The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Help: DPA 4006A vs. Schoeps MK2 (with CMC6U)?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #1
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Help: DPA 4006A vs. Schoeps MK2 (with CMC6U)?

Hi, I know this is a frequently discussed topic, but I have a specific angle for my question.

I'm consider a matched pair of either of these for:

- measurements (noise pollution analysis, for ground plane measurements etc, calibrating my lesser measurement mics, and for FIR correcting control rooms and sound systems etc.)

- but also for recording, piano and acoustic guitar primarily, but hopefully some location work with ensembles...also as an omni in studio work (various ac instruments, drum overheads, etc. etc.).

I know no one mic does all, I have a limited mic locker (some decent tube mics and vocal mics, (mostly coloured stuff), some OK measurement mics)...but of these two which is the most suitable for me (or any others to consider)?

Way I see it is (correct me if I'm wrong):

- the Schoeps is near ruler flat (easy measuring without cal files), but rolls off after 4k up to nearly -15 at 16k off-axis. Schoeps requires different capsules to alter response, unlikely I'll have the funds to buy any soon...I have heard some I really liked though...so maybe a good long term investment. I haven't found many samples of this capsule (MK2), no great ones anyway, and no comparisons (that are alive anyway)...

- the DPA has a bit of a top-end lift and is a bit less directional at high frequencies...but the DPA has a number of cheap attachments that can alter the response of the mic for many circumstances. Problem is, in most samples I've heard, I thought it sounded a bit fizzy, or boring, that said it also always sounded like it'll do, and you wouldn't do much to it.

P.S. I prefer the sound of the Joesphen C617set to either of these, but it's a bit expensive to me...maybe I should hold out for it...it just seems to have something, a bit more focused, with less room sound, but more three-dimensionality (excuse the waffle).

Earthworks M50 is another contender, liked some clips, but I've heard mixed reports about the reliability of the plastic capsule, especially if you're going to be out and about with it.

No way of trying before I buy, so all I have is the specs, a few samples, and anecdotes to go on...
Old 2 weeks ago
  #2
Gear Addict
I have a pair of Josephson 617's and they are terrific mics. By the way the
MK221 capsules of the 617's are nickel instrumentation capsules made by Gefell. I believe Josephson picks the capsules for a tighter frequency response
spec. than standard MK221 capsules.
FYI, Josephson also sells measurement/instrumentation
mics and David Josephson (past chair
of AES Technical Committee for Microphones) knows a lot about mics.
I have learned a lot from and I would trust him to offer unbiased advice.
Strongly suggest you call/write him.
http://josephson mics
(and save up money for the Josephson's,
my best mics)
If you would like to hear the 617's go to my thread: http://https://www.gearslutz.com/boa...l#post12877963
It includes a 2 ft spaced pair of 617's
live recording ( NO processing of any kind other than gain boost) of Kevin Burke, a top Irish fiddler.
The attached samples are MP3-320 BUT
you can download both 2496 along with MP3-320 samples from the Google drive link in my initial post. The 617 pair was recorded via Gordon preamps to
Sound Devices 788 SSD.
Thanks,
Bill

Last edited by Folkie; 2 weeks ago at 05:07 AM.. Reason: corrected URL
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
I'm consider a matched pair of either of these for:

- measurements (noise pollution analysis, for ground plane measurements etc, calibrating my lesser measurement mics, and for FIR correcting control rooms and sound systems etc.)
One thing to remember when using these mics for acoustic measurement (that may even end up in court) is that you need to record and demonstrate a measurement calibration. So the calibrator ring capsule inserts are required for your acoustic calibrator.

I use 4006TL and MK2 for acoustical measurements and have the B&K calibrator inserts for both. The nextel coating on the MK2 means the Schoeps supplied calibrator insert doesn't fit over the capsule, you have to use the nickel finish capsules. Schoeps will refinish your Nextel capsule in Nickel for a modest fee.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #4
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
I have a pair of Josephson 617's and they are terrific mics. By the way the
MK221 capsules of the 617's are nickel instrumentation capsules made by Gefell. I believe Josephson picks the capsules for a tighter frequency response
spec. than standard MK221 capsules.
FYI, Josephson also sells measurement/instrumentation
mics and David Josephson (past chair
of AES Technical Committee for Microphones) knows a lot about mics.
I have learned a lot from and I would trust him to offer unbiased advice.
Strongly suggest you call/write him.
http://josephson mics
(and save up money for the Josephson's,
my best mics)
If you would like to hear the 617's go to my thread: http://https://www.gearslutz.com/boa...l#post12877963
It includes a 2 ft spaced pair of 617's
live recording ( NO processing of any kind other than gain boost) of Kevin Burke, a top Irish fiddler.
The attached samples are MP3-320 BUT
you can download both 2496 along with MP3-320 samples from the Google drive link in my initial post. The 617 pair was recorded via Gordon preamps to
Sound Devices 788 SSD.
Thanks,
Bill
Cheers, yeah, I've looked around for samples of Gefell's own MK221 mic, it didn't catch my ear as much as the 617set...could be just the recordings themselves however...would be nice to hear a good head-on of both. With an ensemble or piano in a decent room or something.

Definitely prefer the 617set in that sample you posted, by a mile! Cheers.

I have no doubts about the 617set really, if I could get it for the same price as the 4006as it would be on the way.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #5
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
One thing to remember when using these mics for acoustic measurement (that may even end up in court) is that you need to record and demonstrate a measurement calibration. So the calibrator ring capsule inserts are required for your acoustic calibrator.

I use 4006TL and MK2 for acoustical measurements and have the B&K calibrator inserts for both. The nextel coating on the MK2 means the Schoeps supplied calibrator insert doesn't fit over the capsule, you have to use the nickel finish capsules. Schoeps will refinish your Nextel capsule in Nickel for a modest fee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
One thing to remember when using these mics for acoustic measurement (that may even end up in court) is that you need to record and demonstrate a measurement calibration. So the calibrator ring capsule inserts are required for your acoustic calibrator.

I use 4006TL and MK2 for acoustical measurements and have the B&K calibrator inserts for both. The nextel coating on the MK2 means the Schoeps supplied calibrator insert doesn't fit over the capsule, you have to use the nickel finish capsules. Schoeps will refinish your Nextel capsule in Nickel for a modest fee.
Cheers David, actually I just noticed that on their site yesterday...was also considering the CMC6lin...yes, well aware of this...

Considering you have both, I'd be more curious how you find these for recording? I never seem to like the sound of the DPA when I hear it in most of these online samples, especially DPA's own one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YMTqe0L84E, that said, I'm sure I've heard it 10s of thousands of times on classical recordings and never thought "what an awful mic they're using". Only a handful of snippets of the MK2, sounded nicer to me, in the few comparisons with a 4006 I found.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
This helped me understand what I was hearing a bit, though I would post it:
Attached Thumbnails
Help: DPA 4006A vs. Schoeps MK2 (with CMC6U)?-screen-shot-2017-10-01-13.37.58.jpg  
Old 2 weeks ago
  #7
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pno View Post
Considering you have both, I'd be more curious how you find these for recording?
I like them both very much. I tend to use the 4006 more for instrument ensemble main pairs and the MK2 for closer piano pairs or for choral.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #8
Lives for gear
 
jnorman's Avatar
I used to work in acoustic measurement also, and we used DPA exclusively. I have also owned both 4006 pairs and cmc62 pairs in my recording studio. As David mentions, the DPA’s are perhaps better suited for ensemble work, whereas the Schoeps mk2 capsules are more useful for closer micing situations. I am quite fond of both sets, though if I had to pick a single pair for multiple duties, I would go with the DPA.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Bruce Watson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnorman View Post
...the DPA’s are perhaps better suited for ensemble work, whereas the Schoeps mk2 capsules are more useful for closer micing situations. I am quite fond of both sets, though if I had to pick a single pair for multiple duties, I would go with the DPA.
When faced with this compromise problem myself, I picked the Schoeps mk2h caps. Although I'm not sure I compromised anything at all.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
I think that measurement and music recording are two very different crafts with different tools required.

I think that the MK2 is the best capsule made and it is used here as a universal omni. I don't understand the comments about it not being for "ensemble use."
It offers a beautiful even pick up of the musicians and the acoustic. The MK2 is not a measurement mic.

When the 4006 (not a measurement mic) was made by Bruel & Kjaer, one could change out the electronics in it and dump the transformer and get much bettter sound. The glassy and hard top end needed to be ameliorated.

The same glass and hard top end in the 4006 now made by DPA is much worse than the B&K model since its electronics are so cheap and sound poor. They still offer a glassy and hard treble immediately recognizable in recordings made with these mics.

I would always choose MK2 because it is the best.

For measurement, buy Gefell or Bruel & Kjaer capsules with the right amplifier. The Russians also make fantastic measurement mics at a much lower price point.

Measurement and Music--never the twain shall meet.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #11
Here for the gear
 

I think both the DPAs and Schoeps have an identifiable and characteristic sound. Like Plush, I find the DPAs to be a bit glassy. I frequently use the MK2 as my preferred omni capsule; the flatness both invites and demands close placement.

If you want to hear an ensemble recording made with MK2 caps, check out the recording of the Voxare String Quartet here: https://www.amazon.com/Tonality-Voxa...=UTF8&qid=&sr=. (The recording was just released on 10/1/17; I play in the quartet.) The quartet recording was made with three MK2 mics at the Academy of Arts and letters, and engineered by Judy Sherman. The center mic was in the middle of the quartet to capture articulation of the 2nd vln and cello. The other two mics were just in front of the quartet. If I remember correctly, she was using Millennia pres. Judy actually first set up Sonodore 402s but switched to the Schoeps.

Good luck with your decision!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #12
Gear Addict
 
voltronic's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush View Post
I think that measurement and music recording are two very different crafts with different tools required.

I think that the MK2 is the best capsule made and it is used here as a universal omni. I don't understand the comments about it not being for "ensemble use."
It offers a beautiful even pick up of the musicians and the acoustic. The MK2 is not a measurement mic.

When the 4006 (not a measurement mic) was made by Bruel & Kjaer, one could change out the electronics in it and dump the transformer and get much bettter sound. The glassy and hard top end needed to be ameliorated.

The same glass and hard top end in the 4006 now made by DPA is much worse than the B&K model since its electronics are so cheap and sound poor. They still offer a glassy and hard treble immediately recognizable in recordings made with these mics.

I would always choose MK2 because it is the best.

For measurement, buy Gefell or Bruel & Kjaer capsules with the right amplifier. The Russians also make fantastic measurement mics at a much lower price point.

Measurement and Music--never the twain shall meet.
Maybe the "ensemble mic" term is describing the treble boost one can get with the 4006 using the appropriate grid, allowing more distant placement.

Anyway, couldn't you have your Schoeps cake and eat it too with more distant placements, by using the MK 2H, 2S, or 2XS variants of the same capsule, like Bruce is using?

Regarding measurement vs. music mics: Surely you don't think the aforementioned Josephson C617s (using MK221 measurement capsules) are poor mics for music? If so, what about their sound is not to your liking?
Old 2 weeks ago
  #13
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
No I prefer only the MK2. It is the true Knight Templar with the unique signature and noble sound. Others don’t have the same noble sound and are from a different family.

RE:Josephson—617 set are not measurement mics either. Made as a music recording mic. Mic is much more than its capsule origin.
Old 1 week ago
  #14
Thumbs up Nice full, rich sound

Quote:
Originally Posted by brawee View Post
If you want to hear an ensemble recording made with MK2 caps, check out the recording of the Voxare String Quartet here: https://www.amazon.com/Tonality-Voxa...=UTF8&qid=&sr=. (The recording was just released on 10/1/17; I play in the quartet.) The quartet recording was made with three MK2 mics at the Academy of Arts and letters, and engineered by Judy Sherman. The center mic was in the middle of the quartet to capture articulation of the 2nd vln and cello. The other two mics were just in front of the quartet.
Thanks for posting this link to your new recording. The material is interesting and clearly, the playing is excellent. There is a thickness to the recordings that I like very much (not as much of the glassy thing you're referring to with DPAs, perhaps).

The width and definition of the stereo spread are a little unnerving for me when monitoring with my head pretty close to nearfields (centered my usual listening triangle). The 2nd violin and viola appear to jump out in my stereo spectrum at certain frequencies but this is, of course, compressed preview files on amazon so that may not actually be the case with your recordings. Recording a main pair a little further back certainly wouldn't provide for the same level of per-instrument detail that this mix achieved.

Thanks again for posting. I'm always interested to listen to new releases like this.
Old 1 week ago
  #15
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gsbe View Post
Thanks again for posting. I'm always interested to listen to new releases like this.
Thanks for listening! The entire double-disc set has interesting music; David is one of my favorite composers, and it's always a pleasure to work not only with him but to record with someone as accomplished as Judy.
Old 1 week ago
  #16
Gear Head
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush View Post
I think that measurement and music recording are two very different crafts with different tools required.

I think that the MK2 is the best capsule made and it is used here as a universal omni. I don't understand the comments about it not being for "ensemble use."
It offers a beautiful even pick up of the musicians and the acoustic. The MK2 is not a measurement mic.

When the 4006 (not a measurement mic) was made by Bruel & Kjaer, one could change out the electronics in it and dump the transformer and get much bettter sound. The glassy and hard top end needed to be ameliorated.

The same glass and hard top end in the 4006 now made by DPA is much worse than the B&K model since its electronics are so cheap and sound poor. They still offer a glassy and hard treble immediately recognizable in recordings made with these mics.

I would always choose MK2 because it is the best.

For measurement, buy Gefell or Bruel & Kjaer capsules with the right amplifier. The Russians also make fantastic measurement mics at a much lower price point.

Measurement and Music--never the twain shall meet.
From Schoeps website: "The MK 2 is often used for acoustical measurement, an application for which it has gained a considerable reputation."

I'm pretty sure I also heard Josephson saying he recommended the C617SET over his measurement mic for a higher end measurement mic...I actually contacted them about this once also.

I agree about the glassy/hard top-end on the 4006A...though I'd describe it as fizzy.

Thanks for the recommendation on the MK2 though, it does sound like a great mic...unfortunately it worked out too expensive so I went with some M30s for now (nearly half the price for a matched pair). Some day...
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump