CM3 - really THAT good?

[jpgerard]

Very nice indeed. Good recording and good performance too.

[polytope]

Chain: CM3 in XY (6 feet away from source) -> Symetrix 202 (unmodded) -> PCM-M10
Source: Advancing student violin
Room: living room with hardwood floor.

A quick recording done this morning. Please pardon the wrong notes and the intonation problems as I haven't been practising for 3 months and I started playing cold without any warmup (bad idea).

Please comment on any aspect of the recording you'd like. I'm just a newbie.

As a reference, the third clip is a separate take of Allemande straight into PCM-M10.

[jbjoubaud]

Hey guys,

I'm in the market for a new pair of main mics. I currently use a pair of Oktavamod mk-012.
I mostly record choir or metal but I really make a living out of post-prodution work (so I have to record the occasional SFX)

I've read this hole thread but I'm still considering a pair of schoeps. What's wrong with me ?

[ljudatervinning]

Nothing is wrong with you!
While the CM3 is a very good mic, Schoeps is better. Lower noise, cleaner high-end, cleaner low-end IMHO.

[jbjoubaud]

I guess you're right ljudatervinning.
The difference in price seams kinda crazy vs the difference in sound quality though (judging from the samples I've heard here)

[boojum]

Originally Posted by jbjoubaud

I guess you're right ljudatervinning.
The difference in price seams kinda crazy vs the difference in sound quality though (judging from the samples I've heard here)

Écoute, you are going to have a really hard time beating the value of this inexpensive but good mic. I have some Schoeps and love them, but they are sometimes a little too honest for some situations where these little guys smooth and round out the sound nicely. They are a little like a soft-focus lens on a camera. They are also good mics. And at the price they are offered you cannot go wrong. You will always have this little mics with you, sont mignon.

[jbjoubaud]

Originally Posted by boojum

Écoute, you are going to have a really hard time beating the value of this inexpensive but good mic. I have some Schoeps and love them, but they are sometimes a little too honest for some situations where these little guys smooth and round out the sound nicely. They are a little like a soft-focus lens on a camera. They are also good mics. And at the price they are offered you cannot go wrong. You will always have this little mics with you, sont mignon.

Merci Boojum, these are some good points as well.

The Listener talked about some low-end crazyness that I'm experiencing with my Oktavamod nt1a and oktavamod tcm1050. It's not really something audible, but if somebody's walking withing 15 feets of the mics, the VU meters are gonna go crazy if I don't high-pass the mic at 40hz.

Anybody else is experiencing some weird low-end behaviour with the cm3 ?

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by jbjoubaud

Merci Boojum, these are some good points as well.

The Listener talked about some low-end crazyness that I'm experiencing with my Oktavamod nt1a and oktavamod tcm1050. It's not really something audible, but if somebody's walking withing 15 feets of the mics, the VU meters are gonna go crazy if I don't high-pass the mic at 40hz.

Anybody else is experiencing some weird low-end behaviour with the cm3 ?

The behavior (shock transmission) you are reporting with your mic's is unrelated to the anomalies reported by The Listener.

[jbjoubaud]

Have you experienced any of the anomalies reported by The Listener ?

[Douglas Whates]

Originally Posted by jbjoubaud

Anybody else is experiencing some weird low-end behaviour with the cm3 ?

I don't think there's any weirdness with the low-end, but I have definitely noticed that it is extremely sensitive down there. It is sensitive to conductive vibration, and also sensitive to actual low frequency. I wouldn't say overly sensitive, just equally sensitive as the rest of the frequency range and something to be aware of.

[polytope]

Originally Posted by Douglas Whates

I don't think there's any weirdness with the low-end, but I have definitely noticed that it is extremely sensitive down there. It is sensitive to conductive vibration, and also sensitive to actual low frequency. I wouldn't say overly sensitive, just equally sensitive as the rest of the frequency range and something to be aware of.

It is indeed sensitive all the way down. My pair picked up walking sound in my living room VERY WELL, something that I didn't want. I think I need to put these on a shockmount unless the floor is marble.

[jpgerard]

The CMEH shockmounts are quite necessary in most applications but if you mount your mic stands on isolation pads I guess you might be OK too.

[polytope]

Originally Posted by jpgerard

The CMEH shockmounts are quite necessary in most applications but if you mount your mic stands on isolation pads I guess you might be OK too.

What would make good isolation pads?

[jpgerard]

I've seen a number of different ones, I think Auralex had the first ones, then copies came in, typically Neoprene based.

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by JEGG

The behavior (shock transmission) you are reporting with your mic's is unrelated to the anomalies reported by The Listener.

Actually it is the same thing... vibrations were picked up more than by my other mics, which made me over cautious, because I was still rather biased with the worm in my head saying: "it can't be that those mics are so good and have no flaw for that kind of price. There MUST be some "catch" or compromise that I haven't found out yet..."
So I was overly alert for anything surprising. If you listen to the files you'll hear it's not really a problem that couldn't be dealt with some low cut or using better shock mounts...

I don't know if I would call it an anomaly now.

Like others already said... be aware of the characteristics of the mic and use them to your advantage (picking strong low bass when needed) or dealing with it appropriately (placement, shock mounts, low cut...).

For going out in the field - shaking the mics in the blimp, transmission of vibrations through the boom, etc. I would choose some other mics. If money is not a problem - a Schoeps MS configuration - with MK41 hypercardioid for MID, so you also have the fanciest standard dialogue mic at your disposal! Actually that could be my dream FX catching / field recording set-up. But money IS an issue.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by The Listener

Actually it is the same thing... vibrations were picked up more than by my other mics, which made me over cautious, because I was still rather biased with the worm in my head saying: "it can't be that those mics are so good and have no flaw for that kind of price. There MUST be some "catch" or compromise that I haven't found out yet..."
So I was overly alert for anything surprising. If you listen to the files you'll hear it's not really a problem that couldn't be dealt with some low cut or using better shock mounts...

I don't know if I would call it an anomaly now.

Sorry! Someone posted about low frequency amp noise, and I jumped to conclusions and thought that was you. I do remember posts about shock sensitivity-and somehow (?) didn't think that was you.

Which is to say-sorry, and I'll do more checking before responding to posts.

(Note to self: remember to remember not to rely so much on remembered posts...)

[king2070lplaya]

This low-frequency sensitivity thing is quite interesting....

I frequently use a cm3 as a floor mic on a small V-shaped piece of foam (as a low-profile vocal spot) in a room with horrendous a-c rumble, ad have never had this problem. And I almost never use shockmounts when I stand mount these.

I'll have to keep my ears open for this.

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

This low-frequency sensitivity thing is quite interesting....

I frequently use a cm3 as a floor mic on a small V-shaped piece of foam (as a low-profile vocal spot) in a room with horrendous a-c rumble, ad have never had this problem. And I almost never use shockmounts when I stand mount these.

I'll have to keep my ears open for this.

Place them as spots for marimba without shock mounts and you will hear it.

My monitoring system with a sub goes very low, so it's very audible here, but nothing a shock mount or a low cut wouldn't fix. It's not actually a "problem", just a characteristic one should be aware of.

You can here it here on african balafon: CM3 - really THAT good?

Ah, and ignore my comments in that above post I linked to.

[amcl]

Here's a little recording I just made during a visit to a quail production facility. There are about 7,000 birds here (4,600 hens & 2,400 cocks).

Handheld 2 x CM3 ORTF into a SD 722.

My choice of low-cut at 40 Hz, 12 dB/oct in the SD turned out to not be sufficient to limit a little rough handling noise so I used Sound Forge's 200 Hz low-cut EQ only between 00:09-00:12 sec. As with most mics, I have found that good, well-damped, isolation is crucial for the CM3.

Of course, listening to a somewhat foreign sound through only one type of mic doesn't really tell you much about those particular mics but the recording sounds to me an awful lot like what I experienced. Who knows if the detail got "smeared" or is "warmer" than something more expensive but for a compact field rig they are working out well. If I go back there I'll bring a couple of different mic pairs to compare.

--allan

[SoSueMe]

I just got some CM3's and they are fantastic at ANY price!

Somewhere on this site I heard a comparison between the 4006TL, I believe, and the CM3. A couple of people mentioned that the transient response wasn't as good on the CM3, but I didn't get that when listening to the samples. I felt the transient response was just as good from the CM3.

Then, I heard another comparison between either the CM3 or the 4006TL and the STO-2. The poster mentioned that the transient response was slower on the STO-2 and after listening to the samples, this was clearly evident. However, I didn't get that from my useage of my STO-2s. Based on this, I was expecting my STO-2 to sound slower than the CM3s. Not the case. To me the transient response sounds close as far as speed. The STO-2s don't exhibit that slow sound I heard on the samples posted here.

The two actually sound similar to me frequency-response-wise. They have a similar signature, except of course that you hear a lot more room with the STO-2s since they're omni; they have a more open sound. I compared the noise level too, expecting the STO-2s to be noiser, but in practice, they are pretty much the same.

I haven't spent nearly enough time with the CM3s but my initial impression is that they have a distinct "sound" to them that's very pleasing, revealing, fast, and neutral at the same time. The off-axis response is the best I've heard from a cardioid variant. The rejection at the back is better than I expected too. Very nice. They can take a lot of level too. I couldn't overload them on drums, and I'm a hard hitter [sometimes]. Due to their size, it seems a perfect combination for close-miking drums, as well as overheads at more modest distances. Again, I need to work with them more, but I'm really impressed.

[polytope]

Originally Posted by SoSueMe

I haven't spent nearly enough time with the CM3s but my initial impression is that they have a distinct "sound" to them that's very pleasing, revealing, fast, and neutral at the same time. The off-axis response is the best I've heard from a cardioid variant. The rejection at the back is better than I expected too. Very nice. They can take a lot of level too. I couldn't overload them on drums, and I'm a hard hitter [sometimes]. Due to their size, it seems a perfect combination for close-miking drums, as well as overheads at more modest distances. Again, I need to work with them more, but I'm really impressed.

I finally put the CM3s to do some real live recording. I used them to record a school drama performance. The sound was so smooth and clean. My friend put up a pair of AT4041s as well for sound reinforcement through the PA. The CM3s totally blow the ATs away in terms of smoothness.

[Mats H]

Haven't really put my CM3s to the test quite yet and I have a cold right now which affects my hearing. The ASP008 has now been modded so the fan noise isn't quite as disturbing. Hence, I did some comparisons between the Gefell 296 mics in AB and the CM3s in X/Y on acoustic guitar... Not really a fair comparison, so I'll leave it at saying I preferred the Gefells in that instance.

Anyways, before last concert with my choir, I put up both the CM3s and a pair of Neumann KM140s on a tall stand to record the rehearsal. Unfortunately, I only brought my Babyface, so two mic preamps were available at a time. I switched mics in the break.

Here's a comparison between the two mic pairs in ORTF. The only post processing is leveling, resampling from 96 to 44.1 dithering down to 16 bits. I usually apply some EQ to compensate for the distance, but these are raw files, two different pieces of music from the rehearsal.

http://www.livingsound.se/cm3vskm140.zip

Btw the singing in the concert sounds _way_ better...

[polytope]

Originally Posted by Mats H

http://www.livingsound.se/cm3vskm140.zip

Btw the singing in the concert sounds _way_ better...

The choir sounds so good. It comes down to personal taste. The CM3 sounds a tad rounder to my ears through my MDR-V6. I like it.

[Mats H]

Originally Posted by polytope

The choir sounds so good. It comes down to personal taste. The CM3 sounds a tad rounder to my ears through my MDR-V6. I like it.

Thx! Yeah I agree, the CM3 sound a little softer, still rather open. The Ss sound a little rounder perhaps.

Maybe a bit OT but Here's a link to the entire concert except one track, recorded with KM140s, a bit of EQ and very light reverb: S:t Jacobs Ungdomskör - Vårens första dröm by MatsHelgesson on SoundCloud - Create, record and share your sounds for free

[marvin100]

Tried mine out for the first time last night. Pair of CM3s --> SD788t

Very impressed. My recording set-up is so tiny now. Awesome.

[boojum]

Originally Posted by marvin100

Tried mine out for the first time last night. Pair of CM3s --> SD788t

Very impressed. My recording set-up is so tiny now. Awesome.

Yeah, killer, huh? Imagine with a 702/722! Almost vest pocket. They are lovely mics. They are a good buy, serve well, sound great and look good. What's not to like??

Now, imagine the CM3's flanked by a pair of OM1's for a Faulkner/jnorman/boojum array. Pretty petite.

[marvin100]

Originally Posted by boojum

Yeah, killer, huh? Imagine with a 702/722! Almost vest pocket. They are lovely mics. They are a good buy, serve well, sound great and look good. What's not to like??

Now, imagine the CM3's flanked by a pair of OM1's for a Faulkner/jnorman/boojum array. Pretty petite.

I might try that with Little Blondies...

[Oren]

And yet another clip of the highly regarded CM3. After reading this thread I just had to buy a pair...

I recorded a live concert with a pianoforte (historical one dating from 1810s) with classical clarinet. Used the CM3 at 25cm with a total angle of 90 degrees and flanked them with two DPA 2006a at around 40cm. The room was small and had rather poor acoustics and lots of unfriendly reflections so of course the CM3 won bigtime over the DPA (well it's not a fair game in this small hall )

I'm attaching a small clip from the concert. The signal chain is:

CM3 - RME Fireface UC - Cubase
DPA 2006a - RME Quadmic - FF UC - Cubase
No EQ, no compression, no nothing.

(BTW this is my very first post in this forum!)

[Tim Ragnur]

Originally Posted by Oren

...of course the CM3 won bigtime over the DPA (well it's not a fair game in this small hall )

Actually, I don't agree. For me the DPA was best.
People tend to prefer whatever is louder, which the CM3 track certainly is.

[didier.brest]

Here attached the DPA track with gain added (+ 2.4 dB on left + 4.4 dB on right) to get about the same RMS levels like the Line Audio track.