426 4006 M150 MK21 Shootout on Piano

[David Spearritt]

Here are some test files from a soundcheck for a Goldberg var recording. Sorry about the condition of soundcheck piano. The four pairs are so obvious to pick out I didn't disguise the mics used. Which winning pair we used in the first session is fairly obvious too. Hope you agree with my choice.

The session piano (Winner track) is a Grotrian, quite a nice instrument.

[David Spearritt]

Pictures of pairs as setup for the soundcheck.

[Gaston69]

Hi David,

So what was your choice?

To my ears the 4006 sounded most natural and the M150 very coloured however very pleasant indeed.

Gaston

[Roland]

I'm only listening on a cheap pair of computer speakers, I'm guessing that the used pair are the 4006's?

One thing I did notice was how the piano being out of tune effected the sense of presence on the sound. Do you think that your choice would have still been the same had you done the try out after the piano was tunned?

Regards


Roland

[BrianHanke]

Nice comparison! Based on the test files I think I would have gone with either the Neumanns or the DPAs. They sounded the smoothest to me. The AKG and Schoeps samples also sounded wonderful, but ever so slightly thin in comparison with the others.

Is it the DPAs in the final session? Did you move the mics closer then?

[Roland]

Originally Posted by BrianHanke

Nice comparison! Based on the test files I think I would have gone with either the Neumanns or the DPAs. They sounded the smoothest to me. The AKG and Schoeps samples also sounded wonderful, but ever so slightly thin in comparison with the others.

Is it the DPAs in the final session? Did you move the mics closer then?

I'm sure David will give the definitive answer on this, but I suspect that it is just the tunning. That is one of the reasons it is difficult to make judgements from the original files, I too quite liked the M150's, they gave a good sense of the "acoustic" of the room. The Grotrian Steinwegs are good instruments, I have a 1952 Concert grand of theirs, it was Steinweg that went to America with his youngest son leaving Theodore in Germany running the Steinweg factory. He changed his name after a couple of years in the States to Steinway and formed Steinway and sons. Theodore, I believe, sold his interest in Grotrian Steinweg to his partner (Grotrian) on his fathers death, and took over the running of Steinways. I am pretty sure that Theodore is responsible for many of the patents that Steinways were reknown for.

Regards



Roland

[aracu]

Wonderful mic comparison. Listening briefly on AKG k 240 headphones, I prefer the 426 with this particular music clip, as it sounds further away and more gentle, which matches the nostalgic content of the music. The imaging of the 426 sounds clear, credible and well centered. The 4006 sounds impressive with a beautiful sonority. The winner might be a combination of the 426 with omnis, possibly the 4006.

[rumleymusic]

One thing I did notice was how the piano being out of tune effected the sense of presence on the sound.

I was hard to get that one especially sour note out of my head while listening, I hope it was tuned before the recording.

At that distance, I liked the neumann. Though I thought the 4006 could be better a little closer up.

[David Spearritt]

Interesting comments. I should have been more specific about the pianos. The soundcheck piano is not the Grotrian, it was a small Yamaha or Kawai and just the resident piano in the school chapel. The Grotrian was a 6ft 6 or 7ft moved in especially for the main recording and can only be heard in the final winner clip. It was professionally tuned for the recording.

I would have preferred a 9ft though.

For the winning choice, the pair was moved slightly closer up. Signal chain for the soundcheck samples were all DAV BG8 into SK48. Chain for the winning clip was the Forssell SMP-2 into MADC-2 then Nagra V.

Will reveal winner after more deliberation with these new facts.

[fifthcircle]

What is amazing to me is how close the sound is on each of these... Obviously there are differences between the mics, but considering how different each of these mics are from each other, I would have expected more. What was the pickup pattern for the 426?

There is a euphonic midrange quality to the winning mic which seems to only exist on the M150 samples from before.

Nice listening excercise and good sounding recording.

--Ben

[Roland]

For me, there are a few too many variables, particularly with the fact that the piano was untuned. I would personally find it hard to evaluate the acoustic and make a microphone choice based on the test samples, especially knowing that the instrument was to be changed.

the original samples sounds too distant for my personal liking, amd knowing the mic's tested, any of them are capable of producing a top quality rating recording. I felt there was more presence on the "session" take and I put this down to the fact that the instrument was tunned. On my original listen, I still felt that this was the 4006, that the piano is only 6'6" or 7' (IMHO) explains why there is a slight lack of weight in the sound.

Knowing that the mics used for the final session were moved forward of the original position could change the perception of which mic's were ultimately used. There is more bottom end in the sound of the session clip than the test clips, but I've only been able to listen on my cheapo computer set, I will try and give it another listen later.


Roland

[Roland]

I went and had another listen, and in light of the fact that the mic's have been moved closer and the piano is different, it's pretty impossible to say what was finally used with any degree of accuracy, certainly I couldn't make any decision based on the original clips, particularly knowing the instrument was to be changed. Definitively, I can say that I would be resonably happy to use any of them on a piano session, though I would probably err towards the DPA or the Neumanns, there again the AKG will do a good MS option!

Regards



Roland

[aracu]

Listening more carefully, I think Ben is probably right about the winner being the 150 pair. It has a particular character sound and imaging, which comes across richer in the final recording.

[David Spearritt]

Yes, indeed. It is certainly the M150 pair which stood out a mile in the test recordings despite all the variables Roland identified. I immediately heard the midrange beauty that Ben heard and decided the testing of position and config didn't need to proceed any further.

The 426 was easily my second favorite, it was in pure Blumlein mode for the tests, but I wanted more expansive sound for the small piano and this music. In a really top acoustic it might have won.

The 4006TL's were up to their usual accurate tricks, but sounded a bit cold, where the M150's offered so much more. The Schoeps were a funny pair, at the very first tests they sounded the best, but that was because all the other pairs were too far away. When I moved the others in more towards their correct positions the MK21's were not providing enough support from the room, they also work better in a much higher quality, more reverberant acoustic.

[aracu]

Truly rich and expansive, very stable sound image. When I first listened to the final recording I thought it used more than two mics.

[Celloman]

I use the MK21's in an ortf style, not AB as your picture showed. You would get way better sense of space and imaging in my opinion.

Mike





The Schoeps were a funny pair, at the very first tests they sounded the best, but that was because all the other pairs were too far away. When I moved the others in more towards their correct positions the MK21's were not providing enough support from the room, they also work better in a much higher quality, more reverberant acoustic.[/QUOTE]

[Roland]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

Yes, indeed. It is certainly the M150 pair which stood out a mile in the test recordings despite all the variables Roland identified. I immediately heard the midrange beauty that Ben heard and decided the testing of position and config didn't need to proceed any further.

The 426 was easily my second favorite, it was in pure Blumlein mode for the tests, but I wanted more expansive sound for the small piano and this music. In a really top acoustic it might have won.

The 4006TL's were up to their usual accurate tricks, but sounded a bit cold, where the M150's offered so much more. The Schoeps were a funny pair, at the very first tests they sounded the best, but that was because all the other pairs were too far away. When I moved the others in more towards their correct positions the MK21's were not providing enough support from the room, they also work better in a much higher quality, more reverberant acoustic.

That's interesting, I liked the sense of space that the M150's conveyed, take a listen to the clip attached.

Prelude Autunnali.mp3

Regards


Roland

[mljung]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

The 4006TL's were up to their usual accurate tricks, but sounded a bit cold, where the M150's offered so much more. The Schoeps were a funny pair, at the very first tests they sounded the best, but that was because all the other pairs were too far away. When I moved the others in more towards their correct positions the MK21's were not providing enough support from the room, they also work better in a much higher quality, more reverberant acoustic.

Wonderful [winning] sound recording David - I hope you'll share some more details about the microphone placement. The microphones seem to be raised quite a bit; it doesn't look like tail end recordings.
[I wonder how a set of 4006 would have been in same position with APE spheres attached, not as magic as M150 I reckon, but still]

The 426 - it still amazes me that a large diaphragm microphone is this good in Blumlein, often Fig8 LDs has obvious weaknesses.


::
Mads

[David Spearritt]

Originally Posted by Roland

That's interesting, I liked the sense of space that the M150's conveyed, take a listen to the clip attached.

Attachment 138874

Regards


Roland

Roland, this is a very nice sounding clip. Was this recorded with M150's as well?

I agree with your previous statements about the limitations of my test procedure. I needed to move all the pairs closer to get a really great shootout happening. But the tuning of the piano and the fact that the M150's stood out clearly by then, and both pianist and I had had enough, terminated the tests. Will try and do more with my next piano soundcheck.

[David Spearritt]

Originally Posted by Celloman

I use the MK21's in an ortf style, not AB as your picture showed. You would get way better sense of space and imaging in my opinion.
Mike

Hi Mike, yes I do use the MK21's in ORTF style and sometimes it works well and other times not so well. I have also used the MK21's in wide AB and they can sound wonderful. In this case I wanted to compare them in AB mode with the other AB pairs, although as you say, it might have been better in some sort of NOS or ORTF, but I simply ran out of time.

[David Spearritt]

Originally Posted by mljung

Wonderful [winning] sound recording David - I hope you'll share some more details about the microphone placement. The microphones seem to be raised quite a bit; it doesn't look like tail end recordings.
[I wonder how a set of 4006 would have been in same position with APE spheres attached, not as magic as M150 I reckon, but still]

The 426 - it still amazes me that a large diaphragm microphone is this good in Blumlein, often Fig8 LDs has obvious weaknesses.


::
Mads

Hi Mads, for the winning recording, the M150s were straight out from the centre line of the piano, and:
1. Distance from front vertical surface = 2200 mm
2. Height: 2670 mm
3. M150 separation: 570 mm

I have done a few experiments with the Decca tail-end positioning and do not like it one bit! All the rich upper harmonic content is missing, I have tried this in two rooms with two different 9ft Steinways and a 9ft Shigeru Kawai. In all cases the richest palette came from straight out in front positioning. Perhaps it works in Henry Wood Hall for Decca but I am not going to try it again in a hurry.

Also it simply does not make any sense. I notice that in some cases (pictures of Hamelin) another stick replaces the piano stick to open the lid wider, and I guess if the lid was completely removed, I might try the technique again.

[didier.brest]

I preferred the MK21 despite I well understand that you was pleased with the richness of the M150 sound. The Schoeps sounds more natural to me. As an opposite the C426 sounds too naked and has shy lows. There is too much room sound with the 4006s.
How much room sound is needed is just a question of personal taste. I am captivated by the dry sound of the 1982 recording from Glenn Gould.

[Larry Elliott]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

I have done a few experiments with the Decca tail-end positioning and do not like it one bit! All the rich upper harmonic content is missing, I have tried this in two rooms with two different 9ft Steinways and a 9ft Shigeru Kawai. In all cases the richest palette came from straight out in front positioning. Perhaps it works in Henry Wood Hall for Decca but I am not going to try it again in a hurry.
.

David,

In the Decca recordings using the tail end positioning mics were small diameter capsules. Historically Neumann KM83's not M50's

Larry

[David Spearritt]

Hi Larry, yes I used MK21's and DPA4006TL's to try it. Also remember too, that the M50 and M150 are small diaphram mics, only 12mm caps in them (M150). Some photos of the recent valve replacement in mine. Sorry for the fuzzy ones.

[Roland]

Originally Posted by David Spearritt

Roland, this is a very nice sounding clip. Was this recorded with M150's as well?

I agree with your previous statements about the limitations of my test procedure. I needed to move all the pairs closer to get a really great shootout happening. But the tuning of the piano and the fact that the M150's stood out clearly by then, and both pianist and I had had enough, terminated the tests. Will try and do more with my next piano soundcheck.

No, that was recorded about 15-16 years ago with a pair of 4006's, that is why I originally thought it could have been those chosen on your session. I was particularly refering to the "rich" mid sound that Ben mentioned, IMHO nothing cold and clinical about 4006's in this recording, however, the piano is a well tunned, good instrument and some time was spent over mic positioning.

To Larry,

I believe that the tail pair were only used as spots, usually in concerto's, that would explain the tail usage, probably trying not too get too much "sound" so that when/if used it will sit better with the mains, spotting piano's in concerto work is difficult as often you only need the slightest fraction more and this (IMO) is the usually the most difficult level to successfuly hide a spot at.

Regards



Roland

[aracu]

Originally Posted by mljung

The 426 - it still amazes me that a large diaphragm microphone is this good in Blumlein, often Fig8 LDs has obvious weaknesses.
::
Mads

A mic with a somewhat similar design which would be interesting to hear sample recordings of, or user's opinions, is the Manley Stereo Gold Referance, a stereo LD multipattern tube mic.

[didier.brest]

I put samples from the Manley compared to a pair of Brauner Valvet in the audio test section of the forum. Despite I don't have got the 426 (but I have a pair of AKG C414B-XLS from the same family, same caps?), I guess it's much different (more character from the Manley). A Nevaton MC48 could be closer.

[amfortas2006]

Hi David, thanks for the nice samples!

I liked DPA4006 best.

It would have been great to hear MK2S instead of an MK21 there... The 21 sounded a bit dry in comparision with the real omnis. Especially in higher registers. Low registers on MK21 I liked maybe most of all (DPA I found also great there).

What is the difference in distance between the first and the second M150 clip?
I actually liked the first one much more - was the second one much closer to the piano? That clip (Winner) sounds a bit too round-woofy to me.

I was just thinking about all of our playback equipment and how much difference in making decisions they make... (in all the tests done here a GS)

?

Thank you for the effort thumbsup

[studentjohn36]

In my opinion the piano should have been tuned BEFORE the test was made.