I agree that the Higher voltage version of the SM69 sounds alot better than the phantom powered version, but, as a really good stereo mic, I still don't understand why they built it. The KK47 capsule really doesn't lend itself to XY the way a KK67 does. I've always found the KK47 capsule (which is found in the SM69) to be better at very non-coincent stereo, like room mics on a drum kit set very wide. What are you going to use the SM69 for?

The few I've worked on had KK47's, which apppeared to be factory stock.

I've got a SM-69fet (at least that's what it says on the mic) that runs on phantom 48vdc, but has the remote pattern box. Is there a sort of voltage step up in the pattern box or something?

Sorry for the slow reply.

I was considering using the mike for anything I might record in stereo; drum room mikes; above a pair of accoustic guitars; above an acapella or percussion section.

I thought that with the two mikes already set to be turned to the various angles, that the setup would be easy. OTOH, I did wonder about using large diaphrams for this.

Re: small vs. large diaprhagms for wide angle room pickup stuff... How much does the 'capsule width vs. wavelength' thing come into play, really, especially with the super thin diaphragms? How much of a frequency range has a wavelength short enough to be susceptible to off-axis phase silliness across a ~1" diaphragm, vs. a much smaller one? I have never bothered to do the math and see exactly what frequency range might be in the neighborhood of 1/2-1" wavelength, or been in a really great room with a pair each of top flight small and large diaphragm mics to see how much off axis phase anomoly I could actually hear.

Originally posted by Stephen Paul:
Exactly why the 3 micron has the advantage... it resolves the room better. Go to 0.9 and watch it really kill most small capsule mikes on room resolution! ;)

That's about what I figured- I guess I was asking for a kind of subjective answer as to how the greater 'room resolution' of the thinner diaphragms affects perception of high end off axis- does it subjectively somehow mitigate? Or does it clarify the phase stuff? Or is it so much different that you can't compare?

I suppose the questions might not even mean anything....

Dan, you building a mic? :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Stephen Paul:
[QB]Absolutely not.
Stephen, forget absolutes, and this forum is not to be used for pissing matches or attempts to berate people, rather, to share experiences and knowledge. Just because something hasn't happened in your world doesn't mean it hasn't happend.
I know the difference between a KK47 and KK67 as well as you.
The few FET69's I've worked on were from eastern europe, with KK47's, mounting holes in the center of the hex shaped capsule mount.
I'm sure the one you're selling has KK67's, as you stated, and all the ones you've seen had KK67's.
I may have been wrong to assume they all had KK47's, but it was certainly more wrong of you to assume I hadn't seen what I said I'd seen.
There are plenty of Neumann things I haven't seen, like thier tube measurement mic and a U47 with a KK67, it doesn't mean they don't exist.
Cheers,
David Bock

'bye......