7 Omni Mic comparison(piano)

[T.RayBullard]

Gefell 296, DPA 4006, Neumann TLM 50, AT 4050, Neumann u87, Gefell MK250/mv220, Schoeps MK2S (all omni)

in the "test 1" mics were 10 ' away and spaced about 50cm

in "test 2" mics were 20' away and spaced 1 meter.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=Z85B3GXH

Mics>>>DAV BG-1>>>PT Conversion>>>PT then taken to my home studio and opened in Samplitude Pro 8.31, level matched, and dithered to 16/44.1 using triangular spread dither(samp native)>>win zip>>mega upload

Piano isnt perfect, and needs repair... HF Squeal occasionally. Ignore as best you can.It isnt my piano, know what they say about Govt. Equipment. dfegad My poor pregnant wife was sightreading, I grabbed her on a whim and a mendelsohnn book....she did fine though. Love that gal.

I was at work and had the Army Studio to myself and just did it on a whim. It isnt "scientific" but gives a decent idea I guess...

[ajfarber]

Ok, where do I begin? First, let me thank you for conducting this shootout, I always learn something whilst being entertained. Second, how do they tune pianos in the army? Nevermind that comment. You say that test 2 the mics were 20' away

Here we go.
1. AT4050 Lots of air like I would expect from an M50. I can hear key and pedal noises, also the rustleing of clothes. Piano sounds OK but the mic is not flattering.

2. AT4050 A tad warmer but I'm not jumping up & down
.
3. DPA 4006 I like this straightaway. Maybe not the most accurate sound but it seems to put a little "hair" on the tone.

4. DPA Better still,

5,6,7 & 8 the Gefells. Fine. Doesn't grab me or piss me off either. Kinda neutral in colour and vibe.

9. M150 YOU ARE THERE. OK, I'm standing next to the piano. Doesn't seem to add much and yet it glosses over some of the piano's flaws. Alot of air and naturally, room/pedal/key noise.

10. M150 You Are there too. If the immaging wasn't so wide it WOULD feel as if I'm sitting at the piano.

11, 12. U87 More colour than I expected. I've use 87s and 67s over the hammers and gotten good results. Cardioid only in my case.

13,14. Schoeps Not as warm as a Schoeps 221b, I havn't heard a 222
I dig the Schoeps.

I'd be cool with the DPAs, the Schoeps, the M150 and the U87. My favourite: M150

[T.RayBullard]

Interesting! My favorites are the MK250, M296, and TLM50. This test helped confirm my fears about the Schoeps, (ive done many tests with them) so I am probably going to sell them and grab some more gefells.

[T.RayBullard]

oh yeah, there is a german contractor that comes in every 3 months or so and tunes all the pianos. That particular one is just a beater that is in a rehearsal room, used for Vocalists to practice arias with, etc..the Main Piano is a Steinway, but it is on tour. I know...it is out of tune, this was a last minute thing, born out of boredom.

Originally Posted by ajfarber

Ok, where do I begin? First, let me thank you for conducting this shootout, I always learn something whilst being entertained. Second, how do they tune pianos in the army? Nevermind that comment. You say that test 2 the mics were 20' away

Here we go.
1. AT4050 Lots of air like I would expect from an M50. I can hear key and pedal noises, also the rustleing of clothes. Piano sounds OK but the mic is not flattering.

2. AT4050 A tad warmer but I'm not jumping up & down
.
3. DPA 4006 I like this straightaway. Maybe not the most accurate sound but it seems to put a little "hair" on the tone.

4. DPA Better still,

5,6,7 & 8 the Gefells. Fine. Doesn't grab me or piss me off either. Kinda neutral in colour and vibe.

9. M150 YOU ARE THERE. OK, I'm standing next to the piano. Doesn't seem to add much and yet it glosses over some of the piano's flaws. Alot of air and naturally, room/pedal/key noise.

10. M150 You Are there too. If the immaging wasn't so wide it WOULD feel as if I'm sitting at the piano.

11, 12. U87 More colour than I expected. I've use 87s and 67s over the hammers and gotten good results. Cardioid only in my case.

13,14. Schoeps Not as warm as a Schoeps 221b, I havn't heard a 222
I dig the Schoeps.

I'd be cool with the DPAs, the Schoeps, the M150 and the U87. My favourite: M150

[mr.gefell]

the mk250 was great. wow.

[T.RayBullard]

I know..thats why I am selling my Schoeps omnis and getting more gefells.

Originally Posted by mr.gefell

the mk250 was great. wow.

[mr.gefell]

Originally Posted by T.RayBullard

I know..thats why I am selling my Schoeps omnis and getting more gefells.

been fan of these measurement capsule for a long time, you should definately try the mk 102 capsule and get a pair of old school b&k 4034 ( for diffuse field )

thumbsup

[mr.gefell]

my only beef with the mv220 pre-amp was the xlr termination , not sure why gefell couldn't make one with xlr output on the end of the mic body

[T.RayBullard]

yeah, true Muj...the capsule is too narrow to hold a XLR connection..

They are very light though.

[ben_allison]

Dude, thank you for this great comparrison!

Really. Much appreciated.

The Geffels won for me.

The DPA lost.

And the 4050? Seriously, with a slightly different placement and a little tasteful EQ, you'd be golden -- and for the price? Wow. Very interesting results.

I can't believe it stacked up that well.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by ben_allison

Dude, thank you for this great comparrison!

Really. Much appreciated.

The Geffels won for me.

The DPA lost.

And the 4050? Seriously, with a slightly different placement and a little tasteful EQ, you'd be golden -- and for the price? Wow. Very interesting results.

I can't believe it stacked up that well.

I guess there must be alot of "taste" issues when it comes to piano sounds. Some of us like a dark piano, some bright et al....

The Geffels didn't do much for me, and I really dug the DPAs. I also thought the M150 was the most realistic.

I like Steinway, Grotrian, Mason & Hamlin and Bechstein pianos. Dark and rich.

Some folks like Bosendorfer, Bluthner, Yamaha and Fazioli, wich to me are all brassy, bold and bright.

So naturally, some people will like the Geffels ond others the DPAs, but i think we should all agree that the M150s sound pretty damn real! No?

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

should all agree that the M150s sound pretty damn real! No?

that would be the TLM 50, not m150. TLM=TransformerLess.. the M150 is a modified tube design.

I liked the TLM50, yep. Not as much as Gefells, but definitely liked them.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by T.RayBullard

that would be the TLM 50, not m150. TLM=TransformerLess.. the M150 is a modified tube design.

I liked the TLM50, yep. Not as much as Gefells, but definitely liked them.

Ahhh. TLM150. Sounded good to me, but the DPAs sounded darker to me and the U87s seemed to have more character, good for solo jazz piano. The TLM150s sounded "real" and uncoloured like classical music should.

I'll relisten to the Gefells.

[matyas]

Maybe it's my less than ideal listening situation, but I actually expected the differences to be more dramatic. I do think that any one of those mics could give you a respectable tone for a record. However, the large-diaphragm mics sounded a bit "creamier" - I guess that shouldn't be surprising. Of the the TLM, the U87, and the AT4050, I actually liked the 4050 the best, which is cool, because that's the only one of those mics I can even contemplate affording! Anyway, I'm going to re-listen to the SDCs, but I also liked the Gefells a lot.
Out of curiosity, what was the mic placement?

[Dzoing]

Originally Posted by ajfarber

I guess there must be alot of "taste" issues when it comes to piano sounds. Some of us like a dark piano, some bright et al....

[...]

I like Steinway, Grotrian, Mason & Hamlin and Bechstein pianos. Dark and rich.

Some folks like Bosendorfer, Bluthner, Yamaha and Fazioli, wich to me are all brassy, bold and bright.

Yep! I prefer dark pianos as well. Not sure "rich" is the right word. Yamaha's and Bösie's have more overtones, which make them bright sounding. In that way they are richer than the Grotrian-fashioned ones.

As far as mics, I would have liked to hear some Gefell UMT70s or even UM92.1s piano tracks -- how would their sound compare to the Gefell used here?

Anyway thanks Ray for this! I have to listen to those tracks on a better system: my mobile speakers are real shit!

[mr.gefell]

Just a reminder, the TLM 50 has a hyped frequency response compared to the other microphones in the test. thumbsup

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by Dzoing

As far as mics, I would have liked to hear some Gefell UMT70s or even UM92.1s piano tracks -- how would their sound compare to the Gefell used here?

The UMT70s would have been similar in character to the 296, perhaps with a bit less detail/clarity.....the um92.1s would have been HUGE sounding, and really "colored"

Originally Posted by matyas

Mic placement?

It is in the first post.

Originally Posted by AjFarber

ahh TLM150

nope, TLM50

[ajfarber]

nope, TLM50

I like it.

[ben_allison]

I actually thought the DPA and TLM50 shared a mildy boxy quality that was absent with all the other candidates. A very obvious masking/smearing of frequencies in the high mids...

But yeah, the differences in detail and realism were quite minimal.

Here's food for thought...

What would enrich your setup and add more value and tone capturing options:

1) really expensive SDC's that are marginally better than others
2) totally usable LDC's, with a WAD of cash left over for a primo EQ

Considering, to me at least, the 4050 didn't compromise detail or realism captured when compared to the other options, it seems like the latter setup would allow for a far greater amount of possibility.

Especially condisering how much of an impact mic placement has, I'd rather have more pieces in the studio to work with, and push them as far as I can, as opposed to having a few select pieces, and no options on top of that...

But if you have a $50,000 mic budget, you probably aren't as concerned about stretching your budget...

[ajfarber]

This is just my opinion so don't jump all over me.

I would stock my studio with Lawson L47s, because they are great at recording instruments and voices. They might not be as coloured as som other mics, they might not be as attractive to clients who don't know shit. They are, in my opinion, todays equivilent of a Neuman M49, the kind of mic they used at Columbia 30th street studios in the 50s and 60s on piano, brass, woodwinds, strings, and vocals.

Lawson is almost totally flat in the wide cardioid position, and costs only $2000. While not cheap, they are much less than Neuman M149, Soundelux E49, Wagner, Wunder, Telefunken USA, Gefell, Blue etc... They are made in the US w/o any Chinese parts and have a lifetime garentee. (not sure if that's the mic's life, your life, or Gene Lawson's life). For $50K you can have a pile of lawsons and say a pile of Royers or Coles, and still have $ for slutty pre amps, eqs and compressors.

The only thing we can't buy is a healthy record business.

[larsfarm]

Originally Posted by mr.gefell

Just a reminder, the TLM 50 has a hyped frequency response compared to the other microphones in the test. thumbsup

Yes, and there are many other variables. For instance the DPA test2 has a lower level than the TLM50 test2 in the left mic and several dB lower in the right mic. What grid was used on the DPA? etc, etc. This is still a very interesting set of files!

best regards
Lars

BTW someone put the TLM50 in the LDC group, but it really is one of the most SDC of those in the set. The capsule diameter is 12mm (ca 1/2"), smaller than the DPA, smaller than the Schoeps./L

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by larsfarm

Yes, and there are many other variables. For instance the DPA test2 has a lower level than the TLM50 test2 in the left mic and several dB lower in the right mic. What grid was used on the DPA? etc, etc. This is still a very interesting set of files!

best regards
Lars

BTW someone put the TLM50 in the LDC group, but it really is one of the most SDC of those in the set. The capsule diameter is 12mm (ca 1/2"), smaller than the DPA, smaller than the Schoeps./L

uh oh there comes Mr. Scientific analysis.. the DPAs didnt have any grids..just the mic capsule and body>>>??? regardless of db differences, the character of the mics show through.

[mr.gefell]

Originally Posted by T.RayBullard

??? regardless of db differences, the character of the mics show through.

+1thumbsup

[larsfarm]

Originally Posted by T.RayBullard

uh oh there comes Mr. Scientific analysis..goof.

Mea culpa. I actually thought you meant to illustrate differences between microphones, not differences in recording techniques. It is generally accepted that level differences skews comparisons in favour of the louder. The stereo image of DPA2 is also off to its disadvantage. Do you find that controversial?

Originally Posted by T.RayBullard

..goof the DPAs didnt have any grids..just the mic capsule and body.

Really? One of them should always be on! The grids are there to shape the frequency response. My question was, which one? Each 4006 comes with three different grids intended for different recording situations. Sort of like the different Schoeps MK2/H/S capsules.

best regards
Lars

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by larsfarm

image of DPA2 is also off to its disadvantage. Do you find that controversial?

Nope. This wasnt a scientific comparison, and will not ever be. I gathered a lot from it, "exact" or no "exact". I dont find it controversial at all. Dont really care. I know what the mics sound like. Note the disclaimer in my first post
"this was not an exact or scientific experiement, so dont expect that" just listening and comparing...which is good enough for me.

Originally Posted by larsfarm

Really? One of them should always be on! The grids are there to shape the frequency response. My question was, which one? Each 4006 comes with three different grids intended for different recording situations. Sort of like the different Schoeps MK2/H/S capsules.

best regards
Lars

free field.

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by larsfarm

It is generally accepted that level differences skews comparisons in favour of the louder.

And? These arent a bunch of yahoos here,some still prefer the DPAs.. and I am sure that those seeking laboratory worthy tests wont look at MY posts. I use my ears, approximation, and my ears...and my ears. I wasnt here to prove one better or worse,. just to show some basic differences in character. it was nothing more than that, nothing less.

[JazzYoda]

Actually in my quick glossing-over of the recordings I like the DPA far recording best. It seems to work with that instrument. Wish it were tuned.

[T.RayBullard]

Originally Posted by JazzYoda

Actually in my quick glossing-over of the recordings I like the DPA far recording best. It seems to work with that instrument. Wish it were tuned.

I wish that it had been tuned too, unfortunately this was on a whim, thrown together in about 45 minutes or so , using the old practice piano. I didnt have a piano tuner in my pocket. My wife was wincing as she was playing it, but I encouraged her to carry on. next up, Honky Tonk/Western Piano Selections.

[AmekGuy]

T.Ray -

Thanks for taking the time to put this this informative post together. IMO, using the ears for a good overview makes more sense, than getting carried away with scientific mumbo jumbo

[T.RayBullard]

I Like the way you talk. Thanks much for the kind words!

Originally Posted by AmekGuy

T.Ray -

Thanks for taking the time to put this this informative post together. IMO, using the ears for a good overview makes more sense, than getting carried away with scientific mumbo jumbo