More comparative samples - fathead, at4051, km184s - flute solo

[jnorman]

As promised, here are some more comparative samples. this is some flute solo material - part of the "demon dance" from the medieval suite by hoover, performed by one of my wife's students - a sophomore who was a MTNA National Finalist this year.

for this testing, i set up a single cascade Fathead (ribbon) at about 4 feet out, a single AT4051 also about 4 feet out, and a pair of KM184s in ORTF at about 7-8 feet out. the purpose is to compare a close mono mic to a distant stereo pair, and to compare a ribbon mic against condensers for this type of material.

for me, this time, there is a clear winner.

clip #1 is the ORTF KM184s:
clip #2 is the single AT4051
clip #3 is the Fathead (with a Fethead module)
clip #4 is a blend of the fathead and the km184 pair.

all comments are appreciated. thanks.

[BrianHanke]

Again I would go with the 184s. My only objection to the other mics is that each one captures some harsh-sounding overtones in the initial flute attack that I find unpleasant.

[jnorman]

brian - thanks for comments. do you think the fethead module is altering the basic character of the ribbon? seems like a ribbon should not be exhibiting any harsh overtones.

[MaTr1x2051]

I also prefer the 184 pair over the others. They sound the most natural by far. The AT would come in second for me, yet its surprisingly bright, even when compared against the reasonablly bright 184s. The ribbon sounds unnaturally harsh and dull at the same time to my ears. I personally find ORTF to be one of the most convicing stereo techniques, even when used on a solo source. It still accurately represents the reflections from the room. I think if you also did an ORTF with the 2 ATs, I wouldn't have minded that sound. But of the samples posted, the 184s sound most like the real instrument - something which I value quite highly.

What pre are you running through?

[jnorman]

matrix - thanks for responding. pres were the mackie onyx 400f. inre the brightness thing, i think that is because the AT4051 was not only close, it was directly on-axis, while the 184s were well off axis in the ORTF configuration, hence the 4051 coming across as brighter.

i agree, the ribbon is not as smooth as i was expecting, and was wondering if that might be caused by the fethead. i read good things about the fethead before buying it, but it just may not be possible to completely solve the ribbon gain/impedence issues for a mere $100.

about the AT4051s, you are quite correct - they make an excellent ORTF pair, and are some of my all time favorite SDCs (and i have owned dpa 4011s and 4006s, schoeps cmc64s, and many other nice mics). the 4051s can be a little bright on-axis for flutes, whistles, piccolos, horns, and a few other things, but are totally on for piano, strings, guitars, percussion, and almost any other acoustic application. they have a nice big open natural sound that almost always works well on anything.

but i agree, the 184s were the clear winner for me this time. i think it shows the advantage of using more distant mics, and the advantage of stereo over mono, even for a solo instrument.

[Melgueil]

Interesting thread. I just picked up a 4051 - wow. On acoustic guitar through Metric Halo ULN2 - it's the stuff. I think in general AT mics are very underrated / under appreciated.

The other thing that interests me is recording solo flute. I plan to record my daughter performing some classical pieces, so it's good to know that 4051 works well. Will have to make decision on placement though - there seem to be many options there....

rgds

[BrianHanke]

Originally Posted by jnorman

brian - thanks for comments. do you think the fethead module is altering the basic character of the ribbon? seems like a ribbon should not be exhibiting any harsh overtones.

Yes, I wonder about that. I was expecting the ribbon mic to be very mellow, but it turned out to be the opposite!

[mathieujm]

For me also the 184 are the winner. Great recording

And this sound is far smoother than the one of your previous comparative test. But I think it's mostly due to the more integrated reverb or it was not recorded in the same place ?

JMM

[jnorman]

JMM - the only real difference between the samples is the preamps. same location, same mics.

[mljung]

Originally Posted by mathieujm

For me also the 184 are the winner. Great recording
JMM

Me too!
I would have loved to hear the 184 compared to 4051, both as ORTF.

::
Mads

[mathieujm]

Originally Posted by mljung

Me too!
I would have loved to hear the 184 compared to 4051, both as ORTF.

::
Mads

You can compare them in jnorman previous thread
Comparative Samples - MC930, KM184, AT4051, and XXX

But I don't explain the differences from these to the last one with only a difference on preamp which are decent ones.

JMM - the only real difference between the samples is the preamps. same location, same mics.

And same flute player ?

JMM

[sunflute]

Hey James,

I agree, the clearest sample here is the 184 in ORTF.

It sounds like there may be something wrong with that ribbon, specially on the blended sample, there's slight distortion or something going on there.

Maybe just using a high gain preamp would solve it or maybe there's something amiss with that ribbon?

Thanks for your posting.
Peace

[jnorman]

melgueil - yes, the AT4051s are fantastic all around mics for almost any kind of acoustic application, and they make a fabulous ORTF main pair - big, clean, open sound. they are some of my favorite SDCs, and i have owned DPA 4011s, schoeps cmc64s, akg c481s, gefell m300s, and a wide variety of other sdc's.

jmm - - yes, a different player this time, and yes, she is very very good for a sophomore. also, i dont think i put as much reverb on the samples this time. i wanted to keep them a little cleaner for comparison purposes. but other than player finese, i really think the pres made a noticeable difference.

marco - i am going to try the ribbon again without the Fethead. but i am on vacation in panama city beach for couple weeks, so it will be a bit before i post more samples. there is a pina colada calling my name right now...

all - thanks for the comments. i think comparative sample threads are some of my favorite threads. i would be interested in hearing some similar things from those of you with different mics - lets hear a shootout from some of youse guys who have access to some really high end mics, maybe on solo violin or something that highlights specific differences between 4011s, cmc64s, sanken, km140s, vs some more midline stuff like i am currently using. or shootout some top end omnis, like km131s vs cmc62's, or 4006s vs cmc621s or such.

[NorseHorse]

Here's a serious question:

According to the majority of posters in this thread (Mono Micing a Symphony Concert), there is NO comparison between mono and stereo. So, why are we now comparing comparing mono and stereo samples as if the playing field is level?

I don't think I can really evaluate two different mics when one is a pair and the other is solo. Particularly for applications like this. Imaging is hugely important and you need a pair to see how they perform. I'd have to go with the ORTF pair by default.

[BrianHanke]

Originally Posted by jnorman

i think comparative sample threads are some of my favorite threads.

I totally agree. I love to hear different mics being used in real-world situations. It's always fun and educational! I've done a lot of shootouts on my own, but I don't think my methods were "scientific" enough to be of much help to others. The mics I've tried over the past few years include Earthworks, Audio-Technica, AKG, Neumann, Schoeps, Shure, Oktava and Rode.

My current ultimate mic for piano is the Neumann KM131. An AKG C 414 B-ULS in omni is a semi-distant second place, just about tied with an AT4050, also in omni. For cardioid mics I liked the Shure KSM109, Oktava MK-012 and Neumann TLM103. At the bottom of my list are Earthworks TC30K, AKG C 451 B, and Schoeps CMC54.

I've really only scratched the surface of all the different choices available out there. I'd love to do a big, comprehensive shootout just for fun, but the cost of renting a ton of mics for a few days is a bit prohibitive.

[jnorman]

norse - there are many pro studios that will mic solo instrumetns in mono. i have seen james galway miced up with a single akg 414 about 4 feet above him. a single u87 is a common mic setup for solo acoustic instruments of any kind. part of the main purpose of this exercise was to clearly show the difference between a single close mic and a more distant stereo pair for a solo instrument.

brian - my expereince with the schoeps cmc64 was simlar to yours with the cmc54 - for some reason they just didnt do much for me. yet, they seem to be about the most popular SDCs around this neck of the woods. i found the AT4050s to be very useable for all kinds of things. and i also agree that km131s are very appealing for intimate chamber and acoustic material. i think the schoeps mk2 near field capsules are probably also very nice, but havent tried them (thats what ivo uses, and i like the work he turns out).

it would be nice if some of the big guns around here, like steve remote, plush, ben maas, john willet, mpdonahue, huub, and others that have comprehensive mic lockers would do some serious mic shootouts for us on some simple material like solo violin or some duo material in intimate chamber type settings (rather than full orchestra where so many other variables come into play).

hey steve - what say??

[Remoteness]

It’s true, we did mic solo instruments with one mic, but it’s not the rule.
I know engineer’s that capture the bass drum in stereo, so anything goes in our line of work.

For me, spot mics are usually one mic placed at the best possible position.
Yes, it would be nice; very nice indeed. Why don’t we have a Remote Possibilities Retreat where we can get together and sift through our mic lockers and do some serious mic shootouts as a collective effort?

If we plan this far enough in advance, perhaps we can have a lot of our faithful Remote Possibilities member in on this awesome suggestion.
What do you folks think about that?

I can look into a location in the NYC area; You're welcomed to bring your portable rigs and I can bring one or two of my mobileunits. Maybe Michael from Indre Recording can bring his truck too. Everyone is welcomed to join in on the potential festivities.

What do you folks say about this possibility?

[NorseHorse]

I'm all for it. Several engineers (including GSers) contributed to a shoot-out this weekend in Williamsburg involving around twenty mics pairs, many in at least two different stereo techniques. We would have done more if we weren't pressed for time! Oh well.

[Remoteness]

Norse, start a show and tell thread if you haven't already!

[RichS]

Originally Posted by sunflute

It sounds like there may be something wrong with that ribbon, specially on the blended sample, there's slight distortion or something going on there.

While I also agree that the 184's sound best, I don't think that there's anything wrong with the ribbon.

I think what you're hearing is mechanical wind noise from a slightly unfocused embouchure. Especially on note attacks. Perhaps the player wasn't quite warmed-up. It also sounds like the mic was a little to close, and aimed more towards the head joint instead of the finger holes and lower end of the instrument where most of the sound emanates.

I like to hear the ribbon at that eight foot distance and positioned slightly off to the instrument body side.

[jnorman]

rich - thanks for the comments. the riibbon was about 4 feet out, and aimed at the middle of the flute body. i do think the fethead has something to do with the nature of the sound i was getting from the ribbon.

hey steve - why dont you start a new thread inviting some of your buds to participate in a larger scale mutli-mic shootout - i dont know if those folks have seen your comments on this thread. thanks.

[Corran]

Hey I've just got my new place setup and I can listen to this!

I agree that the 184 pair sounds very good. However, I think comparing it to a closer, single Fat/Fet-head is a like apples and oranges. I think a pair of Fatheads in Blumlien a little further out would possibly be better than the 184 - there's still something I don't like about it.

[MBBCFP]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

I'm all for it. Several engineers (including GSers) contributed to a shoot-out this weekend in Williamsburg involving around twenty mics pairs, many in at least two different stereo techniques. We would have done more if we weren't pressed for time! Oh well.

I was about to e-mail you asking how it went. Please do start a show and tell thread. DOn't forget to ask me again next time.

[MBBCFP]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

. . . Why don’t we have a Remote Possibilities Retreat where we can get together and sift through our mic lockers and do some serious mic shootouts as a collective effort?

If we plan this far enough in advance, perhaps we can have a lot of our faithful Remote Possibilities member in on this awesome suggestion.
What do you folks think about that?

I can look into a location in the NYC area; You're welcomed to bring your portable rigs and I can bring one or two of my mobileunits. Maybe Michael from Indre Recording can bring his truck too. Everyone is welcomed to join in on the potential festivities.

What do you folks say about this possibility?

I think it is a wonderful idea -- a master class in recording where everyone contributes. The only caveat I see is that you and Michael are so far above most of us in gear and gigs that you may need to be careful not to scare off those of us who may need this the most.

"Festivities" sounds good.

[Corran]

Oh yeah Steve's idea is great, however, I will say that NYC is rather "remote" from most of the country (not to mention an expensive destination) so I'd much rather see it more centrally located if it ever did happen.

[MBBCFP]

Originally Posted by Corran

Oh yeah Steve's idea is great, however, I will say that NYC is rather "remote" from most of the country (not to mention an expensive destination) so I'd much rather see it more centrally located if it ever did happen.

How about regional dos like Norse just organized? Let's not get too uptight about all this or someone will figure out a way to make money from us.

[Piedpiper]

I agree that there's nothing wrong with the ribbon. I think it exhibits superior midrange clarity, which is the brightness commented on above, and typical ribbon high end roll off, which shows up with less breath noise on top. I think the main reason for the 184s being so appealing to many here is their distance and stereo pairing. Personally, although I prefer the distant ORTF aspect, they sound like 184s which is to say bright and edgey on the top end.

[grrrayson]

This test exhibits what I've previously seen with the Fathead: a rolled-off high end is not the same thing as an extended low end. I think a lot of people get initially fooled by the high-end rolloff and miss the bandpass-filtered effect, the weird lumpy (upper and lower) mids, etc.

Once I heard a Fathead on sax next to a U67...I realize it's not a fair comparison, but I felt a little embarrassed for the Fathead.

The 4051 has too much of that airy high end v. the body, the sound coming from the actual instrument (as opposed to the air moving out from the lips).

From one who is not necessarily a km184 fan: the winner here is the km184 track, even compensating for unfair stereo goodness.

The mix of the two is somewhat interesting, but it's probably best to keep things clean and simple.


Thanks for posting samples, by the way!

Regards,

Grayson

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by grrrayson

The mix of the two is somewhat interesting, but it's probably best to keep things clean and simple.

[getaway_fromme]

What preamp did you use with the KM184's? Very nice sound, btw. I also prefer the KM184's, which I will be getting a pair of today.