opinions: SE4400a for orchestra/choir

[lewdslewrate]

Hi....i'm not going to afford a pair of C414XLS before a recording gig
in a couple of weeks....so anyone got an opinion on SE 4400a as a
matched pair that i'v been offered new for £600. It's a very
competent school choir and invited london orchestra...Mozarts
requiem. I've lent out BD930's so it's Rode NT4 with (maybe)
se4400a's on the sides. I will spot mic soloists with a C414.

These mics will be behind orchestra (i think) and i also can get a
stereo feed from a spaced pair of hypercardioids the engineer is using
for reinforcement of whole shabang, he mostly intends to feed a modest
reinforcement coupled with a multi speaker reverb system as the school
hall is dry as a bone, he's more concerned with GBF than my
recordings. I will track at 24 bits to an AW2400 multitrack recorder
Any thougfhts welcomed. cheers

[Scott Dorsey]

lewdslewrate > wrote:
>Hi....i'm not going to afford a pair of C414XLS before a recording gig
>in a couple of weeks....so anyone got an opinion on SE 4400a as a
>matched pair that i'v been offered new for =A3600. It's a very
>competent school choir and invited london orchestra...Mozarts
>requiem. I've lent out BD930's so it's Rode NT4 with (maybe)
>se4400a's on the sides. I will spot mic soloists with a C414.

You can try it but I think you'll find it's a step down from the NT4.
Off-axis response isn't really what you'd want for area miking. Set it
up in a room, start talking into it and walking backwards and listen to the
tape... compare what the room ambience sounds like compared with the
NT4 and you'll see what I mean. Not that the NT4 is any great shakes for
that application.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[nebulax]

On Mar 16, 3:02*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
> lewdslewrate > wrote:
> >Hi....i'm not going to afford a pair of C414XLS before a recording gig
> >in a couple of weeks....so anyone got an opinion on SE 4400a as a
> >matched pair that i'v been offered new for =A3600. *It's a very
> >competent school choir and invited london orchestra...Mozarts
> >requiem. *I've lent out BD930's so it's Rode NT4 *with (maybe)
> >se4400a's on the sides. *I will spot mic soloists with a C414.
>
> You can try it but I think you'll find it's a step down from the NT4.
> Off-axis response isn't really what you'd want for area miking. *Set it
> up in a room, start talking into it and walking backwards and listen to the
> tape... compare what the room ambience sounds like compared with the
> NT4 and you'll see what I mean. *Not that the NT4 is any great shakes for
> that application.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."



I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
haven't come up with any solid conclusions. I currently have an Audio-
Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?

-Neb

[Scott Dorsey]

nebulax > wrote:
>
>I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
>haven't come up with any solid conclusions. I currently have an Audio-
>Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
>sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
>about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
>I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
>up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?

A pair of AT-4051 or even better the AT-4053.

A pair of Oktava 012 (a new one from a legitimate vendor) with the
hypercardioid capsules.
--scott

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

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> nebulax > wrote:
>>
>> I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
>> haven't come up with any solid conclusions. I currently have an Audio-
>> Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
>> sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
>> about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
>> I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
>> up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?
>
> A pair of AT-4051 or even better the AT-4053.
>
> A pair of Oktava 012 (a new one from a legitimate vendor) with the
> hypercardioid capsules.
> --scott

A little sidetrack here. I have an AT-4053 that I have never used. It pops too
easily for voice, even with the pop filter. It's a pretty expensive mic. I've
thought about buying the $200 cardioid capsule for it. What are some of the best
uses for the cardioid versus the hyper capsules?

[Scott Dorsey]

mcp6453 > wrote:
>
>A little sidetrack here. I have an AT-4053 that I have never used. It pops too
>easily for voice, even with the pop filter. It's a pretty expensive mic. I've
>thought about buying the $200 cardioid capsule for it. What are some of the best
>uses for the cardioid versus the hyper capsules?

About the same... the cardioid is a little wider and doesn't have the rear
lobe, but it will pop just as much.

The cool thing about the hypercardioid is that you can get it four or five
feet away where popping isn't a problem. All these mikes are really designed
to be used in the far field.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Richard Kuschel]

On Mar 23, 9:16*am, mcp6453 > wrote:
> On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
> > nebulax > wrote:
>
> >> I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
> >> haven't come up with any solid conclusions. I currently have an Audio-
> >> Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
> >> sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
> >> about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
> >> I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
> >> up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?
>
> > A pair of AT-4051 or even better the AT-4053.
>
> > A pair of Oktava 012 (a new one from a legitimate vendor) with the
> > hypercardioid capsules.
> > --scott
>
> A little sidetrack here. I have an AT-4053 that I have never used. It pops too
> easily for voice, even with the pop filter. It's a pretty expensive mic. I've
> thought about buying the $200 cardioid capsule for it. What are some of the best
> uses for the cardioid versus the hyper capsules?

That microphone is not designed for miking voice at close distance.
Use it on an acoustic guitar or on a choir at 10 feet or more. A
cardioid capsule for it won't be any better. The off axis response
won't be as even, The low frequency response might be better with less
proximity effect.

If you want to use your 4053 for close miking voice, you will need a
monster pop filter (not just a foam one) that has dead air space in it
such as those made by Rycote and a method of rolling off the low end
proximity effect that will be created. 6dB/octave at approximately
100Hz turnover.

i once used a Schoeps CMC6/41 (Supercardioid condensor) with their big
round windscreen and a CUT-2 filter for voice at a live concert and it
worked exceptionally well.

[mcp6453[_2_]]

On 3/24/2011 1:31 PM, Richard Kuschel wrote:
> On Mar 23, 9:16 am, mcp6453 > wrote:
>> On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> nebulax > wrote:
>>
>>>> I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
>>>> haven't come up with any solid conclusions. I currently have an Audio-
>>>> Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
>>>> sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
>>>> about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
>>>> I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
>>>> up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?
>>
>>> A pair of AT-4051 or even better the AT-4053.
>>
>>> A pair of Oktava 012 (a new one from a legitimate vendor) with the
>>> hypercardioid capsules.
>>> --scott
>>
>> A little sidetrack here. I have an AT-4053 that I have never used. It pops too
>> easily for voice, even with the pop filter. It's a pretty expensive mic. I've
>> thought about buying the $200 cardioid capsule for it. What are some of the best
>> uses for the cardioid versus the hyper capsules?
>
> That microphone is not designed for miking voice at close distance.
> Use it on an acoustic guitar or on a choir at 10 feet or more. A
> cardioid capsule for it won't be any better. The off axis response
> won't be as even, The low frequency response might be better with less
> proximity effect.
>
> If you want to use your 4053 for close miking voice, you will need a
> monster pop filter (not just a foam one) that has dead air space in it
> such as those made by Rycote and a method of rolling off the low end
> proximity effect that will be created. 6dB/octave at approximately
> 100Hz turnover.
>
> i once used a Schoeps CMC6/41 (Supercardioid condensor) with their big
> round windscreen and a CUT-2 filter for voice at a live concert and it
> worked exceptionally well.

Richard and Scott, I'm not doubting anything you're saying. The 4053 is probably
something I never should have bought. Of course, that has never stopped me
before. Maybe I'll sell it or trade it.

What I'm curious about now is the Shure Beta 87A. It's a supercardioid mic, and
it's used for vocals all the time. Clearly the mic is a different design for a
different application, but what did Shure do to make the Beta 87A suitable for
close vocal micing?

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

nebulax wrote:

> I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
> haven't come up with any solid conclusions.

RØDE's stereo mic is not a bad choice - a thin layer of felt on the U would
be my mod for it before using it, but it does have a nice stereo image,
tried it on church bells inside a bell tower once.

> I currently have an Audio-
> Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
> sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
> about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
> I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
> up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?

There's the AT-822 and the AT-825, they are very similar but one of them has
a "near linear" response, and the other one hasn't, can't remember which is
which, both are kinda "toy class" tho' but some of the time "toy class" has
its uses too.

If you consider also stereo pairs you can get a pair of C42's at that budget
and a pair of KM184's are not way beyond it. Both choices are way better
than "toy class".

> -Neb

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

mcp6453 > wrote:
>
>What I'm curious about now is the Shure Beta 87A. It's a supercardioid mic, and
>it's used for vocals all the time. Clearly the mic is a different design for a
>different application, but what did Shure do to make the Beta 87A suitable for
>close vocal micing?

They put a pop filter into it, as well as a blast filter. They put some
shock mounting between the element and the handle so it wouldn't pick up
handling noise. The venting on the capsule is designed also to avoid
creating noise from breath blasts.

Also the capsule tuning is set up to reduce the low end response. This
means it's closer to flat when up close since the capsule drop compensates
a bit for the proximity boost. It also means that it's less sensitive to
breath blasts.

Mikes designed for close-working are designed for close-working, regardless
of the pattern.

You could probably make the 4053 work okay as a close-working mike if you
used the Baby Ball Gag on it, but that is an expensive proposition and you
probably would will have to EQ the hell out of it. It's not for that.
--scott




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

[Ty Ford]

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 19:55:22 -0400, mcp6453 wrote
(in article >):

> On 3/24/2011 1:31 PM, Richard Kuschel wrote:
>> On Mar 23, 9:16 am, mcp6453 > wrote:
>>> On 3/23/2011 9:27 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> nebulax > wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I've been looking at various sub $1000 stereo mic choices myself, and
>>>>> haven't come up with any solid conclusions. I currently have an Audio-
>>>>> Technica AT-822 that I'm not all that thrilled with (too unnatural
>>>>> sounding for my tastes), but I also haven't gotten a real consensus
>>>>> about what actually might be a better choice for slightly more money.
>>>>> I'm not dead set on having a one-point stereo mic, but the quick set-
>>>>> up time and convenience they provide would be nice. Any thoughts?
>>>
>>>> A pair of AT-4051 or even better the AT-4053.
>>>
>>>> A pair of Oktava 012 (a new one from a legitimate vendor) with the
>>>> hypercardioid capsules.
>>>> --scott
>>>
>>> A little sidetrack here. I have an AT-4053 that I have never used. It pops
>>> too
>>> easily for voice, even with the pop filter. It's a pretty expensive mic.
>>> I've
>>> thought about buying the $200 cardioid capsule for it. What are some of
>>> the best
>>> uses for the cardioid versus the hyper capsules?
>>
>> That microphone is not designed for miking voice at close distance.
>> Use it on an acoustic guitar or on a choir at 10 feet or more. A
>> cardioid capsule for it won't be any better. The off axis response
>> won't be as even, The low frequency response might be better with less
>> proximity effect.
>>
>> If you want to use your 4053 for close miking voice, you will need a
>> monster pop filter (not just a foam one) that has dead air space in it
>> such as those made by Rycote and a method of rolling off the low end
>> proximity effect that will be created. 6dB/octave at approximately
>> 100Hz turnover.
>>
>> i once used a Schoeps CMC6/41 (Supercardioid condensor) with their big
>> round windscreen and a CUT-2 filter for voice at a live concert and it
>> worked exceptionally well.
>
> Richard and Scott, I'm not doubting anything you're saying. The 4053 is
> probably
> something I never should have bought. Of course, that has never stopped me
> before. Maybe I'll sell it or trade it.
>
> What I'm curious about now is the Shure Beta 87A. It's a supercardioid mic,
> and
> it's used for vocals all the time. Clearly the mic is a different design for
a
> different application, but what did Shure do to make the Beta 87A suitable
for
> close vocal micing?

The 4053 is really a quite nice mic. Sure it pops, especially if you eat it
which you don't need to do. However if you are used to sucking on an SM58
then you have to bust yourself of that habit. Before you trash it, back off
and rethink your approach. And, yes, get a good pop filter.

You can't suck on a Neumann KMS 105 either, but if you give it a little
space, like 6 inches it a great live (or studio) mic.

Regards,

Ty Ford

--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA