Hey Crescendo!

It's interesting the price differences - here the 4049 is far cheaper than the AKG's. Personally, I like both of these mics - a lot! I find the 4049 to be rather laid back in the mids and quite present (not too much though) in the highs. The AKG's have a very flat mid and unhyped highs. Though, others on this site will disagree, this is what I've found to be true.

However, I can't imagine a better mic EVER than the M296 (Not even my Schoeps or the DPAs or Neumanns that I've been fortunate enough to use). I got a pair of these recently and have been so impressed, I just can't do them justice with words. My advice - save the money and get the Gefells. (I will be putting up a review here soon if Kurt doesn't mind me doing so on his part of the forum...)

The 296s are without a doubt, the clearest, cleanest, most detailed, ear-friendly, accurate, sweet mic I've ever heard. They have a low frequency detail that simply must be heard to be believed. Their high frequency is very natural (there is a slight boost in the 8kHz region for field equalization - though there is the 'S' version which is technically so perfect it's considered and certified as a test microphone - I do actually prefer the slight rise for use in the diffuse field.) They are incredibly sensitive (not just macro-sensitivity, but micro-sensitivity.) You will hear stuff in the recordings that you've never heard before.

I will be posting a 15 second snippet of some stuff recorded with them in 16/44.1 wav (not MP3, so the file will be large!) I had to run a HPF on it b/c it was picking up seriously meaningful harmonics from BD attacks as low as 3 Hz!!!!!!!!! (I was freaking out cuz my monitors' woofers were reaching their peak excursion, but I couldn't hear a damn thing until I put the recording on my mastering set-up with a REL sub capable of producing tones as low as 11Hz and BD hits were so deep, I couldn't believe it. Not hyped or too loud, but as though a BD were actually being played in my listening room!!!

Frankly, I thought they looked cheap just by looking at their picture on-line and in catalogues, but they are some of the most robust mics I've ever held. They are sturdy enough to drive in nails (though I wouldn't want to do that when a hammer costs $4 :wink: )

I think you can tell, I like the M296's! The only gripe I have with them is they don't come with mic clips! :? However, the clips that hold the AT 30 and 40 series pencil mics (readily available and cheap) also fit the MG's just fine.

BTW...That nickel diaphragm just looks drool-worthy cool!!! And com'on .4microns thick?!?!?! That's got to be one of the thinnest diaphragms on the planet! Oh well, I don't want to spoil my review before it's posted!

J...

thanks Cucco for the in depth explanation
i was hopng that you will answer because i am an omni freak just like you.
Regarding prices, ATs are litle overpriced over here but MGs the last time i checked at their distributor here, I can get them for about 1200$ wich is a great price I think.

The DPA 4061 without grid sounds almost identical to my 4006 and are only $400 ea.

If you can deal with the unorthodix appearance you are in for a pleasant surprise.

Rich

Jeremy
I've been holding my breath for this ever since you bought them. Can't wait! I'm thinking of some more investments, but over here the MGs are WAY more expensive than the Schoeps -that are not really that expensive considering their status (1600 euro for a pair of caps and bodies).

John

Looks like the M296's go for about $1500 apiece? (Just about the same as the DPA 4006's, etc.)

They sure LOOK sexy, too.... 8-) Can't wait to hear your excerpts, Jeremy.