Skip to main content

Over time, I've seen a lot of microphone companies tout their wares as "Just like a M49 only better!" or "A U87 you can actually afford..." but rarely these companies actually have a true hit on their hands. (The Studio Project line being one notable exception.)

I've recently come across a relatively obscure brand of microphone known as Peluso. It's a line manufactured by a gentleman (with the last name Peluso, hence the name... ) located here in Virginia who has done custom work and repairs for several years.

His small diaphragm mic, the CEMC6 is apparently patterned after the venerable Schoeps line of mics, particularly the CMC6/MKx. I recently spoke with Mr. Peluso and learned that, even the built in filters and pads are designed to be similar to the Schoeps in every way. The only difference is, you can get a pair of Peluso's with every capsule (Cardioid, Omni, Wide-Cardioid, and Hyper-Cardioid) for less than you'd pay for 1 schoeps mic/capsule. Roughly $1200 to be specific -- Yep, per pair!

While I'm usually one of the first people on the block to rush out and buy a pair if for nothing else other than to say I've used it, I'm not in the position to blow $1200 right now. (Having spent over $20,000 since Jan 1, my wife is one step from justifiable homocide right now.)

I'm curious, has anyone out there tried these mics? If so, what's your opinion. Saying that your mic is real similar to a Schoeps is a pretty big claim; I'm just real curious to know if these can stack up.




sdelsolray Mon, 03/07/2005 - 14:08

Initial reviews of the Peluso CEMC6 SD mics are rather positive, kinda the "best value under $1,000" type statements. Actually, Peluso makes LD mics too, modelled after the U47 and E LAM 251 that are getting excellent initial reviews.

Dan Richards of is quite familiar with the Peluso mics. I have not yet heard anyone do a direct comparison between the Schoeps CMC/MKx mics and the Peluso SDs. I'm skeptical too. We'll see.

anonymous Tue, 03/08/2005 - 05:42

Since there are some unknowns regarding these mics, one doesn't have to spend $1200.00 for all the caps, right? My thought is, why not try a pair of the cardioid capsules and bodies instead for around $500 a pair? If you like 'em you can always get the other caps down the road. I received this quoteback from

"(1) Peluso CEMC6 Solid State Microphone: $255.00 (cash), $259.00 (credit)"

Or you can get them on eBay for $525.00/pair (though $25 for shipping seems a bit steep):…

I do stereo location recording and have been checking these mics out as well, but agree that I would like to hear a sample or two before taking the plunge (my uses for these mics might be different than some of yours). I have a friend who recorded a Los Lobos show who said he'll post a bit torrent of it, I'll let you know if/when he does post it.

anonymous Thu, 03/10/2005 - 10:56

Hi Jeremy and all,

I just sprung for a pair of the CEMC-6's, just with the cardiods -
just arrived and only had a chance to use one on fiddle so far. Love it. I recorded with this mic and also a Soundelux U195 at the same time, just 2 mono tracks which I blend, panned the same. They make a great balance for the style I play, which is sort of eclectic ethnic fusion. The Peluso is smoother than the U195, smooths off on the top end, while the U195 adds extra bite which really works for some of my stuff. I'll be playing around with mic placement and also trying the Peluso on acoustic guitar, as well as overheads, but won't have much chance for more until I get back from out of town ina 2-3 weeks. But so far 2 thumbs up.
I got 'em direct, which cost me a little more, but I like to support artisans directly when I can. Real nice guy too, answers the phone himself.

anonymous Sun, 03/13/2005 - 01:13

Thanks to David Satz on, I saw where Peluso probably obtains the heart of his microphones. Visit http://www.feilo-us… and click on the lower right-hand box, CR1-14. The consensus of those on RAP who have tested the Peluso small diaphragm mic is that there is little similarity in sound between the Peluso and the Schoeps. You do enough research and you learn .... -- "Uncle Russ" Reinberg

anonymous Mon, 06/13/2005 - 10:58

Sorry, I don't follow you here. What do Feil CR1-14 mics have to do with Peluso mics? And, when I go to that link, what am I supposed to look at that has anything to do with a review or comparison between these and the CEMC6s? Help me on this. Unless all you are doing is pointing out how similar they look to one another.

anonymous Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:58

Dave Satz explained that Peluso apparently obtains his basic microphone components from Feilo, then modifies them. As you seem to be, I was very interested in any mic that performs like a Schoeps but costs less. I looked up everything I could but was unable to find a conclusive review or comparison. So I turned to another group for input.

David Satz is an extremely knowledgeable, responsible, and objective engineer. He and others whose opinions I've learned to trust explained that the Peluso mics really do not sound a lot like Schoeps although nobody condemned Peluso. Satz went on to point out the extreme similarity in appearance between the Peluso capsule and body and the Feilo via the Internet link. He and others further suggested the primary reason for the comparison between Peluso and Schoeps is the nature of their modularity.

The guys who actually used them reported the Peluso may be a good mic but still not a Schoeps. I tried to pass along the jist of what they said. On the other hand if, after an analytical A-B comparison between the two mics, you are able to show a Peluso equivalent to a Schoeps, please let us know. I'll be one of the first in line to buy a pair. -- "Uncle Russ" Reinberg

John Stafford Sun, 06/19/2005 - 11:35

I had thought that the NT5 was electronically similar to the Neumann KM-184, but this is VERY interesting to know. Hopefully Rode will divert some of their huge R&D budget into making a really nice omni. A figure-of-eight would be nice as well -with Rode prices of course :)

I think this is the company that the big European manufacturers should be afraid of, and not the countless suppliers of Chinese mics.

The link you provded is great!


DavidSpearritt Sun, 06/19/2005 - 14:24

The NT5 is a copy of the Neumann physically but I read somewhere that Freedman copied Schoeps circuits for the innards. He has got the manufacturing very high tech and with volume and this is how the prices are low. They're not bad mics, and I think they will still get better. The physical quality is there now.

Incidentally, the reason all the Rode mics have model numbers starting with "NT", its so when its strung behind the manufacturer name it spells "RODENT", the fake Norwegian or Swedish umlaut with the O is for pseudo sophistication of the brand logo in the hope Europeans will buy them. Could only happen is Australia, sigh. :roll:

John Stafford Sun, 06/19/2005 - 20:42

I initially assumed the O was reflected the Danish heritage of the company. Wasn't it set up by a Danish immigrant? I've seen the name transcribed as Roede on some European sites. I prefer the idea that it was to make it look European. It's like giving the finger to the big European mic companies.

BTW is it true that there are twelve mic companies based in Sydney? I read that in an Australian magazine a couple of years ago. The only comany I know apart from Rode is Wagner. Their U47 is cool if the demos are anything to go by.


grant Sun, 05/08/2011 - 12:13

I know this is an old thread but nobody said this, so:

If Rode "copied" Schoeps circuitry, it was ineffectual. They're good mics in their own right. But I've put up NT5s and Schoeps CMC64s both in ORTF--one just below the other--for an orchestral recording. I just wanted to see how well the Rodes would do. They sounded very different.

It was a piano concerto and I actually think I preferred the sound of the piano through the Rodes. But the overall orchestra was better through the Schoeps so I ended up using the Schoeps.

But the bottom line: both are good and both are quite different.


grant Sun, 05/08/2011 - 21:25

Both the Schoeps and the Rodes were used as the main recording array for an orchestra. The piece in question happened to be a piano concerto. So they weren't "piano mics" per se. It's just that the piano sounded quite good in the Rodes. As much as I (having invested so much in Schoeps) would've wanted the Schoeps to sound better in all respects, the Rodes sounded good. But--to reiterate--I scrapped the Rodes for the final work. While the piano sounded good in the Rodes, the orchestra through the Schoeps was preferable so I opted to actually use the Schoeps. Mind you, I've always liked the sound of pianos through those Schoeps anyway.

I don't remember exact figures, but the microphones (in ORTF) were placed about 12 feet high just downstage of the piano, which itself was just downstage of the standard orchestra setup.

The preamps were Millennia Media HV3s.