Comparative Samples - MC930, KM184, AT4051, and XXX

[jnorman]

As promised, i have done a mic shootout with four pairs of SDCs. Two sets of recordings, both flute and piano duo material. the first piece is from the Medieval Suite by Katherine Hoover, and the second is more traditional Mozart Concerto No 1.

I did not have time during a real session to do this, so I had to just "catch" a couple players for 5 minutes yesterday, and made them sight read these two pieces, so, they are not rehearsed, and are a little rough, but hopefully adequate for this testing.

the four pairs of mics include the Beyer MC930s, Neumann KM184s, AT4051s, and one unidentified pair thrown in to test your ears. mics are set up are ORTF pairs about 7 feet from the flute and maybe 10 feet from piano (flute standing in front of piano). No EQ, but i did add a tad of room reverb.

i am not going to tell which mics are which, but medieval 1 are the same mics as mozart 1, etc.

so i would like for you to both rank the four pairs of mics in order of preference, and also try to identify which mics you think are which. you must use your ears carefully trying to guess what the 4th pair of mics might be :-)

here ya go...

[NorseHorse]

Thanks! Downloading pronto.

[time elapsed]

Medieval in order of preference:

1 - I really like the imaging. I'm torn between 1 and 3, but 3 sounds more "recorded". The soundscape seems most natural to me in 1. Flute sounds great.
3 - Flute sounds fuller than 2. Schoepsy, perhaps. I like the piano here a little more than sample 1.
2 - Has a little less air/breathe than 3. Sounds more "world music".
4 - Just sounds cheap (well, relatively anyway ). Gritty maybe?

BTW, the placement sounds different in all these samples. How close were these microphones placed?

Also, I had to reverse the L and R in sample 2.

Power condition is down at the moment, so I'm listening over my Direct Isolation headphones. Pleasing tone, but not what you'd call transparent.

[BrianHanke]

After a quick listen on both monitors and headphones I'd rank 2 as the cleanest and most polished-sounding. Both 1 and 3 impart a certain amount of "musicality" that I find pleasing (although 3 may go a touch overboard in that department on the Hoover). Number 4 sounds dull and cheap. I have no idea which brand is which... I fully expect to be surprised at the results!

Edit: Just for fun, I'm going to say Neumann is 2, Beyer is 1, and AT is either 3 or 4. Looking forward to finding out the results!

[jnorman]

thanks for the comments. i agree, these are very unfinished, not at all what i would send out. these are completely raw files - the intent was to see exactly what the mics, stock, actually capture, without any benefit of what my ears might tell me to do during post to make them sound more pleasing. i have, of course, fiddled around with some EQ correction here and there, and it really isnt very hard to make each pair of these mics sound pretty solid. the pair you each did not like actually sounds pretty nice with a bit of EQ.

the pairs were all pretty concentric, as best i could, and pretty evenly spaced for the players, but i can also here slight differences even from those very minor differences in placement - its funny that way, huh? i think they could have all been another couple feet out, but after spending many years doing nothing but close micing stuff, it is always hard for me to keep thinking of moving mics further out...

[Ian Mac]

could you put them up as wav please

[jnorman]

ian - will do that in the morning.

[Corran]

I only listened to the Mozart. Here's a flute player's perspective:

#4 had the smoothest sound on the flute I think. So that's probably the one I'd pick. Listening to the piano, #1 sounded a little thin, maybe a bit more roll-off in the bass.

They all sound pretty comparable, but yeah I'm going to go with #4 for best overall, but #2 had a quality I liked, though honestly I am listening on cheap desktop speakers since I'm out of town at the moment at my parents house. Will check this out again when I have my real monitors set up. I might like #2 better at that time.

[jnorman]

btw - in order to maintain as much consistency as possible, the mics are all running through a borrowed MOTU 8-pre, to allow the same mic pres for each mic. i felt like the MOTU pres were pretty grainy sounding, but i dint have any other choices to provide 8 of the same preamps for the testing.

brian - interesting take on the flute sound for mic set #4. the more i listen to these samples, i keep changing my mind.

norse and brian - the schoeps rep is going to not like you much if it turns out #4 mics are cmc64s... OTOH, mics #4 might be the mc930s, or they could be mxl 603s or C1000s, or DPA 4011s, or somesuch - who knows :-)

[Corran]

Well, I tried my new CMC64's on flute briefly when I first got them, and my (very unscientific) conclusion was that they were a little harsh on flute. So I'm assuming #4 isn't a pair of Schoeps.

I would have gotten to listen to these samples tonight but my new place is still getting fixed up. Rain has caused the paint not to dry so I can't setup yet.

[BrianHanke]

Originally Posted by jnorman

norse and brian - the schoeps rep is going to not like you much if it turns out #4 mics are cmc64s... OTOH, mics #4 might be the mc930s, or they could be mxl 603s or C1000s, or DPA 4011s, or somesuch - who knows :-)

The suspense is killing me!

[jnorman]

wav files for the medieval suite tracks, as requested.

Hey Steve - doesnt want to let me upload the wav files - says there is missing security token or something. what should i try?

[Remoteness]

This is the first time I've heard of such a thing.
I'm sorry to say, I'm not sure what you can do, but..

As a test, try to upload something else like a jpg or something so we can see if it's a global problem or just with wav files...

Originally Posted by jnorman

wav files for the medieval suite tracks, as requested.

Hey Steve - doesnt want to let me upload the wav files - says there is missing security token or something. what should i try?

I just uploaded a jpg with no problem.

[sunflute]

Originally Posted by Corran

I only listened to the Mozart. Here's a flute player's perspective:

#4 had the smoothest sound on the flute I think. So that's probably the one I'd pick. Listening to the piano, #1 sounded a little thin, maybe a bit more roll-off in the bass.

They all sound pretty comparable, but yeah I'm going to go with #4 for best overall, but #2 had a quality I liked, though honestly I am listening on cheap desktop speakers since I'm out of town at the moment at my parents house. Will check this out again when I have my real monitors set up. I might like #2 better at that time.

I also just listened to the Mozart and I agree with Corran, the best mic for flute in this scenario is #4. I really can't stand to listen to the 9-10K noise that is being captured out of the other mics. That noise is the excess air from the mouthpiece of the player as he/she vibrates the air and unfortunately it makes it very distracting to the listener. In real life (a concert hall) that noise gets blended with the distance. That's why ribbons are sooo great on flute, because most ribbons start to dip at about 5-6k and by the time it gets to 10K it is about 9-10dB lower (a natural eq).

Anyways I am curious about the results.

Thank you for posting James,

Peace
Marco

[jnorman]

i have to tell you i am most intrigued by these reeponses. i know norse and brain both have good ears, and both felt mics #4 were not in the same league as the first three sets. then brian and marco both weigh in indicating that #4 was the best flute sound, and they are both flutists, marco in particular being quite well known.

funny...

[NorseHorse]

To clarify on #4, it wasn't the EQ / tonal balance that bothered me. It was the lack a smoothness (resolution?) in the mid-range. Sounded dirty / scratchy compared to the others to me. (Also, this is all in reference to the Medieval piece, not the Mozart.) Looking forward to the revelation. Is #4 an AT4022 omni pair?

[sunflute]

Well, I have been thinking about the following lately....

with Flute..... Could it be a question of technique instead of which sdc mic? meaning that if I am going to record up close I use ribbons but that if I am in a concert hall and the mics are at a fair distance, then I can use a SDC pair?

I am questioning this as I am getting ready to record in a church and wondering if I should go back to SDC, or have a blend between ribbons and sdc.

Peace
Marco

[Corran]

Marco, you mentioned ribbons having a "natural EQ" so don't forget that you can in fact use some EQ in post to get the sound you are looking for. I've generally had good results this way.

I think the real problem is how some mics capture that critical frequency area, not the fact that they do at all.

[joelpatterson]

I checked out the medieval-alia. #1 seems one-dimensional, distant, flattish. #2 & #3 have un-nerving 'chalky artifacts' that seem like some weirdness happening right at the capsules. #4 sounds deeper and fuller, to me, anyways...

[sunflute]

Thank you Bryan, You are correct in that some mics are better than others in this area, of the SDC that I've tried had I had the best experiences with the MKH 20, MKH 40 and the MKH 800. Also the JW modded C460B.

Regarding Eq, although I've done this in my recordings (Eq around that frequency) I feel it's best if I can capture the natural sound right off the bat.

Originally Posted by Corran

Marco, you mentioned ribbons having a "natural EQ" so don't forget that you can in fact use some EQ in post to get the sound you are looking for. I've generally had good results this way.

I think the real problem is how some mics capture that critical frequency area, not the fact that they do at all.

[Corran]

Yeah of course choosing the right mic for the job is the best plan! It's just that while I like ribbons on flute, when they are used in a distant-miking situation with such a soft instrument the ribbon just needs an impossible amount of gain. And is therefore noisy.

Last recording I did of a recital I gave, the ribbon had so much gain I ended up getting a radio station very clearly through it no matter the position. Old church didn't have enough shielding.

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this recording I posted in a thread a few months ago. It's of my professor and I love the sound. Chain was two Earthworks QTC-1's about 40cm apart, 6-8ft in front of the performers in an okay concert hall: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attac...flutepiano.mp3

[sunflute]

Bryan, very nice performance and very nice recording as well. The piano overpowers the flute sometimes in the loud sections but not too bad. I wonder how it would have sounded with a great stereo ribbon microphone, like the Royer active one (SF-24) or the Crowley & Tripp microphones.

A thing to keep in mind about flute playing......when we play with "vibrato" we produce a modulation of the air stream in order to produce a corresponding change within the body of the instrument. This change (back and forth) of the air is felt at the mouthpiece and this results in that frequency of air that resides at about 10k......this air is NOT the sound of the flute. The sounds from the instrument reside much lower than that. Unfortunately when a flute player is not properly recorded this air is sometimes louder than the vibrating sound within the tube and it is as if it replaces the sound of the instrument.

The reason I like sample #4 posted by James is that it is the only sample (of the 4) where you can actually begin to feel the vibration of the flute and not the vibrating air.

Your recording is quite nice, specially in the lower register of the flute but when the player begins to climb registers it becomes a bit distracting.

If you want some samples of greatly recorded flute players please refer to a recording of Emmanuel Pahud of the Berlin Phil, playing the same piece you posted (Pierre Sancan - Sonatine) in an Album called "Paris". Also the recordings done by Philips of Slovenian Flutist Irena Grafenauer are wonderful examples of great capture of flute sounds.

Thank you for the link, Peace.

[krs]

1 and 3 are similar (3 is a bit louder). 3 has has a nicer off axis response and a smoother top end (doesn't bring out the breath sounds quite as much as 1). I do hear what Marco is saying about the breath but honestly I think this can be addressed with placement.

2 is ok.

#4 I would not use personally

3 is my pick. (That hall has a crazy slapback!)

[666666]

Reserving comments for after higher quality clips are heard.

[jnorman]

after some of these comments, i went back with a couple of the pairs and did some additional recording with some different preamps. wow, what a difference - way cleaner and more accurate sounding. the MOTU did at least mess up all the samples to the same degree, but please remind me to never buy a MOTU 8-pre...

thanks to all of you for providing feedback on the samples. i will identify the pairs of mics in the next day or so.

[jnorman]

oh what the heck:

#1 mics are the AT4051s
#2 mics are the KM184s
#3 mics are the MC930s
#4 mics are Avantone CK1's ($99 each)

i am quite surprised at how all over the board your responses to these samples have been. for myself, i am also surprised at how differently the samples translate on various monitors. on my studio monitors, i clearly prefer the 184s and 4051s, with the 930s being a little over the top on bottom end, and the CK1 being a little thin for my ears. on my bose system at the office, they all sound pretty good to me, with few significant diofferences - i would have a hard time choosing. on my wifes studio monitors, the 4051s and 930s win, with the 184s being a little thin, and the ck1s sounding much like the 184s. odd odd odd.

again, all four pairs were set up at around 8 feet out from the flute, and maybe 10 feet away from the piano.

i will add that with minor touches of EQ here and there, i am able to make all four of the samples sound very similar, and all four tend to do better with some top end rolled off. the 930s need a little bottom rolled off, and the 184s and CK1s need a slight boost around 100hz. i was most surprised at the KM184s - i have had 3 pairs of 184s before, and never liked them as spot mics. i expected the 184s to be too thin at 10 ffeet out, but i was pleasantly surprised by their performance - they were not as bright as i expected, and the low end was not nearly as thin as i expected - they are actually pretty good sounding mics. the top end freq response on the MC930s was also a little unexpected to me - just a totally different kind of sound with no lift in the normal 6-8khz range, and a fair amount of lift in the 12-15 khz range.

next up, i am going to provide some comparative samples of a couple of ORTF pairs at around 10 feet out vs a pair of close mics on the piano and a close ribbon on the flute. that should be fun.

[BrianHanke]

Very interesting! The biggest issue for me with the 930s was that the piano was so boomy in the lower-mid range. That quality was more proportional with the 4051s and not at all an issue with the 184s. In this case I definitely would have chosen the Neumanns, but I'm sure some selective EQ pretty much levels the playing field.

By the way, this reminds me how much I tend to like Audio-Technica mics. The 4051s certainly sound excellent in this sample, and I remember really liking a 4050 that I tried a while ago. Given their relatively low price point, I think they offer more value than many comparable offerings (I'm thinking especially of AKG mics).

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by jnorman

#4 mics are Avantone CK1's ($99 each)

I knew it! Even blindfolded! What do I win?

[jnorman]

joel - you win a pink VELCRO CABLE STRAP!!! it is, alas, too heavy to ship, so you will need to pick it up here in oregon.

[joelpatterson]

"Give me a ticket for an aeroplane..."

[mljung]

I preferred the 4051 followed by 184 in this test, although they both need a lift below 100hz.
184 has a too much energy in the 6-7 kHz range, especially apparent in the Mozart piece.
The mc930 has too much energy above 10 k
4051 was better, more even [cohesive] sounding, the extra lift needed in the lows is easy to adjust with EQ.
CK-1 was not not up to standard to my ears. [the flute sounded a bit like a bamboo flute] more lo-res but not in an awful way; a fx microphone for some uses...

All judged trough a set of HD650 headphones

[actually I have all these mikes except the one I like the best, maybe it's time for Audio Technica for me ]

PS:
About CK-1 consider the hyper instead of the cardioid, it's darker but better, at least I think mine are.