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
Tags: , , , , ,

Sennheiser MKH40 vs. MKH8040 (vs. Schoeps MK4) Condenser Microphones
Old 3rd May 2015
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Don S's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
By who I wonder? It's their number one seller, the most popular of all their capsules.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12Vog4TZRtE
Rumi said it best above. I'm not sure Ms. Bartolli has the MK4 caps. I know the MK21 is popular in that situation and I've gotten great results using them as well.
Old 3rd May 2015
  #32
Lives for gear
 
Don S's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumi View Post
Yeah, I seem to recall a statement like "the engineers chose the Sennheiser, the musicians chose the Schoeps". Schoeps has a sweetness that people seem to like. I myself am still undecided. It's a bit like the DAV mic pre sound. Sweet, but something is not accurate. I am currently looking for detail and transparency. That might change again.

And yes, people seem to be more fond of the omnis and wide cardioids from Schoeps, and even the hypercardioid.
Funny you should mention DAV. It reminds me of something I also like about Schoeps. Ben Maas mentioned it in a earlier post; that Schoeps seem to be sensitive to preamp sounds and thus easy to get a different "flavor" from a pair by just changing the preamp.
Old 3rd May 2015
  #33
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don S View Post
Rumi said it best above. I'm not sure Ms. Bartolli has the MK4 caps. I know the MK21 is popular in that situation and I've gotten great results using them as well.
Hi Don,

Please note that I didn't say the mics in Mr Bartoli's clip were MK4's. And I also didn't connect the most popular statement with the YouTube clip like you have quoted above. My point was that she could have had Sennheiser anything, but chose Schoeps. They are likely to be MK4's but not certain.
Old 4th May 2015
  #34
Lives for gear
 
Don S's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Hi Don,

Please note that I didn't say the mics in Mr Bartoli's clip were MK4's. And I also didn't connect the most popular statement with the YouTube clip like you have quoted above. My point was that she could have had Sennheiser anything, but chose Schoeps. They are likely to be MK4's but not certain.
Sorry, I didn't mean to misquote anybody. The OP wanted an opinion from folks who have worked with both and gave it. I agree she's awesome along with the Schoeps!

Last edited by Don S; 4th May 2015 at 03:46 PM..
Old 4th May 2015
  #35
Lives for gear
 
Larry Elliott's Avatar
Actually, I doubt that Ms. Bartoli personally had anything to do with the choice of the mics
Old 4th May 2015
  #36
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Elliott View Post
Actually, I doubt that Ms. Bartoli personally had anything to do with the choice of the mics
Perhaps not. But "she" above means her, or her producer or engineer or exec producer etc.
Old 5th May 2015
  #37
Lives for gear
 
DCtoDaylight's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
They are very different in concept and construction.

The MKH 8040 is an RF condenser transistor mic. with internal EQ to get the extended response (they lightly damp the capsule and then put the converse of the capsule curve in the electronics).

The M 300 is an AF condenser fet mic - uniquely, it has a ceramic capsule and optical coupling of the phantom power.

The funny thing is, that although I have both, I have never done a direct comparison and choose by feel.

The 8040 has a very extended top end (up to 50kHz) - the M 300 is slightly brighter at around 10-12kHz (max +3dB) and then rolls off.

The sound is different and I appreciate them both and I'm glad I have them both. The slight boost in the M 300 does make them useful in the diffuse field.

I hope this helps.
Many thanks, John - definitely helpful! And your observations about the M300 jibe with mine....it seems to be happier with a bit of distance. I find that a tiny bit of rolloff (to almost "undo" that HF boost) allows their wonderful detail and sheen to come through better in closer-in situations. They're also nice and quiet, which is always appreciated.
Old 8th September 2015
  #38
Here for the gear
 

They are all good mics, I prefer the MKH 40, the placement is perhaps more important than the differences. To my ear, the 8040 is slightly less musical specifically in the depth of the image, like some camera lenses have a slightly 3D effect and some are very good but just less of this 3D. The 40 to me has a little more 3D, and a wider range of forgiveness.
I never use the MK4, it is a dyspeptic mic: it's either the omni, wide, the sub or the super. I might also be inclined to go with the 8040 with modern instruments and the 40 for baroque or older instruments. The 8040 has some serious extension, as John mentioned, if you want that.
I dislike the extra HF on the CMC6XT but it is fine on the 8040. At least, as far as I can hear....
Old 8th September 2015
  #39
Lives for gear
 
Bruce Watson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by quagga View Post
I never use the MK4, it is a dyspeptic mic...
Really? I've never heard any mic described as dyspeptic. Actually, the last time I can remember seeing the word was in the lyrics for Bewitched, Bothered and Bewildered, where lyricist Lorenz Hart rhymed "dyspeptic" with "antiseptic". In a love song. Should have gotten an award just for that rhyme. It is one of the great Rogers and Hart jazz standards, from well before I was born.

I suspect you are exaggerating, just a bit. But if a microphone literally makes you sick, then by all means use something else. Anything else.

Me, I find all the cardioids at this level perfectly acceptable. The final sound is much more about proper placement of the mic than about the mic itself. I'm just sayin' that any good recordist can make excellent recordings with any of them, and that no one is going to be listening to the recordings later and say things like "if only that guy hadn't used those dyspeptic Schoeps mk4 capsules!" That's just not going to happen.
Old 8th September 2015
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Rumi's Avatar
That must be a strange love song indeed! I'm not sure if I would want to have someone sing that to me.
Old 8th September 2015
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Bruce Watson's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumi View Post
That must be a strange love song indeed! I'm not sure if I would want to have someone sing that to me.
It's one of the best of the infatuation songs. Listen to Ella Fitzgerald sing it. A singer's singer who just nails this song, this recording from 1956.

I'm guessing it's not a Sennheiser or a Schoeps. But how can you tell for sure just by listening?
Old 9th September 2015
  #42
Lives for gear
 
hbphotoav's Avatar
 

It being 1956, I might posit it was a U47... sibilant is a bit more pronounced than most ribbons would reproduce, yet the midrange is... lush.
Attached Thumbnails
Sennheiser MKH40 vs. MKH8040 (vs. Schoeps MK4)-ella_fitzgerald.jpg  
Old 9th September 2015
  #43
Lives for gear
 
Rumi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Watson View Post
It's one of the best of the infatuation songs. Listen to Ella Fitzgerald sing it. A singer's singer who just nails this song, this recording from 1956.

I'm guessing it's not a Sennheiser or a Schoeps. But how can you tell for sure just by listening?
Ella, elle l'a! She's a great singer. And the song is... very interesting. Certainly not one of the simple boring love songs. You can learn some English with it!
Old 9th September 2015
  #44
Lives for gear
 
Rumi's Avatar
U47...

... the quintessential answer to the original question, with a whiff of Hegelian synthesis in it.
Old 10th September 2015
  #45
Bewitched is classic American songbook. Everyone should learn this song.

Shoot, everyone should just own at least a few (if not all) of Ella's "American Songbook" albums. Some of the best music ever recorded, that's for sure
Old 12th September 2015
  #46
Lives for gear
 
DCtoDaylight's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by king2070lplaya View Post

Shoot, everyone should just own at least a few (if not all) of Ella's "American Songbook" albums. Some of the best music ever recorded, that's for sure
+1 on that! Terrific material of course, and Ms. Fitzgerald's voice is a truly amazing instrument - round and rich and almost impossibly shiny, and perfectly harmonized with the music and recording technology of the era.
Old 1 week ago
  #47
Gear Maniac
 
terence's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Spearritt View Post
Anything to do with transient response can be defined from the frequency response.

So its difficult to have a discussion about what your hearing if the terminology is not correct.

There is a lot of writing in GS and on the net to do with "transients" and "speed" of microphones that is quite incorrect. Nebulous words are better than incorrect technical terms.

Do you hear warmth or softness or texture or smoothness or sweetness ...?
I feel I must correct the above claim dismissing microphone transient response as something imaginary. A frequency plot is simply a representation of sound amplitude sensitivity across a spectrum of frequencies, usually ascertained by exposing the mic to a frequency sweep of controlled known amplitudes. This does not capture transient response in any way. You can imagine, for example, that running the sweep from low to high frequency at different rates or changing the amplitude at varying rates at any given frequency might elicit different responses in different microphones—and you would be correct. The speed at which a transducer responds to a signal can vary, depending on its individual physical and electrical characteristics. This is well understood in applied physics and not rocket science. Therefore the statement, “Anything to do do with transient response can be defined [sic] from the frequency response” is factually incorrect. There is a lot more information in the signal from a microphone not represented in a frequency plot. Transient response is a well defined technical term, a specific and measurable parameter, not a “nebulous word”—whatever that statement is meant to convey.
Old 1 week ago
  #48
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by terence View Post
I feel I must.....
Yes the time domain is often forgotten. I think that's why ribbon and dynamic mics are a good combination in a recording session with condensors. Most condensors are lightning fast responders....but sometimes you want something that responds differently to the transient envelope...a slower or differently slew rated mic.

A lot of times you'd like a limousine better than an ambulance

Do you like your paintings... with all pastels, or all fluorescent hues ?
Your food... with garlic, turmeric or cumin in everything ?

Didn't think so

Vive la difference....
Old 1 week ago
  #49
Gear Nut
 

In signal theory, there is a connection between impulse response and frequency response via the Fourier transform. However, you need a Linear Time Invariant system for it to be true.
I am not sure a microphone can be considered a LTI-system?

Last edited by ljudatervinning; 1 week ago at 06:51 PM.. Reason: Spelling
Old 1 week ago
  #50
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ljudatervinning View Post
I am not shure a microphone can be
considered a LTI-system?
Do microphones sound different every recording, or during the recording does it change its sound? Do loudspeakers sound different every time one plays the same music?
Old 1 week ago
  #51
Lives for gear
 

Linear Time Variance also refers to system behaviour which is not influenced by history - ie., its response to a particular signal is not affected by the signal that may have immediately preceded it. A coarse example is small-signal behaviour immediately following a large signal excursion - for example, power supply regulation in the device may be a cause of such behaviour, which isolated steady state testing will not immediately reveal.

So neither steady state testing (frequency response) nor impulse testing in isolation will fully characterise a system. And even more difficult is to translate these objectively into a single 'ranking' or order of merit.

Audio is an art (art being defined as a science with more than seven variables ... )
Old 1 week ago
  #52
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by panatrope View Post
Linear Time Variance also refers to system behaviour which is not influenced by history - ie., its response to a particular signal is not affected by the signal that may have immediately preceded it. A coarse example is small-signal behaviour immediately following a large signal excursion - for example, power supply regulation in the device may be a cause of such behaviour, which isolated steady state testing will not immediately reveal.

So neither steady state testing (frequency response) nor impulse testing in isolation will fully characterise a system. And even more difficult is to translate these objectively into a single 'ranking' or order of merit.

Audio is an art (art being defined as a science with more than seven variables ... )
Maybe this explains why AB and double blind testing of audio gear is doomed to failure (or guaranteed equivocal results) ?
Old 5 days ago
  #53
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by panatrope View Post
Linear Time Variance also refers to system behaviour which is not influenced by history

Linear Time-Invariant system
Old 5 days ago
  #54
Lives for gear
 

I chose to use the noun rather than the adjectival description; however the spurious and confusing 'not' arises from attainment of a certain age where these things happen more often than they should.
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
Forum Jump