unscientific mic comparison

[Nate Najar]

subtitled "why is the schoeps such an incredibly awesome mic"....

I did a short little unscientific test tonight in my room with 3
mics. Schoeps mk41, THE hypercardioid and the dpa 4099G. all about
the same spot (roughly 15th fret) on my classical guitar. The schoeps
and THE were obviously a few more inches further out than the DPA,
which was attached to the guitar. But for all intents and
unscientific purposes, they were pretty much in the same spot.

The point of this was really to see how the THE would do against the
schoeps, since I own 2 schoeps and only 1 THE (and I'd like to use 2
matching mics on drums in a live recording situation).

The clear, short answer here is to buy another pair of schoeps.

The long story is that all 3mics sounded very good, natural and like
my guitar. what was surprising is that the THE and DPA were virtually
indistinguishable from each other. Now I don't have the best
converters- Maudio profire 2626- but they ain't bad. Preamp is a True
Precision 8 and monitors are klein and hummel. But when alternating
soloing each of the mics, those two were damn near identical in tone
and room sound.

The schoeps on the other hand, was so much more full- the top strings
weren't nearly as plasticky sounding- they were big and round. It had
a ton of body. and I've never heard a mic turn down the room like
that mk41. with the other mics, you heard plenty of the room and the
schoeps was so much more "right in front of you". It's also worth
noting that the mics were all reasonably gain matched at the preamp,
and in doing so, the schoeps had the least bit of preamp gain,
followed by the THE and then the DPA which required the most gain for
the same level.

so I guess I'm not going to win- I'll have to carry a stand and use
the schoeps on guitar. which means I need a pair of mics for drums.
The sound character of the schoeps is such that I really want them! I
guess I'll have to save up 3k and get another pair.

I'm reasonably happy with the dpa 4061 on bass, especially since i
don't have to worry about the performer moving around with that mic.
the schoeps on a stand is not a good idea for most upright players in
a live setting. Even in the studio it isn't great unless you pull the
mic back. But I like the character of the mic so much. Still, the
DPA is omni, so it works great that close in. I wonder how the
schoeps MK2 compact mic on their bass mount would do? probably pretty
good. and then a pair of mk4's for drums. re20 on the bass drum, and
then get a few sennheiser 441's for utility mics for extra
performers. use the dpa 4061's on piano when needed.... still need a
stereo pair for overall pickup- one more pair of mk4's!!

Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a few years ago
and it is truly the best sounding mic I've ever heard. I would use it
on everything if i could. hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably
not a great idea, seeing as how recording myself is supposed to save
me money, not cost it!

N

[Ty Ford]

On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 23:03:47 -0400, Nate Najar wrote
(in article
>):

> subtitled "why is the schoeps such an incredibly awesome mic"....

Dear Nate,

Thanks for the hat tip.

What's that line about doing the same thing over and over and expecting
different results? :)

The Schoeps cmc641 is a "desert island" mic. for sure. And I think the world
economy has shifted so it's "only" $1700 USD now instead of $2K as it was
last year. Sorry, $1743! http://tinyurl.com/nu4e77

If you want to torture yourself further, rent an Audio Ltd. 2040 wireless
system. $5K for a transmitter and receiver, but the best sound I have ever
heard from a wireless.

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

[Arny Krueger]

"Nate Najar" > wrote in message


> Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a
> few years ago and it is truly the best sounding mic I've
> ever heard. I would use it on everything if i could.
> hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably not a great
> idea, seeing as how recording myself is supposed to save
> me money, not cost it!


Begging the question why doesn't some genius in China do an effective clone
of this one?

For Rode or even MXL prices, this would have to be a winner.

[Scott Dorsey]

Arny Krueger > wrote:
>"Nate Najar" > wrote in message

>
>> Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a
>> few years ago and it is truly the best sounding mic I've
>> ever heard. I would use it on everything if i could.
>> hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably not a great
>> idea, seeing as how recording myself is supposed to save
>> me money, not cost it!
>
>Begging the question why doesn't some genius in China do an effective clone
>of this one?

Because it's hard.

>For Rode or even MXL prices, this would have to be a winner.

Making the MK41 is a whole hell of a lot harder than making a KM84 capsule.
As it is, the Chinese have made plenty of KM84 capsule clones but none of
them have been any good.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:24:56 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article >):

> "Nate Najar" > wrote in message
>
>
>> Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a
>> few years ago and it is truly the best sounding mic I've
>> ever heard. I would use it on everything if i could.
>> hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably not a great
>> idea, seeing as how recording myself is supposed to save
>> me money, not cost it!
>
>
> Begging the question why doesn't some genius in China do an effective clone
> of this one?
>
> For Rode or even MXL prices, this would have to be a winner.
>
>

Arny,

I think they have, but there is only so much one can do at certain levels of
mfgr. The Audix SCX-1HC is as close as I have heard, but it ain't a cmc641.

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

[Arny Krueger]

"Ty Ford" > wrote in message
al.NET
> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:24:56 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
> (in article
> >):
>
>> "Nate Najar" > wrote in message
>>
>>
>>> Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a
>>> few years ago and it is truly the best sounding mic I've
>>> ever heard. I would use it on everything if i could.
>>> hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably not a great
>>> idea, seeing as how recording myself is supposed to save
>>> me money, not cost it!
>>
>>
>> Begging the question why doesn't some genius in China do
>> an effective clone of this one?
>>
>> For Rode or even MXL prices, this would have to be a
>> winner.
>>
>>
>
> Arny,
>
> I think they have, but there is only so much one can do
> at certain levels of mfgr. The Audix SCX-1HC is as close
> as I have heard, but it ain't a cmc641.

Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a notch up from OM-6s,
prefereably condensers.

Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built product.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Ty Ford" > wrote in message
> al.NET
>> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:24:56 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
>> (in article
>> >):
>>
>>> "Nate Najar" > wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a
>>>> few years ago and it is truly the best sounding mic I've
>>>> ever heard. I would use it on everything if i could.
>>>> hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably not a great
>>>> idea, seeing as how recording myself is supposed to save
>>>> me money, not cost it!
>>>
>>>
>>> Begging the question why doesn't some genius in China do
>>> an effective clone of this one?
>>>
>>> For Rode or even MXL prices, this would have to be a
>>> winner.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Arny,
>>
>> I think they have, but there is only so much one can do
>> at certain levels of mfgr. The Audix SCX-1HC is as close
>> as I have heard, but it ain't a cmc641.
>
> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a notch up from
> OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
>
> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built product.
consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod patters and bass
rolloff built in
g

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
message
rlakestechnologygroup
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Ty Ford" > wrote in message
>> al.NET
>>> On Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:24:56 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote
>>> (in article
>>> >):
>>>
>>>> "Nate Najar" > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Ty, this is your fault, you insisted I try that mk41 a
>>>>> few years ago and it is truly the best sounding mic
>>>>> I've ever heard. I would use it on everything if i
>>>>> could. hmmmm 10 grand on microphones. probably not a
>>>>> great idea, seeing as how recording myself is
>>>>> supposed to save me money, not cost it!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begging the question why doesn't some genius in China
>>>> do an effective clone of this one?
>>>>
>>>> For Rode or even MXL prices, this would have to be a
>>>> winner.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Arny,
>>>
>>> I think they have, but there is only so much one can do
>>> at certain levels of mfgr. The Audix SCX-1HC is as close
>>> as I have heard, but it ain't a cmc641.
>>
>> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a
>> notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
>>
>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>> product.

> consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod
> patters and bass rolloff built in

Doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison. The SCX-1HC seems like a
general purpose tool, while the e965 seems to be very much a vocal mic and
does not seem to be recommended for much else. On paper not as flat, and not
as good pattern control. My intuition says that the e965 might be the better
vocal mic because those seem to almost work better the quirkier they are.

[geoff]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built product.

I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of implies some
elevated degree of 'quality' !

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff > wrote:
>Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built product.
>
>I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of implies some
>elevated degree of 'quality' !

Unfortunately this statement also basically means that final assembly has
been done in the US, and makes no statement about where the components came
from.

On the other hand, it at least implies final assembly and presumably final QC
has been done in the US and that if something goes wrong you can talk to
someone at the factory that knows something about how the thing works.

I am right now dealing with a piece of test equipment which didn't pass
acceptance testing and has to be sent back to the factory for rework... but
the factory is in Russia....
--scott

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

[Arny Krueger]

"geoff" > wrote in message

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>> product.

> I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of
> implies some elevated degree of 'quality' !

Compare and contrast automotive electrics from the US versus UK... ;-)

[George's Pro Sound Company]

>>>
>>> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a
>>> notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
>>>
>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>>> product.
>
>> consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod
>> patters and bass rolloff built in
>
> Doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison. The SCX-1HC seems like a
> general purpose tool, while the e965 seems to be very much a vocal mic

Arn, you were the one that implied you were looking for a upgrade for the
om-6
and as a upgrade for the om6 the 965 is a excellent choice
the scx and om series audix are not "apples to apples " in any way or strech
of the imagination

I believed I was offering what you were asking for, a upgrade for the om-6
and I got that idea here

" I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a
notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers"
george

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"geoff" > wrote in message
...
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built product.
>
> I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of implies some
> elevated degree of 'quality' !
>
> geoff

My audix vx-10(bought direct from audix) had a chinese capsule in it
george
>
>

[Bill Graham]

geoff wrote:
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built product.
>
> I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of implies some
> elevated degree of 'quality' !
>
> geoff

That used to be the case., Today, it just means that if you are charity
minded, you can throw a few crumbs into a starving American's pocket.....

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
message
rlakestechnologygroup
>>>> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a
>>>> notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
>>>>
>>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>>>> product.
>>
>>> consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod
>>> patters and bass rolloff built in
>>
>> Doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison. The
>> SCX-1HC seems like a general purpose tool, while the
>> e965 seems to be very much a vocal mic

> Arn, you were the one that implied you were looking for a
> upgrade for the om-6

Right, but I use my OM-6s as both vocal and instrument mics, which is
consistent with Audix recommendations.

> and as a upgrade for the om6 the 965 is a excellent choice
> the scx and om series audix are not "apples to apples "
> in any way or strech of the imagination

Well then we agree that SCX-1HC and e-965s aren't apples-to-apples.

The OM-6 specs out to be less peaky than the e-965. The e-965 peaks are
fairly high and somewhat damped and thus probably not much of a problem for
vocals, but as instrument mics, smooth, flat response is IME more
important.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
>>>>> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are a
>>>>> notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>>>>> product.
>>>
>>>> consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod
>>>> patters and bass rolloff built in
>>>
>>> Doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison. The
>>> SCX-1HC seems like a general purpose tool, while the
>>> e965 seems to be very much a vocal mic
>
>> Arn, you were the one that implied you were looking for a
>> upgrade for the om-6
>
> Right, but I use my OM-6s as both vocal and instrument mics, which is
> consistent with Audix recommendations.
>
>> and as a upgrade for the om6 the 965 is a excellent choice
>> the scx and om series audix are not "apples to apples "
>> in any way or strech of the imagination
>
> Well then we agree that SCX-1HC and e-965s aren't apples-to-apples.
>
> The OM-6 specs out to be less peaky than the e-965. The e-965 peaks are
> fairly high and somewhat damped and thus probably not much of a problem
> for vocals, but as instrument mics, smooth, flat response is IME more
> important.
>
>
do what you want, the om6 is a terrible acoustic instrument mic, the 965 not
terrible but you want a good dual use mic with no personality get the at
5400 at 250$ it works well for most instruments and voices, voices will
need some high mid peak to cut thru the din and clutter of a stage
and lastly if you honestly believe you can tell what a mic sounds like from
published specs that ould be a failing of yours

I just passed close to 4500$(dealer cost not retail) worth of quality
"live""vocal"mics by my ears in the last 45 days
I kept the 965 , the 5400 and the heil pr35
the rest including heumanns and beyers were sent back as not in the same
class
but of course you need not put two seconds into this advice, that matters
not one bit to me.

[PStamler]

I just had the occasion to use an SCX-1HC for the first time a week
ago, running sound for Bruce Molsky, and I must say I was quite
impressed. He plays both guitar and banjo, and it sounded excellent on
both. In particular, it didn't woof out on the guitar, which some
small-diaphragm mics (read KM 84s) do.

Peace,
Paul

[hank alrich]

Arny Krueger > wrote:

> The OM-6 specs out to be less peaky than the e-965. The e-965 peaks are
> fairly high and somewhat damped and thus probably not much of a problem for
> vocals, but as instrument mics, smooth, flat response is IME more
> important.

If you're inferring that from mfg's charts, be very careful.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
message
rlakestechnologygroup
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
>> message
>> rlakestechnologygroup
>>>>>> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are
>>>>>> a notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and
>>>>>> built product.
>>>>
>>>>> consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod
>>>>> patters and bass rolloff built in
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison. The
>>>> SCX-1HC seems like a general purpose tool, while the
>>>> e965 seems to be very much a vocal mic
>>
>>> Arn, you were the one that implied you were looking for
>>> a upgrade for the om-6
>>
>> Right, but I use my OM-6s as both vocal and instrument
>> mics, which is consistent with Audix recommendations.
>>
>>> and as a upgrade for the om6 the 965 is a excellent
>>> choice the scx and om series audix are not "apples to
>>> apples " in any way or strech of the imagination
>>
>> Well then we agree that SCX-1HC and e-965s aren't
>> apples-to-apples.

An olive branch for George. Watch for the mad-dog hand bite that follows.

>> The OM-6 specs out to be less peaky than the e-965. The
>> e-965 peaks are fairly high and somewhat damped and thus
>> probably not much of a problem for vocals, but as instrument mics,
>> smooth, flat response is IME more
>> important.

> do what you want, the om6 is a terrible acoustic instrument mic,

George, you're probably out of your league lecturing me about acoustic
instrument micing. Do you have a weekly gig where you mic acoustic
instruments operating in the shadow of a medium-sized pipe organ? I didn't
think so.

Geroge, why not show a little humility and respect and tell the truth, which
is that in your experience the OM6 has not served you well in the roles you
tried it? I can live with that - your needs are rather obviously different
than mine. But no, you want to tell me my business no matter how different
it is from yours.

> the 965 not terrible

I never said it was.

> but you want a good dual use mic with no personality get the at 5400 at
> 250$ it works well for most instruments and voices, voices

OK George, when is the last time you did SR for an acoustic string quartet?
Tell the truth.

> will need some high mid peak to cut thru the din and clutter of a stage

I don't need you to lecture me about SR 101, George. But unlike you, I don't
need a mic with a built-in high-mid peak to "cut though". Two words:
parametric equalization. What a parametric eq can't do is do *different*
things to off-axis and on-axis response. I've got plenty of mics with
non-flat off-axis response and that I can use that for a certain advantage.
For a change, I'd like to try a few mics that are more in the direction of
the Schoeps that started this thread - hihgly directional mics with
relatively flat off-axis response.

> and lastly if you honestly believe you can tell what a
> mic sounds like from published specs that would be a
> failing of yours

I don't need you to lecture me about SR 102, George. I was interpreting
spec sheets when you were still trying to drink your way out of business
school.

> I just passed close to 4500$(dealer cost not retail)
> worth of quality "live""vocal"mics by my ears in the
> last 45 days

You may have different needs. Duhhh!

> I kept the 965 , the 5400 and the heil pr35
> the rest including heumanns and beyers were sent back as
> not in the same class

That's your opinion, George. I never ridicule your statements like you
redicule mine, unless you directly attack me. You just did.

You were doing so well...

> but of course you need not put two seconds into this
> advice, that matters not one bit to me.

Obviously it matters a great deal to you, George. That's why you posture
when you should share, and try to act like a world-class expert over all
when there are big holes in your experience base. One of them is music and
voice in a church with a blended worship program. You're also not a
recordist.

[Arny Krueger]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message


> Arny Krueger > wrote:

>> The OM-6 specs out to be less peaky than the e-965. The
>> e-965 peaks are fairly high and somewhat damped and thus
>> probably not much of a problem for vocals, but as
>> instrument mics, smooth, flat response is IME more
>> important.

> If you're inferring that from mfg's charts, be very
> careful.

Duhhh!

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
message
rlakestechnologygroup
> "geoff" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>
>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>>> product.
>>
>> I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of
>> implies some elevated degree of 'quality' !

> My audix vx-10(bought direct from audix) had a chinese
> capsule in it george.

That's the sort of thing I was trolling for. Thanks!

[George's Pro Sound Company]

Arnni, the world of rec.audio.pro knows all too well who you are, what you
know, and all the issues you want to bring to the table
I will not be a party to them, you and you ALONE killed several newsgroups
and when you do that here it will be with me watching from the sidelines
Peace

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
>> "geoff" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Arny Krueger wrote:
>>>
>>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and built
>>>> product.
>>>
>>> I've always been amused that 100% American-made sort of
>>> implies some elevated degree of 'quality' !
>
>> My audix vx-10(bought direct from audix) had a chinese
>> capsule in it george.
>
> That's the sort of thing I was trolling for. Thanks!

some also had russian capsules, though I never owned one of the ones that
did
george
>
>
>

[hank alrich]

Arny Krueger > wrote:

> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> >> message
> >> rlakestechnologygroup
> >>>>>> Interesting. I'm looking for hypercardioids that are
> >>>>>> a notch up from OM-6s, prefereably condensers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Note-Audix claims this is a 100% USA designed and
> >>>>>> built product.
> >>>>
> >>>>> consider the sennheiser 965, it has switchable cardiod
> >>>>> patters and bass rolloff built in
> >>>>
> >>>> Doesn't seem like an apples-to-apples comparison. The
> >>>> SCX-1HC seems like a general purpose tool, while the
> >>>> e965 seems to be very much a vocal mic
> >>
> >>> Arn, you were the one that implied you were looking for
> >>> a upgrade for the om-6
> >>
> >> Right, but I use my OM-6s as both vocal and instrument
> >> mics, which is consistent with Audix recommendations.
> >>
> >>> and as a upgrade for the om6 the 965 is a excellent
> >>> choice the scx and om series audix are not "apples to
> >>> apples " in any way or strech of the imagination
> >>
> >> Well then we agree that SCX-1HC and e-965s aren't
> >> apples-to-apples.
>
> An olive branch for George. Watch for the mad-dog hand bite that follows.
>
> >> The OM-6 specs out to be less peaky than the e-965. The
> >> e-965 peaks are fairly high and somewhat damped and thus
> >> probably not much of a problem for vocals, but as instrument mics,
> >> smooth, flat response is IME more
> >> important.
>
> > do what you want, the om6 is a terrible acoustic instrument mic,
>
> George, you're probably out of your league lecturing me about acoustic
> instrument micing. Do you have a weekly gig where you mic acoustic
> instruments operating in the shadow of a medium-sized pipe organ? I didn't
> think so.

****ing hilarious, Arny. When's the last time you did sound for Doc
Watson? David Grisman? It's a long list that George has covered, at a
level at which I've seen no evidence you've been contracted. George
specializes in high quality sound reinforcement for acoustic artists. As
a result the number of acts and the scale of his work (how big is your
Meyer or comparable rig, Arny?) compared to yours is apples to peanut
shells.

> Geroge, why not show a little humility and respect and tell the truth, which
> is that in your experience the OM6 has not served you well in the roles you
> tried it? I can live with that - your needs are rather obviously different
> than mine. But no, you want to tell me my business no matter how different
> it is from yours.
>
> > the 965 not terrible
>
> I never said it was.
>
> > but you want a good dual use mic with no personality get the at 5400 at
> > 250$ it works well for most instruments and voices, voices
>
> OK George, when is the last time you did SR for an acoustic string quartet?
> Tell the truth.
>
> > will need some high mid peak to cut thru the din and clutter of a stage
>
> I don't need you to lecture me about SR 101, George. But unlike you, I don't
> need a mic with a built-in high-mid peak to "cut though". Two words:
> parametric equalization. What a parametric eq can't do is do *different*
> things to off-axis and on-axis response. I've got plenty of mics with
> non-flat off-axis response and that I can use that for a certain advantage.
> For a change, I'd like to try a few mics that are more in the direction of
> the Schoeps that started this thread - hihgly directional mics with
> relatively flat off-axis response.
>
> > and lastly if you honestly believe you can tell what a
> > mic sounds like from published specs that would be a
> > failing of yours
>
> I don't need you to lecture me about SR 102, George. I was interpreting
> spec sheets when you were still trying to drink your way out of business
> school.
>
> > I just passed close to 4500$(dealer cost not retail)
> > worth of quality "live""vocal"mics by my ears in the
> > last 45 days
>
> You may have different needs. Duhhh!
>
> > I kept the 965 , the 5400 and the heil pr35
> > the rest including heumanns and beyers were sent back as
> > not in the same class
>
> That's your opinion, George. I never ridicule your statements like you
> redicule mine, unless you directly attack me. You just did.
>
> You were doing so well...
>
> > but of course you need not put two seconds into this
> > advice, that matters not one bit to me.
>
> Obviously it matters a great deal to you, George. That's why you posture
> when you should share, and try to act like a world-class expert over all
> when there are big holes in your experience base. One of them is music and
> voice in a church with a blended worship program. You're also not a
> recordist.


--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[Arny Krueger]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message


> ****ing hilarious, Arny.

Typical despicable childish behavior from someone should be old enough to
know far better.

> When's the last time you did
> sound for Doc Watson? David Grisman? It's a long list
> that George has covered, at a level at which I've seen no
> evidence you've been contracted. George specializes in
> high quality sound reinforcement for acoustic artists. As
> a result the number of acts and the scale of his work
> (how big is your Meyer or comparable rig, Arny?)
> compared to yours is apples to peanut shells.

You're not answering the questions that I asked, Hank. Neither is George.
To do so is not your style. Instead you make up irrelevant, self-serving
declarations.

I will no doubt *never* support 99.999999% of all artists that you can drop
the names of. So what?

As a professional, it is my responsibility to support the artists that I
work with where they work; and nobody else, nowhere else.

If my operational environment is different than yours or George's (and it is
wildly so), then I need to pay a lot more respect for that fact than you
give me, which I do.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

>> George, you're probably out of your league lecturing me about acoustic
>> instrument micing. Do you have a weekly gig where you mic acoustic
>> instruments operating in the shadow of a medium-sized pipe organ? I
>> didn't
>> think so.
>
> ****ing hilarious, Arny. When's the last time you did sound for Doc
> Watson? David Grisman? It's a long list that George has covered, at a
> level at which I've seen no evidence you've been contracted. George
> specializes in high quality sound reinforcement for acoustic artists. As
> a result the number of acts and the scale of his work (how big is your
> Meyer or comparable rig, Arny?) compared to yours is apples to peanut
> shells.

Hank here is a picture of the room that I did last month, several string
sections, a couple of gospel bands, choirs from several ivy league schools
and multi grammy awarded Kirk Franklin
this was at Colgate University
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved
george

I used the neumann102s on the stienway and other acoustic instruments , the
965 on featured soloists and my 845 wireless for general riff raff needs,
the gospel bands got a selection of audix and sennheiser mic the speakers
were 3 a side upa1 over 2 a side la400 the monitors were eaw 129's

[hank alrich]

George's Pro Sound Company > wrote:

> >> George, you're probably out of your league lecturing me about acoustic
> >> instrument micing. Do you have a weekly gig where you mic acoustic
> >> instruments operating in the shadow of a medium-sized pipe organ? I
> >> didn't
> >> think so.
> >
> > ****ing hilarious, Arny. When's the last time you did sound for Doc
> > Watson? David Grisman? It's a long list that George has covered, at a
> > level at which I've seen no evidence you've been contracted. George
> > specializes in high quality sound reinforcement for acoustic artists. As
> > a result the number of acts and the scale of his work (how big is your
> > Meyer or comparable rig, Arny?) compared to yours is apples to peanut
> > shells.
>
> Hank here is a picture of the room that I did last month, several string
> sections, a couple of gospel bands, choirs from several ivy league schools
> and multi grammy awarded Kirk Franklin
> this was at Colgate University
> http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved
> george
>
> I used the neumann102s on the stienway and other acoustic instruments , the
> 965 on featured soloists and my 845 wireless for general riff raff needs,
> the gospel bands got a selection of audix and sennheiser mic the speakers
> were 3 a side upa1 over 2 a side la400 the monitors were eaw 129's

The piano is way too long... <g>

Nice setting, George.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[George's Pro Sound Company]

>> Hank here is a picture of the room that I did last month, several string
>> sections, a couple of gospel bands, choirs from several ivy league
>> schools
>> and multi grammy awarded Kirk Franklin
>> this was at Colgate University
>> http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved
>> george
>>
>> I used the neumann102s on the stienway and other acoustic instruments ,
>> the
>> 965 on featured soloists and my 845 wireless for general riff raff needs,
>> the gospel bands got a selection of audix and sennheiser mic the speakers
>> were 3 a side upa1 over 2 a side la400 the monitors were eaw 129's
>
> The piano is way too long... <g>

The room actually sounded really good, an yes the piano was big and once all
the monitors and everything else was set they wanted it on the other side of
the stage(of course)
G
> Nice setting, George.
>
> --
> shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
> http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
> http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
message

>>> George, you're probably out of your league lecturing me
>>> about acoustic instrument micing. Do you have a weekly
>>> gig where you mic acoustic instruments operating in the
>>> shadow of a medium-sized pipe organ? I didn't
>>> think so.
>>
>> ****ing hilarious, Arny. When's the last time you did
>> sound for Doc Watson? David Grisman? It's a long list
>> that George has covered, at a level at which I've seen
>> no evidence you've been contracted. George specializes
>> in high quality sound reinforcement for acoustic
>> artists. As a result the number of acts and the scale of
>> his work (how big is your Meyer or comparable rig,
>> Arny?) compared to yours is apples to peanut shells.

> Hank here is a picture of the room that I did last month,
> several string sections, a couple of gospel bands, choirs
> from several ivy league schools and multi grammy awarded
> Kirk Franklin this was at Colgate University
> http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved


No string sections or seating for them to be seen in the picture above.

I also watched and listened to a number of videos and read some blog
accounts of the event. I've seen videos shot from on stage , from a box seat
at balcony level, and from in front of the stage. No pix of or mention of
acoustic strings, and no mention or audible evidence of any use of the
organ. It was African-American Gospel, which whose instrumentation is
typically based on drums, piano/keyboards, and maybe electric guitar(s).

The visible micing is far from being exemplary. If it worked, it was only
because the performers were *loud*.

The sound I heard on the videos was very poor, but it was probably made
using camera mics, so it is hopefully not representative.

Best overview video I found: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=203Ng8-RyI4 .
Seems to show clips of all groups with major roles in the show.

In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to the questions I
asked.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to the questions I
> asked.
>
of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in that post and as you
like to say arnii, you haven't a clue as to what the weekend of events
curtailed , you wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events both in the chapel
and at other sites on campus

[Arny Krueger]

"George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
message
rlakestechnologygroup

>> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to
>> the questions I asked.

> of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in
> that post and as you like to say arnii, you haven't a
> clue as to what the weekend of events curtailed , you
> wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
> segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events
> both in the chapel and at other sites on campus

George, you claimed that something happened and you claimed that you had
provided evidence to support your claims. The evidence that you provided
and a survey of available online documentation tells a different story.
Please come back when you have something relevant to share.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
>
>>> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to
>>> the questions I asked.
>
>> of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in
>> that post and as you like to say arnii, you haven't a
>> clue as to what the weekend of events curtailed , you
>> wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
>> segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events
>> both in the chapel and at other sites on campus
>
> George, you claimed that something happened and you claimed that you had
> provided evidence to support your claims. The evidence that you provided
> and a survey of available online documentation tells a different story.
> Please come back when you have something relevant to share.
>
This is relevant
I have tried over and over to be kind and polite to you only to have your
insecurities and paranoia seep into everything you say and do
there is no way to communicate with you on anything involving pro audio, and
I would guess anything else
so flap your gums to the wind arnii
this is the last you get from me
my record stands unblemished , your record speaks for it's self
George

[Steve Hawkins[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in
:

> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
>
>>> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to
>>> the questions I asked.
>
>> of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in
>> that post and as you like to say arnii, you haven't a
>> clue as to what the weekend of events curtailed , you
>> wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
>> segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events
>> both in the chapel and at other sites on campus
>
> George, you claimed that something happened and you claimed that you
> had provided evidence to support your claims. The evidence that you
> provided and a survey of available online documentation tells a
> different story. Please come back when you have something relevant to
> share.

Geez....Arny, your name has pretty much become a joke in itself. If you
cruised the rest of George's pics you'd see many examples of what you say
isn't there. Now, be a good boy, quit trying to look experienced by
reading specs off the net, admit you're just an amateur/hobbyist and
learn from the real pros, like George, who post here.

Steve Hawkins

[Steve Hawkins[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in
:

> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
>
>>> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to
>>> the questions I asked.
>
>> of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in
>> that post and as you like to say arnii, you haven't a
>> clue as to what the weekend of events curtailed , you
>> wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
>> segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events
>> both in the chapel and at other sites on campus
>
> George, you claimed that something happened and you claimed that you
> had provided evidence to support your claims. The evidence that you
> provided and a survey of available online documentation tells a
> different story. Please come back when you have something relevant to
> share.

Geez....Arny, your name has pretty much become a joke in itself. If you
cruised the rest of George's pics you'd see many examples of what you say
isn't there. Now, be a good boy, quit trying to look experienced by
reading specs off the net, admit you're just an amateur/hobbyist and
learn from the real pros, like George, who post here.

Steve Hawkins

[hank alrich]

Arny Krueger > wrote:

> "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> message
> rlakestechnologygroup
>
> >> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to
> >> the questions I asked.
>
> > of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in
> > that post and as you like to say arnii, you haven't a
> > clue as to what the weekend of events curtailed , you
> > wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
> > segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events
> > both in the chapel and at other sites on campus
>
> George, you claimed that something happened and you claimed that you had
> provided evidence to support your claims. The evidence that you provided
> and a survey of available online documentation tells a different story.
> Please come back when you have something relevant to share.

Or you could conme back when you're not almost completely full of ****.
Not that I'd expect to see that anytime in this lifetime.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[hank alrich]

George's Pro Sound Company > wrote:

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "George's Pro Sound Company" > wrote in
> > message
> > rlakestechnologygroup
> >
> >>> In short, George's answer was totally non-responsive to
> >>> the questions I asked.
> >
> >> of course it was arnii, you are not being addressed in
> >> that post and as you like to say arnii, you haven't a
> >> clue as to what the weekend of events curtailed , you
> >> wern't there.all you saw was audience clips from a short
> >> segment of the headliner, the weekend was full of events
> >> both in the chapel and at other sites on campus
> >
> > George, you claimed that something happened and you claimed that you had
> > provided evidence to support your claims. The evidence that you provided
> > and a survey of available online documentation tells a different story.
> > Please come back when you have something relevant to share.
> >
> This is relevant
> I have tried over and over to be kind and polite to you only to have your
> insecurities and paranoia seep into everything you say and do
> there is no way to communicate with you on anything involving pro audio, and
> I would guess anything else
> so flap your gums to the wind arnii
> this is the last you get from me
> my record stands unblemished , your record speaks for it's self
> George

His record skips, with lots of pops and crackels.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://armadillomusicproductions.com/who'slistening.html
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidriAlrichwithDougHarman

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 21:45:06 -0400, George's Pro Sound Company wrote
(in article
stechnologygroup>):

> I just passed close to 4500$(dealer cost not retail) worth of quality
> "live""vocal"mics by my ears in the last 45 days I kept the 965 , the 5400
> and the heil pr35 the rest including heumanns and beyers were sent back as
> not in the same class but of course you need not put two seconds into this
> advice, that matters not one bit to me.

George,

Which 5400?

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

[Arny Krueger]

"Steve Hawkins" >
wrote in message
5.250

> Geez....Arny, your name has pretty much become a joke in
> itself. If you cruised the rest of George's pics you'd
> see many examples of what you say isn't there.

Not even George said that.

He said that there was one picture, and now you say that there are a number
of them.

The joke is on you Steve, if anybody choses to follow up the link George
posted for us to examine:

http://www.facebook.com:80/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved

One album, one picture.

There may be some pictures some place, but where are they?

[Steve Hawkins[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in
:

> "Steve Hawkins" >
> wrote in message
> 5.250
>
>> Geez....Arny, your name has pretty much become a joke in
>> itself. If you cruised the rest of George's pics you'd
>> see many examples of what you say isn't there.
>
> Not even George said that.
>
> He said that there was one picture, and now you say that there are a
> number of them.
>
> The joke is on you Steve, if anybody choses to follow up the link
> George posted for us to examine:
>
> http://www.facebook.com:80/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved
>
> One album, one picture.
>
> There may be some pictures some place, but where are they?

LOL!!! You are so clueless; allow me, since you can't seem to figure it
out on your own. Right above the pic you see when you click on the above
link is "VIEW PHOTOS". Click on that and then apologize to George. As
George has already pointed out the original link was not for for you and
didn't address your issue. Now I expect you'll spend hours scrutinizing
each pic and come back with some nonsense saying it still doesn't address
your issue.

This place is a great resource, I really wish you'd read more and post
less.

Steve Hawkins

[Arny Krueger]

"Steve Hawkins" >
wrote in message
.250
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in
> :
>
>> "Steve Hawkins" >
>> wrote in message
>> 5.250
>>
>>> Geez....Arny, your name has pretty much become a joke in
>>> itself. If you cruised the rest of George's pics you'd
>>> see many examples of what you say isn't there.
>>
>> Not even George said that.
>>
>> He said that there was one picture, and now you say that
>> there are a number of them.
>>
>> The joke is on you Steve, if anybody choses to follow up
>> the link George posted for us to examine:
>>
>> http://www.facebook.com:80/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&saved
>>
>> One album, one picture.
>>
>> There may be some pictures some place, but where are
>> they?
>
> LOL!!! You are so clueless; allow me, since you can't
> seem to figure it out on your own. Right above the pic
> you see when you click on the above link is "VIEW
> PHOTOS".

Been there, done that and nothing happens, indicating that there is nothing
else to view.

[Steve Hawkins[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in
:

> "Steve Hawkins" >
> wrote in message
> .250
>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> "Steve Hawkins" >
>>> wrote in message
>>> 5.250
>>>
>>>> Geez....Arny, your name has pretty much become a joke in
>>>> itself. If you cruised the rest of George's pics you'd
>>>> see many examples of what you say isn't there.
>>>
>>> Not even George said that.
>>>
>>> He said that there was one picture, and now you say that
>>> there are a number of them.
>>>
>>> The joke is on you Steve, if anybody choses to follow up
>>> the link George posted for us to examine:
>>>
>>> http://www.facebook.com:80/album.php?aid=35044&id=100001528337794&sav
>>> ed
>>>
>>> One album, one picture.
>>>
>>> There may be some pictures some place, but where are
>>> they?
>>
>> LOL!!! You are so clueless; allow me, since you can't
>> seem to figure it out on your own. Right above the pic
>> you see when you click on the above link is "VIEW
>> PHOTOS".
>
> Been there, done that and nothing happens, indicating that there is
> nothing else to view.

I knew you'd have some excuse.

That is your problem, not George's or mine. They're there, I've looked
at all of them, nine albums, 219 pics. You really should be careful
about implying people are liars on a public forum. Your track record is
not pretty.

Steve Hawkins

[Trevor]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> Been there, done that and nothing happens, indicating that there is
> nothing else to view.

Or your computer is simply blocking redirection.

Trevor.

[Arny Krueger]

"Trevor" > wrote in message
u
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Been there, done that and nothing happens, indicating
>> that there is nothing else to view.
>
> Or your computer is simply blocking redirection.
>

Strange. FB works well, otherwise.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Ty Ford" > wrote in message
al.NET...
> On Wed, 6 Apr 2011 21:45:06 -0400, George's Pro Sound Company wrote
> (in article
> stechnologygroup>):
>
>> I just passed close to 4500$(dealer cost not retail) worth of quality
>> "live""vocal"mics by my ears in the last 45 days I kept the 965 , the
>> 5400
>> and the heil pr35 the rest including heumanns and beyers were sent back
>> as
>> not in the same class but of course you need not put two seconds into
>> this
>> advice, that matters not one bit to me.
>
> George,
>
> Which 5400?
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
The AT ae5400, left me wanting as a vocal mic but works wnderflly on
acoustic instruments
George

[Scott Dorsey]

George's Pro Sound Company > wrote:
>
>The AT ae5400, left me wanting as a vocal mic but works wnderflly on
>acoustic instruments

You tried a comparison with the 4051? The 4051 and 4053 are hard acts to
beat for the price.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> George's Pro Sound Company > wrote:
>>
>>The AT ae5400, left me wanting as a vocal mic but works wnderflly on
>>acoustic instruments
>

I have 2x 4051 and do like them but they are almost 100$ more than the 5400
the 051 is wonderful as well and i choose it over the 5400 for instrument
use, but at just a 200$ the 5400 was a good mic as well, reminded me of the
535 which as about the only akg mic I got along with(that I could afford)
g
> You tried a comparison with the 4051? The 4051 and 4053 are hard acts to
> beat for the price.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."