Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Nate Najar Nate Najar is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 594
Default Current 441

They haven't changed it have they? I.e. If I bought a brand new one will it perform as expected? Or have they given it the 421 treatment?

Thanks!
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Current 441

Nate Najar wrote:
They haven't changed it have they? I.e. If I bought a brand new one will it perform as expected? Or have they given it the 421 treatment?


The capsule looks different, but it doesn't sound obviously different. I have
not done a careful A-B test between them, but I have used both on the same
stage and not noticed anything. It's certainly not like the new 421 that
sounds like Jack has been at it with the 3k boost.

You'll also see some of the Fireball 441s out there, which have capsules that
look different than all the other 441 variations, and more limited M-S
settings. Those came out back in the eighties and I don't think they sound
dramatically different either.

Maybe someone else who has done a real A-B test can be sure.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Nate Najar Nate Najar is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 594
Default Current 441

Thanks Scott. I shall just get a new one and not be concerned then!
  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Current 441

On 23/01/2017 2:10 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Nate Najar wrote:
They haven't changed it have they? I.e. If I bought a brand new one
will it perform as expected? Or have they given it the 421
treatment?


The capsule looks different, but it doesn't sound obviously
different. I have not done a careful A-B test between them, but I
have used both on the same stage and not noticed anything. It's
certainly not like the new 421 that sounds like Jack has been at it
with the 3k boost.


How do you know which vintage you have ? I've never been fond of the
two oldish 421s that I have because of what I perceive as a thin shrill
sound and very low output, even for a dynamic.

Or are they both broken ? The casing around the stand-adaptor slot
certainly is one one !

geoff
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Current 441

geoff wrote:

How do you know which vintage you have ? I've never been fond of the
two oldish 421s that I have because of what I perceive as a thin shrill
sound and very low output, even for a dynamic.


There are three kinds of 421. The original one, which is white, the
newer-but-fine one which is black, and the "improved" model which says
421 Mk. II on the nameplate.

The original 421 capsule is designed to be repaired. During my lifetime
I don't think anyone actually provided a repair service for it, but it was
designed for the diaphragm to be removed from the element and replaced.
The stuff required for that made it very expensive to manufacture, and
making it flat was even more expensive.

The Mk. II has a huge gargantuan presence peak and sounds totally different.
The capsule is not repairable and is much easier to manufacture.

Or are they both broken ? The casing around the stand-adaptor slot
certainly is one one !


If the low end is gone, likely the voice coil has become deformed and is
sticking. This might be repairable by someone with skill, but for the past
few decades Sennheiser has just replaced the whole element. It is a common
failure. I suggest getting replacement elements while you can.

Throw out the stand adaptor that comes with it, and get the flexible rubber
"broadcast mount" that Sennheiser sells. It actually works.
--scott

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


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Nate Najar Nate Najar is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 594
Default Current 441

Is there any chance that an original 421 could have a replacement mkii capsule? I just got a secondhand u5 and it sounds brighter than I remember 421's sounding.....
  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Current 441

In article ,
Nate Najar wrote:
Is there any chance that an original 421 could have a replacement mkii capsule? I just got a secondhand u5 and it sounds brighter than I remember 421's sounding.....


Dunno. I don't know if they can be fit in, but maybe.

If it's bright, it might again be a low end loss due to voice coil sticking
or on the other hand it might be the preamp load impedance being higher.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Nate Najar Nate Najar is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 594
Default Current 441

I just borrowed a buddy's u4 and compared it to mine. The top end is the same but mine has a little less low end than his. His sounds normal, mine slightly brighter. Makes sense now.
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Peter Larsen[_3_] Peter Larsen[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,295
Default Current 441

On 23-01-2017 18:25, Scott Dorsey wrote:

In article ,


Nate Najar wrote:


Is there any chance that an original 421 could have a replacement mkii capsule? I just got a secondhand u5 and it sounds brighter than I remember 421's sounding.....


Dunno. I don't know if they can be fit in, but maybe.


If it's bright, it might again be a low end loss due to voice coil sticking
or on the other hand it might be the preamp load impedance being higher.


I have had old and less old greys and have a pair of black 421's, from
their specsheet curve what Sennheiser did over time was to fix the 500
Hz. KinoVox kindly made large Tüchel rears - available sparepart in the
late 1970-ties - into XLR rears on my 5 greys. Something that made them
a very nice drum set bunch, I eventually sold them to a PA Company.

Not having the entire tone control module in my opinion comes with a
clarity benefit and in some contexts it is also practical because it
reduces the possible number of setup-errors. A bypass wiring may be
possible. AB-test not done.

Today I would not discard the tonecontrol: it is very good for fixing
the proximity effect and in doing that - 2 clicks down - also appears to
make off axis response reasonably linear in the low range.

--scott


Kind regards

Peter Larsen




  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
JS[_2_] JS[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Current 441

On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 9:37:06 PM UTC+2, Nate Najar wrote:
They haven't changed it have they? I.e. If I bought a brand new one will it perform as expected? Or have they given it the 421 treatment?

Thanks!


test
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
API eq's current value? rickymix Pro Audio 2 December 25th 07 08:47 PM
Current Noise west[_4_] Vacuum Tubes 101 June 12th 07 02:01 PM
Hi current bjt amp. Patrick Turner Vacuum Tubes 8 December 2nd 04 01:19 AM
Alternating Current means ALTERNATING current? apa Pro Audio 73 June 23rd 04 06:56 PM
Alternating Current means ALTERNATING current? apa Pro Audio 6 June 21st 04 03:07 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:21 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"