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
First pair of SDC's - Gefell M300's or Josephson C42's?
Old 8th July 2005
  #1
Lives for gear
 
enharmonic's Avatar
 

First pair of SDC's - Gefell M300's or Josephson C42's?

Primary use will be micing up my Goodall Rosewood Dreadnaught...might find their way onto mandola, and maybe even vocals.

I know that both are well liked here...would appreciate some help making up my mind.

Old 8th July 2005
  #2
Lives for gear
 
jnorman's Avatar
both are good choices. i quite liked my pair of M300s, and preferred them to the neumann km184s i had previously. the little jospehson's are also nice, but are a mass-produced mic, unlike their flagship series 6 mics which are handmade. the gefell factory is actually the "true" neumann heritage, as neumann moved there during the war. the company currently called "neumann" is really just a division of sennheiser. having been a user of DPAs and schoeps for a while, i am no longer much of a n eumann fan, but i found the gefell M300s to be clean and robust, with a nice solid lower mid, and a touch of (but not too much) lift in the upper mids that is often desireable for acoustic guitar. the c42s are similar in sonic character, but not quite as mellow in the lower mids as the gefells. if your guitar is boomy, or if you like to mic REALLY close (which exaggerates the proximity effect in cardioid pattern mics), the c42s might be the better choice. otherwise, i would probably opt for the gefells. you may be surprised at how well a good SD mic can handle vocals.
Old 8th July 2005
  #3
Lives for gear
 
sdelsolray's Avatar
 

I've spent several years searching for mics to record fingerstyle acoustic guitar. I've used both the MG 300's and the Josephson C42's. The MG M300's are very nice mics, and as mentioned previous, are Nuemanesque in a very good way. They are fairly forgiving and worked well with all the guitars I use. So they're a good bet for your large rich sounding Goodall. The C42's are very nice also. Rather different sounding than the Gefells however. They sound creamier, a bit scooped. Their proximity effect is more noticable, and less easy to deal with. They worked better if placed out a bit further. I don't think they would be as good of a match for the Goodall.

FWIW, after trying numerous mics and owning some, the collection I've built for my application are:

2x Schopes CMC6/MK4
2x Microtech Gefell M294
Microtech Gefell UMT800
CAD VX2

I use one of the LD mics for a third source along with a pair of the SDs.

Keep an eye open for used Gefells. The M294's (or M295's) are stunning mics. More detail and accuracy than anything I've ever tried (incuding DPAs). The 0.8 micron nickel diaphram has much to do with this.
Old 8th July 2005
  #4
Gear Head
 

really like Earthwork SR77's. Not hyped, quick on transients, takes lots of spl.
Old 8th July 2005
  #5


The Earthworks are worth checking out. They are clinically accurate and have a HPF at 100Hz on the cardioid mics so that the proximity effect doesn't get too bad.

Then, again, the Gefell mics are pretty nice. I almost hate to ask what they cost (never bought a pair of my own).



-tINY

Old 8th July 2005
  #6
Lives for gear
 
enharmonic's Avatar
 

I knew you guys would come through! Thanks! Good info on the both, as well as experience w/ a Goodall! Only on Gearslutz

Tiny, the M300's can be had new for under $1.6k for a matched pair...and slightly less if you don't need 'em matched. Seems like a lot of mic for the money.

The C42's are under $1k though. The extra $$ could be put into an upgrade at the mic pre for me...though I don't think I'll be complaining. I decided to go with a MP2NV for my first pre. The extra $$ could allow me to stretch to a GTQ2, but I'm thinking MP2NV now, and EQ2NV in a few months if I can't get on with eq plugs.
Old 9th July 2005
  #7
Jai guru deva om
 
warhead's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by missilanious
really like Earthwork SR77's. Not hyped, quick on transients, takes lots of spl.
Agreed. My partner finished a project with those on acoustic recently and I was very impressed with them on acoustic. I've used them mostly on drum overheads and they had a bit of a scooped mid sound to them without a lot of low end. Great mic when you want cymbals and not necessarily a whole kit sound and rely on close tom mics etc.

War
Old 8th October 2008
  #8
Lives for gear
 
IntenseJim's Avatar
 

1234
Old 8th October 2008
  #9
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

One vote for the Gefell's.........
Old 8th October 2008
  #10
Either - both sound great!
Old 9th October 2008
  #11
C42 sound really great, sparkly but smooth. I'd put the Beyer MC930 in with those choices too, it's very natural sounding and on par with both the Gefell and Josephson. I've seen the Gefells compared to vintage KM84's, not even close. The Gefells are significantly brighter and cleaner. Not a bad thing, but they don't remotely sound like 84's.
Old 9th October 2008
  #12
Gear Nut
 

I've found the C42's to be quite bright, too much for my liking. I have yet to try out the M300's, but have loved every Gefell I have used. With that in mind, if it were my money, I'd bet on the Gefell's.
Old 9th October 2008
  #13
Gear Guru
 
drBill's Avatar
You might also want to check out a pair of Gefell 692/M70's. Nickel caps and a very sweet sound on AC.
Old 9th October 2008
  #14
Lives for gear
 
redrue's Avatar
 

I have a pair of the M300s and I really like them... (overheads and acoustic, percussion) they are clean, which is awesome, but they do have a high-frequency rise (which has become more and more distracting to me lately).

The common complaint I hear about the Josephsons is that they are also a bit bright
for some people's taste.

I really like the sound of my acoustic and I want to realize the same
sound I hear out of my guitar with no hype... My next mic will be the Josephson
C617 as I'm after ACCURACY above all at this point.

My point is just that if you really like the sound of your guitar you might
look at something with no hype and both the m300 and C42 have a bit.
Old 9th October 2008
  #15
Lives for gear
 
mr.gefell's Avatar
 

You might want to tray a pair of russian mc 49 mics......heh
Old 9th October 2008
  #16
Gear Addict
 
Recycled_Brains's Avatar
 

I picked up a MP of the Josephsons a couple months back, and they are quickly becoming my favorite mics. I've used them on ac. guitar, dobro, el. guitar, bass cab, kick drum, snare drum, OH, percussion, handclaps...... and they've been wonderful in all of those applications.

They are very crisp, detailed and unbelievably clear sounding. TONs of reach and depth. They are bright, but always in a flattering way. I've found that if you want a flatter response, you just back it off the source a bit, and it evens out more, which, IIRC, was an intentional design characteristic (remember reading something about that on a forum).

I haven't found proximity effect to be any sort of problem, as the bass is so clear.

They're built mighty ****ing well too. Very solid and they have some weight to them. And they're really small, so they'll fit anywhere.

After using them on so many things, I'm making the Josephson e22 my next mic priority.

You really ought to just arrange to try both and pick which works best with your guitar. I'm sure you can't go wrong with either.
Old 9th October 2008
  #17
Lives for gear
 
dubrichie's Avatar
uh guys, this thread is over 3 years old!!!
Old 9th October 2008
  #18
Lives for gear
 
IntenseJim's Avatar
 

I bumped it because it's a good thread, I'm getting some mics before year end is up, and I though this was better than creating a new thread.

Old 9th October 2008
  #19
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by redrue View Post
I have a pair of the M300s and I really like them... (overheads and acoustic, percussion) they are clean, which is awesome, but they do have a high-frequency rise (which has become more and more distracting to me lately).
All the M300s Ive used , I would say the complete opposite. They sounded more meaty and dark (compared to, say, a km84). Different pres maybe? But they do have a quality sound.
Old 10th October 2008
  #20
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by phaqu View Post
All the M300s Ive used , I would say the complete opposite. They sounded more meaty and dark (compared to, say, a km84). Different pres maybe? But they do have a quality sound.
Meaty and dark-ish indeed. Perfect for many steelstrings, easily stay flat or almost flat eq. For nylon, depending on guitar/sound desired might even be a little too dark up top.......bright?????
Old 10th October 2008
  #21
Lives for gear
 
skybluerental's Avatar
 

have you ever checked out the older AKG 451 EB?
really great on many sources!

i have not heard the gefell's, but i can say that the C 42's did not sound as good as the pair of KM 184's i compared them to on OH's and AC gtr. however, the KM 184's dont sound nearly as good as the AKG 451 EB's on the same sources IMHO.
Old 10th October 2008
  #22
Gear Nut
 

Ive got great results from a pair of Mike Joley modded oktava 012s, Im also going to try the puluso's. I heard some clips with those that were really impressive
Old 10th October 2008
  #23
I think the C42 eats the KM184i for breakfast! It's not as brash or spitty on drum overheads like the KM184, or with acoustic sources in general. The C42 is WAY more natural than the KM184i throughout the upper mid. It also has way better low end extension overall.
Old 10th October 2008
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Kris's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roc Mixwell View Post
I think the C42 eats the KM184i for breakfast! It's not as brash or spitty on drum overheads like the KM184, or with acoustic sources in general. The C42 is WAY more natural than the KM184i throughout the upper mid. It also has way better low end extension overall.
I have the exact opposite opinion. I'd put it this way: For my tastes, I think the KM184i eats the c42 for breakfast! It's not as brash or spitty on drum overheads like the c42, or with acoustic sources in general. The KM184i is a bit more natural than the c42 throughout the upper mid.

I would use either of these two in a pinch.

This is one where you should DEFINATELY try for yourself. If you're looking for hyped in an intersting way, try the c42. I posted tracks here on Gearslutz a few years back comparing these two on drum overheads and acoustic guitar. A search might find it if anyone's interested.
Old 11th October 2008
  #25
Gear Addict
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris View Post
I think the KM184i eats the c42 for breakfast!...
For the record, what is a 184...i? I know the KM184, and I have KMi 84s, but Ive never heard of the i model of 184. Did they do an improvement/change to the mic?
Old 11th October 2008
  #26
Lives for gear
 
tnjazz's Avatar
The "i" in Neumann nomenclature typically designates that the mic has a Cannon (XLR) connector.

For instance:
KM84i = XLR output
KM84 = tuchel output

It was probably a more important distinction back in the days when tuchels ruled the earth...heh

As far as my recommendation goes - for sub-$1000 you should go with the beyer MC930. If you're going in the sub-$2000 range, the Gefell M300, vintage KM84(i) and Nevaton MC49 are my favorites. IMO, one of these three is miles better than the others, but I won't say which one...
Old 11th October 2008
  #27
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Can I bring you gentlemen together perhaps, and venture to state that it COULD be summed up as the KM184 having an artificial 'shimmer' at the top and a somewhat hollow (like cheap speakers with ports) bass end, yet somehow packages this into a somewhat flattering 'neumann-ness' (if you're into that kind of thing).

Whereas the Josephson is a more solid sound bodywise, yet with a pronounced bump at the (little bit lower) top which does bring forward detail, but without sounding as artificially shimmery with it. Still very forward and a wee bit on the noisy side, too.

Depending on the situation no doubt both can turn out the result, yet personally I wouldn't fight to the death for either......can't think of any jobs either Gefell M300's or M295's for that matter wouldn't kill both with a big hammer.......
Old 14th October 2008
  #28
Lives for gear
 
Kris's Avatar
thumbsup (except I would characterize the top end of the c42 as less natural sounding than the 184 ... that's just my opinion and I wouldn't sell you either.)
Old 14th October 2008
  #29
mds
Lives for gear
 

I like both mics, but the c42 is significantly brighter, less smooth, and more scooped. I have a pair of M200s with the cardoid caps, which are very similar to the m300s. Love those mics and they have never been considered for sale. Super smooth, rich sound. VERY forgiving in terms of placement. Simple to use and very elegant results...love 'em on acoustics, banjos, mandos, etc. as well as OHs and far field stereo. Work great on clean electric amps too...

Good luck!

Mike
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
eso / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
rems / So Much Gear, So Little Time
13
Lek / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0
withintheflux / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
3
Lanstar Zero / High End
19

Forum Jump
Forum Jump