Schoeps CMTS 501 v. Crown SASS v. Rode NT5 on Piano

[NorseHorse]

In the last month, I've had two opportunities to record a sudent playing audition / recital pieces on a Steinway in the recital hall of the College of William and Mary. The hall is horrible, but the gigs were extremely low key ("set-up and go"). Since I had four channels (R-44) and they weren't live recordings, I figured it would be beneficial to set-up two pairs of mics on both sessions. The more I can compare, the better I can get to know the mics I have at my disposal.

Because I don't care for the hall, I put the mics relatively close on both occassions - about three/four feet from the lid of the piano, which was open. I'm posting these not because I think they're fantastic, but because I'd really like to hear more thoughts on the differences / preferences of my fellow Remotesters. And I thought there might be a few of you out there that would be interested in hearing the differences as well.

First set (Bach):

1. Schoeps CMTS 501 in m/s
2. Crown SASS (binaural)

Second set (Scarlatti):

2. Schoeps CMTS 501 in x/y
2. Rode NT-5s in x/y

You're also welcome to share you thoughts comparing the m/s and x/y. The 501 was approximately in the same position on each occassion. Related thread: Microphone shootout (classical piano)

[jnorman]

hiya norse - i thought the schoeps in MS was the best sounding of the group. i did not care for the SASS much. of the two XY pairs, i, unbelievably, liked the NT5s better than the schoeps. i did feel like all mics were a tad too close, even though i use mics closer than that quite often.

for the MS schoeps, i would have emphasized the S signals a bit more - as it is, it would work fine in a mix, but i thought it was a tad localized for a solo piano and could use a little more width. i expected to like the schoeps XY most, so i was a little surprised. thanks for posting.

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

Second set (Scarlatti):

2. Schoeps CMTS 501 in x/y
2. Rode NT-5s in x/y

[/URL]

One of the channels of the CMTS 501 seems to be have incorrect polarity. It sounds really weird until I flip the polarity of either left or right channel when playing back. Just a heads-up.

[Mats H]

And oh, thanks for the demos, always nice to hear microphone comparisons with the same source material

[NorseHorse]

Thanks a lot for catching that. I hadn't done any type of processing to flip phase anywhere, so I'm not quite sure what happened. Perhaps it could be because the Schoeps capsules are stacked vertically and the waves were coming at an angle? They have about 1" between them. I've tested it on more distance applications without a problem, but perhaps being close to the piano is testy. I was able to get the NT5s nearly touching each other on the other hand. I could also check my cables, but I won't have time for that soon.

Updated Schoeps Scarlatti now posted.

[BrianHanke]

I prefer the Schoeps XY sample over all the others. The Rodes sound nice on headphones, but they come across as being a little thin on my monitors. Between the Bach samples I like the Crown better. The sound from the Schoeps isn't as well-placed as I would like, probably mostly due to it being MS. The piano has a great classic Steinway sound!

[mathieujm]

Nice piano sound... with the schoeps. They are more dynamic, natural, accurate than the others.

Did you add some reverb ?

JMM

[cortisol]

I'm of the same opinion as BrianHanke.

Bach

1. Schoeps CMTS 501 in m/s - not bad and yet NQR!
2. Crown SASS (binaural) - quite good but maybe a touch too big in the bass register

Scarlatti

3. Schoeps CMTS 501 in x/y - tonally pleasing and carried me into the music
4. Rode NT-5s in x/y - articulate but a bit too hard on the transients and with an open but thin soundscape.

I'm mulling over whether to get myself some Soundman OKM Rock's or go for some of the cheaper DPA's and build a Jecklin disc... And so I was pleased to hear the SASS mic as a good binaural option.

Thanks for posting NorseHorse.thumbsup

Peace,
cortisol

[NorseHorse]

I ended up going with the Crown SASS for the Bach session. I liked the Schoeps more on the quiet parts due to the thicker low-end, but the SASS continued to sing clearly and intelligibly on louder sections. It was also dead-on accurate in tone.

Went with the Schoeps on the XY comparison.

[Teddy Ray]

Originally Posted by jnorman

. of the two XY pairs, i, unbelievably, liked the NT5s better than the schoeps.

Why is it unbelieveable?? Tony Faulkner endorses them. I hope that one day we can move away from name brands and pricing and focus only on what we hear. not saying that that is the basis for your "surprise" but...in general, it affects us as a whole way too much..

[mljung]

Originally Posted by Teddy Ray

Why is it unbelieveable?? Tony Faulkner endorses them. I hope that one day we can move away from name brands and pricing and focus only on what we hear. not saying that that is the basis for your "surprise" but...in general, it affects us as a whole way too much..

I hope so too!


::
Mads

[didier.brest]

In Bach I prefer the Crown that achieves a more natural stereo image. The attacks from the Schoeps are sharper, which I like less also.

In Scarlatti the Schoeps sounds to me by far better than the NT5.

[Welkin]

Thanks for the comparison. These are really educational. I prefer the Schoeps in both cases. The sound is three-dimensional and effortless. Especially the NT5s sound dull and mono in comparison. That's a shame for me as I already have a pair of NT5s but don't have any Schoeps.

[rumleymusic]

Why is it unbelieveable?? Tony Faulkner endorses them. I hope that one day we can move away from name brands and pricing and focus only on what we hear. not saying that that is the basis for your "surprise" but...in general, it affects us as a whole way too much.

Well personally, I liked the Schoeps in this sample much more than the NT5's. The NT5 have the capability of being fantastic microphones, but they need special treatment. They are great on woodwinds and strings if you can tame the upper mids. They can be very good on close piano with the omni heads and a good amount of high end boost. They are just plain average on brass or heavily distorted instruments no matter what you do, so I wouldn't recommend them in that application. For the price, no one should complain.

Most people would rather just get a Schoeps which works well by itself 80% of the time and be done with it. But if you have a little post production creativity, your options increase.

[rumleymusic]

I noticed with the NT5 sounding mono comment that he was right. The imaging on the NT5 sample was much narrower in my pan/phase display than the Schoeps. Could have been a placement thing, or just the fact that NT5's have a very uniform pattern that needs a wider angle to achieve the same separation.

I had a little fun with the scarlatti samples, sorry

Which is which?

[NorseHorse]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

Thanks a lot for catching that. I hadn't done any type of processing to flip phase anywhere, so I'm not quite sure what happened.

The quote above is in reference to one of the XY channels being initially reversed in phase. Well, several months later, I've encountered the problem again and finally figured out what the problem is. One of the channels is inverted on my 5-pin to 3-pin XLR cable! Well, I suppose it could be actually be reversed in the microphone, but I'll give Schoeps the benefit of the doubt here.

This weekend I did some preamp comparisons while traveling and needed two channels of identical pick-up in the exact same spots, so I used the Schoeps with both capsule set to cardioid. I just went to listen to the results, and it's easy to hear/see the inverse polarity. Flip phase - problem solved. I use this mic pretty much exclusively for m/s and blumlein m/s, which is why the problem hadn't come up before.

[Corran]

Interestingly I have the same problem with my stereo ribbon. I'm not sure if it's a cable thing or a mic thing (though I suppose it doesn't matter). I need to sit down and figure out which channel so I have the phase right on both rather than wrong on both! Did you figure out which side is wrong?

[avebr]

Originally Posted by Corran

Interestingly I have the same problem with my stereo ribbon. I'm not sure if it's a cable thing or a mic thing (though I suppose it doesn't matter). I need to sit down and figure out which channel so I have the phase right on both rather than wrong on both! Did you figure out which side is wrong?

+1

I used an R88 (not mine) on a studio session, and during mixdown I found the same problem...

I'm sure it's a cable issue (original?), as I always double-check mic positioning.


all the best,
ave.

(the same does not happen on my beloved and 'from the good ol'days' VP88 - both custom and original cables)

[Piedpiper]

I thought the NT5s sounded flat and boxy, no finesse in comparison to the Schoeps. I preferred the SASS-P except that it shouldn't be used so close. The timing difference between the capsules is too obvious. I think you could have come back another foot or two without introducing too much of the negative qualities of the room.

Did you ever get around to modding the Crown?

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by Teddy Ray

Tony Faulkner endorses them.

Actually it's the Rode *omni* head that Tony likes.

[NorseHorse]

And to further complicate the discussion, jnorman had listened to the samples when the phase was still incorrect on the Schoeps. Oh well! As they say, "It takes a village to troubleshoot".

Haven't modified the Crown yet. Still a possibility though...

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

Haven't modified the Crown yet. Still a possibility though...

Lemme know if you want help.

[JEGG]

Well, the Rode sounds very close to the Schoeps, yet there is something just not right and irritating about the sound. I would not want to listen to that mic and that piano. On other occasions, the Rode cardioid has sound sort of synthetic to me. Here it's just irritating, not synthetic.

The Schoeps sound right.

Is this the "Mk II" version of the SASS? The MII is capable of some good results, but not so in this case and/or in this position, IMO.

For the record, note that the earlier versions of the first generation (non "Pro" non R44) R-4 had one channel incorrectly in opposite polarity. I hope it's safe to assume they didn't repeat their mistake.

I'm not as enthused about the piano as other writers are. But it gave telling results with the recordings, or would that be the other way around?

Thanks very much for posting the recordings!

[aracu]

A valuable comparison. I found it interesting to see how much undesirable information the boundry mics left out of the recording compared with the other mics.

[hanuman]

I never seen that Schoeps:
Pictures by dbx786 - Photobucket

[mljung]

Just listened

On headphones:
All sounded pretty good, but the Scarlatti xy's were too narrow!


On speakers:
Bach: both Schoeps and Crown had something going for them. With this microphone placement and room I think I would pick Schoeps

Scarlatti: Schoeps sounded much better than Røde to my ears.

Overall I think I prefer the Schoeps xy, although I still think it's too narrow/mono sounding [also on speakers]
If the acoustic were top notch I'm sure the more spacious sounding Crown Sass or Schoeps m-s would be my pick.

::
Mads

[NorseHorse]

Same room, same piano, same deal - quick audition recording, this time for a high schooler.

The 501 and Apollo were set in blumlein configuration about about six feet out from the piano. The 501 was less than an inch in front of the Apollo.

SAMPLES: No compression, no EQ, no verb. Both channels run into the Edirol R-44 at 24-bit, 44.1kHz. When I finish this, I'll be bringing the master gain up.

I'll wait to hear your thoughts before sharing my own. But for the record, the student also did some jazz trombone pieces accompanied by piano, and the Apollo slayed the 501.

[didier.brest]

The 501 sounds more present because it is edgier. By comparison the attacks of the Apollo are softened. Also the Apollo is more focused on the middle of the stereo image, so sounds more distant. The Apollo could be more comfortable for a long listening, the 501 is immediately more impressive but lacks the focus of the Apollo. I prefer the relax listening on headphones (Beyer 990) from the Apollo.

[videoteque]

Is this Apollo we are listening??

[Piedpiper]

I found the Schoeps to be far superior. The Apollo drops off above 6k in classic ribbon style. It's nice and warm but I thought it was less focussed and the Schoeps more incisive and transparent revealing a lot more harmonic content. I like the distance.

BTW, the Beyers are a very bright headphone, complimenting the roll off of the ribbon mic. The Schoeps is pretty flat and natural actually.