[Mike Rivers]

H. Khalil wrote:

I am curious why the M160 and not the M130, given that the latter has
a much flater frequency response, judging by the data sheet on the
Beyer page

They're different animals. The M160 is a hypercardioid, the M130 is
bi-directional. The M130 will give you more room sound, which will make
much more difference than a small difference if frequency response on
axis. If the room sounds good you can use it to advantage. If there's a
reflection that you want to null out, you can do it with the
bi-directional, but the M160 is better for getting the direct sound of
the instrument while minimizing the sound of the room.

The diagram of the M160 shows a bump in the high frequency range that
scares me (a brighter mic than the CMC 641 is the least thing I want).
Do the diagrams have any practical significance?

Not much, as long as they're relatively smooth, and then only if they're
actual measurements and not created by the marketing department based
loosely on actual measurements. What's more significant when you're
getting room sound is how the frequency response looks off axis. Beyer
mics, at the time I bought mine, more than 25 years ago, came with
actual frequency response plots.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)