| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
I have a question about mic pick-up patterns, related to Schoeps capsules.
I was thinking of getting another pair of capsules to compliment my MK4's, and was looking to get something that had a wider pick-up area. One capsule that caught my eye was the MK21H, a "wide cardioid" with "high-frequency emphasis". Wide cardioid sounds cool, and the high frequency emphasis is something I might like since I often find I need to add a little upper-end eq whenever I use my MK4's. Anyway, so I took a glance at the pick-up pattern diagram for the MK21H (at the Schoeps site) and noticed that while the pattern is a wide cardioid and most frequencies have a wide pick-up area, the 16kHz pick-up area is quite narrow. (I realize that most mics are like this.) I then checked out the diagram for the MK41 supercardioid capsules and noticed that the 16kHz pick-up area is much larger and wider than that of the MK21H.... even larger and wider than that of the MK4 cardioid. If you compare the diagrams, you might conclude that the MK41 supercardioid has a wider and more balanced frontal pick-up area than the MK21H. I find this confusing. I realize that diagrams do not tell all. Maybe I should just ask the following question: if one needed to record a small string or percussion ensemble that was spread across an area of say 10 - 13 feet wide, using one mic on a stand about 6 feet high in front of the ensemble, what Schoeps capsule might you recommend for the most even response possible from the entire ensemble. Picking up some room is ok. Again, the diagrams at the Schoeps site lead me to believe that an MK41 might be better than an MK21H for this (wide even frontal pick-up), but... there must be a problem with my thinking here. I know, I know, I need to get all these capsules and audition / compare them myself, fine. But before I do any auditioning, I'd like to at least have a better technical understanding and narrow down my choices. Final question: for all purpose use, recording a percussion ensemble, or drum overheads, or even an acoustic guitar, etc, what Schoeps capsules would be a good compliment and companion to the MK4's? Thanks! -wg http://www.schoeps.de/E/overview-caps.html |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
In Article , "WideGlide"
wrote: I have a question about mic pick-up patterns, related to Schoeps capsules. I was thinking of getting another pair of capsules to compliment my MK4's, and was looking to get something that had a wider pick-up area. One capsule that caught my eye was the MK21H, a "wide cardioid" with "high-frequency emphasis". Wide cardioid sounds cool, and the high frequency emphasis is something I might like since I often find I need to add a little upper-end eq whenever I use my MK4's. Anyway, so I took a glance at the pick-up pattern diagram for the MK21H (at the Schoeps site) and noticed that while the pattern is a wide cardioid and most frequencies have a wide pick-up area, the 16kHz pick-up area is quite narrow. (I realize that most mics are like this.) I then checked out the diagram for the MK41 supercardioid capsules and noticed that the 16kHz pick-up area is much larger and wider than that of the MK21H.... even larger and wider than that of the MK4 cardioid. If you compare the diagrams, you might conclude that the MK41 supercardioid has a wider and more balanced frontal pick-up area than the MK21H. I find this confusing. I realize that diagrams do not tell all. Maybe I should just ask the following question: if one needed to record a small string or percussion ensemble that was spread across an area of say 10 - 13 feet wide, using one mic on a stand about 6 feet high in front of the ensemble, what Schoeps capsule might you recommend for the most even response possible from the entire ensemble. Picking up some room is ok. Again, the diagrams at the Schoeps site lead me to believe that an MK41 might be better than an MK21H for this (wide even frontal pick-up), but... there must be a problem with my thinking here. I know, I know, I need to get all these capsules and audition / compare them myself, fine. But before I do any auditioning, I'd like to at least have a better technical understanding and narrow down my choices. Final question: for all purpose use, recording a percussion ensemble, or drum overheads, or even an acoustic guitar, etc, what Schoeps capsules would be a good compliment and companion to the MK4's? Thanks! -wg http://www.schoeps.de/E/overview-caps.html Dear Wide, I'm sorry, but I can't read all of your text because it's just one block of text. Please drop a paragraph or two on long posts for us. Regardless, the standard cardioid and the hyper would be good additions. Regards, Ty Ford For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews, click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
"WideGlide" wrote in message et...
Maybe I should just ask the following question: if one needed to record a small string or percussion ensemble that was spread across an area of say 10 - 13 feet wide, using one mic on a stand about 6 feet high in front of the ensemble, what Schoeps capsule might you recommend for the most even response possible from the entire ensemble. Picking up some room is ok. Again, the diagrams at the Schoeps site lead me to believe that an MK41 might be better than an MK21H for this (wide even frontal pick-up), but... there must be a problem with my thinking here. That's a pretty interesting question/issue for sure. Just for the sake of argument I propose that perhaps the question needs to be rephrased, since you are not considering stereo micing in your question. Let me put an idea out there for everyone to mock; a supercard pair will probably be set up in a coincident or near coincident configuration with either mic oriented at 90degrees or greater with respect to a substantial portion of the soundstage (vague statement, I know). The sub-cards or wide cards can probably tolerate being placed further apart than the supers without pulling the image apart, and likewise could/would be oriented less drastically, perhaps even in an AB config. Arguably the subcards would be less off-axis with respect to the ensemble while maintaining a balanced stereo image. So perhaps the fact that they lack top octave balance is not such an issue? I'm just kind of talking out of my ass here....anybody else care to weigh in? |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
v.hcvlny.cv.net
I have a question about mic pick-up patterns, related to Schoeps capsules. I was thinking of getting another pair of capsules to compliment my MK4's, and was looking to get something that had a wider pick-up area. One capsule that caught my eye was the MK21H, a "wide cardioid" with "high-frequency emphasis". Wide cardioid sounds cool, and the high frequency emphasis is something I might like since I often find I need to add a little upper-end eq whenever I use my MK4's. Anyway, so I took a glance at the pick-up pattern diagram for the MK21H (at the Schoeps site) and noticed that while the pattern is a wide cardioid and most frequencies have a wide pick-up area, the 16kHz pick-up area is quite narrow. (I realize that most mics are like this.) I then checked out the diagram for the MK41 supercardioid capsules and noticed that the 16kHz pick-up area is much larger and wider than that of the MK21H.... even larger and wider than that of the MK4 cardioid. If you compare the diagrams, you might conclude that the MK41 supercardioid has a wider and more balanced frontal pick-up area than the MK21H. I find this confusing. I realize that diagrams do not tell all. I have both the ML41 and the 2s omnis. the next capsules I will get are either going to be figure 8's or the 21 wide cardioid. The omni 2s exhibits a very narrow HF polar pattern, but it isn't aproblem. I probably won't get the MK4's until I own every other mic that I want as I have a whole drawer full of good cardioids. The Mk21 wide cardioids are the choice of the "tapers" that I know and they really have a wonderful sound. They are better off axis than the Mk4's and allow you to get in closer. The Mk 21also has a much better LF response than the MK41 or the MK4. Richard H. Kuschel "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
Sorry for my previous longish post and thanks to all for the feedback. I
have read a bit more at the Schoeps site and see that indeed the wider pattern mics have tighter high frequency frontal grabs. I do not see any wide pattern mics that also have a wide high freq grab. Thus the pick up of these "wide" mics will surely be "colored" off axis, less hi frequencies off axis than in front. Kind of defeats the purpose to some extent, doesn't it? I still need to gain more experience with these mics. Let's take drum overhead mics placed in an XY pattern about 90 - 110 degrees apart about a foot or two above the drummer's head, trying to pick up a large kit as evenly as possible. Normally I would not use hypercardioids for this since the directionality of such mics tends to split the kit in two yielding an unnatural exaggerated stereo image. Cardioids often work well, but with a lot of mics, I can really hear the off axis "coloration" - cymbals right in front sound accurate, cymbals at the edges sound darker and have color. My goal would be to pick up the whole kit as evenly as possible with little or no audible coloration.... and even in stereo, a "large" kit requires a pair of wide pick up mics to grab the whole thing. (I'd prefer to not do the three spaced mic thing even though this might be the ultimate solution.) What Schoeps capsules might be best for such a situation? I am interested in hearing opinions, though I realize I must ultimately experiment to really understand. If Schoeps capsules are not the answer, what other mics might be good for picking up a wide yet even pattern across the entire frequency range, hi-end included? Is there such thing as a cardioid, wide cardioid or omni that has a top-end pattern (10k+) that is just as wide as all frequencies below? I was shocked to notice that most cardioid mics have a rather tight hi-frequency pick up pattern, and wider patterns are often worse. Thanks - wg |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
wrote:
(Mike Rivers) wrote in message There are no standards for what's "wide", "hyper" or just plain cardioid. Are you sure about that? Angular sensitivity of a mic is usually expressed as either a measurement of response to pressure, response to pressure gradient or some combination of both. A bidirectional (simple pressure gradient) is described mathematically as the cosine of the arrival angle; ie. sensitivity=cos? An omni (pressure mic) is described very simply as having exhibiting unity gain regardless of arrival angle. ie sensitivity=1 A cardioid lies in between, meaning that it is partly pressure and partly pressure gradient; sensitivity=.5+.5cos? A sub card is described mathematically as .75 + .25cos?, although the MK21 is actually .68+.32cos? (so it is not as wide as other subs). Supers are .37+.63cos´?. Hyper are .25+.75cos? Right, but let's pick the 635A. It's an omni at 1 KHz. It's a cardoid at 20 KHz. What is the mike pattern? The AT 4047 is a cardioid at 1 KHz, an omni at 50 Hz, and a hypercardioid somewhere around 300 Hz. What is the mike pattern? Those are just generalizations and what's more important than the width of the pattern at a certain frequency is the frequency response at a given angle off axis. This is the same thing; width of pattern at a certain frequency is the same as frequency response off axis. It's a different way of looking at the same problem. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
"WideGlide" wrote:
[ ... ] I took a glance at the pick-up pattern diagram for the MK21H (at the Schoeps site) and noticed that while the pattern is a wide cardioid and most frequencies have a wide pick-up area, the 16kHz pick-up area is quite narrow. (I realize that most mics are like this.) I then checked out the diagram for the MK41 supercardioid capsules and noticed that the 16kHz pick-up area is much larger and wider than that of the MK21H.... even larger and wider than that of the MK4 cardioid. If you compare the diagrams, you might conclude that the MK41 supercardioid has a wider and more balanced frontal pick-up area than the MK21H. I find this confusing. This gets back to the basic physics of microphone patterns. There are two fundamental kinds of sensitivity which a condenser microphone can have: pressure response, and pressure gradient ( = velocity) response. With capsules of the first kind (the kind that respond purely to pressure), the overall pattern is omnidirectional. But the response above 6 - 8 kHz becomes narrower because the physical size of the capsule is 1/2 or more of the very small wavelengths of those high frequency sound components; the capsule itself causes some interference in the sound field. Thus the on-axis response of these capsules is always brighter than their off-axis response. That's not a bad thing for sound recording; it's actually very helpful in most rooms since you don't usually want reverberant sound to be picked up with as much high-frequency content as direct sound. Omnidirectional microphones need to be aimed at their intended sound sources; you simply have to be aware of that fact, despite what the term "omnidirectional" would lead a person to expect. Capsules of the second kind (pressure gradient) can have essentially the same response curve both on- and off-axis, but they're directional-- so the exact sensitivity at different angles will differ according to the pattern. A purely pressure-gradient-sensing microphone will have a bidirectional (figure-8) pickup pattern. OK--you asked about "wide cardioid" vs. supercardioid capsules. They are mixtures, in terms of how they operate. The wide cardioid has about 3/4 pressure response and 1/4 pressure gradient response. The supercardioid has nearly the opposite mixture. As a result, the supercardioid has nearly the same directionality at the highest frequencies as it does in the midrange (although a figure-8 would come even closer)--while conversely, the wide cardioid's pattern is somewhat narrower at the highest frequencies than it is in the midrange (although an omni would have even more of a narrowing at high frequencies). Do you see the logic there? The capsules are behaving as one might expect, given how they actually operate. This is a very condensed (no pun intended) explanation--if you have any further questions about the physical principles involved, please ask. The big variable which I left out was the effect of high-frequency absorption in the reflected sound, which is the reason there are four different Schoeps omni capsules intended for different approaches to the choice of miking distance; that involves two further variables, of which you yourself are one (i.e. your subjective preferences). I don't have much concrete advice about what capsules you should buy next; it simply depends too much on what types of recording you intend to do in what kinds of spaces, and on what techniques interest you, for anyone else to be able to prescribe something too particular for you. However, in spaces of adequate size (which for me means pretty large), the MK 41 has long been my "go-to" Schoeps capsule--the one that I can almost always find good-sounding places for in any situation. The one big exception is when I'm trying to get a smooth sound out of a small room, especially one with a low ceiling--then I most often would use the MK 8. Still, it depends on what you're trying to accomplish in the recording--for the record (or the tape), I'm also a fan of the MK 2 and of the AK 40 and AK 50 spheres for Schoeps pressure capsules, though they reflect an entirely different approach to stereo recording from the MK 41 or MK 8. --best regards |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
"WideGlide" wrote:
Let's take drum overhead mics placed in an XY pattern about 90 - 110 degrees apart about a foot or two above the drummer's head, trying to pick up a large kit as evenly as possible. Normally I would not use hypercardioids for this since the directionality of such mics tends to split the kit in two yielding an unnatural exaggerated stereo image. Cardioids often work well, but with a lot of mics, I can really hear the off axis "coloration" - cymbals right in front sound accurate, cymbals at the edges sound darker and have color. My goal would be to pick up the whole kit as evenly as possible with little or no audible coloration.... and even in stereo, a "large" kit requires a pair of wide pick up mics to grab the whole thing. You could try the supercardioids, but reduce the angle between them to some extent and bring them back slightly farther away from the drum kit if necessary to fit the entire drum kit within the stereo image. This should both reduce coloration and give a more even "spread" across the sound stage. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
David,
Another very informative reply. I have a question, though. I don't quite get this. However, in spaces of adequate size (which for me means pretty large), the MK 41 has long been my "go-to" Schoeps capsule--the one that I can almost always find good-sounding places for in any situation. The one big exception is when I'm trying to get a smooth sound out of a small room, especially one with a low ceiling--then I most often would use the MK 8. I was under the impression that the MK 41 would be better in a small room because it would ignore more of the room given it's tight pattern. Further, the following is an excerpt from the Schoeps web site referring to the MK 8. "When an MK 8 or CCM 8 is used as a spot microphone, care must be taken to avoid picking up early reflections or unwanted direct sound from its rear, since sound arriving from the back is picked up with full intensity but reversed in polarity. This could result in partial cancellation of the intended sound, which can lead to comb-filter effects at higher frequencies." Would this not be more prevalent in a small room? Please clarify. Thanks. Martin PS. I suppose defining the size of a small room would help. |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
Martin wrote:
However, in spaces of adequate size (which for me means pretty large), the MK 41 has long been my "go-to" Schoeps capsule--the one that I can almost always find good-sounding places for in any situation. The one big exception is when I'm trying to get a smooth sound out of a small room, especially one with a low ceiling--then I most often would use the MK 8. I was under the impression that the MK 41 would be better in a small room because it would ignore more of the room given it's tight pattern. It does ignore more of the room than a cardioid and is more useful in more situations for many of us. the following is an excerpt from the Schoeps web site referring to the MK 8. "When an MK 8 or CCM 8 is used as a spot microphone, care must be taken to avoid picking up early reflections or unwanted direct sound from its rear, since sound arriving from the back is picked up with full intensity but reversed in polarity. This could result in partial cancellation of the intended sound, which can lead to comb-filter effects at higher frequencies." Would this not be more prevalent in a small room? Yes, but the front lobe is even more directional than that of an MK41, leading to less problems with sidewall reflections. Also, a figure-eight mic has the unique advantage of having a planar null which can be used (by choice of position and angle) to reduce or eliminate the problems caused by a low cieling or close wall (parallel walls.) |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
Martin wrote:
I was under the impression that the MK 41 would be better in a small room because it would ignore more of the room given it's tight pattern. Further, the following is an excerpt from the Schoeps web site referring to the MK 8. When an MK 8 or CCM 8 is used as a spot microphone, care must be taken to avoid picking up early reflections or unwanted direct sound from its rear, since sound arriving from the back is picked up with full intensity but reversed in polarity. This could result in partial cancellation of the intended sound, which can lead to comb-filter effects at higher frequencies. Would this not be more prevalent in a small room? Please clarify. Thanks. This is one of the passages in the catalog (and thus on Schoeps' Web site) that say something fairly obvious--unfortunately in a way that makes it sound more complicated than it really is. However, maybe you overlooked the word "direct" which is the key to what it is saying. Direct sound can be picked up by the rear lobe of a figure 8 as easily as it can be by the front lobe. This would actually occur if the capsule were to be placed between two sound sources, with the capsule's front lobe pointing toward one sound source and its rear lobe pointing toward the other one. That could sound rather bad. In a situation like that, a cardioid could be used instead, placed so that its null would suppress the direct sound from one of the two oppositely-placed sources. But a figure-8 can't be. That's all that this passage is trying to say (I more or less ought to know; I was the translator). The size of the room would have no effect one way or the other. But what this paragraph is pointing out is probably not all that relevant to the issues that you're thinking about. --best regards |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
Thanks, I get it now..........
Martin "David Satz" wrote in message om... Martin wrote: I was under the impression that the MK 41 would be better in a small room because it would ignore more of the room given it's tight pattern. Further, the following is an excerpt from the Schoeps web site referring to the MK 8. When an MK 8 or CCM 8 is used as a spot microphone, care must be taken to avoid picking up early reflections or unwanted direct sound from its rear, since sound arriving from the back is picked up with full intensity but reversed in polarity. This could result in partial cancellation of the intended sound, which can lead to comb-filter effects at higher frequencies. Would this not be more prevalent in a small room? Please clarify. Thanks. This is one of the passages in the catalog (and thus on Schoeps' Web site) that say something fairly obvious--unfortunately in a way that makes it sound more complicated than it really is. However, maybe you overlooked the word "direct" which is the key to what it is saying. Direct sound can be picked up by the rear lobe of a figure 8 as easily as it can be by the front lobe. This would actually occur if the capsule were to be placed between two sound sources, with the capsule's front lobe pointing toward one sound source and its rear lobe pointing toward the other one. That could sound rather bad. In a situation like that, a cardioid could be used instead, placed so that its null would suppress the direct sound from one of the two oppositely-placed sources. But a figure-8 can't be. That's all that this passage is trying to say (I more or less ought to know; I was the translator). The size of the room would have no effect one way or the other. But what this paragraph is pointing out is probably not all that relevant to the issues that you're thinking about. --best regards |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
Martin wrote:
Thanks, I get it now.......... Well, actually ... with a little sleep and just a little more thought, I remembered that this problem is not entirely independent of room size. Small voiceover or announcer booths, iso booths of any kind, cramped little radio studios--anything like that can be small enough to produce audible comb filtering effects even with a single sound source. I tend to forget that some people spend a lot of their working lives in rooms so tiny that I'd never even think of them as recording spaces, since I work primarily with live music. But even a tabletop in a decent-sized studio can cause this type of problem. On the other hand, wise use of a figure-8 (or supercardioid) can also be the solution to the problem of adverse early reflections. The main benefit of figure-8s in _relatively_ small spaces is that their nulls are so sharp that they can effectively erase one dimension of the room, so far as early reflections are concerned (the main problem with small rooms). If you use a Blumlein configuration or spaced figure-8s (don't be afraid to try it, even if it doesn't appear in any textbook or article) with the microphones aimed directly in the horizontal plane, the nulls will then be "aimed" at the floor and ceiling of the room. This will suppress enough of the reflections from the two nearest room surfaces to give the impression of a less cramped space. |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Schoeps / pick-up pattern question / freq response, etc
Wide -
FWIW, you can listen to a drum kit recorded with coincident MK41s he http://www.erinmillermusic.com . . . go to "listen" and click on "Believin' Love" or "To Sleep". The OH's are about 60% of the sound, with the other two mic's - 57 on snare and D112 on Kick - filling in). Peter in St. Louis "WideGlide" wrote in message et... Sorry for my previous longish post and thanks to all for the feedback. I have read a bit more at the Schoeps site and see that indeed the wider pattern mics have tighter high frequency frontal grabs. I do not see any wide pattern mics that also have a wide high freq grab. Thus the pick up of these "wide" mics will surely be "colored" off axis, less hi frequencies off axis than in front. Kind of defeats the purpose to some extent, doesn't it? I still need to gain more experience with these mics. Let's take drum overhead mics placed in an XY pattern about 90 - 110 degrees apart about a foot or two above the drummer's head, trying to pick up a large kit as evenly as possible. Normally I would not use hypercardioids for this since the directionality of such mics tends to split the kit in two yielding an unnatural exaggerated stereo image. Cardioids often work well, but with a lot of mics, I can really hear the off axis "coloration" - cymbals right in front sound accurate, cymbals at the edges sound darker and have color. My goal would be to pick up the whole kit as evenly as possible with little or no audible coloration.... and even in stereo, a "large" kit requires a pair of wide pick up mics to grab the whole thing. (I'd prefer to not do the three spaced mic thing even though this might be the ultimate solution.) What Schoeps capsules might be best for such a situation? I am interested in hearing opinions, though I realize I must ultimately experiment to really understand. If Schoeps capsules are not the answer, what other mics might be good for picking up a wide yet even pattern across the entire frequency range, hi-end included? Is there such thing as a cardioid, wide cardioid or omni that has a top-end pattern (10k+) that is just as wide as all frequencies below? I was shocked to notice that most cardioid mics have a rather tight hi-frequency pick up pattern, and wider patterns are often worse. Thanks - wg |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| headphone response curve question | High End Audio | |||
| M/S-stereo setup | Pro Audio | |||
| Blindtest question | High End Audio | |||
| Question for Robert Morein... | Audio Opinions | |||
| Freq response ADS AL6 | Car Audio | |||
Linear Mode
