DPA mics for acoustic guitar, 4041 or 4003?

[tamasdragon]

In classical music, many engineers tend to agree in that you should use rather small diaphragm mics, because the off axis response is much better, so your leakage will be be much more good.
Regards Tamas Dragon

[ghellquist]

I have no doubt, both are extremely good mics. I have a pair of 4003 that I use all the time on-location for recording classical music. There is a very special clarity in those mics that I simply love. Have not had the opportunity to test the 4041.

But are you really sure you want to use omnis for recording guitar? If you are at all unsure about how omnis work in that application, why not simply add an omni capsule to your Schoeps collection, one of the MK2 versions (there are several: MK2S, MK2H and so on, I am no expert on them). While you are at it add an MK21 as well. These two capsules will cost you less than one 4003 and add flexibility to your current setup.

I agree that the 41 capsule might not be the perfect solution at all times, and the KM184 has quite a bit of character that might not fit every time either.

Gunnar.

[tamasdragon]

The first thing what I learned was always start with an omni, and than if you have specific things to consider, than change to something else. It's really worth trying an omni first, you'll love it.
Regards Tamas Dragon

[wyomingbound]

Originally Posted by ghellquist

I have no doubt, both are extremely good mics. I have a pair of 4003 that I use all the time on-location for recording classical music. There is a very special clarity in those mics that I simply love. Have not had the opportunity to test the 4041.

But are you really sure you want to use omnis for recording guitar? If you are at all unsure about how omnis work in that application, why not simply add an omni capsule to your Schoeps collection, one of the MK2 versions (there are several: MK2S, MK2H and so on, I am no expert on them). While you are at it add an MK21 as well. These two capsules will cost you less than one 4003 and add flexibility to your current setup.
Gunnar.

Reading about DPAs vs Schoeps, I was under the impression that DPAs really excel in the omni capsules whereas Schoeps was highly regarded for cardoid (and hypercardoid).

What preamp do you use with your 4003?

I noticed your location is Stockholm. I visted there May 2003 and loved it. I liked it better than Paris.

[ISedlacek]

Originally Posted by wyomingbound

Reading about DPAs vs Schoeps, I was under the impression that DPAs really excel in the omni capsules whereas Schoeps was highly regarded for cardoid (and hypercardoid).

I would not be so sure about it ... I specifically tried them side by side (Schoeps MK2 vs DPA 4006) and I actually prefered Schoeps - having more musical "vibe", whereas DPA sounded a bit "cold" to my ears.

I wanted to give you a link to the thread where I posted lot of samples DPA vs. Schoeps - but alas - that thread has disappeared from GS

I wonder - was it erased ?

[mrhappyballoon]

I know you're asking about DPA's, and said that it's hard for you to try other high end mics, but I would definate give a Soundelux Elux 251 a shot. Some people are apposed to the whole LDC thing in this situation, but it's worth a try if it's available. It often sounds phenominal on acoustic guitar.

[wyomingbound]

Originally Posted by mrhappyballoon

I know you're asking about DPA's, and said that it's hard for you to try other high end mics, but I would definate give a Soundelux Elux 251 a shot. Some people are apposed to the whole LDC thing in this situation, but it's worth a try if it's available. It often sounds phenominal on acoustic guitar.

I should've included DPA 4012 (smaller diaphram cardoid condenser) in the list for everyone's opinion.

[T.RayBullard]

if you arent hung up on DPA , the Gefell m 296 were MADE for acoustic guitar...a match made in heaven. I own Schoeps, but much prefer the MGs for this task.

[jnorman]

i've been through a variety of neumann, schoeps, akg, and DPA mics. of the DPAs for your application, i would recommend the 4011s - they are simply the best mics made, IMO - nearly completely transparent and totally accurate. second to the 4011s, i might suggest the 4006s. my current favorite mics for amny acoustic applications are the akg c480/ck61s - nearly indistinguishable from the DPA 4011s, and very smooth. the schoeps were always too boomy for me in any kind of near-field application, though they do excel as a main pair for small ensembles. km184s are very bight and thin, and only serviceable for a select few applications.

[fifthcircle]

The 4041 with the tube body is a pretty stunning mic... I haven't used it on guitar, but when I've used it, I've loved how natural feeling and sounding the result was.

I use 4006's on classical guitar and I've gotten great results from them. With the small DPA's, play with the different grids. They will massively change the sound of the mic (the top end especially) and will really help you dial in your sound.

As for the LD-SD debate, even as a classical engineer, I personally think it is a waste of time. Several of my favorite microphones happen to be LD condensers (the AKG 426 gets nearly daily use around here for classical recording). Usually SD is more accurate off axis, but that is by far not the rule. The Microtech M930 is great off axis (heck, the first time I used them, I had them backwards and still got a great recording) as is my 426. The SM81 is SD and sucks off axis... Personally, I use what I like the sound of and don't worry about traditional "rules."

Either way, you'll get a great recording, but the differences between them are ones that in the end, only you can decide if you like.

[wyomingbound]

Originally Posted by BigRay

if you arent hung up on DPA , the Gefell m 296 were MADE for acoustic guitar...a match made in heaven. I own Schoeps, but much prefer the MGs for this task.

I wonder if the Microtech Gefell M 296 is less boomy because it's omnidirectional instead of cardoid? In other words, do you think omni instead of cardoid lessened the bass frequency more so than the issue of Microtech Gefell vs Schoeps?

[fifthcircle]

Cardiod vs omni will bring in the whole subject of proximity effect or no proximity... In that case an omni will sound much flatter. In general, however, omnis have much better low end frequency response than any directional mic will have.

--Ben

[ghellquist]

Originally Posted by wyomingbound

What preamp do you use with your 4003?

Hi Wyomingbound.

I run a Millenium Media HV3D with the 130V option. Most often though on location I have to run through a snake and then it is a DPA HMA5000 out in the auditorium going back to the HV3. The 4003 should not have a long cable run to the preamp, my longest cables are 10m although DPA indicates that 20m should be OK. It is sort of similar to a traditional tube microphone with a dedicated power supply in that respect. The HMA then feeds the mic with clean power and translates the output signal to a balanced signal that can travel several hundred meters on normal mic cables. There is a special problem with the combination as the Millenium generally comes with a 4 pin XLR but the HMA has a 7 pin. I solved that by changing to a 7pin on the Millenium keeping both options.

Anyway, regardless if you choose the 4003 or as suggested a Schoeps omni, both are up in that top segment of mics where it is matter of taste which one you like best. For classical on-location recording work both have their uses, with perhaps the Schoeps a bit more "forgiving" if you have a less than stellar performance and the 4003 just maybe a bit crystal clear in giving all inner details. We are talking small nuances here, smaller difference than what you get from changing the mic positioning a bit.

On another note, Stockholm is at the moment emerging from the long winter. Snow is mostly melted and spring flowers are showing their heads. A few weeks and the outdoor cafés will be filled with the "Summer swedes", a totally different breed of people from the winter variant. The girls are again colourful and beautiful and the people are open and friendly instead of gray and depressed. That is what a climate can do to you.

Gunnar

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by wyomingbound

I wonder if the Microtech Gefell M 296 is less boomy because it's omnidirectional instead of cardoid? In other words, do you think omni instead of cardoid lessened the bass frequency more so than the issue of Microtech Gefell vs Schoeps?

I was comparing the MK2S(omni, schoeps) with the M296(omni, gefell) so they are both omnis. Ive tried DPAs(4060,4003), AT4050, Neumann u87, akg 426, gefell m300s, ( I own the at, M300s, schoeps, akg426, u87, and 4060)mbhos and a few more on acoustic guitar and while the 296 isnt the best choice for everything, to my ears it absolutely SLAYED all the others on acoustic guitar. I have a pair that automatically go out when there are guitars on the gig. Sometimes I use them on my pedal and lap steels too(im a player) but always for acoustic guitar. There is nothing better for that task IMHO. A gefell engineer turned me on to them and it is one of the best purchases i have made. I dont know if it is the nickel diaphragms or what but man...chemistry!

[ethan_c]

I am a HUGE DPA fan. The 4006's and 4011's sound great on anything. The wonderful thing about the DPA's is that they are as neutral as you can get. You get exactly what you put through the mic with no coloration. The 4041's are in a class all their own.

If you want the most accurate sounding track then use DPA's.... I sound like a rep. I'm sure but I'm not...

[huarez]

Got stunning results with a 4006 , positioned 1 1/2 feet away pointed to the soundhole.