Tags: ,

Which Figure-8 Mic For Mid-Side?
#31
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #31
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris319 View Post
I know there is a preponderance of high-enders here, but is there any love for such mics as the AKG C414 or AT4050 (both LDCs) or even the Oktava dual cardioid (figure-8) head for the MK012?
The AKG 414 is one of my all time favorite mics... I am in the process of obtaining some for my collection. I prefer ribbons over condensers, but when I do condense, it's a 414 you can be sure. Fantastic sound, and all those patterns... AMAZING!
#32
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #32
Lives for gear
 

#33
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #33
Lives for gear
where the F is the MKH8030? please... get it done.
#34
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #34
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris319 View Post
I know there is a preponderance of high-enders here, but is there any love for such mics as the AKG C414 or AT4050 (both LDCs) or even the Oktava dual cardioid (figure-8) head for the MK012?
For an affordable fig-8 I would look at the Ambient EMESSER at about £600.

This is also a single diaphragm fig-8 (like the Sennheiser, Schoeps, Neumann and MBHO).
#35
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #35
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tourtelot View Post
FWIW, the Rycote piggyback clips are about $30 a set of two if I remember correctly. Coupled with the new Rycote Lyre "Softie" suspension, they make a pretty unbeatable M/S mic holder.

D.
This is what I use for MS now.
#36
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #36
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelPatrick View Post
I like how accurate Schoeps specifications are.

Is the MKH30 frequency response really that ideal in LFs? How do you use it to take advantage of its perfectly flat frequency performance to 45 Hz?
Sennheiser used to make an omni that was flat down to 0.1 Hz for military use, so 45.0 Hz doesn't seem too difficult after that.
#37
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #37
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsvisser View Post
where the F is the MKH8030? please... get it done.
I agree!


Oh, and sorry for all this multiple posting - I'm on the iPhone and can't multi-quote in a single post with the app.
#38
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #38
Gear addict
 
Jaymz's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tsvisser View Post
where the F is the MKH8030? please... get it done.
Indeed.
#39
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #39
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
Excellent as Schoeps microphones are, the MK8 does have a high-frequency roll-off on the rear lobe, which is clearly visible in the published plots on the Schoeps website
And which is completely inaudible. Can you hear it John? Why continue to advertise this red herring?
#40
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #40
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnRichard View Post
Induction?

Also, sorry, I meant the SF-12 (although mine is an SF-24... cause you never know with phantom power and dumb people).
Electromagnetic induction is the production of el.current across a conductor moving through a magnetic field.

It was a suggestion for OP, to go with a ribbon! He is nailing with mid mics, it is good sinergy...

Me, as a simph.orc. player, must say, ribbon sound is far beyond condenser, if you like natural.
#41
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #41
Gear addict
 
Sheikyearbouti's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
We can analyze how the specs are achieved by both the above mentioned microphones, the truth is that a MKH 40/30 combo has a lot better extension than the equivalent Schoeps combo, not just according to the spec, you can actually hear it.
I second that.

I love Schoeps mics but may I quote myself from another thread here in regards of the mk8:
"The mic sounds very thin as a spot mic. Even for violin where the roll-off on the FRC given by Schoeps (no distance specified) starts just a bit above the lowest fundament of the violin."

The spot was as close as possible to the instrument and still very thin sounding.
#42
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
And which is completely inaudible. Can you hear it John? Why continue to advertise this red herring?

I still defend the fact that you want a side mic to be as symetrical as possible, with as flat and extended a response as possible.

In fairness, you probably would only be able to hear it if you compared front to back on the same source, being that we are talking MS I suspect that it may lead to some image artifacts, perhaps ambience on one side would sound duller?

What I don't understand is why this discussion has become so much about defending the Schoeps Mk8, as John pointed out their is the other option of the Neumann AK20 (though I think this also may have noticeable bass roll off) and the other options of ribbon mics or dual diaphram microphones, all of which my be suitably deployed.

I personally use and like Schoeps microphones for many applications, however, I often see "blind" faith in their products, the like of which I witness in those that love everything "Apple".
#43
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #43
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
Sennheiser used to make an omni that was flat down to 0.1 Hz for military use, so 45.0 Hz doesn't seem too difficult after that.
This reveals confusion about the physical factor that limits LF capture with bipolar mics. On this subject you can't compare omni pressure mics with gradient mics; and bipolar designs are least able to capture LFs because they have virtually no acoustical impedance on both sides at low velocities.
#44
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #44
Lives for gear
 

That's why I MKH omni/8 for MS
But MKH 8/8 MS is excellent too
#45
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #45
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
That's why I MKH omni/8 for MS
But MKH 8/8 MS is excellent too
Yep, and without hearing your results I'm sure you get strong LFs in the mid channel when it's an omni.
#46
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #46
Lives for gear
 

Both give plenty of music LF
The omni rig gives 'City Skyline ' too
That pleasant rumble when recording in a Cathedral or Abbey, when removed it makes a location recording a trifle sterile.

I'm recording singing bowls and gongs tomorrow, in a perfect 18th C Quaker Meeting house,in a peaceful valley, I will compare arrays
Bowls and gongs are a challenge, imho.
#47
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #47
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by aracu View Post
short clip of ccm8 side with senn 800 mid on string quartet:
http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/...mk8.Frank2.mp3
Very nice stereo image!

I do not understand the heat in this discussion. It is not about a figure-of-eight mic as a spot mic, but as the "S" in M/S. A roll-off in the lower registers is no problem at all as there isn't much need to define them right or left in the stereo image. The mid-mic will take care of it. Naturally, if you use only the sides of the M/S signal then you might have a problem, but in a normal M/S situation the side-mic will only determine to which side the signals of the mid will be "routed". And to my experience the Schoeps MK8 is just fine for that. The MKH30 is going to swing the basses more to the right and left. If that's what you like, fine, but I prefer a more center weighted low. (Especially since a subwoofer for the lowest frequences is mono anyway and it is nice to hear the lows being funneled gradually to that "centre of gravity". Less fatiguing.)
Quote
1
#48
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #48
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
And which is completely inaudible. Can you hear it John? Why continue to advertise this red herring?
It's not a red herring, it's a fact.

Whether it matters to you is your personal choice.
#49
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #49
Lives for gear
 
tourtelot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
What I don't understand is why this discussion has become so much about defending the Schoeps Mk8. . .
I don't really see it as a blind defense of the Mk8. It is what I have and I think that the recordings produced by it are excellent and that works for me.

I am a bit amused by the whole PC/Mac type discussions that seem to be a common point of the GS forums and how folks seem to want to proselytize instead of discuss.

Now, just to be clear, I am not a Sennheiser "hater" and use the MKH50 as my PREFERRED dialog capture mic in film and TV. It is, to my ears, the BEST choice of mic for that job. And would I love to have two MKH40, two MKH20 and an MKH30 in my kit? You betcha!

It's just, as I was saying, that the Schoeps combination produces wonderful results for me, in spite of some silly lines drawn on a piece of paper (which have absolutely no input to my ears!) I know really well respected live recordists with great ears who agree, just as, I'm sure, there are respected engineers that wouldn't record without a Sennheiser pair, and that's all good. Just tools in a box, and I don't really see the need to argue which carpenter's hammer is better.

Go, one and all and make fabulous sounding recordings with whatever tools you have in your box. And remember that you can't hear a piece of paper.

D.

Last edited by tourtelot; 6th November 2011 at 07:00 PM.. Reason: Spelling as always :)
#50
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #50
Lives for gear
 
tourtelot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
It's not a red herring, it's a fact.
It was a simple question, unanswered. "Can you hear it?"

D.
#51
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #51
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earcatcher View Post
If that's what you like, fine, but I prefer a more center weighted low. (Especially since a subwoofer for the lowest frequences is mono anyway and it is nice to hear the lows being funneled gradually to that "centre of gravity". Less fatiguing.)
It's true that one subwoofer gives mono bass however two or more subwoofers gives you stereo. Multiple LF sources are (basically) always better than one no matter if the LF is mixed to mono or kept in stereo.


/Peter
#52
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #52
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Earcatcher View Post
I do not understand the heat in this discussion.
What about comments like these?

"The MKH has exceptional proximity."
OK, but what does that mean? And what does a perfect response curve mean for a Fig-8 mic? Proximity makes ALL the difference, right?

"Schoeps measure at a closer distance" (than industry-standard 1 meter).
Really? Please explain!

I think this is a great thread with a good OP and that cheering for a favorite mic is fine! My problem is letting biased claims go unchallenged, especially if they are attached to an unclear agenda.
#53
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #53
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelPatrick View Post
I think this is a great thread with a good OP and that cheering for a favorite mic is fine! My problem is letting biased claims go unchallenged, especially if they are attached to an unclear agenda.
Here, here!
#54
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #54
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by tourtelot View Post
It was a simple question, unanswered. "Can you hear it?"

D.
I would not be able to hear it, I'm too old and my top end has dropped away a bit.

But that isn't the point - a younger person with a much better top end hearing would very likely hear it.
#55
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #55
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelPatrick View Post
What about comments like these?

"The MKH has exceptional proximity."
OK, but what does that mean? And what does a perfect response curve mean for a Fig-8 mic? Proximity makes ALL the difference, right?

"Schoeps measure at a closer distance" (than industry-standard 1 meter).
Really? Please explain!

I think this is a great thread with a good OP and that cheering for a favorite mic is fine! My problem is letting biased claims go unchallenged, especially if they are attached to an unclear agenda.

I certainly have no "agenda" other than truth and clarity.

I have posted many times that my top mic. brands are (in alphabetical order): DPA, Gefell, MBHO, Neumann, Schoeps and Sennheiser and I treat these as equals, each having their own "characteristics".

The last comment came from a friend who told me that he was told by Schoeps's designer that they measure closer than 1m (names removed, but I do know them).

I like Schoeps mics very much, just I don't like the fig-8 for MS applications due to the reasons I have stated.
#56
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #56
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
I still defend the fact that you want a side mic to be as symetrical as possible, with as flat and extended a response as possible.
This is an ideal position, yes. But you also want a mic that sounds correct when matrixed, which the MK8 does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
In fairness, you probably would only be able to hear it if you compared front to back on the same source, being that we are talking MS I suspect that it may lead to some image artifacts, perhaps ambience on one side would sound duller?
So you're guessing now: "probably", "suspect", "perhaps". You've actually never heard a problem with the MK8 imaging have you Roland. Next we will probably get the "not a matched pair" detection in spaced omnis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
What I don't understand is why this discussion has become so much about defending the Schoeps Mk8
Not defending Schoeps, defending against GS facts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
I personally use and like Schoeps microphones for many applications, however, I often see "blind" faith in their products, the like of which I witness in those that love everything "Apple".
Blind faith? C'mon Roland, we are talking proper listening tests here and not theoretical mumbo jumbo that exists because Schoeps are honest about their specs.

Why are we not talking about the artificial EQ applied to the Senn fig 8 to counter the laws of physics?
#57
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #57
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 

John,

I don't think you should spread rumors. Or, before you do, at least get a comment directly from Schoeps in response to your accusation and with their permission post it so we'll all know what they say.

If you won't I will.
#58
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #58
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by tourtelot View Post
I don't really see it as a blind defense of the Mk8. It is what I have and I think that the recordings produced by it are excellent and that works for me.

I am a bit amused by the whole PC/Mac type discussions that seem to be a common point of the GS forums and how folks seem to want to proselytize instead of discuss.

Now, just to be clear, I am not a Sennheiser "hater" and use the MKH50 as my PREFERRED dialog capture mic in film and TV. It is, to my ears, the BEST choice of mic for that job. And would I love to have two MKH40, two MKH20 and an MKH30 in my kit? You betcha!

It's just, as I was saying, that the Schoeps combination produces wonderful results for me, in spite of some silly lines drawn on a piece of paper (which have absolutely no input to my ears!) I know really well respected live recordists with great ears who agree, just as, I'm sure, there are respected engineers that wouldn't record without a Sennheiser pair, and that's all good. Just tools in a box, and I don't really see the need to argue which carpenter's hammer is better.

Go, one and all and make fabulous sounding recordings with whatever tools you have in your box. And remember that you can't hear a piece of paper.

D.
To a large extent I agree with you, however, what a lot of posters here are probably not as aware of (as you obviously are), how big a presence in broadcast and tv and film sound Schoeps have. Predominantly I would say the majority of members of this forum are music recordists. Schoeps with their excellent interchangeable capsule system and vast range of accessories make them a great choice for a "kit of bits" that can be used to address almost every situation.

My original post, I think, detailed good reasons why the MKH 30 has some advantages in music recording. In my original situation it was an orchestral recording done with a simple, single point, microphone set-up. As I mentioned I was able to deliver results that were ultimately satisfactory. Was it the best tool for the job? Not for me, in that scenario, I have used the MKH 40/30 combo and the MKH 30 combined with other centre mics such as DPA 4006's, it really is a good all rounder for music recording, changing the centre mic allows for a further degree of "sculpting" the sound. Even combined with a Mk2 the Mk8 still lightens the sound, not what I want for orchestral work. Having a good idea of your background, I didn't think for a moment that you were a Sennheiser hater, however, I was making the point that in your work, the Mk8 would likely have advantages, and from your reply about you and your colleagues impressions of it as a side mic, this seems to be born out.

My point with the Apple analogy, was simply to say there are plenty of other posters jumping to defend the Mk8 when they (by their own admissions) don't have the experience of the MKH30 (I am fortunate to have experienced both and several other options too, as has John).

Quote:
MichaelPatrick

What about comments like these?
"The MKH has exceptional proximity."
OK, but what does that mean? And what does a perfect response curve mean for a Fig-8 mic? Proximity makes ALL the difference, right?

"Schoeps measure at a closer distance" (than industry-standard 1 meter).
Really? Please explain!

I think this is a great thread with a good OP and that cheering for a favorite mic is fine!

My problem is letting such biased claims go unchallenged
Proximity shouldn't really be a feature with a side mic in an MS set-up, I can't imagine employing an MS system close enough for that to be a factor. Measured at 1m there should be no discernible proximity effect.

I think it was John who said that Schoeps take their measurements at a closer distance, again this should have little effect, unless it is close enough that there is some proximity effect, then it would presumably mean that the bass response is potentially even worse than displayed on their published chart.

As I would reiterate, my findings, re the Mk8 were based on an initial listening assessment, I looked out the spec's subsequently and found they bore out my observations.

Quote:
It's true that one subwoofer gives mono bass however two or more subwoofers gives you stereo. Multiple LF sources are (basically) always better than one no matter if the LF is mixed to mono or kept in stereo.


/Peter
And interestingly I have found that surround recordings seem to portray a greater sense of scale and weight. I do have my own pet theory about why this may be the case.
#59
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #59
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
But that isn't the point - a younger person with a much better top end hearing would very likely hear it.
A guess here too, John?
#60
6th November 2011
Old 6th November 2011
  #60
Gear interested
 

the original question was:
> Which figure-8 mics do people use for the "side" mic in mid-side recording (or Blumlein for that matter)?

A number of folks use pairs of ribbon microphones, such as two Coles 4038 or a Royer SF24. For me, that option is out, mostly I suppose because I tend to record quiet subjects and it's difficult to get a good SNR with ribbons. Large diaphragm condensors have problems because they have poor polar patterns at HF, and for LDCs HF starts at about 5 kHz. That leaves small diaphragm condensors (again, this is according to my personal criteria).

What are the figure 8 candidates?

Ambient ATE_208 $830 15 dBA
AKG blueline CK94 $828 (with SE300) 22 dBA
Neumann KM120 $1700 17.5 dBA
Schoeps Mk8 $2124 (with CMC6) 18 dBA
Sennheiser mkh30 $1250 13 dBA


MBHO is the dark horse in this race and I have no data on it.

The AKG blueline is least expensive (except that the Ambient is essentially the same price) and the Schoeps is most expensive. The AKG has the worst self noise and Sennheiser has the best self noise.

Then comes the all-important frequency response. Here, I include _all_ of the frequency response, that is the response in all directions. We don't really have much info. Most of the polar patterns shown on the mfgrs. web sites seem nearly perfect. The schoeps mk8 polar patterns show attenuation in the rear lobe at HF. The Neuman KM120 polar patterns become acorn-shaped at HF.

All of them show a LF roll-off starting about 150 Hz. This is, as was written above, due to the fact that the actual motive force is proportional to the audio frequency, but the diaphragm motion is controlled by acoustic resistance at midband. At some point the stiffness of the diaphragm becomes more significant than the resistance and the response rolls off. Sennheiser has designed their capsule such that the resistance is less, increasing the midband output and moving the roll-off frequency up to about 260 Hz (source, John Willet's AES paper on the symmetrical microphone capsule, Fig. 8). But Sennheiser supplies EQ within the microphone and that moves the LF corner frequency down to about 60 Hz. And they supply a low-cut filter to get rid of that response if it gets to be a problem.

My best effort on extrapolating the LF response from measurements and mfgr. data gives:

CK94
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Spectacle / So much gear, so little time!
8
MrVelvet / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
7
leddy / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
4
Hiker / So much gear, so little time!
9
filmgirl / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
10

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.