Cool Mic Comparo: Golden Ears requested

[hbphotoav]

So... My friend Lynn Fuston called a couple of weeks ago and asked if I wanted to play with a pair of the new Advanced Audio CM-28 tube pencil mics. I said, "Sure." Then my friend Dave Sinko asked if I wanted to play with his Brauner VM-1S. I said, "Sure." Then I asked my friend Joe Fitzpatrick, Worship Pastor at Nashville's First Baptist Church if I could record the 2010 Organ Series Concert there today. He said, "Sure." I didn't tell him I'd have four pairs of mics in the air. Fortunately, he didn't mind. Nor did Stephen Aber, the performer du jour, a senior at Belmont University.

So... I arrived with plenty of time to set up the various pairs, power supplies and record rack (DAV Broadhurst Gardens BG8 into an Apogee Ensemble's +4 line inputs, through Logic Pro to a hard drive). The organ is a 56-rank Schantz comprising 3,236 pipes ranging from 32' to 3/8", with Trompette en Chamade and zimbelstern. The 2010 Organ Concert Series celebrates the 40th anniversary of the building and the organ, dedicated in 1970.

The mics were arrayed thusly: The center stand was a K&M Heavy Duty with a stereo bar perpendicular to the stage, about 9' (3m) high. The front screw held a small stereo bar with my pair of Sennheiser MKH8040 in classic ORTF (17cm; 110 degrees). The rear screw held the Brauner VM-1S set in classic XY (90 degrees, cardioid pattern selected). Each CM-28 was mounted on a Manfrotto 11' (3.5m) stand in a shock mount. The selectors were at "0dB" and "Flat". To the side of each shock mount was taped a DPA4061, standing 3" above the mount. The stands were approximately 9' (3m) apart, between pew 1 and 2, just off the center aisle. All mics were fed to my DAV BG8 and into the Apogee Ensemble. The stands were approximately 50' (15.2m) from the organ. The Trompette en Chamade is approximately 16' (4.8m) from the choir loft; the top of the organ is nearly 65' (20m) from the floor. The room is brick and glass and hardwood pews, with a full surrounding balcony, and seats 1,400. There were about 90 people in attendance.

The clips are in no particular order, and were straight bounces from 44.1/24 to 44.1/16; then into iTunes for a conversion to 192kbps MP3s. No attempt to match levels was made, though I recorded them as closely matched as I could (the BG8 controls gain in 3dB steps). The highest recorded level was -4.2dB. One anomaly: the wide cardioid capsules on the CM-28 mics were not well matched. One channel was about 3dB hotter than the other, out of the box. I adjusted the low channel up to more closely match the relative L/R levels of the other mics.

See if you can pick the LDC from the SDC, and the tube front ends from the solid state. Answers on the weekend. Comments and criticisms are welcomed.

Photos are in this post. Clip One, from "All Creatures of our God and King", follows. Clip Two, from the end of the Virgil Fox arrangement of "Now Thank We All Our God" follows that post.

Enjoy.

HB

[hbphotoav]

Sorry... the .aif files are .7mb too large. Trims on the way.

[hbphotoav]

Now it seems my security token is missing. Didn't even know I had one...

More later. Sorry.

HB

[jnorman]

keep trying harry, i'm interested in hearing the clips.

[hbphotoav]

Alas... Still seeking the elusive "security token" which is still missing. I wonder if the move to the new MBP and Snow Leopard is any way responsible? The pics loaded promptly... just not so the .aif files.

Ah well. MP3s will be the next try...

[hbphotoav]

"All Creatures" clips. 192kbps iTunes conversions from .aif bounces.

Here we go...

[hbphotoav]

"Now Thank We All Our God" clips. 192kbps iTunes conversions from .aif bounces.

Enjoy.

[didier.brest]

Hi Harry,

thank you much for sharing these samples. I'm listening on them. I wonder whether L and R in 3 would be out of phase.

Originally Posted by hbphotoav

The front screw held a small stereo bar with my pair of Sennheiser MKH8040 in classic ORTF (13cm; 110 degrees).

13 cm or 17 cm ?

From the first set, my preference order and my guess are

2 (Brauner)
1 (DPA)
3 (Sennheiser)
4

From the second set:

7 (Brauner)
8 (DPA)
5 (Sennheiser)
6

Didier

[BrianHanke]

Thanks for the comparison! I really like 04 and 05. It seems like 03 and 06 are leaning to the right for some reason?

[hbphotoav]

Yep. 17cm. Dang fat fingers and bad eyes... I shall fix that now...

I should say... the presentation order of the mics in the "All Creatures" clips is different from the order in the "Now Thank We" clips. Everything else is the same... but the mic in "All Creatures _A" may be different than the mic in "Now Thank We_A". Careful listening, and truth will out.

I was struck that all four were decent... but three were definitely "decent-er" and one ring was there to rule them all. The fun was to eliminate the mic amp from the equation and hear all four pairs on the same source.

Answers first of the week, for those interested in playing.

Didier... not on my account.

Brian... good ears.

[Celloman]

My Guess is 1) Sennheiser 2) Brauner 3) CM28 with phasing issue? 4) DPA (Hard to tell between 3 and 4 because the phasing is distracting.)

Mike

PS: Mostly guessing, I don't own any of the above mics to be familiar with their sound.

[egor]

1.8040
2.vm-1s
3.cm28
4.4061
""
5.4061
6.cm28
7.8040
8.vm-1s

[CGBrian.M]

Originally Posted by egor

1.8040
2.vm-1s
3.cm28
4.4061
""
5.4061
6.cm28
7.8040
8.vm-1s

My guesses line up with these. 4 & 5 have distinctly more room sound, with 5 having more audience noise at the end, so I assume those are the DPA. 7 really brings out the low end, which I heard the 8040's excel at.

Brian

[NorseHorse]

Samples 1 and 8 are quite clearly the Brauner.
Samples 2 and 7 are the 8040.
Samples 3 and 6 are the CM28.
Samples 4 and 5 are the 4061.

Out of the four, I'd go with the 4061. For another session, I'd move them a little closer together.

[didier.brest]

Originally Posted by didier.brest

Hi Harry,

thank you much for sharing these samples. I'm listening on them. I wonder whether L and R in 3 would be out of phase.


13 cm or 17 cm ?

From the first set, my preference order and my guess are

2 (Brauner)
1 (DPA)
3 (Sennheiser)
4

From the second set:

7 (Brauner)
8 (DPA)
5 (Sennheiser)
6

Didier

I just realized that I did a mistake in my reporting. The samples having phase issues are 3 (as stated in my first post) and 6. I swapped 3 and 4. So my intended answer was

From the first set, my preference order and my guess are

2 (Brauner)
1 (DPA)
4 (Sennheiser)
3

From the second set:

7 (Brauner)
8 (DPA)
5 (Sennheiser)
6

[BrianHanke]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

For another session, I'd move them a little closer together.

I agree; there's a bit of a hole in the middle.

[hbphotoav]

Originally Posted by BrianHanke

I agree; there's a bit of a hole in the middle.

For that, we shall thank the wide center aisle...

[mljung]

I prefer a mix of 2 and 3 [or 4] in the first set. Good example of what outriggers can do in combination with a near coincident arrangement.

If I should choose only one stereo set it would be one of the spaced pairs [3 or 4], although as mentioned, they have an obvious h-O-le in the middle.

My guess 1: VM-1S 2: 8040 3: 4061 4: C-28

*

In set two I clearly prefer 5 followed by 6. I don't know the C-28, but the "creamy" quality could suggest tubes. So this is my guess. They sound pretty extended in the lows, which could suggest an omni pattern, but it is cardioid, right?

If so 4061 is 6 [which can sound a little lean in the lows - or maybe just unhyped because of it's perfect omni pattern]

7 sounds a little opaque, something that I heard from 8040 do on other samples, but the samples also suggest ORTF.

8 must be the Brauner XY

[The Listener]

I like 2 and 8, no idea what mic would that be. I guess it's the same pair. Maybe the Sennheisers in ORTF?

[amfortas2006]

I liked 1 in the first group. in 3 something is of focus.

and in 6 the right channel is approx. 2,5 dB louder, that bothers -but when that is fixed, its my favorite in the second group... then 5.

Is 7 ORTF? I think so.

Maybe the problem in 3 is also that its 2,5dB louder, didnt check that

[egor]

Originally Posted by The Listener

I like 2 and 8, no idea what mic would that be. I guess it's the same pair. Maybe the Sennheisers in ORTF?

My preference as well.I like the definition of organ in this one. I hear XY...

[trompetfreak]

A - Brauner?
B - Absolute winner for me. Tube?
C - is leaning a bit to the right. Some phasing maybe? SDC?
D - DPA?

That's after listening to the first 4 samples. Maybe I'll have another opinion next time I listen to the other 4 aswell...

This is just my quick guess on a late night after a gig guys from Slipknot, 3hrs of sleep and a Stockhausen concert...

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by trompetfreak

A - Brauner?
B - Absolute winner for me. Tube?
C - is leaning a bit to the right. Some phasing maybe? SDC?
D - DPA?

That's after listening to the first 4 samples. Maybe I'll have another opinion next time I listen to the other 4 aswell...

This is just my quick guess on a late night after a gig guys from Slipknot, 3hrs of sleep and a Stockhausen concert...

Finally I see a person that can digest hardcore metal, avant-garde classical and contemporary jazz-rock at the same time (judging from your post and your signature quote by Marc Ribot.)
I thought there are not many such people outside my shell. And picking the same preference... fun world.

[hbphotoav]

As promised...

Clip 1 ("All Creatures of Our God and King")
(01) A: Brauner VM-1S
(02) B: Sennheiser MKH8040 ORTF
(03) C: AA CM-28 (tube) Wide Cardioid caps
(04) D: DPA 4061

Clip 2: ("Now Thank We All Our God")
(05) A: DPA 4061
(06) B: AA CM-28 (tube) Wide Cardioid caps
(07) C: Sennheiser MKH8040 ORTF
(08) D: Brauner VM-1S

Norse, you pretty well nailed it... with gusto and panache. And the Wren project sounds great.

My preference is for the Brauner (wee bit better "sparkle" on the zimbelstern, but a bit "narrower" organ sound) and the 8040 pair (I thought the image of the organ was more like the organ sounded, from the front row... the left/right directionality is actually quite apparent). I thought the DPA did the best job of capturing the room from the "listener's" perspective from the "usual" seating distance, though not the most impressive capture of the instrument itself (it's a very reverberant environment). I would not do the CM-28 pair spaced AB, unless I had the omni caps (which I had assumed would be included in the kit... as it was there were cards, wide cards, and what seemed to be supercard and hypercard capsules... alas, no omnis). Since it was a concert and not a session, I decided not to further clog the center aisle and left the CM-28s and the 4061s at about 9' spread between the first and second pews.

Overall... from the original 44.1/16 AIF bounces, I was persuaded that, while I liked the Brauner better overall (on both Tannoy 800As w/ sub, and UltraSone 650s) I probably didn't like it $10,000 better. It's a truly gorgeous piece of kit, and sounds wonderful, but in my case, I will continue to soldier on with the 8040s and the 4061s. And I'll gladly borrow the VM-1S whenever Mr. Sinko will see fit to loan it to me.

Were I to attempt to capture the Mighty Schantz again (as I hope to do at least a couple of more times during the series), I will do the Sennheisers from the same position, but on a taller stand, and move the DPAs closer together (perhaps a 1m bar) from the same stand.

Please continue with your comments and advice. Y'all all are a great and knowledgeable resource. Thanks for playing!

HB

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by hbphotoav

My preference is for the Brauner (wee bit better "sparkle" on the zimbelstern, but a bit "narrower" organ sound) and the 8040 pair (I thought the image of the organ was more like the organ sounded, from the front row... the left/right directionality is actually quite apparent). I thought the DPA did the best job of capturing the room from the "listener's" perspective from the "usual" seating distance,...

HB

I had similar thoughts - I prefered 2 (Sennheisers) in the soft part, because it seemed more "open" - more feeling of space, more like I am used to hear organ - example 1 (Brauner) was really nice and had most beautiful midrange, but of course - one cannot not know how that particular organ in that particular church sounds if one was not there... but as you say, Brauner seemed more "narrow" or better - direct - in that quiet passage (maybe it has more to do with XY vs ORTF), but in the loud examples I prefered the Brauner (now that I know what was no.8) because it seemed that it handled the chaotic complexity of sound better... The combination of the Brauner and DPAs would probably get you where you want... I didn't like any of the spaced pairs on their own - too much hole in the middle, too artificial sound, but I can imagine them complementing the main pair very well. If you could repeat the recording, I would position that additional pair even more in the distance to get less direct sound and more reverberation and I would then mix them much lower than the main pair - just to get that tiny % more of depth.

[amfortas2006]

Originally Posted by amfortas2006

I liked 1 in the first group. in 3 something is of focus.

and in 6 the right channel is approx. 2,5 dB louder, that bothers -but when that is fixed, its my favorite in the second group... then 5.

Is 7 ORTF? I think so.

Maybe the problem in 3 is also that its 2,5dB louder, didnt check that

I chose 1 but 2 was maybe even clearer in all parts of the organ, and worth its $ compared to Brauner. But now, knowing the financial aspect, I"d also take the Sennheisers or DPA Harry.
And in the second group the Brauner sounded kinda brutal to me.

I didnt read about the width of the DPA-s?
I think the DPA also did great!

Thanks for the shoot-out!

[hbphotoav]

Originally Posted by amfortas2006

I chose 1 but 2 was maybe even clearer in all parts of the organ, and worth its $ compared to Brauner. But now, knowing the financial aspect, I"d also take the Sennheisers or DPA Harry.
And in the second group the Brauner sounded kinda brutal to me.

I didnt read about the width of the DPA-s?
I think the DPA also did great!

Thanks for the shoot-out!

You are correct. The distance was about 9' (3m) spaced. They were set out of the aisle (public concert, and the K&M in the center was necessary for the Brauner/Sennheiser setup) between pews 1 and 2... as close as I could get them without raising the ire of the fire marshall, had he paid a call. The aisle is 6' (2m) across, and the mics were 18" (0.5m) or so inside the pews.

[Celloman]

I was close, but not knowing the Brauner or the Sennheiser 8040, I wasn't sure which had the brighter top. Both sound quite good for the task. Thanks for the post... lots of fun!

Mike

[jnorman]

i only listened to the first set of clips, but i preferred the sennheisers and the DPAs in terms of sound. as mentioned, the DPAs were spread a bit too far, but the sound was wonderful. the brauners are clean and nice, but not quite as flat as i like. thanks for posting the samples.

[mljung]

Well I only had one mistake [swapping 4061 and CM-28]. So what I described as a "creamy" sound, wasn't from a tube circuit.

So now it's clear to me that I actually preferred the sound of the 4061 [which is nice since I have a pair of 4060] I'm amased again and again about how good these micro-microphones are.

By themselves I didn't like the Brauner XY or Sennheiser ORTF that much, too narrow for this kind of music and acoustics. And the Sennheiser pair was a bit opaque in loud passages, something I've heard before in other samples from them [the Listener mentions something like this too].

The spaced pairs was obviously too spaced, but still.

As I said in my original post:
In this recording and mic-placement, a combo of ORTF, or the XY, and one of the outrigger pairs [pref. 4061], works best in my opinion.

[but dpa 4061 on 1m bar, or maybe even a little further in this room - who knows - doesn't sound like a bad idea]


::
Mads