschäftsführer: Ulrich Schoeps
SCHOEPS Microphones www.schoepsclassics.com


---------------------------

Dear Ulrich Schoeps,

I would like to get some information on small diaphragms microphones. My friend Onno Scholtze explained and demonstrated me that the smaller the diaphragms of a microphone the higher the resonance frequency is which results in more depth in the stereo panorama etc. Therefore he had specially made by you a pair of modified Schoeps microphones. However he uses also DPA 4060 as there diaphragms are even smaller however they have one side effect which is noise.
Now my question is do you offer/make microphones that have the benefits of being:
small diaphragm such like for example DPA4060 less noise or as quiet as the Schoeps microphones.What I want is a very very small microphone in a AB setup for recording classical music.

Met vriendelijke groet / Best Regards, Gaston Matthijsse
__________________
"Less is More"

Acoustic Music Recordings

[ISedlacek]

MK2 is not dark at all - it sounds just natural ... I used to have MK2H - I returned it quickly, was a way too bright ... I personally much prefer to add some air later if needed than to have some extra there instantly ...

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by ISedlacek

MK2 is not dark at all - it sounds just natural ... I used to have MK2H - I returned it quickly, was a way too bright ...

That makes sense knowing that you use them close to the source - else, the MK 2 will be darker when used as main mic in the diffuse field. That's why Schoeps make several varieties of diffuse-field capsules.

That said, I've moved from a pair of diffuse-field (i.e. treble-boosted) AKGs to the free field (i.e. flat) Neumann KM 131 as my main AB mic, and I don't feel there's a lot missing...

With the MK2H, besides applying EQ, you can also tilt the capsules outwards a bit, which is what I mostly did with my AKGs. This method is a bit controversial, but I like it, it provides a touch of extra separation also...


Daniel

[Don S]

If you're planning on using them 3-10 meters, I would go with the 2H. Within a meter I would use the 2. But the bump of the H is only 2 or 3db if I remember correctly. Anyway, almost any reputable dealer should let you try both!

[ABBA]

Hello again!

Gaston69:

What mic pre-amps do you use, because the darkness you experience might come from there?

I use the Earthworks ZDT 1024. No darkness there I assure you.
The preamp has been tested many times against DAV, Millennia,
Grace, True, DACs etc with superiour results.

I wrote to Bernhard Vollmer, thanks.


Ivo:

I used to have MK2H - I returned it quickly, was a way too bright

I know where you stand on this Ivo and I respect your opinion.
At the moment you and I are corresponding privately (Michael/Sweden).



d_fu:

That said, I've moved from a pair of diffuse-field (i.e. treble-boosted) AKGs to the free field (i.e. flat) Neumann KM 131 as my main AB mic, and I don't feel there's a lot missing...

What AKGs where those? I'm interested in opinions
regarding the AKG C480/omni as well.

At the moment I am discovering annoyingly good results with a pair of
Neumann KM 183 at a few meters away.
Much to my surprise.
However they are not frequency-matched very well.
Is this a common issue or perhaps this particular pair has
been tortured and damaged...


Don:

If you're planning on using them 3-10 meters, I would go with the 2H. Within a meter I would use the 2. But the bump of the H is only 2 or 3db if I remember correctly. Anyway, almost any reputable dealer should let you try both!

Thanks Don.
Do you have personal experience of this or are you making a
presumed judgement?
Hope that didn't sound rude, I really want to know.

Reputable dealers in Sweden are not to be found I'm afraid.
Most of them haven't even heard of Schoeps.
They know of Behringer though...

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by ABBA

What AKGs where those? I'm interested in opinions
regarding the AKG C480/omni as well.

460s with the CK 62DF (diffuse field). However, the DF capsule is no longer manufactured. Never tried the regular one...

At the moment I am discovering annoyingly good results with a pair of Neumann KM 183 at a few meters away.

These are nominally like the KM 130, with a certain treble boost. Certainly not a bad mic, if you already own them and it's just that they don't match well, you could consider sending 'em home and having the diaphragms replaced. Don't know what Neumann would charge, but I've had AKG turn two rather different 414 B-TL (not TL-II) into a wonderful sounding stereo pair at a very reasonable rate.

Daniel

[Plush]

MK2 is made to be used close in to the source. It is a fantastic mic. Close is close. Far is Far.

MK2 H is a slight boost. No big deal.

YOu can make a great recording with either mic with any mic amp. The source and the room will mostly determine your sound.

[Gaston69]

I go with Plush +1

[ISedlacek]

Originally Posted by Plush

YOu can make a great recording with either mic with any mic amp. The source and the room will mostly determine your sound.

Yes, but still, if you use Behringer preamp vs say Gordon preamp, it will not be only room that will determine the final sound

[hughesmr]

Originally Posted by Don S

If you're planning on using them 3-10 meters, I would go with the 2H. Within a meter I would use the 2. But the bump of the H is only 2 or 3db if I remember correctly. Anyway, almost any reputable dealer should let you try both!

There's your recipe for success ... try them both and listen for yourself. And you should throw the MK2S in for good measure to get a complete picture and set of choices. You will not be the first person to request this comparison from a Schoeps dealer, I'm sure!

The boost in the MK2H is more subtle (in dB terms) than the MK2S, but is also in a narrower frequency band. The lift in a 2S starts around 4khZ, and the 2H closer to 6khZ.

I once heard an organ recording made in a smallish (though live) room using only MK3 ... now THAT was BRIGHT.

[johnlagrou]

ABBA, I've used both capsules (with CMC6) for years on acoustic sessions. FWIW, I find the MK2 to work best on small ensembles, where I don't need the reach. The MK2H is one of my favorite mics in small AB on large ensemble / orchestra. It's in the same league as the Gefell MK221 / Josephson 617, Sennheiser MKH20, and a few others.

I've tried the MK2S but never could find an ideal use for it - sold those capsules long ago. But I know others use them with great success. That's audio! JL

[klaukholm]

Originally Posted by ABBA

Reputable dealers in Sweden are not to be found I'm afraid.
Most of them haven't even heard of Schoeps.
They know of Behringer though...

this is a sad fact indeed. We use only danish and norwegian dealers. The swedish schoeps dealer has never once replied to my emails, and consequently we got our collection of schoeps elsewhere.

You do however have a fairly well stocked rental company in sweden!

I would have a serious look at the MKH800 for your purpose. Paired with a Grace or Millennia and you have a very clear mic, with a wonderful warmth.

[Don S]

Originally Posted by ABBA

Hello again!

Don:


Thanks Don.
Do you have personal experience of this or are you making a
presumed judgement?
Hope that didn't sound rude, I really want to know.

Reputable dealers in Sweden are not to be found I'm afraid.
Most of them haven't even heard of Schoeps.
They know of Behringer though...

I don't blame you for asking. Some people DO offer opinion without any experience. I prefered the reach of the 2H. And even then I almost always added a bit more EQ in the highs in post. After owning Schoeps for 10 years, the 2 capsules that stayed after trying most of them, was the MK21 and 2H. The 2H also has a great advantage on "community" level performances. It gave some bad choirs a very musical blend of warmth and detail. In a diffused field, I also found that placement was a little more forgiving as with some concerts, I did not have a choice where the mics were placed. I have friends that use the 2H in studio and love it as well.

[zoom]

A few years ago my decision beween different Schoeps omni capsules went in an other direction:
I wanted to choose between the MK2S and the MK2H. I've tested both and it was impossible to say which one is the more universal one. Probably the MK2S is more universal (sometimes you need the EQ in the post anyway...) but for me it was a matter of taste.
Finally I've bought a pair MK2H. These are my universal omnis now :-)

[johnlagrou]

I wanted to add one more thought. The Schoeps MK21 capsule makes an ideal "wide ORTF" setup. I probably use that as much or more than an MK2 on small ensemble or solo work.

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by johnlagrou

I wanted to add one more thought. The Schoeps MK21 capsule makes an ideal "wide ORTF" setup. I probably use that as much or more than an MK2 on small ensemble or solo work.

Good point. I've been doing something of that kind (one could also call it small AB with cardioids...) with a pair of Sennheiser MKH 40 on a number of occasions recently, with very good results. This might replace the Straus packet setup (KM 131 and Beyer 803) I've used in reverberant places, saves 2 channels...

(According to a graph in an SDC comparison in a german magazine, the MKH 40 does seem to have a slight tendency toward wide-cardioid (compared to KM 140 or MK 4 et.), which is why I decided to try it out.)

[ABBA]

Don S:

I don't blame you for asking. Some people DO offer opinion without any experience.

Exactly! I don't know why people do that. If I want to know the specifications
from the manufacturers, I can find out myself.

However, I just clicked on your link and realized that my question
regarding your experience of Schoeps was completely unnecessary.
Sorry about that and thanks for your input.


ABBA

[ABBA]

Thanks again guys.

I do find the MK21 interesting but I am a bit put off by the
higher noise. Low noise is very important for my needs.
Also the bassresponse seems to get too reduced at longer distances.

Our much appreciated slut Mr. Ivo has a very nice recording
(as usual) of a choir somewhere here with MK21 and MK2. To me the MK2-version is teh best out of the two.
I did like the focus/detail of the high frequencies and the overtones of the voices with the MK21 but
the bass and smoother overall tone (and less of the S-sounds) of the MK2 sounded more pleasing.

Once again I'm wondering if a MK2h would perhaps have been a good
in-between solution in this particular recording... or not...
Perhaps it would have been too bright.

Kjetil, thanks for your thoughts. If you can give me a good discount on the
Sennheiser MKH 800 I can purchase a pair.
About 85% off will be neccesary...

ABBA

[ABBA]

Important question for those who have compared the
Schopes MK2 vs Sennheiser MKH 8020

How do they compare sonically?
Does the MK2 have more highfrequency detail, is it brighter?


By the way -
It's really great to have these proffesional advices available.
Many thanks to all of you who help out.
It's nice to be a gearslut.

ABBA

[ISedlacek]

Originally Posted by ABBA

Thanks again guys.

I do find the MK21 interesting but I am a bit put off by the
higher noise. Low noise is very important for my needs.
Also the bassresponse seems to get too reduced at longer distances.

Our much appreciated slut Mr. Ivo has a very nice recording
(as usual) of a choir somewhere here with MK21 and MK2. To me the MK2-version is teh best out of the two.
I did like the focus/detail of the high frequencies and the overtones of the voices with the MK21 but
the bass and smoother overall tone (and less of the S-sounds) of the MK2 sounded more pleasing.

ABBA

I record extremely quiet music, often oscillating between sound and silence and never was aware of some extra noise coming from Schoeps ... this was never an issue. Another thing is - MK2 is NOT bright (MK2H , S are a bit bright). DPA 4041 is very bright, but not MK2

[Joba]

Originally Posted by ABBA

Reputable dealers in Sweden are not to be found I'm afraid.
Most of them haven't even heard of Schoeps.
They know of Behringer though...

Call Polteknik, they are the swedish Schoeps dealer. I have nothing to complain about there service. Use a telephone, not a computer.

I have MK2H and MK21. 2H can indeed be percived a bit bright used close up, but it depend on your preference.

If absolute lowest noise is important defenitely go omni, the subjective noise difference between MK21 and MK2H is surprisingly large considering their specs. Not that I have had any real world noise problems with MK21.

Among lowest noise of all mics would be MKH20 (maybe MKH8020 as well?) PM me if you are interested in buying my pair that i'm not using enough to keep.

[hughesmr]

Originally Posted by ABBA

I do find the MK21 interesting but I am a bit put off by the
higher noise. Low noise is very important for my needs.
Also the bassresponse seems to get too reduced at longer distances.

I use MK21 all the time and cannot imagine anyone ever having a noise issue with them (or any Schoeps capsule, really).... and for the sources you cite that you will be recording, you will not perceive any lack of bass response. In fact, if you usually record on location, you would probably benefit from the MK21's very gentle rolloff in the LF. Omnis in a live space with very quiet sources occasionally benefit from a little HPF anyway to clean up the subsonic muck.

I posted a recording in another thread (thread title "Just because...") a few days ago I made of the Britten Ceremony of Carols ... chorus and harp in a packed church, using only MK21 as a widely spaced A/B pair more than 20' out from the source in a revererant space. Worked like a charm to my ears! They are a wonderful and highly versatile capsule in every respect.

Mike

[Don S]

Originally Posted by hughesmr

I use MK21 all the time and cannot imagine anyone ever having a noise issue with them (or any Schoeps capsule, really).... and for the sources you cite that you will be recording, you will not perceive any lack of bass response. In fact, if you usually record on location, you would probably benefit from the MK21's very gentle rolloff in the LF. Omnis in a live space with very quiet sources occasionally benefit from a little HPF anyway to clean up the subsonic muck.

I posted a recording in another thread (thread title "Just because...") a few days ago I made of the Britten Ceremony of Carols ... chorus and harp in a packed church, using only MK21 as a widely spaced A/B pair more than 20' out from the source in a revererant space. Worked like a charm to my ears! They are a wonderful and highly versatile capsule in every respect.

Mike

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand the noise issue. ABBA, are you hearing this or getting info from specs? I've never noticed anything but great sound from mine.
But I did want to add that the MK21 is great for many uses. I recently started using them for wings and love the extra reach. I really like them as mains in a modified ORTF. Mike, I couldn't agree more with your last sentence!

[hughesmr]

ABBA, have you visited here? You may find the "Ensemble" page enlightening...

Schoeps Microphone Showroom

[mljung]

Originally Posted by ABBA

Important question for those who have compared the
Schopes MK2 vs Sennheiser MKH 8020

How do they compare sonically?
Does the MK2 have more highfrequency detail, is it brighter?

ABBA

I want to know too - has anyone compared these and if so - what were your findings..?

[resound]

Ditto here on the 8020 vs. MK2 comparisons.

[achabloop5080]

Originally Posted by Don S

But I did want to add that the MK21 is great for many uses. I recently started using them for wings and love the extra reach. I really like them as mains in a modified ORTF.

I often read of "modified ORTF" or "wider ORTF" using 2 Schoeps MK21s.
Some more information would be very appreciated.
I'd also like to know if this wider ORTF technique could be used on classical grand piano with better results than spaced AB configurations.
Thank you

[Don S]

Originally Posted by achabloop5080

I often read of "modified ORTF" or "wider ORTF" using 2 Schoeps MK21s.
Some more information would be very appreciated.
I'd also like to know if this wider ORTF technique could be used on classical grand piano with better results than spaced AB configurations.
Thank you

Absolutely. My modified ORTF technique is simple. It is AB on end of the scale and textbook ORFT on the other. As the mics come closer together, the angle increases. A good example (depending on the size of the sound stage and esnsemble) is 12 inches at 100 degrees. Your ears will tell you any other changes you need. Too close together/angle too small, the sound will bunch up in the middle. Too far apart/ angle too large, will result in hole, not unlike with omnis.

[achabloop5080]

Originally Posted by Don S

Absolutely. My modified ORTF technique is simple. It is AB on end of the scale and textbook ORFT on the other. As the mics come closer together, the angle increases. A good example (depending on the size of the sound stage and esnsemble) is 12 inches at 100 degrees. Your ears will tell you any other changes you need. Too close together/angle too small, the sound will bunch up in the middle. Too far apart/ angle too large, will result in hole, not unlike with omnis.

Great explanation and very interesting arguments.
I'll try this technique very soon....
Thank you