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: , , ,

CM3 - really THAT good? Condenser Microphones
Old 19th November 2014
  #1081
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2manyrocks View Post
By using ribbons in the mic configuration shown in the ribbon madness thread, the vehicle noise didn't come through on the recording.

But as you suggested, ribbons can minimize some less than desirable room situations.
Would you happen to have photos of the mics in place? =]
Old 19th November 2014
  #1082
Lives for gear
I didn't photography my mic setup, but copied drbill's setup which he thoroughly photographed here: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/1571668-post45.html
Old 12th December 2014
  #1083
Lives for gear
Bump to the top to ask for some guidance. How close can cm3's be placed to piano strings before proximity turns bad? Are they suitable for under the lid mounting or is this not recommended?
Old 12th December 2014
  #1084
Gear Maniac
 

I use CM3s inside grand pianos (lid open or closed) regularly, and while you always have to use judicious EQ, that's nothing to be afraid of. I use them either on K&M Clamps on the frame beams, 6" behind the hammers (for more contemporary material) or in foam blocks sitting on the flat part of the frame in the curve of the piano, facing at 45degrees across the strings towards the lowest hammers, spaced about 20cm apart - for more classical repertoire, where an external stand isn't practical. They certainly handle the SPL, even in a Steinway D with the lid closed. I actually prefer them to my MKH8020s in this position - a little less harsh sounding, and less LF rumble. Did this last weekend (in a Steinway) for a mixed programme of small Jazz ensembles up to a full Symphony Orchestra (with orchestral piano parts) for a broadcast, Long stick, Short stick and Closed - and the CM3s acquitted themselves very well. I prefer the sound of mics outside the edge of the instrument, but you do what's appropriate at the time.
Old 12th December 2014
  #1085
Lives for gear


If you could post a photo, even more
Old 22nd December 2014
  #1086
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
Today the CM3s are a standard workhorse for me... I don't gush over them anymore, but they are useful and they - work...

Another use - I recorded the khoji bells, frame drum and clarinet sounds for this trailer live with a set up of stereo set of CM3s and Shure SM7B through TC Voicelive for special fx... I recorded both parts (percussion and clarinet) separately with the dancer and visual artist performing along and then combined the two for the trailer soundtrack.

Old 22nd December 2014
  #1087
Lives for gear
 
jpgerard's Avatar
Well done, as usual ;0)
Old 24th December 2014
  #1088
Gear Nut
 
A.alden's Avatar
 

Here are the CM3s on an Estonia baby grand:
Attached Files
Old 1st January 2015
  #1089
Schoeps MK2 vs Line OM1
first is best

Schoeps MK22 vs Line CM3
second is best
Old 1st January 2015
  #1090
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
1 and 2 is the same microphone brand in both comparisons
Old 1st January 2015
  #1091
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 

Not easy. My guess:
1 is Line Audio,
2 is Schoeps.
Old 1st January 2015
  #1092
Gear Addict
 
voltronic's Avatar
 

They sound very close - possibly brand #2 is doing a better job of accurately capturing sustained notes?

I popped the files into Audacity to look at the spectrograms, and Brand 1 in both cases appears to have the "butterfly" mirror-image of its frequencies I've seen other places. What causes this?

View spectrograms here (apparently I can't use IMG tags...)
Old 1st January 2015
  #1093
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Oh yes, these can be direct reflections of those special 17 brass gongs that are placed just behind and that are tuned in the same tones I dragged them there yesterday from the other room to record something with them ..
Also maybe direct reflections of the mics that are placed together ...

1 = Line 2 = Schoeps
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1094
Gear Addict
 
voltronic's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek View Post
Oh yes, these can be direct reflections of those special 17 brass gongs that are placed just behind and that are tuned in the same tones I dragged them there yesterday from the other room to record something with them ..
Also maybe direct reflections of the mics that are placed together ...

1 = Line 2 = Schoeps
I don't think that's what the spectrograms are showing - it's a mirror image vertically for the Line samples but the Schoeps doesn't show this at all. Was there something different in the recording chain or processing?

Thanks for posting these samples, this was a fun comparison.
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1095
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
No - exactly the same chains for both .... (= Forssell SMP-2 - Forssell MADA-2)
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1096
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
Based on definition, transient response and completeness of frequency representation:

1a = OM1
2a = MK2

1b = CM3
2b = MK22

Edit: oops! I see that the results were already given. Will you please wait a little longer next time, Ivo?
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1097
Does anyone have experience in using CM3's (as wide cardioids) or perhaps OM1's for Decca tree recordings (orchestral music)?
Or maybe a CM3 tree with OM1 outriggers?
I might want to try, but if some users have bad experience, it would be a wasted recording of course...
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1098
Lives for gear
 
scorpix74's Avatar
I prefer CM3 over OM1 but why aren't they cut the same way?

I prefer the sound of 1 over 2 in the CM3 VS Schoeps it sounds louder maybe saturation?
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1099
Gear Addict
 
voltronic's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek View Post
No - exactly the same chains for both .... (= Forssell SMP-2 - Forssell MADA-2)
I think you need to look at a possible clock problem in your ADC or DAW that is affecting whichever channels you used to record the OM1 and CM3 mics.

I now remember where I've seen spectrograms like this before - on falsely-labeled 88.2kHz files that were really 44.1kHz recordings with an altered file header. They were being sold by one of the "high definition" download stores and resulted in some customers getting refunds when this was brought to light. I posted my spectrograms to another forum where another user very helpfully was able to verify what was going on.

Your 1a and 1b files are really 48kHz recordings with a 96kHz header, and each sample from the 48kHz recording has been written twice into the 96kHz file. Further evidence to support this: If you zoom in on a waveform view of the 1a and 1b files to the sample level you will see "stairstepping" of the waveform - every sample is there twice. Compare that to files 2a and 2b which transition smoothly. Here's a comparison between 1b and 2b:
https://i.imgur.com/cwXXWy4.jpg

Now, how much of this is audible is debatable, but files 1a and 1b (and potentially whatever other files come through recording through those channels of your ADC and/or DAW) are NOT 96kHz recordings.
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1100
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
Please, don't waste your time any further which such analysis ... these ARE 96 kHz recordings without any debate ... I quickly made these samples just for fun ... maybe the mics were too close and touching (vibrating) etc. but some info it gives ... just take it as it is ... if I have more time, I may do more samples, but not now
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1101
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voltronic View Post
Your 1a and 1b files are really 48kHz recordings with a 96kHz header, and each sample from the 48kHz recording has been written twice into the 96kHz file.
Untrue. The values of the first 10 samples of the left channel of 1a are equal to

0 -0.0238 -0.0358 -0.0477 -0.0715 -0.0954 -0.0238 -0.0119 -0.1311 -0.1192

divided by 100.000, for 0 dBFS equal to 1.

1a has 12470465 samples among which 10517984 are different from both their neighbours on the left channel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by voltronic View Post
Further evidence to support this: If you zoom in on a waveform view of the 1a and 1b files to the sample level you will see "stairstepping" of the waveform - every sample is there twice.
Likely due the graphical resolution limit of your editor.
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1102
Lives for gear
 
Mats H's Avatar
Sry but 1a and 1b sound really brittle and show mirror images, just like aliasing does. I noticed the rattling/resonating sound straight away. Not many stringed instruments show strong harmonics at 43 KHz... 2a and 2b sound good and look normal in a spectral view.

I get this sometimes when the sample rate is off between my gear.
Attached Thumbnails
CM3 - really THAT good?-1a.jpg   CM3 - really THAT good?-2a.jpg  

Last edited by Mats H; 2nd January 2015 at 11:07 PM.. Reason: clarification
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1103
Gear Addict
 
voltronic's Avatar
 

Very well. I stand corrected regarding the double-sample issue. It still doesn't explain the strange spectrogram, but I meant no offense to ISedlacek - on the contrary, I wanted to point out a possible problem with two channels in the recording chain. Just trying to be helpful, there was no offense meant.
Old 2nd January 2015
  #1104
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek View Post
Please, don't waste your time any further which such analysis ... these ARE 96 kHz recordings without any debate ... I quickly made these samples just for fun ... maybe the mics were too close and touching (vibrating) etc. but some info it gives ... just take it as it is ... if I have more time, I may do more samples, but not now
If they are, then I suspect a really bad jitter problem or some other interference in your ADC's clock.
Old 3rd January 2015
  #1105
Here for the gear
 

High Freqs

Hello all ! Please excuse my bad english...

I don't think i'm the only one to hear it ( or maybe i can be proud of my young undamaged ears listening some high frequencies ) but i can actually hear that un-knowned high frequencies we see on the graphs. That doesn't sound at all like mics "vibrating". I don't have enough experience to say where it comes from, but i'm pretty sure of one thing : for me, this shootout does not say anything about the quality of Line Audio products. Since i got a pair of CM3, and never had that sort of Hi Freqs, i don't think this can be made by the mics itself.

Beside that, i would be very interested in the same shootout, without the "butterfly" weird thing...
Old 3rd January 2015
  #1106
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
I just deleted it, so that you are not disturbed by that ... no time now to return to it, sorry
Old 4th January 2015
  #1107
nkf
Lives for gear
 

I will not make any comparisons myself but I think the admiration for the CM3s are now going a bit over the top. They are good, usable microphones, probably better than Rode stuff (I own a pair of CM3s) with a fantastic price/performance ratio but they are not in the same league of Schoeps, DPA or Neumann. Single comparisons are just snapshots what someone can do with certain microphones. For me the CM3s are microphones for certain circumstances or conditions where I wouldn't risk my Schoeps, DPA or Neumann stuff but want a decent quality.
Old 4th January 2015
  #1108
Here for the gear
 

Anyway, thank you for your time Isedlacek, hope you will be able to solve that strange "mirror" effect, and maybe you'll find time to shoot line audio vs schoeps again, but if you don't have the time, fine, that means you got work and I'm happy with that :-)
Old 5th January 2015
  #1109
Lives for gear
 
rojaros's Avatar
I don't have too many high class microphones, but I do have a pair of DPA 4011, a pair of MBHO 603/KA100 and a pair of CM3 (I'm talking abou cardioid SDC).

I mostly record classical guitar, and on that the CM3 do a remarkably good job, certainly better than MBHO. DPA sound a bit more weighty and resolved to my ears, but maybe by a factor 1.2 and not 12 as the price difference would indicate... just my little bit of experience.

I think Line Audio did a fantastic job with these mics.
Old 29th January 2015
  #1110
Gear Addict
 
voltronic's Avatar
 

Close-Miked HS Wind Ensemble Samples

Here are some quick recordings made tonight of a HS wind ensemble. 12ft up at edge of stage directly behind conductor, angled slightly downward in NOS spacing. CM3 > Shure FP24 (SD MixPre) > Sony PCM-M10.
Attached Files

02 Take 02.mp3 (4.69 MB, 1309 views)

01 Take 03.mp3 (8.10 MB, 1368 views)

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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Plugin / So much gear, so little time
10
adclark / Low End Theory
31
hollywood_steve / The Good News Channel
0

Forum Jump
Forum Jump