Mid-priced cardioid SDC main pair (again!)

[PaulMac]

If you find the KM184 too bright then try an older KM84... you'll get one for probably just less than a KM184 and I find them to be less bright. The KM184 is a great, natural mic, though imo.

[tomdarude]

while an older KM84 or Beyer 930 are a nice choice, too....don´t rule out the great Mojave MA-100´s ! (or even the 101fet´s for very high spl sources)

I had some (and a MA-200) long before I joined audio-import, just to be clear ....

if your budget grows a pair of vintage KM54´s are a dream...

[richgilb]

If you don't want bright, well, I wouldn't necessarily be looking at SDCs. I'm not sure I'd be using SDCs to track grouped orchestral instruments.

What do you mean in both of your points?

[claying]

Originally Posted by richgilb

What do you mean in both of your points?

I think he wanted to say that he'd like to use LDC for a "less bright" solution...

but I do believe that SDC is more uncoloured, better transient response, visually less obstrusive and safer to up them up high.

[mathieujm]

I know a lot of bright LDC, especially in the far field.

JMM

[richgilb]

Originally Posted by binarymilton

I'd say AKGC451B without a second's hesitation.

This is or is not an SDC mic?

[claying]

Originally Posted by richgilb

This is or is not an SDC mic?

AKG C451B is a SDC.

C 451 B

[avebr]

As opinions are just opinions... here goes mine.

I would suggest

a) pair of MBHO 604 + cardio capsules;

or

b) pair of Sennheiser MKH40;

(I use and own both [and many others])

The MBP 604 are clean and fast/modern sounding, a bit upfront, great for main or spots. The modular thing is good so you can get omni capsules later.

The MKH40s are excellent condensers for main, neutral to darker, off axis sound is smooth and they tend to be a bit forgiving with not-so-great sources or rooms (so they are really useful). Great spots too, lovely on woodwinds and piano. I must get a second pair... On these days of MKH80xx, you may get them cheaper.

I also own the Beyerdynamic MC930, althought only used as spots for now, but always great results.

The MBP 648 that the OP cited is transformer-based (and costs less than the newer 604) - so I would expect it to perform closer to the MKH40 than to 604. Both 604 or the MKH40 are not transf. based, but the MKH40 is a bit forgiving for sources, and that's a good toll to have - so 648 could surely be a good option too, to keep the modular design, lower cost and still have more versatility/that 'forgiviness'.

Originally Posted by claying

(...)
2. MBHO MBP648 + KA200N: said to be near Schoeps
(...)

About the 'near Schoeps', a little story...

Some weeks ago I was recording a "very famous italian (*) player" with orchestra, and he asked me which mics were his spot... to make the story shorter, he asked specifically for Schoeps - but they were already at the main pair and we had no more (as that room asks for the Schoeps and they were already 'flying in the air').

We tried the MKH40 and the MBHO 604+omni caps. He loved the MBHOs and said "oh, now you put the Schoeps as I asked!". (!!)

So, you can think that a (*) player may not be trained for such audio judgement but this guy does a lot of recordings and he is amazingly sure how he should sound no matter what. We played both mic recordings blindly and randonly and he always choosed the 604.

That day I was sure that the "near Schoeps" was a possibility, altought for me the MBHO is still a bit less colored than the Schoeps - color here means an specific characteristic of manufacturer, and not a value of quality. And I want as much [different] colors as possible on my pallete.

PS: (*) the instrument was omited because of work contract rules.


Have fun! All the best,
ave.

[richgilb]

Originally Posted by claying

AKG C451B is a SDC.

C 451 B

Quite. Must be a language issue then, as I do not understand his points at all.

[mathieujm]

Originally Posted by avebr

About the 'near Schoeps', a little story...

But you compared an omni with a cardio

I compared my MBHO KA200 + transformer preamp with a CMC64.
I was also surprised how the direct sound was similar. But when the instruments stoped playing I listened to the ambiance. And there the Schoeps was clearly a step above. Some others tests confirmed that the off axis response of the Schoeps were unbeatable. And this is very important for orchestral works
But yes, MBHO are good mics.

JMM

[avebr]

Originally Posted by mathieujm

But you compared an omni with a cardio

I understand your point but the reason of that test was to provide 2 very different options - so no intention to compare Sennheiser to MBHO, neither the performance of cardio figure to the omni!

Both mics were spot pairs for the solist, they were on the same bar, pratically the same position. Also same mic preamp and converter. But each one was very different in result (more or less the two usual types of sound we get asked for that solo instrument)

And the musician choosed the one that sounded how he/she wanted - and made that comment (the musician only records with Schoeps as his/her spots, and was surprised that we got an equal [or very similar] sound with other mics not the Schoeps).


all the best,
ave.

[Igor2012]

Originally Posted by 666666

I'd really love to hear a shootout of the AT "a" stuff verses the "b" stuff....

I'd love to hear that too.

A few years ago I bought a 4051a with the intention of getting a second one later when my finances permitted so I could have a stereo pair. I also planned on getting a pair of the omni capsules.

A couple of days after that purchase, I stumbled across an AT4049a (omni) on blowout from another store at a price that was too good to pass up. Now all I needed was an extra cardioid capsule and an extra omni one and I'd be set.

Then, after contacting a few places in search of the capsules, I realized that AT had come out with the new "b" models and that the "a" ones were discontinued. I had been sold a discontinued mic. I had no luck finding a place that could sell me the "a" capsules in both omni and cardioid.

I emailed AT's North American office and asked them what the difference was between the "a" and "b" models. After my question got bounced around to a few people, I got a reply informing me that there was no difference between them except that the "b" model was RoHS compliant, and that mixing an "a" and a "b" model in a stereo pair wouldn't be a problem. I knew this to be false, since by then I had compared the frequency response graphs and knew that the differences were deeper, so I went and returned the 4051a to the store I bought it from and ordered a matched pair of Oktava MK-012s from Germany instead.

I was recently listening to some test recordings I had done with the 4051a and 4049a of voices and cymbal crashes and was impressed with how nice they sounded. The 4051a had a more balanced sound than my AT3031, which is fairly bright, and the attacks on the cymbal crashes were softer than with other mics, which I found pleasing. If I ever need another SDC pair, I would consider the 4051/4053/4049 line, but I'm afraid that the new ones might not sound as good. It's obvious looking at pictures of the capsules that the "a" and "b" models are not the same at all.

[Igor2012]

Originally Posted by Winter

Don't know why a brand will change the sound of a very succesful mic the way they do, it's a mistery and i cannot understand it.

Seriously. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Originally Posted by Winter

I really like clear and simple catalogues....

Me too. I recently was looking at Oktava's catalogue and was overwhelmed by the number of models they have of mics that essentially look the same.