Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default T.H.E. Microphones

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:24:36 -0400, OSPAM wrote
(in article ):

First review I've seen of them... too bad. They seem like they could be a
viable system.
--


Neil Henderson
Progressive Rock
http://www.saqqararecords.com

Neil,

Let me be VERY clear about this, again. AT THEIR PRICE POINT the hyper
Taylor sent me was OK. It was not, however, a price busting challenger to the
Schoeps cmc641.

Regards,

Ty ford




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

  #2   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:24:36 -0400, OSPAM

wrote
(in article ):

First review I've seen of them... too bad. They seem like they could be

a
viable system.
--


Neil Henderson
Progressive Rock
http://www.saqqararecords.com

Neil,

Let me be VERY clear about this, again. AT THEIR PRICE POINT the hyper
Taylor sent me was OK. It was not, however, a price busting challenger to

the
Schoeps cmc641.


OK, but at the price point is it better/lower in self-noise/clearer than a
KM184, for example?
--


Neil Henderson
Progressive Rock
http://www.saqqararecords.com




  #3   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ty Ford wrote:

Let me be VERY clear about this, again. AT THEIR PRICE POINT the hyper
Taylor sent me was OK. It was not, however, a price busting challenger to the
Schoeps cmc641.


Was it a price-busting challenger to the AT 4053?
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #4   Report Post  
Paul Gitlitz
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 08:11:27 -0400, Ty Ford
wrote:

Let me be VERY clear about this, again. AT THEIR PRICE POINT the hyper
Taylor sent me was OK. It was not, however, a price busting challenger to the
Schoeps cmc641.


Damned by faint praise!
  #5   Report Post  
HandFStudio
 
Posts: n/a
Default

the 2C cardiod capsule is the best THE capsule. (not the hyper) i directly
compared it to a stereo pair of schoeps and prefered the THE. it was very
similar but a touch brighter which is what i liked. I didn't hear any more
noise out of THE mic compared to Schoeps. Taylor from THE is out of the
country for the month of june. THE is not even shipping any mics till they
reopen at the end of June. This is probably why he hasn't responded.



  #6   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stephen Boyke wrote:
How would you compare the Microtech Gefell M294/295 with the
Schoeps/Senn/DPA/Josephson crowd? The nickel diaphragm would be a major
difference, I would think.


I have never used it. And I really should, because I really like the
nickel-diaphragm Schoeps 221 and the nickel-diaphragm B&K measurement mikes.
It's on the list of things I really need to try.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #7   Report Post  
HenryShap
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The sennheiser mkh 40 I used was remarkably quiet, like a whole 'nother
dimension. The scheops wasn't as quiet but felt more 'natural'. I also use
neumann km140s and they are very nice too. They can be found sometimes used for
around $1000/pair. If I was on a budget in the market for a serious mic, that's
what i'd look for.

On another track, if you don't need eye candy, the MCA mic I bought for $40 and
had Jim WIlliams mod for another $125 is decidedly cool and very schoeps-like.

Henry
Pittsburgh, PA
  #8   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:06:42 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):

Stephen Boyke wrote:
How would you compare the Microtech Gefell M294/295 with the
Schoeps/Senn/DPA/Josephson crowd? The nickel diaphragm would be a major
difference, I would think.


I have never used it. And I really should, because I really like the
nickel-diaphragm Schoeps 221 and the nickel-diaphragm B&K measurement mikes.
It's on the list of things I really need to try.
--scott



I have used and reviewed the M294, M295 AND M296. I especially liked the omni
m296. I forget which is the flatter of the M294 M295, but the flatter one was
the one I liked.

All were contenders in the km 184 and above class.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

  #9   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ty Ford wrote:

My problem with it professionally is that they seem bent on making the case
for their mics being the equivalent of Schoeps. When I reported back here
about the hyper Taylor sent me, they chose to make this response.


But that's what marketing is all about. Mercedes made it a lot easier for
Volkswagen to sell German cars.

I am concerned that RAPpers with less experience might buy into their claims.


I'm sure many of them will, but maybe it will teach them to actually listen
to gear and do real comparisons themselves rather than believing anyone else.
Don't believe the marketing glossies. Don't believe reviewers. Listen to
the stuff. If more people actually listened to products we wouldn't have
the screwed-up situation we've got now.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #10   Report Post  
Paul Stamler
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...

I am concerned that RAPpers with less experience might buy into their

claims.

I'm sure many of them will, but maybe it will teach them to actually

listen
to gear and do real comparisons themselves rather than believing anyone

else.
Don't believe the marketing glossies. Don't believe reviewers. Listen to
the stuff. If more people actually listened to products we wouldn't have
the screwed-up situation we've got now.


Yeah, we would. There are too many people out there who have never heard
audio better than Radio Shack quality, and some of them have studios and buy
gear they've been told is pro.

Peace,
Paul




  #12   Report Post  
Dan Rowlings
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I own pairs of both the THE KR-2C's and the Schoeps CMC6/MK4
cardioids. They are mostly used for classical work, generally ORTF.
I've had the THE's (a Taylor matched pair) for a while and recently
picked up the Schoeps (US matched boxed set). I also have some Sound
Room Oktava's.

Considering all the Cardioids, If I place the Schoeps at a 10, the
The's get a 9 and the Oktavas about a 5 for performance.

The Schoeps are perfectly matched. The THE's are close, althought I
think they are doing better at matching these days. the THE's and
Schoeps are both very transparent and will pick up all the details
quite nicely. I have not found self noise an issue with either.

I can tell the difference between them as in a number of cases I
recorded the same source with the same set up. They both sound good.
I think I find the Schoeps to be just a bit smoother and richer, but
not much. The THE's give just a bit more high end. I've had some
great results using the THE's on orchestra, band, string ensembles,
Brass choirs and choral groups. ORTF with a little distance - nothing
close miked. I've also thought the Schoeps sounded a bit better on
all although THE's on Cello was nice. I also find the THE's quite
good on percussion ensembles, particularly bells, chimes, marimba,
etc., brings our the sound quite nicely, almost 3 dimensional when I
get the mics in the right spot.

I'm glad I picked up the Schoeps for they are great, and there is that
name recognition thing. But, the THE's work very well, have their
place and I'll be keeping them. That said, the Schoeps will see most
of the work as my main ORTF pair and will be preferred for all but
percussion and maybe cello (or celli).

If I consider value as part of the equation (cost and performance),
the THE's might be a 10 and the Schoeps the 9, Oktavas a 7.

Of course, beauty is in the ear of the beholder.

Regards,
Dan
  #13   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default



I'd ask for proof. Side by side recordings made with the each mic run
through the same mic preamps, preferrably something along the lines of
Martech MSS-10, with matched gain structures in a very quiet acoustic
space. I'd be willing to bet T.H.E. mics would have noticeably more
self noise apparent on low SPL passages. I've made some recordings
following this method with gains matched via a B&K mic calibrator. The
differences are not necessarily subtle. If anyone is interested, I
have one comparison readily available between a Schoeps CMC62 and an
Audix TR40 to demonstrate an extreme. I think the TR-40 is a great
omni at it's price point. Pay the extra and you get a stellar omni
with much less self noise with the CMC62.

bobs

bob smith
bs studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com


I have the proof on my hard drive; the recordings I made here. Selfnoise is
an issue.

Regards,

Ty Ford


Well now! Bob and I swapped sound files from presumably different THE hypers
and Schoeps cmc641. If the selfnoise problems of a single THE was a fluke,
there are now two flukes; three if you count Bryan's

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

  #14   Report Post  
Bryan Beasleigh
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This is a lot of advertising for the mic. I actually tried the mic
simply because of the exposure that it got on either RAP or RAMPS last
year. I figured the few naysayers were just sour grapes.,They weren't.

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 23:41:05 -0400, Ty Ford
wrote:



I'd ask for proof. Side by side recordings made with the each mic run
through the same mic preamps, preferrably something along the lines of
Martech MSS-10, with matched gain structures in a very quiet acoustic
space. I'd be willing to bet T.H.E. mics would have noticeably more
self noise apparent on low SPL passages. I've made some recordings
following this method with gains matched via a B&K mic calibrator. The
differences are not necessarily subtle. If anyone is interested, I
have one comparison readily available between a Schoeps CMC62 and an
Audix TR40 to demonstrate an extreme. I think the TR-40 is a great
omni at it's price point. Pay the extra and you get a stellar omni
with much less self noise with the CMC62.

bobs

bob smith
bs studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com


I have the proof on my hard drive; the recordings I made here. Selfnoise is
an issue.

Regards,

Ty Ford


Well now! Bob and I swapped sound files from presumably different THE hypers
and Schoeps cmc641. If the selfnoise problems of a single THE was a fluke,
there are now two flukes; three if you count Bryan's

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford


  #15   Report Post  
H. Taylor Johnson
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thank you to everyone who has contributed here.

The latest published comparison/review is by Myles Boisen at Electronic
Musician in a March 1st, 2004 article.
see: http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_smokin_condensers/

Yes, we have had some production problems, self-noise problems, lack of $$
to advertise, but we're still here, working to make a fine product and
deliver it to the working engineer at a reasonable cost.

The Schoeps comparison comes directly from MY mouth.
My intent was to convey the fact that; in my mind, and in the minds of many
engineers using T.H.E. microphones, I think it a VERY important point to not
only consider the labratory/mechanical measurement of the mics, but,
even-more importantly, the real-world, solid - useful - great sounding and
quiet tracks that are delivered under as many conditions as possible.
There are many engineers out there who cannot afford $2000 for a matched
pair, or even $1500 - and are glad when they find a modular system that
affords them solid, quiet and (dare I say it) "luscious" tracks.
The ONLY true test is for an engineer to use a mic in their recording chain
for a few weeks to see if it is a useful, positive and "go-to" tool for
their arsenal. If it makes their job easier and more fun, then we're doing
our job. That is why we offer our mics with a 3 week return policy.

Using different mics is like using different colors made by different
manufacturers for one's own painting. Sometimes 5 different manufacturers
will present a Deep Royal Blue" that are many shades and depths apart, each
creating a different effect.

I personally LOVE (and would NEVER part with) my Schoeps, and some early mic
purchases that were mod'ed by Jim Williams, and some of the early stuff that
my partners and I did, and some of my 1970's KM84i's and early Sennheiser
409's and 421's and .......

If you have not tried a T.H.E. unit and are actuaslly commenting on it, then
perhaps you should re-consider.

Warmest regards,

Taylor Johnson, CEO
T.H.E., Llc
Taylor Hohendahl Engineering
www.theaudio.com
www.themics.com
www.themicrophones.com



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 6/18/2004




  #16   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've never tried the Hypercard capsule but I own a matched set
(Thanks, Taylor) of the KR-1F (free-field) omnis.

I use my T.H.E.'s for location recording -- usually in a baffled omni
configuration. I run them through an Amek 9098 dual mic pre (Ty Ford
has written highly of the single channel/EQ version of this pre). No
self-noise issues with these mics. (In live settings I'm far more
worried about ambient noise than self-noise, anyway.)

IMHO my T.H.E.s with the KR-1F capsules are excellent microphones --
at any price. One can make very good recordings with these
microphones. Given all the other possible variables that influence the
outcome of a given recording session -- from instruments, to pre-amps,
to acoustics, to the mood of the perfomers on a given day -- one
should be careful about making blanket statements about T.H.E. vs.
Schoeps.

I can't say whether the Hypercard configuration is noisy but I hope
T.H.E. products as a whole aren't being unfairly written off. Try the
KR-1Fs and you will think highly of what T.H.E. is trying to do as a
company.

Kelly Dueck
Winnipeg
  #17   Report Post  
Bryan Beasleigh
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kelly
I'm very glad that you're happy with the THE omni's. My problem was
with the hypercardoid only

I found the self noise so offensive that I went out and spent more
than double on a Schoeps CMC6 with MK41 capsule. I'm ordering another
preamp and capsule this week. Spending $1600 per schoeps rather than
$800 (Can$)can not be excuses as simple sour grapes.

Say hi to Sean

On 21 Jun 2004 15:50:27 -0700, (Kelly Dueck) wrote:

I've never tried the Hypercard capsule but I own a matched set
(Thanks, Taylor) of the KR-1F (free-field) omnis.

I use my T.H.E.'s for location recording -- usually in a baffled omni
configuration. I run them through an Amek 9098 dual mic pre (Ty Ford
has written highly of the single channel/EQ version of this pre). No
self-noise issues with these mics. (In live settings I'm far more
worried about ambient noise than self-noise, anyway.)

IMHO my T.H.E.s with the KR-1F capsules are excellent microphones --
at any price. One can make very good recordings with these
microphones. Given all the other possible variables that influence the
outcome of a given recording session -- from instruments, to pre-amps,
to acoustics, to the mood of the perfomers on a given day -- one
should be careful about making blanket statements about T.H.E. vs.
Schoeps.

I can't say whether the Hypercard configuration is noisy but I hope
T.H.E. products as a whole aren't being unfairly written off. Try the
KR-1Fs and you will think highly of what T.H.E. is trying to do as a
company.

Kelly Dueck
Winnipeg


  #18   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bryan Beasleigh wrote in message . ..
Kelly
I'm very glad that you're happy with the THE omni's. My problem was
with the hypercardoid only

I found the self noise so offensive that I went out and spent more
than double on a Schoeps CMC6 with MK41 capsule. I'm ordering another
preamp and capsule this week. Spending $1600 per schoeps rather than
$800 (Can$)can not be excuses as simple sour grapes.



I didn't mean to imply your were munching on sour grapes -- sorry if
it seemed that way -- just that it sounds like there was a problem
with the Hypercardioid capsule and it would be too bad if folks didn't
give the other models a try based on one possible troublesome capsule
model.

I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.

Was your Hypercardioid as noisy as any of the 1/4-inch measurement
mics that use the Panasonic capsule -- like the ones from Behringer or
Audix? If that is/was the case ... there must definitely be something
wrong with your mics ... or that particular production run. I used to
have a pair of the Behringer ECM8000s and I sold them off. They were
unusable except as drum overheads.

The quietest mic I own for comparison's sake is an AT4040. Sure, it's
a different class of microphone entirely seeing as it's a large
diaphragm cardioid, but my T.H.E.'s -- while clearly not as quiet as
the 4040 -- are competitive and waaaaay more than useful.

However, the Schoeps sound awesome, by all accounts.
  #19   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bryan Beasleigh wrote in message . ..
Kelly
I'm very glad that you're happy with the THE omni's. My problem was
with the hypercardoid only

I found the self noise so offensive that I went out and spent more
than double on a Schoeps CMC6 with MK41 capsule. I'm ordering another
preamp and capsule this week. Spending $1600 per schoeps rather than
$800 (Can$)can not be excuses as simple sour grapes.



I didn't mean to imply your were munching on sour grapes -- sorry if
it seemed that way -- just that it sounds like there was a problem
with the Hypercardioid capsule and it would be too bad if folks didn't
give the other models a try based on one possible troublesome capsule
model.

I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.

Was your Hypercardioid as noisy as any of the 1/4-inch measurement
mics that use the Panasonic capsule -- like the ones from Behringer or
Audix? If that is/was the case ... there must definitely be something
wrong with your mics ... or that particular production run. I used to
have a pair of the Behringer ECM8000s and I sold them off. They were
unusable except as drum overheads.

The quietest mic I own for comparison's sake is an AT4040. Sure, it's
a different class of microphone entirely seeing as it's a large
diaphragm cardioid, but my T.H.E.'s -- while clearly not as quiet as
the 4040 -- are competitive and waaaaay more than useful.

However, the Schoeps sound awesome, by all accounts.
  #20   Report Post  
Kurt Albershardt
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kelly Dueck wrote:

The quietest mic I own for comparison's sake is an AT4040. Sure, it's
a different class of microphone entirely seeing as it's a large
diaphragm cardioid


How do you like your 4040?





  #21   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 15:02:53 -0400, Kelly Dueck wrote
(in article ) :

Bryan Beasleigh wrote in message
. ..
Kelly
I'm very glad that you're happy with the THE omni's. My problem was
with the hypercardoid only

I found the self noise so offensive that I went out and spent more
than double on a Schoeps CMC6 with MK41 capsule. I'm ordering another
preamp and capsule this week. Spending $1600 per schoeps rather than
$800 (Can$)can not be excuses as simple sour grapes.



I didn't mean to imply your were munching on sour grapes -- sorry if
it seemed that way -- just that it sounds like there was a problem
with the Hypercardioid capsule and it would be too bad if folks didn't
give the other models a try based on one possible troublesome capsule
model.

I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.



Hey Taylor,

Can you send me one of these omnis?

Regards,

Ty Ford





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

  #22   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kurt Albershardt wrote in message ...
Kelly Dueck wrote:

The quietest mic I own for comparison's sake is an AT4040. Sure, it's
a different class of microphone entirely seeing as it's a large
diaphragm cardioid


How do you like your 4040?



I like it. The AT4040 is a clean, quiet, fairly 'hot' mic that sounds
neutral on pretty much anything you put in front of it -- though I've
had thin results in front of some guitar amps -- mostly smaller
combos. I've never tried it in front of a bass cab. It's definitely
not a "character" mic. I only have one so I've never used this mic in
a stereo pair ... as drum overheads, for example ... though LD
condensers wouldn't usually be my first choice in this application,
anyway. I've found it most useful on acoustic guitars and mandolin.
I've also gotten workmanlike bluegrass banjo tones out of it. Male
vocals sound superb. Never tried it on female vocals. Given that it is
quite hot, yet neutral, I hope to try it in a single mic bluegrass
stage set-up sometime. The mic sounds "full" but also has a boost
around 6 KHz that is surprisingly smooth, given the mic's low street
price. That being said, the highs aren't exactly "silky", either.
Compared to what people were paying $300 to get 3 or 4 years ago, this
mic is lightyears ahead. The fit and finish is superb. The shockmount
is solid (though annoying since it uses an unwieldy rubber band
design). Though it has a pad and bass roll off, I never use them. I do
not own any esoteric high-end pre-amps or tube gear. I use the mic
successfully with an Amek 9098 dual mic pre, a Focusrite Octopre, and
the pre-amps on a Soundcraft M8 mixer in a live setting (as a point of
reference, Soundcraft indicates the M8 pres are basically the pre's
found in the original Ghost console, if you've ever used one of
those.)

Hope this answers your question.
  #23   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kurt Albershardt wrote in message ...
Kelly Dueck wrote:

The quietest mic I own for comparison's sake is an AT4040. Sure, it's
a different class of microphone entirely seeing as it's a large
diaphragm cardioid


How do you like your 4040?



I like it. The AT4040 is a clean, quiet, fairly 'hot' mic that sounds
neutral on pretty much anything you put in front of it -- though I've
had thin results in front of some guitar amps -- mostly smaller
combos. I've never tried it in front of a bass cab. It's definitely
not a "character" mic. I only have one so I've never used this mic in
a stereo pair ... as drum overheads, for example ... though LD
condensers wouldn't usually be my first choice in this application,
anyway. I've found it most useful on acoustic guitars and mandolin.
I've also gotten workmanlike bluegrass banjo tones out of it. Male
vocals sound superb. Never tried it on female vocals. Given that it is
quite hot, yet neutral, I hope to try it in a single mic bluegrass
stage set-up sometime. The mic sounds "full" but also has a boost
around 6 KHz that is surprisingly smooth, given the mic's low street
price. That being said, the highs aren't exactly "silky", either.
Compared to what people were paying $300 to get 3 or 4 years ago, this
mic is lightyears ahead. The fit and finish is superb. The shockmount
is solid (though annoying since it uses an unwieldy rubber band
design). Though it has a pad and bass roll off, I never use them. I do
not own any esoteric high-end pre-amps or tube gear. I use the mic
successfully with an Amek 9098 dual mic pre, a Focusrite Octopre, and
the pre-amps on a Soundcraft M8 mixer in a live setting (as a point of
reference, Soundcraft indicates the M8 pres are basically the pre's
found in the original Ghost console, if you've ever used one of
those.)

Hope this answers your question.
  #24   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.



Hey Taylor,

Can you send me one of these omnis?

Regards,

Ty Ford



Hi Ty,

Now let me clarify my last sentence above. What I should have stated
was ... My Omnis are RELATIVELY quiet. Compared to what, you're bound
to ask?

Compared to an AT4040? No. Compared to an MXL603? Yes. Compared to a
similar type of Schoeps product? Almost certainly not, judging by the
posts on this newsgroup. (Though I have never used a Schoeps
microphone, so I can't say for myself.)

However, in the settings in which I have used my mics, they have been
SUFFICIENTLY quiet.

I use my THE omnis almost exclusively in live location recording
situations -- I don't have a great sounding room at home so I stick to
cardioids there. The self noise has not been a problem with the
sources I've recorded with them ... namely string trios, pipe organ
solos, flute/piano duets and jazz quartet (main stereo pair capturing
the whole band, plus individual fill mics). Would I record a quiet
solo celtic harp with them in a quiet room? Ideally, no. However, I
would likely end up having to since I don't have any other small
diaphragm Omni's, and I'm fond of simple stereo recording.

I know you are one of this group's toughest critics, when it comes to
noise specs. It also sounds like you have a very quiet studio. I also
know the excuse ... "Most people will never listen to the finished
product in a really quiet listening room anyway, so what difference
does a little self-noise make?" ... won't cut the mustard with you,
either. For this you should be thanked loudly and regularly -- as a
professional product reviewer it's your job to do all you can to help
keep junk off the market and out of the hands of unwitting dupes.

However, for my money ... and the level of projects I record (I have
no illusions I, or any of my clients, will ever win a grammy) my THE's
do just fine. They may not meet your needs, I don't know

By the way ... have you tried out the AT4040?

Regards,

Kelly
  #25   Report Post  
Kelly Dueck
 
Posts: n/a
Default


I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.



Hey Taylor,

Can you send me one of these omnis?

Regards,

Ty Ford



Hi Ty,

Now let me clarify my last sentence above. What I should have stated
was ... My Omnis are RELATIVELY quiet. Compared to what, you're bound
to ask?

Compared to an AT4040? No. Compared to an MXL603? Yes. Compared to a
similar type of Schoeps product? Almost certainly not, judging by the
posts on this newsgroup. (Though I have never used a Schoeps
microphone, so I can't say for myself.)

However, in the settings in which I have used my mics, they have been
SUFFICIENTLY quiet.

I use my THE omnis almost exclusively in live location recording
situations -- I don't have a great sounding room at home so I stick to
cardioids there. The self noise has not been a problem with the
sources I've recorded with them ... namely string trios, pipe organ
solos, flute/piano duets and jazz quartet (main stereo pair capturing
the whole band, plus individual fill mics). Would I record a quiet
solo celtic harp with them in a quiet room? Ideally, no. However, I
would likely end up having to since I don't have any other small
diaphragm Omni's, and I'm fond of simple stereo recording.

I know you are one of this group's toughest critics, when it comes to
noise specs. It also sounds like you have a very quiet studio. I also
know the excuse ... "Most people will never listen to the finished
product in a really quiet listening room anyway, so what difference
does a little self-noise make?" ... won't cut the mustard with you,
either. For this you should be thanked loudly and regularly -- as a
professional product reviewer it's your job to do all you can to help
keep junk off the market and out of the hands of unwitting dupes.

However, for my money ... and the level of projects I record (I have
no illusions I, or any of my clients, will ever win a grammy) my THE's
do just fine. They may not meet your needs, I don't know

By the way ... have you tried out the AT4040?

Regards,

Kelly


  #26   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:54:44 -0400, Kelly Dueck wrote
(in article ) :


I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.



Hey Taylor,

Can you send me one of these omnis?

Regards,

Ty Ford



Hi Ty,

Now let me clarify my last sentence above. What I should have stated
was ... My Omnis are RELATIVELY quiet. Compared to what, you're bound
to ask?

Compared to an AT4040? No. Compared to an MXL603? Yes. Compared to a
similar type of Schoeps product? Almost certainly not, judging by the
posts on this newsgroup. (Though I have never used a Schoeps
microphone, so I can't say for myself.)

However, in the settings in which I have used my mics, they have been
SUFFICIENTLY quiet.


Because the cmc641 Schoeps is a SD mic, it's not one of the quietest mics on
the planet. Many LD mics are quieter. That's just physics. Selfnoise alone is
not the reason for its success. It's just the most immediately noticeable
difference. Once you get past selfnoise there's a whole nother world of why
it's better; phase coherence, lack of distortion, transient response, etc..

I use my THE omnis almost exclusively in live location recording
situations -- I don't have a great sounding room at home so I stick to
cardioids there. The self noise has not been a problem with the
sources I've recorded with them ... namely string trios, pipe organ
solos, flute/piano duets and jazz quartet (main stereo pair capturing
the whole band, plus individual fill mics). Would I record a quiet
solo celtic harp with them in a quiet room? Ideally, no. However, I
would likely end up having to since I don't have any other small
diaphragm Omni's, and I'm fond of simple stereo recording.

I know you are one of this group's toughest critics, when it comes to
noise specs. It also sounds like you have a very quiet studio. I also
know the excuse ... "Most people will never listen to the finished
product in a really quiet listening room anyway, so what difference
does a little self-noise make?" ... won't cut the mustard with you,
either. For this you should be thanked loudly and regularly -- as a
professional product reviewer it's your job to do all you can to help
keep junk off the market and out of the hands of unwitting dupes.


Well here's where it DOES make a difference. When the project is mastered, a
lot of compression and limiting are used. They suck up the noise floor. Now
that we no longer have much analog tape to mask things, selfnoise is a large
part of that noise floor. Even if you only record one track and one mic at a
time, by the time you mix 24, 36, whatever tracks, that selfnoise adds.

You want music with impact? Impact is the result of having a very quiet
background. The quieter your backgound, the more well defined your
foreground.

However, for my money ... and the level of projects I record (I have
no illusions I, or any of my clients, will ever win a grammy) my THE's
do just fine. They may not meet your needs, I don't know


Um, rent a cmc641 for a week and stick your face in it.

By the way ... have you tried out the AT4040?

Regards,

Kelly


Yes, the review is on my website for everyone to read.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

  #27   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 02:54:44 -0400, Kelly Dueck wrote
(in article ) :


I haven't read any reviews ... whether in RECORDING, AUDIO MEDIA, or
TAPE OP ... that cite any major self-noise issues with the other
models. My Omni's are quiet.



Hey Taylor,

Can you send me one of these omnis?

Regards,

Ty Ford



Hi Ty,

Now let me clarify my last sentence above. What I should have stated
was ... My Omnis are RELATIVELY quiet. Compared to what, you're bound
to ask?

Compared to an AT4040? No. Compared to an MXL603? Yes. Compared to a
similar type of Schoeps product? Almost certainly not, judging by the
posts on this newsgroup. (Though I have never used a Schoeps
microphone, so I can't say for myself.)

However, in the settings in which I have used my mics, they have been
SUFFICIENTLY quiet.


Because the cmc641 Schoeps is a SD mic, it's not one of the quietest mics on
the planet. Many LD mics are quieter. That's just physics. Selfnoise alone is
not the reason for its success. It's just the most immediately noticeable
difference. Once you get past selfnoise there's a whole nother world of why
it's better; phase coherence, lack of distortion, transient response, etc..

I use my THE omnis almost exclusively in live location recording
situations -- I don't have a great sounding room at home so I stick to
cardioids there. The self noise has not been a problem with the
sources I've recorded with them ... namely string trios, pipe organ
solos, flute/piano duets and jazz quartet (main stereo pair capturing
the whole band, plus individual fill mics). Would I record a quiet
solo celtic harp with them in a quiet room? Ideally, no. However, I
would likely end up having to since I don't have any other small
diaphragm Omni's, and I'm fond of simple stereo recording.

I know you are one of this group's toughest critics, when it comes to
noise specs. It also sounds like you have a very quiet studio. I also
know the excuse ... "Most people will never listen to the finished
product in a really quiet listening room anyway, so what difference
does a little self-noise make?" ... won't cut the mustard with you,
either. For this you should be thanked loudly and regularly -- as a
professional product reviewer it's your job to do all you can to help
keep junk off the market and out of the hands of unwitting dupes.


Well here's where it DOES make a difference. When the project is mastered, a
lot of compression and limiting are used. They suck up the noise floor. Now
that we no longer have much analog tape to mask things, selfnoise is a large
part of that noise floor. Even if you only record one track and one mic at a
time, by the time you mix 24, 36, whatever tracks, that selfnoise adds.

You want music with impact? Impact is the result of having a very quiet
background. The quieter your backgound, the more well defined your
foreground.

However, for my money ... and the level of projects I record (I have
no illusions I, or any of my clients, will ever win a grammy) my THE's
do just fine. They may not meet your needs, I don't know


Um, rent a cmc641 for a week and stick your face in it.

By the way ... have you tried out the AT4040?

Regards,

Kelly


Yes, the review is on my website for everyone to read.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

  #32   Report Post  
Kurt Albershardt
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kelly Dueck wrote:

How do you like your 4040?



I like it. The AT4040 is a clean, quiet, fairly 'hot' mic that sounds
neutral on pretty much anything you put in front of it
...
The mic sounds "full" but also has a boost
around 6 KHz that is surprisingly smooth, given the mic's low street
price. That being said, the highs aren't exactly "silky", either.


There are two bumps in the curve A-T publishes, perhaps the second one is responsible for the "non-silky."



  #33   Report Post  
Kurt Albershardt
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Kelly Dueck wrote:

How do you like your 4040?



I like it. The AT4040 is a clean, quiet, fairly 'hot' mic that sounds
neutral on pretty much anything you put in front of it
...
The mic sounds "full" but also has a boost
around 6 KHz that is surprisingly smooth, given the mic's low street
price. That being said, the highs aren't exactly "silky", either.


There are two bumps in the curve A-T publishes, perhaps the second one is responsible for the "non-silky."



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
Ferstler on Soundstaging Howard Ferstler Audio Opinions 158 October 6th 04 08:57 PM
Ferstler on recording Howard Ferstler Audio Opinions 108 September 25th 04 05:09 PM
More on Equalizers from Ferstler Howard Ferstler Audio Opinions 515 September 20th 04 05:49 AM
Power Filtration Lucas Tam Audio Opinions 58 September 20th 04 05:25 AM
Mic Questions Twist Turner Pro Audio 22 November 25th 03 04:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:14 AM.

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"