[[email protected]]

Hi thank you so much peter!

i want to record my own classical compositions inside the room.
I will record with my computer.I have a senheiser headphone .

I need preamp, converter, sets of mikes and capsules which should be around 4000dollars.

I will try to find matched pair of Josephson C42 microphones and MKH 4040 !

Please let me know if you have other suggestion about which mic set I should buy it .

I am sorry that I am completely amateur about this

I really appreciate your answer!

[Steve[_25_]]

wrote in
:

Hi thank you so much peter!

i want to record my own classical compositions inside the room.
I will record with my computer.I have a senheiser headphone .

I need preamp, converter, sets of mikes and capsules which should be
around 4000dollars.

I will try to find matched pair of Josephson C42 microphones and MKH
4040 !

Please let me know if you have other suggestion about which mic set I
should buy it .

I am sorry that I am completely amateur about this

I really appreciate your answer!

I'm selling my matched pair of km184's rarely used. I bought them new.
email me at essessell (at) gmail dot com if anyone is intersted.

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
Hi thank you so much peter!

i want to record my own classical compositions inside the room.
I will record with my computer.I have a senheiser headphone .

I need preamp, converter, sets of mikes and capsules which should be around 4000dollars.

I will try to find matched pair of Josephson C42 microphones and MKH 4040 !

The Josephson C42 is a lower cost microphone, but I think you will like it.
I don't think it's as clean as the Schoeps but then again that is a hard act
to follow. Cutting Edge Audio Group in Burbank should have a set you can
borrow for testing. Vintage King and AEA are in he LA area also.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

To the OP...

FYI, you can make technically excellent recordings while spending a lot less than $4000.

Mark

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

On 19-08-2015 18:21, Scott Dorsey wrote:

wrote:

Hi thank you so much peter!

i want to record my own classical compositions inside the room.
I will record with my computer.I have a senheiser headphone .

I need preamp, converter, sets of mikes and capsules which should be around 4000dollars.

I will try to find matched pair of Josephson C42 microphones and MKH 4040 !

Again, MKH40 (my typo), but you could also try MKH 8040.

The Josephson C42 is a lower cost microphone, but I think you will like it.
I don't think it's as clean as the Schoeps but then again that is a hard act
to follow.

Scott, first recording with my matched pair was in parallel with Schoeps
subcardioids in a very reverberant room. The Josephsons sounded cleaner
in that specific application. This comparison could go differently in a
less reverberant room because imaging in a marble hall is a challenge
and it would be fair and say "neither is better". Having a pair and two
C42's is one of the wiser equipment follies I have ventured into

Cutting Edge Audio Group in Burbank should have a set you can
borrow for testing. Vintage King and AEA are in he LA area also.

Since the OP is modestly skilled and needs a full recording setup I'll
reiterate that a matched pair of C42's is perhaps the wisest
startup-choice and remind that it is possible to get two matched pairs
and perhaps even to order a kit of 4 for less than the cost of a pair of
any of the competing suggestions.

Plan for 4 track capability, it is folly not to.

--scott

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
To the OP...

FYI, you can make technically excellent recordings while spending a lot less than $4000.

You could hire me for more than a week for that, for instance.
--scott

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

[Scott Dorsey]

Peter Larsen wrote:
kludge writes:

The Josephson C42 is a lower cost microphone, but I think you will like it.
I don't think it's as clean as the Schoeps but then again that is a hard act
to follow.

Scott, first recording with my matched pair was in parallel with Schoeps
subcardioids in a very reverberant room. The Josephsons sounded cleaner
in that specific application. This comparison could go differently in a
less reverberant room because imaging in a marble hall is a challenge
and it would be fair and say "neither is better". Having a pair and two
C42's is one of the wiser equipment follies I have ventured into

Yeah, the problem is that these are both excellent microphones. I'd bet
the Josephson was a win because of the tighter pattern in that room.

Which, in the end, all goes to show you that the right microphone for
one room isn't the right microphone for another one. Not to mention
different placement and sometimes even different technique altogether.

Cutting Edge Audio Group in Burbank should have a set you can
borrow for testing. Vintage King and AEA are in he LA area also.

Since the OP is modestly skilled and needs a full recording setup I'll
reiterate that a matched pair of C42's is perhaps the wisest
startup-choice and remind that it is possible to get two matched pairs
and perhaps even to order a kit of 4 for less than the cost of a pair of
any of the competing suggestions.

This is true, and if you bought a pair of C42s, you would never feel bad
about them. And if you later decided you wanted a pair of Schoeps, you
could easily sell the C42s for about what you paid for them after a few
years of use. This equipment tends to appreciate with time.

Plan for 4 track capability, it is folly not to.

Maybe in the long run, but I think it's important to learn how to work
with two tracks first.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

thank you peter!
Yes probably it is most reasonable choice to get C42's than spending a lot of money without any recording skills.
I will go check sound and want to see how much different from other more expensive microphone
yes I will get 4 channel one!

thank you so much!

[[email protected]]

thank you mark

do you mean should get cheeper microphone?

thank you

[geoff]

On 25/08/2015 9:03 a.m., wrote:
thank you mark

do you mean should get cheeper microphone?

thank you

Forgive me if I've got this wrong, but what is the context of this
project ?

Sounds a very high cost exercise for a rank beginner. Like a first-time
learner driver jumping into a Rolls Royce.

But if it is a *really significant* project that must be done by a
beginner, what else can you do, I guess...

Most of us started out on, and often still use, far lesser microphones
and esoteric converters/preamps than those suggested, and there are many
that can achieve a perfectly good result at far lower cost. Certainly
hiring is the best way to go if that primo quality level and
brand-name-dropping is essential.

Forgive my rambling ...

geoff

[[email protected]]

hi scott

Ill rent cardioid capsule as you suggest !

yes it will cost 2 hundred 60 dollars per day if I rent 3microphone and amp and converter
Moreover, they said they do not have matched pair for cmc6.
they can only have same 2 microphone ..

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

Ill rent cardioid capsule as you suggest !

yes it will cost 2 hundred 60 dollars per day if I rent 3microphone and amp and converter

That seems high to me, but then I am usually in a better position to dicker than
you are.

Moreover, they said they do not have matched pair for cmc6.
they can only have same 2 microphone ..

That's fine, you don't need a matched pair. These are not cheap mikes
where no two are the same off the production line. You can pick one
Schoeps and another that is 20 years newer and listen to them and measure
them and not tell the difference.

You can even compare use CMC6 and CMC4 together in a stereo pair and
have little or no degrading of the stereo image.

This is the difference between the $100 miek and the $1000 mike.

For years, Neumann wouldn't even sell matched pairs because their consistency
was so good they weren't needed. They sell them now, but you basically pay more
money and get no improvement.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

Hi Geoff.
I really appreciate your opinion because I need a very honest suggestion from professional people.

A purpose is for my recording composition. If sound is really good then, eventually I want make a CD out of this recording set I will buy. Or if get offer job for example CM music , then it is great if I can use this recording set.


Actually I have exactly same opinion as you
At first time, I though going to recording studio is better.

However, my professor told me that he had bad experience in the recording studio
that is why he is telling me I should trust my ear and depends on my self.

I still doubt if I can really get very good quality of recording by myself.

I do not mind paying a lot of money on microphone only if It is not very hard and make good sound.

do you think self-leaning is better or going to recording studio is better?

how do you think from you guys experience?

[[email protected]]

By the way if shop has only mk184 analog then should i not rent it?

my professor says digital one has much better reputation

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/24/2015 8:26 PM, wrote:
At first time, I though going to recording studio is better.

However, my professor told me that he had bad experience in the recording studio
that is why he is telling me I should trust my ear and depends on my self.

I still doubt if I can really get very good quality of recording by myself.

I do not mind paying a lot of money on microphone only if It is not very hard and make good sound.

Having great equipment will be one less limitation to getting great
sound, but I think you're right that you won't make great recordings by
yourself as a beginner unless you're very lucky. It doesn't hurt to
learn on great equipment, but then it doesn't hurt to learn on lesser
quality equipment and experiment a bit. If you spend a few thousand
dollars on microphones, you're pretty committed to using those
microphones and while they may be, in general, great mics, they may not
be the best mics for your particular recording situation.

Find a good studio and do some recording there. Don't go to the one your
professor did. Work with someone else's investment in equipment and
experience for a while. It ill allow you to evaluate your music, and if
you pick a good studio if it's really good enough to release, it'll
sound good enough to release. Learn what you can, experiment with mics
in the studio, and when you feel like you know more about how recording
really works, consider making an investment in your own gear.



--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/24/2015 8:58 PM, wrote:
By the way if shop has only mk184 analog then should i not rent it?

my professor says digital one has much better reputation

There are far fewer Neumann digital mics in use than analog ones. The
digital version has somewhat better specs and costs a lot more. It's a
great mic, but in order to get the most out of it, you should record its
digital output so that you take your interface's A/D converter out of
the signal chain. And, still, what you hear will be influenced by the
sound of your D/A converter.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[geoff]

On 25/08/2015 12:58 p.m., wrote:
By the way if shop has only mk184 analog then should i not rent it?

my professor says digital one has much better reputation


Is your professor a musician or a 'recordist' (or both) ? Some of the
ideas sound a bit like the equivalent "You need a Bosendorfer to get
best results' - ie, a bit 'sweeping'.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
By the way if shop has only mk184 analog then should i not rent it?

The ordinary analogue KM184 is the one everybody uses.
Digital microphones with the converters and preamp built into the
microphone really have not become very popular.

my professor says digital one has much better reputation

Did he explain why? For the most part, I think you will find it very
difficult to even find anyone who has ever used the KM184D.
--scott



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

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

A purpose is for my recording composition. If sound is really good then, eventually I want make a CD out of this recording set I will buy. Or if get offer job for example CM music , then it is great if I can use this recording set.

You want to spend $4000 on equipment and spend a year or two learning how to
get it set up right in order to make a single recording?

Actually I have exactly same opinion as you
At first time, I though going to recording studio is better.

However, my professor told me that he had bad experience in the recording studio
that is why he is telling me I should trust my ear and depends on my self.

Go to the studio, and think of it as a learning experience. Maybe you
will have a good experience, maybe you will have a bad experience, but
either way you will come out of it having learned something important,
for a lot less money than buying a microphone kit.

After you get a sense of how things work in the studio, THEN consider
buying a microphone kit.

But... if you select a studio, pick one with a good sounding room and a
good sounding piano, and an engineer who knows about classical music.
Don't just pick the big-name rock studio in town, or the one that advertises
it has the most tracks.

I still doubt if I can really get very good quality of recording by myself.

I do not mind paying a lot of money on microphone only if It is not very hard and make good sound.

It is hard to get good sound, but it is worth the effort to do it. It is
not easy and you will spend a lot of time learning how to work with the
room, but it is a useful thing to learn. I have spent 40 years doing it
and I still learn new things about room acoustics; you can readily spend
the rest of your life learning.

do you think self-leaning is better or going to recording studio is better?

I think the two are tightly combined together and doing either one makes
it much easier to do the other.

how do you think from you guys experience?

Well, I am biased because I make a living from recording. It is not an
easy thing to learn, but it's an enjoyable and valuable thing to learn.
--scott

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

[Frank Stearns]

However, my professor told me that he had bad experience in the recording studio
that is why he is telling me I should trust my ear and depends on my self.

If it was classical or acoustic music and he just picked a studio out of the phone
book then yes, he probably did have a poor experience.

I know a few very good rock engineers (and that's what most of the remaining
"studios" do) who simply don't have the experience or ear for finer points of what
one might call classical work, modern or otherwise. Some of them call me for advice,
or projects they messed up by applying rock/pop techniques to classical/acoustic
music land in my lap and I do what I can to repair the recording. Sometimes
you can, sometimes you can't.


I still doubt if I can really get very good quality of recording by myself.

It's taken me 30-40 years to reach a point where I can give my work a consistent
pass in the classical realm. Over those years I've learned there's much to consider
individually on many fronts on every project. Very few (if any) are "cookie cutter".

I do not mind paying a lot of money on microphone only if It is not very hard and
make good sound.

Oh my. Good gear is a barely-beginning. It is light years from making a fine
end-product. There is so much more involved.


do you think self-leaning is better or going to recording studio is better?

You need to find the right engineer (and better yet an engineer/producer) -- someone
who can communicate with you and ask the right questions about your project,
understands and hopefully has a classical/acoustic sensibility, can help you find
the best recording venue for your project (a "studio" might be the worst place --
it's hard to know without having a fuller grasp of your music), help you get the
best performance possible during the recording, and so on. A thousand other
considerations go into making a top-notch classical/acoustic recording.

how do you think from you guys experience?

If you're really serious about this and have $4000 to toss around, I'd start asking
all your musician friends who they've worked with for recording work, then start
interviewing the folks referred to you and listening to their work. Even then it's
likely going to be something of a crap shoot.

I might be able to help (and have some rather fine gear), but schedules and other
local audio projects don't allow for any significant travel.

But as this thread has developed, it seems to me you're going about it the wrong way
if the hope is that a good microphone will, by defualt, make a good recording.

A good mic could very well simply do a better job of revealing just how awful the
room is, how badly placed the microphone was, and so on.

My opinion only.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

wrote:
By the way if shop has only mk184 analog then should i not rent it?

The ordinary analogue KM184 is the one everybody uses.
Digital microphones with the converters and preamp built into the
microphone really have not become very popular.

my professor says digital one has much better reputation

Did he explain why? For the most part, I think you will find it very
difficult to even find anyone who has ever used the KM184D.

An fellow recordist in my old stomping ground of the Northwest has about a dozen of
the "Solution D" mics. They're good, but once while visiting me at a venue he looked
longingly at my analog KM183s up in the air and expressed that he wished he had
those rather than the 183Ds. They're fine when they work, but apparently there are
some quirks with the the digital Nuemanns. He did not elaborate.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns wrote:

An fellow recordist in my old stomping ground of the Northwest has about a dozen of
the "Solution D" mics. They're good, but once while visiting me at a venue he looked
longingly at my analog KM183s up in the air and expressed that he wished he had
those rather than the 183Ds. They're fine when they work, but apparently there are
some quirks with the the digital Nuemanns. He did not elaborate.

Wow! I think that between him and Mike Pappas, they have all of the ones
in the country!

The Neumann digital interface was designed in a different kind of digital
world. They can all be locked together into a master clock and made to
spit out AES/EBU, but only with an awful lot of external boxes. It just
seems very silly and kind of limiting, and you're of course limited to
the converter and limiter that can be fit into that tiny little handle.

I honestly don't know anybody that actually invested seriously into the
system, it really seems to have turned into a bit of a white elephant.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Neil[_9_]]

On 8/24/2015 8:26 PM, wrote:
Hi Geoff.
I really appreciate your opinion because I need a very honest suggestion from professional people.

A purpose is for my recording composition. If sound is really good then, eventually I want make a CD out of this recording set I will buy. Or if get offer job for example CM music , then it is great if I can use this recording set.


Actually I have exactly same opinion as you
At first time, I though going to recording studio is better.

However, my professor told me that he had bad experience in the recording studio
that is why he is telling me I should trust my ear and depends on my self.

I still doubt if I can really get very good quality of recording by myself.

I do not mind paying a lot of money on microphone only if It is not very hard and make good sound.

do you think self-leaning is better or going to recording studio is better?

how do you think from you guys experience?

As others have suggested, there is a lot more involved in getting a good
quality recording than just the equipment. After reading most of your
posts, I am still wondering what the subject was that you studied. At
times, it sounds like it was a course on recording, but the comment
about your professor having a "bad experience" in "the" recording studio
calls that into question. A lot depends on what you are ultimately
wanting to achieve.

If you are investing in building a recording studio, I would recommend
that you put the money into the room rather than hardware. Good
equipment in a bad room is unlikely to result in a good recording, and
bad room acoustics will overwhelm the quality differences between the
best mics and entry-level mics. After building a good room, you can
experiment by renting different equipment to find the best match for
your room.

If you are investing in being a recording artist, then I would recommend
that you spend the money in a number of studios with a track record in
the type of music you perform. That takes the engineering learning curve
out of the equation, and will give you exposure to both the equipment,
the issues involved in recording your music, and the different
approaches to addressing those issues.

Hope this is of some help!

--
Best regards,

Neil

[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

Frank Stearns wrote:

An fellow recordist in my old stomping ground of the Northwest has about a dozen of
the "Solution D" mics. They're good, but once while visiting me at a venue he looked
longingly at my analog KM183s up in the air and expressed that he wished he had
those rather than the 183Ds. They're fine when they work, but apparently there are
some quirks with the the digital Nuemanns. He did not elaborate.

Wow! I think that between him and Mike Pappas, they have all of the ones
in the country!

The Neumann digital interface was designed in a different kind of digital
world. They can all be locked together into a master clock and made to
spit out AES/EBU, but only with an awful lot of external boxes. It just
seems very silly and kind of limiting, and you're of course limited to
the converter and limiter that can be fit into that tiny little handle.

I honestly don't know anybody that actually invested seriously into the
system, it really seems to have turned into a bit of a white elephant.

The guy up in Portland also had a pair of the 130D-something (or was it 140D --
don't remember) that sounded incredible ("'too good' for some things" was his
comment). They where the itty-bitty diaphragm critters, roughly 1/4", and with the
mid-body taper to a small diameter shaft they looked vaguely like the Earthworks
calibration microphones. $4K each or there abouts, IIRC.

And you're right, early on he had all sorts of doo-dads to make the system work, but
last time I ran into him on location he had an 8-channel interface box for the D
series microphones. Seems to have streamlined the hardware.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/25/2015 11:48 AM, Frank Stearns wrote:
And you're right, early on he had all sorts of doo-dads to make the system work, but
last time I ran into him on location he had an 8-channel interface box for the D
series microphones. Seems to have streamlined the hardware.

I seem to recall that the Neumann Solution-D mics used a two-stage A/D
converter since mics are called upon to handle a wide range of SPLs. I'm
pretty sure that there's an AES digital microphone interface standard
that they comply with, but I don't believe that anybody's making a
console that fully supports that standard yet. Ultimately, you'll be
able to plug the mics right into a digital console that will power them,
sync them (or more likely sample rate convert all the inputs to a common
clock) and mix them to a high resolution WAV file which, before it gets
too far, will probably be converted to an MP3.

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[[email protected]]

Thank you for reply everyone .

I talked to professor and I decided I will got renting mic tomorrow and if sound good enough by my self then, I will buy them. I have a small piano hall in my country so I will get equipment depending on that room.
Also I will be planning to go to couple studio to see how recording room works.

I really appreciate you all give me very good response and Im sorry for late reply .

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

I will check Portland microphone Mr frank

Almost everyone thinks that Shoeps is the best brand for microphone.

Is second most reputable microphone Neuman?
I will rent Shoeps CMC6 and If it is possible, I want to rent one of them from KM184 or MHK40
since it will cost almost 3hundred dollars renting fee a day with 3mic pair, preamp and coveter etc.
Could you suggest me which one I should rent or
Would you say I should rent both since KM184 or MHK40 because they are equally good for piano and violin recording?

I am sorry for asking too many questions .

[geoff]

On 27/08/2015 9:04 p.m., wrote:
Thank you for reply everyone .

I talked to professor and I decided I will got renting mic tomorrow
and if sound good enough by my self then, I will buy them. I have a
small piano hall in my country so I will get equipment depending on
that room. Also I will be planning to go to couple studio to see how
recording room works.

I really appreciate you all give me very good response and Im sorry
for late reply .

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of
km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

I will check Portland microphone Mr frank

Almost everyone thinks that Shoeps is the best brand for microphone.

Is second most reputable microphone Neuman? I will rent Shoeps CMC6
and If it is possible, I want to rent one of them from KM184 or
MHK40 since it will cost almost 3hundred dollars renting fee a day
with 3mic pair, preamp and coveter etc. Could you suggest me which
one I should rent or Would you say I should rent both since KM184
or MHK40 because they are equally good for piano and violin
recording?

I am sorry for asking too many questions .



To get good results with the K184D you will need considereable expertise
and experience and maybe additional equipment. I suggest you get a
straight analogue version microphone.

Out of interest , where is your country ?

geoff

[[email protected]]

Thnak you geoff!
OK! I will try analog one!

I am from Tokyo!

If I decide to get microphone, I will get good one. In case I decide no to buy, then I will stick my self going to recording studio.

Therefore, I would like to try and prioritize good sounding microphone rather than considering cost at this point.

[Frank Stearns]

writes:

Thank you for reply everyone .

I talked to professor and I decided I will got renting mic tomorrow and if sound
good enough by my self then, I will buy them. I have a small piano hall in my
country so I will get equipment depending on that room. Also I will be planning to
go to couple studio to see how recording room works.

Japan seems to have a wide variety of studios and levels of expertise -- some very
good for classical/acoustic music; some very bad. (Sorry, I don't recall any
facility names; just casual reading and listening over the years.)

When you go that route, you'll need to look around. And again, the same selection
methods apply -- find a place that has some track record with the kind of music you
want to do; make sure you can work easily with engineer/producer, and that they can
help you.

I really appreciate you all give me very good response and Im sorry for late reply .



I will check Portland microphone Mr frank

There is no "Portland Microphone" -- just an engineer there who has many of the "D"
Nuemanns he will bring to a location.


Is second most reputable microphone Neuman?

I will rent Shoeps CMC6 and If it is possible, I want to rent one of them from
KM184 or MHK40 since it will cost almost 3hundred dollars renting fee a day with
3mic pair, preamp and coveter etc. Could you suggest me which one I should rent or
Would you say I should rent both since KM184 or MHK40 because they are equally good
for piano and violin recording?


It's likely that a good studio with a scoring or classical music reputation will
have most or all of these microphones. Then, your investment might do "double duty".
You can compare microphones, and possibly find a studio and engineer/producer you'd
want to work with.

Good luck with it.

Frank
Mobile Audio


--

[JackA]

On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 5:30:16 AM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 27/08/2015 9:04 p.m., wrote:
Thank you for reply everyone .

I talked to professor and I decided I will got renting mic tomorrow
and if sound good enough by my self then, I will buy them. I have a
small piano hall in my country so I will get equipment depending on
that room. Also I will be planning to go to couple studio to see how
recording room works.

I really appreciate you all give me very good response and Im sorry
for late reply .

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of
km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

I will check Portland microphone Mr frank

Almost everyone thinks that Shoeps is the best brand for microphone.

Is second most reputable microphone Neuman? I will rent Shoeps CMC6
and If it is possible, I want to rent one of them from KM184 or
MHK40 since it will cost almost 3hundred dollars renting fee a day
with 3mic pair, preamp and coveter etc. Could you suggest me which
one I should rent or Would you say I should rent both since KM184
or MHK40 because they are equally good for piano and violin
recording?

I am sorry for asking too many questions .



To get good results with the K184D you will need considereable expertise
and experience and maybe additional equipment.

You found someone with those qualifications??!!!

Jack

I suggest you get a
straight analogue version microphone.

Out of interest , where is your country ?

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

Almost everyone thinks that Shoeps is the best brand for microphone.

I keep the Schoeps microphones in my kit. Sometimes I use them, but sometimes
I prefer older B&K mikes. Sometimes I use some older Josephsons. I pick the
microphone based on the room and the sound I want, so I have a number of
microphones in the kit. All of the top-grade microphones are excellent, but
they are all a little different and those differences can be a useful tool.

I will rent Shoeps CMC6 and If it is possible, I want to rent one of them from KM184 or MHK40
since it will cost almost 3hundred dollars renting fee a day with 3mic pair, preamp and coveter etc.

Dicker with the rental house. You might not get them down at all, but then
again you might.


Could you suggest me which one I should rent or
Would you say I should rent both since KM184 or MHK40 because they are equally good for piano and violin recording?

I would tend to pick the KM184 over the MKH-40 for loud sources, but the
MKH-40 is just so amazingly quiet that sometimes it is the best choice.
I will frequently use the MKH-series microphones for baroque chamber
works using original instruments that don't make much sound.

I am sorry for asking too many questions .

You need to listen to some microphones! Then you will have even more
questions!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

On 27/08/2015 9:04 p.m., wrote:

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of
km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

This is a review written in a magazine that Neumann advertises in. It's not
entirely biased.

But... if you read this review, you will see that the reviewer has a difficult
time telling the difference between the KM184 going into a Benchmark converter
and GML preamp, compared with the KM184D. If he cannot tell the difference,
what makes you think the KM184D is any better?

Personally I liked the old KM84 better than the KM184. But then again, I have
a customer who is obsessed with the old Neumman M50. They are all good mikes
but they all sound different.
--scott


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

[geoff]

On 28/08/2015 1:18 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 27/08/2015 9:04 p.m., wrote:

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of
km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

This is a review written in a magazine that Neumann advertises in. It's not
entirely biased.

I think you'll find that Sound On Sound is in fact extremey unbiased,
never mincing words or failing to point out negative aspects of a
product, the brand being an advertiser or not. It's not Mix or Recording !


geoff

[JackA]

On Thursday, August 27, 2015 at 4:10:36 PM UTC-4, geoff wrote:
On 28/08/2015 1:18 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 27/08/2015 9:04 p.m., wrote:

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of
km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

This is a review written in a magazine that Neumann advertises in. It's not
entirely biased.

I think you'll find that Sound On Sound is in fact extremey unbiased,
never mincing words or failing to point out negative aspects of a
product, the brand being an advertiser or not. It's not Mix or Recording !

Most of those audio gear sites will not say a bad word, fearing no reviews of future gear!! Besides, it was SOS who posted 3 pages of garbage for that Disco sounding Doobies song!!

Jack


geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff wrote:
On 28/08/2015 1:18 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
On 27/08/2015 9:04 p.m., wrote:

Here is the link my professor sent me and has a good reputation of
km184 digital.

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar...umannk1840.htm

This is a review written in a magazine that Neumann advertises in. It's not
entirely biased.

I think you'll find that Sound On Sound is in fact extremey unbiased,
never mincing words or failing to point out negative aspects of a
product, the brand being an advertiser or not. It's not Mix or Recording !

It is much better than Mix and Recording in that regard, but it's not
anywhere near as good as Resolution (or as good as it was in the distant
past when they actually did louspeaker measurements).

Still... read the review and see what you think!
--scott

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

[[email protected]]

Yes I think Japan is very delayed in sound engineering .

Today I went to rental shop and rent 3 microphone cmc6, mk184d,and mkh 40

It was 215sdollars because I conveyer has preamp!And They gave me 2days deal!

[[email protected]]

I was very surprised because each microphone has totally different personality!

I think km 184 is most transparent and has a lot of details in sound
I hear sound is not one but from many other angle.

cmc6 is opposite. I heard sound is more together and much warmer.

Mkh 40 has very powerful sound but little bit too harsh to me .

Overall, I liked km184 the best.

Here is another link my professor sent me .

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remo...-km-183-d.html

There is audition between analog and digital one
Please let me know how you think. It seems #2 is the digital one

Thank you for you guys help!!

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/28/2015 6:26 AM, wrote:

I was very surprised because each microphone has totally different personality!

Glad you finally had a chance to listen to some different microphones,
and I'm happy to hear that you could indeed hear the differences and
characterize them in ways that mean something to you.

So, are you going to continue with your plan to record at home, perhaps
with a pair of KM184s, or let a studio engineer do the worrying and
concentrate on playing the best you can?


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Frank Stearns]

On 8/28/2015 6:26 AM, wrote:

I was very surprised because each microphone has totally different personality!

If you're going the KM184 route, another microphone in that exact same class is the
Gefell M300.

Performance on all counts is nearly identical to the 184 *except* that the M300 is a
little creamier on the top end. It's somewhat similar to a ribbon in that regard.

The M300 is one of the few small diaphragm condensers you can stick right on top of
a violin or viola and not get exaggerated screetching. I own both the 300s and the
184; the 300s are the go-to microphones for close-mic'ing strings.

Overall, the M300 has more of a neutral "personality," though at times I want the
more assertive 184 sound.

Frank
Mobile Audio

--

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
I was very surprised because each microphone has totally different personality!
Yes, but they are all good ones.

I think km 184 is most transparent and has a lot of details in sound
I hear sound is not one but from many other angle.

What you like about the KM184 is the brightness. This is what I usually
dislike about the KM184, although it can be useful in some rooms and with
some instruments. It makes violin more harsh, at the same time it makes
the piano more forward.

cmc6 is opposite. I heard sound is more together and much warmer.

Yes, I like that.

Mkh 40 has very powerful sound but little bit too harsh to me .

It should sound pretty close to the KM184 except in the octave or so below
middle C where it sounds a little weird to me.

Overall, I liked km184 the best.

If your room and your instrument sounds best with the KM184, then by all means
go with the KM184.

Here is another link my professor sent me .

https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remo...-km-183-d.html

There is audition between analog and digital one
Please let me know how you think. It seems #2 is the digital one

Both of these recordings are digital recordings. One was made with the
converters in a digital microphone, the other was made with the converters
in the Nagra VI portable recorder.

The two recordings sound a little different... but it is the kind of
difference that might be cause by moving the microphone a foot or two away.
It sounds to me like the difference is just more low frequencies on #2.
That might be the result of the converters or the preamp or the placement.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."