[joe h]

Hello,

Thanks for all the help. I've settled in on my interface (ISA 430 MK
ii)

I'm auditioning mics. I've found the omni pattern to work best for
me. I was originally centering around figure 8, but now I found that
omni with the mic off to the side by about five inches and speaking
outward produces the best result.

So I've gotten on this kick of looking into Schoeps. This brings me
to the CMC6 and the MK2 capsule. Since I've never worked with these,
I was hoping someone could focus my understanding on this:

Is the CMC6 amplifier the one to get? They also make a CMC5,and then
I think there is something called a CMC6 xt.

How does the MK2 produce a true audiophile omni pattern? The capsule
is closed off below the top. How does the sound get in behind the
other side of the diaphragm? It seems like the side of the diaphragm
that is contained within the capsule would be blocked off and then the
sound on that side would be dull and then it would not be a true omni.

I'm auditioning an AKG 414 xls right now. It's a nice mic, but it
sounds slightly 'robotic' (in fairness, slightly!) and it has just a
bit too much zing on the esses for my sibiliant voice. The Schoeps,
while being accurate, seem to have some sort of automatic nice-o-matic
sound quality (based on my listening to a couple of dozen mp3's and
wavs on the internet of people posting examples).

I feel like I'm about 10:30 on the dial with the 414, and the Schoeps
might get me exactly where I want to be.

But I've never even used a Schoeps, and that closed-off back of the
MK2 capsule makes me skeptical about whether or not it's properly
designed for omni use:

http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/mk2

Notice how there is no opening for the sound to get in behind the
diaphragm. I could understand that for a cardioid. But the 414 has
both sides fully accessed, which seems to make more sense for an omni.

Thanks for any insights into the mysterious world of Schoeps!

[Scott Dorsey]

joe h wrote:
So I've gotten on this kick of looking into Schoeps. This brings me
to the CMC6 and the MK2 capsule. Since I've never worked with these,
I was hoping someone could focus my understanding on this:

Is the CMC6 amplifier the one to get? They also make a CMC5,and then
I think there is something called a CMC6 xt.

The CMC6 is fine. It works on 12-48V phantom power. The older CMC5
only works on 48V phantom and has slightly more restricted low end.
If you find either one used at a good price, buy it because they are
both fine.

The CMC6xt is a silly thing intended to get extended high end out of
capsules that were never designed for it. It is a mistake, but again
if you get a good price on one it can be converted back to a standard
CMC6 with a pair of dikes.

How does the MK2 produce a true audiophile omni pattern? The capsule
is closed off below the top. How does the sound get in behind the
other side of the diaphragm? It seems like the side of the diaphragm
that is contained within the capsule would be blocked off and then the
sound on that side would be dull and then it would not be a true omni.

That's how omni capsules are. They have a sealed rear chamber, so they
measure the difference in pressure between the outside and the inside.
Which is why they are called "pressure microphones." They are all like
that, you will never see a rear vent on an omni capsule.

I'm auditioning an AKG 414 xls right now. It's a nice mic, but it
sounds slightly 'robotic' (in fairness, slightly!) and it has just a
bit too much zing on the esses for my sibiliant voice. The Schoeps,
while being accurate, seem to have some sort of automatic nice-o-matic
sound quality (based on my listening to a couple of dozen mp3's and
wavs on the internet of people posting examples).

Well, try a 414 B/ULS which is a cleaner sound than the XLS one. Also,
of course, the omni pattern on the 414 is not very omni, whereas the omni
pattern on the Schoeps is very, very omni.

I feel like I'm about 10:30 on the dial with the 414, and the Schoeps
might get me exactly where I want to be.

But I've never even used a Schoeps, and that closed-off back of the
MK2 capsule makes me skeptical about whether or not it's properly
designed for omni use:

http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/mk2

The closed back is what makes it omni. I assure you that the Schoeps
engineers probably know more about capsule design than just about anyone
around. They are the _only_ people to successfully make a small diaphragm
figure-8 without weird workarounds.

Notice how there is no opening for the sound to get in behind the
diaphragm. I could understand that for a cardioid. But the 414 has
both sides fully accessed, which seems to make more sense for an omni.

No, a cardioid has to have venting in rear. That is what makes it a cardioid.

The current 414 mikes use a dual diaphragm capsule which is a whole
different thing and doesn't really give you a very omni omni. But
sometimes people want the beaminess.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
That's how omni capsules are. They have a sealed rear chamber, so they
measure the difference in pressure between the outside and the inside.
Which is why they are called "pressure microphones." They are all like
that, you will never see a rear vent on an omni capsule.
--scott

Scott ~ Permit me to remind you that the omni EV RE55 & DO54/PL9 have
rear-vented capsules, as did their predecessors - 655A, 655C & 654.

The "55s" are longer, placing the vent farther from the diaphragm to
support LF response down to 40 Hz. The shorter "54s" make it to 50 Hz.

--
~ Roy
"If you notice the sound, it's wrong!"

[joe h]

Thanks, Mr. Dorsey.

I greatly appreciate you helping clarifying the omni concept.
Definitely "beyond my paygrade"! I understood the basics your
explanation, and I never would have thought that's how a true omni mic
works. I would have thought the omni wants to pick the sound up from
both sides, and the theoretical ideal would be no undercasing and no
side bezel at all, just two pure sides unobstructed in free space.
Was I wrong!

I'm getting more and more comfortable with this Schoeps idea...

As a further clarification, upon inspection, for my spoken word tests
I have the mic about 11 inches away, at about a 40 degree angle to the
side. It's helping keep some of the sibilance away, and I don't want
to breathe directly on the mic (even with a pop filter). I think the
Schoeps could get that final "yeah!". Every time I hear a Schoeps in
a mic comparison audio test it sounds awesome. Especially grand
pianos. They sound like they have just a bit of "forgiveness" to help
the sound settle in and be pleasant while still being linear and not
dull. My ears pick up distortion really easily, even tiny amounts.
Maybe I'm hearing a lack of mic distortion within the mic electronics
among other things.

My background is large diaphragm condenser cardioids mostly, with the
usual SM57 and KM184's hanging around (typical studio tracking
stuff). So I'm having to learn how the Schoeps crowd does things.

Thanks!

[PStamler]

What you're hearing as "nice-o-matic" and "forgiveness" is almost
certainly the lack of distortion in the Schoeps electronics. They're
good at that.

Peace,
Paul

[[email protected]]

joe h wrote:


How does the MK2 produce a true audiophile omni pattern?

Think of a pressure transducer as an electronic barometer. When
the pressure goes up, the diaphragm goes in; when the pressure
goes down, the diaphragm comes back out again. All (that I can
think of, anyway) sounds consist of alternating compression
and rarefaction.

Cardioids (and other pressure gradient transducers) are open
at the back because they reflect the difference in pressure
between what is arriving at the front and back of the diaphragm.

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore thatyou can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much
better than can be done in a newsgroup post.



Thanks for any insights into the mysterious world of Schoeps!

Schoeps don't make no junk. For classical and other acoustic
recording, where the goal is to make an accurate recording of
the source, it would be hard to do better and very easy to do
worse. People talk about the prices, but they aren't any higher
than other top-quality microphones.

I saw in a later post that you want to record piano. For that
my two favorite microphones are the Schoeps 221B with 934C
capsule in omni pattern and the Gefell 296. If you get a 221B,
for God's sake get a real one and not one of the Hungarian
knockoffs.

[Charles Tomaras]

wrote in message
m...
joe h wrote:


How does the MK2 produce a true audiophile omni pattern?

Think of a pressure transducer as an electronic barometer. When
the pressure goes up, the diaphragm goes in; when the pressure
goes down, the diaphragm comes back out again. All (that I can
think of, anyway) sounds consist of alternating compression
and rarefaction.

Cardioids (and other pressure gradient transducers) are open
at the back because they reflect the difference in pressure
between what is arriving at the front and back of the diaphragm.


Any thoughts as to orientation of the capsule and amp? I regularly record a
"learning" youth/mentor orchestra and have used Schoeps CMC6/MK2's on some
of the recordings. Is there a practical difference between "pointing" the
end of the MK2 towards the source versus vertically orienting it? I "think"
I get more pleasing recordings with the mics pointed directly at the source,
but if omni is omni, does it make a theoretical difference? Since I have
little time to experiment my only comparisons are by doing it one way on one
performance and another on the next. I'm comparing drastically different
music often in different halls so it's really hard for me to say one is
better than the other. Lately I've been so pressed for setup time that I've
been going with a single stand and a CMC6/MS array and like that as well.

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 10/18/2011 1:44 AM, wrote:

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore that you can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much
better than can be done in a newsgroup post.

Can you provide a link to this download? I cannot find it.

[Scott Dorsey]

Roy W. Rising wrote:

Scott ~ Permit me to remind you that the omni EV RE55 & DO54/PL9 have
rear-vented capsules, as did their predecessors - 655A, 655C & 654.

The "55s" are longer, placing the vent farther from the diaphragm to
support LF response down to 40 Hz. The shorter "54s" make it to 50 Hz.

Granted, although those aren't really normal vents but a goofy transmission
line thing to create a low frequency resonance.

The 635A is a more "normal" omni capsule design.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , wrote:

I saw in a later post that you want to record piano. For that
my two favorite microphones are the Schoeps 221B with 934C
capsule in omni pattern and the Gefell 296. If you get a 221B,
for God's sake get a real one and not one of the Hungarian
knockoffs.

I have never seen the Hungarian knockoffs? What do they get right and
wrong?

I found that the Gefell nickel-diaphragm mikes have some of the same
character that the 221B does... as do some of the larger B&K measurement
mikes although those are of course only omni.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Charles Tomaras wrote:

Any thoughts as to orientation of the capsule and amp? I regularly record a
"learning" youth/mentor orchestra and have used Schoeps CMC6/MK2's on some
of the recordings. Is there a practical difference between "pointing" the
end of the MK2 towards the source versus vertically orienting it? I "think"
I get more pleasing recordings with the mics pointed directly at the source,
but if omni is omni, does it make a theoretical difference?

The MK2 is more omni than just about any other omni out there (except maybe
the 1/2" measurement capsules and the DPA 4006). So it makes _less_ of a
difference than it would with just about any other mike. But it still makes
SOME difference, because the top octave response is still a little bit
different in that one direction.

I actually like a little bit of beaminess for Jecklin Disc recordings, and
prefer something that has a little bit more of that than the MK2.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Arny Krueger[_4_]]

"Roy W. Rising" wrote in message
...
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
That's how omni capsules are. They have a sealed rear chamber, so they
measure the difference in pressure between the outside and the inside.
Which is why they are called "pressure microphones." They are all like
that, you will never see a rear vent on an omni capsule.
--scott

Scott ~ Permit me to remind you that the omni EV RE55 & DO54/PL9 have
rear-vented capsules, as did their predecessors - 655A, 655C & 654.

If one would want to split hairs, all practical omnidirectional mics have a
rear vent, so that atmospheric pressure changes don't distort the diaphragm.
It's just very aggressively low pass filtered in most mics.

[Frank Stearns]

writes:

snips

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore thatyou can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much

Durned if I can find it, either on the Neumann site or using a search engine... Do
you have a specific link?

Thanks,
Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Tmaki]

On 10/18/2011 8:06 AM, Frank Stearns wrote:
writes:

snips

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore thatyou can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much

Durned if I can find it, either on the Neumann site or using a search engine... Do
you have a specific link?


http://www.neumann.com/download.php?...d=docu0002.PDF


Thanks,

Don't mention it... (Author's name is Gerhart Boré.) Gobs of
other excellent microphone stuff there as well. Mostly
Neumann-centric, as one would expect, but quite informative.


Toivo Maki
Intermedia
Riverside, CA

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 10/18/2011 11:27 AM, Tmaki wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:06 AM, Frank Stearns wrote:
writes:

snips

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore thatyou can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much

Durned if I can find it, either on the Neumann site or using a search
engine... Do
you have a specific link?


http://www.neumann.com/download.php?...d=docu0002.PDF


Thanks,

Don't mention it... (Author's name is Gerhart Boré.) Gobs of other excellent
microphone stuff there as well. Mostly Neumann-centric, as one would expect, but
quite informative.


Toivo Maki
Intermedia
Riverside, CA


Absolutely fabulous. This one's worth printing on high quality paper!

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Frank Stearns wrote:

writes:

snips

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore thatyou can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much

Durned if I can find it, either on the Neumann site or using a search
engine... Do you have a specific link?

http://www.neumann.eu/download.php?d...d=docu0002.PDF

Thanks,

Google knew ...

Frank
Mobile Audio


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Roy W. Rising wrote:

Scott ~ Permit me to remind you that the omni EV RE55 & DO54/PL9 have
rear-vented capsules, as did their predecessors - 655A, 655C & 654.

The "55s" are longer, placing the vent farther from the diaphragm to
support LF response down to 40 Hz. The shorter "54s" make it to 50 Hz.

Granted, although those aren't really normal vents but a goofy
transmission line thing to create a low frequency resonance.

The 635A is a more "normal" omni capsule design.
--scott

Agreed. I guess we might call the RCA 77 family's acoustic labyrinth
somewhat goofy as well.

--
~ Roy
"If you notice the sound, it's wrong!"

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 10/18/2011 12:21 PM, Peter Larsen wrote:

Google knew ...

What search term did you use?

[Matt Faunce]

On Tuesday, October 18, 2011 11:27:38 AM UTC-4, Tmaki wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:06 AM, Frank Stearns wrote:

Durned if I can find it, either on the Neumann site or using a search engine... Do
you have a specific link?


http://www.neumann.com/download.php?...d=docu0002.PDF

I found it from this page,

http://www.neumann.com/?lang=en&id=c...ions_documents

click on "Basics of Microphone Technology", and I found some other documents from there too.

Matt

[Richard Kuschel]

On Oct 17, 7:17*pm, joe h wrote:
Thanks, Mr. Dorsey.

I greatly appreciate you helping clarifying the omni concept.
Definitely "beyond my paygrade"! *I understood the basics your
explanation, and I never would have thought that's how a true omni mic
works. *I would have thought the omni wants to pick the sound up from
both sides, and the theoretical ideal would be no undercasing and no
side bezel at all, just two pure sides unobstructed in free space.
Was I wrong!



If you have no undercasing and no side bezel, you would have a figure
8 microphone.


Microphone design is pretty interesting. If you use two diaphragms
such as the AKG 414, you can have a continuously variable polar
response all the way from omni to figure 8. Unfortunately such
microphones are neither the best omni, nor any of the other patterns,
but that doesn't mean they aren't useful or good sounding.

One of my favorite microphones is a Neumann (gefell) vacuum tube mic
with a Stephen Paul modified U47 capsule and a Fred Cameron power
supply that gives it the continuously variable pattern. The frequency
response is anything but flat and the distortion specs and noise level
aren't anything to write home about, but the sound is amazing.

I've had vocalist of all genres comment on how they liked what the mic
did to their voices. There is a richness that is imparted that they
like.

For classical recording, I commonly use Schoeps cmc6 with the MK2S
capsule. The MK2S is not flat, but has a slight high frequency rise,
allowing recording at a greater distance by compensating for the
natural roll off of high frequencies that occurs at distance.

As you are finding out, specifications mean very little, it is the
sound that you are striving for.

[Scott Dorsey]

falkAssaubs wrote:
meal delivery diet plan 'car max auto finance weight loss'

I highly recommend the Schoeps weight loss plan. Before I used to carry
a huge box of microphones but now I just carry two....
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

mcp6453 wrote:

On 10/18/2011 1:44 AM, wrote:

There is a superb book by Gustav Bore that you can download from
the Neumann site and that explains how microphones work much
better than can be done in a newsgroup post.

Can you provide a link to this download? I cannot find it.

http://www.neumann.com/download.php?...d=docu0002.PDF

brings it up for me.

[[email protected]]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

I saw in a later post that you want to record piano. For that
my two favorite microphones are the Schoeps 221B with 934C
capsule in omni pattern and the Gefell 296. If you get a 221B,
for God's sake get a real one and not one of the Hungarian
knockoffs.

I have never seen the Hungarian knockoffs? What do they get right and
wrong?

See http://www.mikrofonbau.de/hungarian_fake.htm

I believe the transformers are the most offending aspect. The
overall fit & finish is quite crude compared to Schoeps as well.




I found that the Gefell nickel-diaphragm mikes have some of the same
character that the 221B does... as do some of the larger B&K measurement
mikes although those are of course only omni.
--scott