microphone question

[Nate Najar]

So I have this schoeps mk22 I recently bought to record my guitar. I have 2 mk41's so I like to use those as drum overheads since I have the pair of them, and I still needed something for the guitar. I really like the mk22, I can bring it in closer than the mk41 (to reduce spill) and it has a very natural sound but still some rejection.

I wanted to compare it to the 87 this morning (I know, completely different animals, that's the point of this post) and I noticed something interesting. The schoeps is hyper-real- like having your ear in that spot listening to the instrument. So I hear an extremely detailed capture of finger on strings etc.... The 87 of course has a completely different tonal picture, but it also has a less "in your face" capture. Still very detailed but more "notes" and less "fingers on strings." The 87 also sounds very good here but the schoeps tonal picture is much more natural.

I wouldn't really call the 87 "softening transients" but maybe that's what it is... It's definitely realistic and detailed, but it sounds more like a guitar in a room than "my ear 24" from a guitar."

What causes this particular type of difference? Is it the fact that the 87 is a large diaphragm? or is it the transformer? Or both? Or something else? What I'm wondering is if there is a microphone that sounds as natural tonally as the schoeps, also with clean off axis sound, but has this sort of glossing or softening effect of the deep deep details. Because I am close miking, not area miking....

I keep thinking maybe I should try an 89? Or a gefell 930? I have no idea. Am I making any sense here? It is difficult to put these things into words and I'm talking micro details here.

What do you think?

Thanks,

N

[[email protected]]

>
> I keep thinking maybe I should try an 89? Or a gefell 930? I have no idea. Am I making any sense here? It is difficult to put these things into words and I'm talking micro details here.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks,
>
> N

are you adverse to starting with a mic that has the directional qualities you want and then using EQ to get the tonal qualities you want?

Mark

[Tobiah]

> more like a guitar in a room than "my ear 24" from a guitar."

<parse error>

Ready>




I was wondering what an ear 24 was and how you got it from
a guitar.

[Ty Ford]

On Friday, March 24, 2017 at 3:41:06 PM UTC-4, Nate Najar wrote:
> What causes this particular type of difference?

Where to start. Yes to pretty much everything you said.

Neumann put some special mojo in the 87 to tame the low end a bit. They engineered in a pretty noticeable present peak. The U 89 is less so.

See if you can rent a Gefell M296 omni. I found it the most "real" sounding of any mic I've heard so far. Gefell sent me M294, m295 and m296 when I got curious about nickel membranes. The m296 was stunning.

Wait. I have a track on dropbox, I think........

Yeah. https://www.dropbox.com/home/Ty%20Ford%20Audio%20%26%20Video/Audio/Gefell%20m296?preview=M296_01.wav

Regards,

Ty

[Scott Dorsey]

Nate Najar > wrote:
>I wouldn't really call the 87 "softening transients" but maybe that's what =
>it is... It's definitely realistic and detailed, but it sounds more like a =
>guitar in a room than "my ear 24" from a guitar."

Some of this has to do with impulse response.

Some of it has to do with the off-axis response and I know that you're in a
dead room and up close so there isn't a whole lot coming from off-axis,
but really you'd be surprised.

>What causes this particular type of difference? Is it the fact that the 87 =
>is a large diaphragm? or is it the transformer? Or both? Or something else?=

It's all of the above. The large diaphragm means that high frequencies are
inherently kind of screwy because the diaphragm is a large fraction of a
wave. At very high frequencies, it can ripple instead of having that one
mode where the diaphragm moves like a piston.

And, the larger diaphragm means you get more serious diffraction effects from
the pressure wave passing around it.

But the added mass of the larger diaphragm also changes things.

And, to be honest, the grille of the U87 changes the sound character a lot
and at high frequencies there are standing wave issues inside the grille.
The combination of the perfed metal opening pattern and the shape of the
grille can change this a lot (which is something the clones seldom get
right.)

> What I'm wondering is if there is a microphone that sounds as natural tona=
>lly as the schoeps, also with clean off axis sound, but has this sort of gl=
>ossing or softening effect of the deep deep details. Because I am close mi=
>king, not area miking....

If you're close miking, you likely don't care so much about off-axis sound.
But I'd suggest that what you want isn't necessarily possible by itself but
might be possible with EQ. And I might suggest the 441 might give you some
of what you want also, because it also has considerable slowing of transients.

>I keep thinking maybe I should try an 89? Or a gefell 930? I have no idea. =
> Am I making any sense here? It is difficult to put these things into words=
> and I'm talking micro details here.
>
>What do you think?

I think you worry too much. But time spent trying out different microphones
is never wasted.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[PStamler]

I think Scott is om target here, but if you're wanting to try things, I definitely recommend the Gefell M930 (keep it off the soundhole, and definitely use the shockmount). It might also be worth trying a Neumann TLM 193, which uses a variant of the U 89 capsule.

Peace,
Paul

[Scott Dorsey]

PStamler > wrote:
>I think Scott is om target here, but if you're wanting to try things, I def=
>initely recommend the Gefell M930 (keep it off the soundhole, and definitel=
>y use the shockmount). It might also be worth trying a Neumann TLM 193, whi=
>ch uses a variant of the U 89 capsule.=20

All of these are great microphones which sound good up close and aren't super
exaggerated on top. But I think your problem is best solved by meditation.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Nate Najar]

Meditation is probably good advice but I *need* to find the source of that magnetic field so I can actually use the 441! But I'm in Europe at the moment, so detective work has been put on hold....

[Matt Faunce]

Nate Najar > wrote:
>
> The schoeps is hyper-real- like having your ear in that spot listening to
> the instrument. So I hear an extremely detailed capture of finger on strings etc....
>

I'm sure you know this, but everyone could use a reminder on some things
sometimes: You can file your left-hand calluses a bit to lessen the noise
coming from them, and soak your right-hand nails in lotion for a couple of
minutes to lessen the noise from there.

--
Matt