Ok, some views but no response so maybe I should be more specific. So here goes.

Would the Sennheiser's be better for choral work because of the extended frequency range of the figure 8 microphone? Maybe this doesnt matter, I dont know.

Is anyone using the Schoeps MS as a stereophonic technique for this kind of work or is it more suited to foley work?

Rob

I think this forum is close to death. Unfortunately those who could advise in this matter are seen in other places but not here. Shame really, it was showing some promise.

Hello Rob,

I can guess that most everyone here in the States is on holiday this weekend.

I use Schoeps microphones to record choral works. No direct experiences with Sennheiser MKH series, however I know John Eargle likes Sennheiser for spot mics and choral pick-up.

From a quick look at the technical specs, I notice one thing that will make the Schoeps MK4 sound different compared to the MKH 40 is the slight rise starting about 10K. This may open up the sound depending on the acoustic and placement. Otherwise, they look very similar, at least on paper.

I have recorded with the MK4/Mk8 in MS as a center pair flanked by a pair of MK21 (Sub-Card) (or MK2 omni) depending on the acoustic and instrumentation. It has worked well for me.

Hope that helps.
Peter.

It mkight be that the question is a bit difficult to answer as maybe few persons has done an A/B comparison between these two mic setups.

I have used the MKH30/MKH40 pair for orchestral recordings with good results. Both mics sounds good to my ears, although the amount of mics I can compare to is not very large. Never used the Schoeps though. I do believe both setups are standard setups used by quite a few persons.

My firm belief is that both sets represent high quality making the deciding factor the taste of the user. If at all possible I would recommend you to rent or borrow the mics and try them out for yourself.

The extende bottom end probably makes very little difference in choral recordings, none of the singers goes down that low in frequency. So the bottom end is mostly "atmosphere". Sometimes that include things like subways and passing buses.

Gunnar

There was a long thread comparing MK8 and MKH30 over at prosoundweb:
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/3691/0/0/3682/?SQ=2c5cd357313559ad294cdb9d864fa862
Regards
Hermann

DavidSpearritt wrote: I think this forum is close to death. Unfortunately those who could advise in this matter are seen in other places but not here. Shame really, it was showing some promise.

I wouldn't say that it's dead, or close to it. We have seen 2 members move away to other forums, but plenty others are still here. I just agree that it is a US holiday and many people haven't compared both of these mics.

For omni and cardioid, I've used both the Senn's and the Schoeps. I own a few pair of the Schoeps and none of the Senn's. That's the only endorsement I could provide. To me, the Schoeps are clearer, more defined and more realistic. The Senn's seem hyper-realistic. Too much in the bass and a very round upper range. Whether this holds true for all of the Schoeps line vs all of the Senn line, I can't say. I do know that the MKH-800 is a shining example of what to do right with a microphone, but the price demonstrates that all too well.

J.

DavidSpearritt wrote: I think this forum is close to death. Unfortunately those who could advise in this matter are seen in other places but not here. Shame really, it was showing some promise.

Nah, it isn't dead... Besides the holidays, many of us are also just insanely busy. This is the most hectic fall I've ever had. Home hasn't been much more than a bed for me... I'm not complaining, but it just leaves little time for the forums (this and all the others I participate in).

I dig both pairs... I actually use the Schoeps more often, but I don't really record choirs with M-S. I don't really like what it does to the image. For choirs, I usually use either a blumlein pair or omnis.

For choral work, I love schoeps. The MK-21 is probably my favorite capsule of all. I find that the Sennheisers have something in the low-mids that doesn't always work. They are extremely quiet and can sound awesome, but not always. When I use MKH80's, I find that I have to position them very differently than when I use other mics in similar situations.

-Ben

Thanks for the replies. I have been thinking of the Schoeps wide cardiods for some time as an alternative. And Gunnar you right about the usefulness of the extended bottom end - mostly traffic noise rumble.

Rob

rcastiglione wrote: Thanks for the replies. I have been thinking of the Schoeps wide cardiods for some time as an alternative. And Gunnar you right about the usefulness of the extended bottom end - mostly traffic noise rumble.

Rob

I bought a pair of CMC621 a couple of months back. Have limited experience, but I love what I've gotten so far. Next up is using them as choir spots in a orch+choral Messiah gig next week. Looking forward to it!

Mike

DavidSpearritt wrote: I think this forum is close to death. Unfortunately those who could advise in this matter are seen in other places but not here. Shame really, it was showing some promise.

Forum isn't really dead David. I for one am extrememly busy this time of year. However, no offense to Ben and Cucco, I have found other forums to provide more meaningful discussions, professionalism and accurate "sound" information. I still peruse conversations here and will add things when appropriate to do so and/or if/when I have time.

Just speaking as a beginner I find this forum to be marvellous. I've learned *tons* here. Great forum IMO. 8-)

alexaudio wrote: [quote=DavidSpearritt]I think this forum is close to death. Unfortunately those who could advise in this matter are seen in other places but not here. Shame really, it was showing some promise.

Forum isn't really dead David. I for one am extrememly busy this time of year. However, no offense to Ben and Cucco, I have found other forums to provide more meaningful discussions, professionalism and accurate "sound" information. I still peruse conversations here and will add things when appropriate to do so and/or if/when I have time.

I'm glad to hear it, but I agree with you about the meaningful discussions, elsewhere. I was kinda hoping this forum would extend above and beyond the gear obsession downstream of the mic, as there are plenty of forums around for that sort of thing. I will be patient for a little longer.

Forums are whatever you make them. I run a busy IT forum as part of my day job for the past many years. If you present a certain angle with energy and dedication people will respond. If you leave a forum to evolve on its own devices without strong guidance it will almost never turn out the way you hoped although it can still turn into something exciting. It really comes down to how bad you want something. 8-)

DavidSpearritt wrote: [quote=alexaudio][quote=DavidSpearritt]I think this forum is close to death. Unfortunately those who could advise in this matter are seen in other places but not here. Shame really, it was showing some promise.

Forum isn't really dead David. I for one am extrememly busy this time of year. However, no offense to Ben and Cucco, I have found other forums to provide more meaningful discussions, professionalism and accurate "sound" information. I still peruse conversations here and will add things when appropriate to do so and/or if/when I have time.

I'm glad to hear it, but I agree with you about the meaningful discussions, elsewhere. I was kinda hoping this forum would extend above and beyond the gear obsession downstream of the mic, as there are plenty of forums around for that sort of thing. I will be patient for a little longer.

I don't know guys -
I've checked out the other forums on a regular basis (and still do.) I find that they are all just as "gear obsessed" as this forum here. The only difference is that people get chastized for speaking of gear like Rode or Audio Technica instead of DPA or Schoeps.

The funny thing is, the other forum out there with the orchestral recording forum (which I might add was kind of a copy cat of this forum's) seems to hash up all the same old questions over and over and over again. Many of the questions are so silly or elemetary, I can't imagine it being all that helpful.

In reality, much of the discussions in the Acoustic Music forum here rise far above gear. Very rarely will you see someone asking something stupid like:
"Yo, which microphone would work best for all orchestral recording situations..."
These are the kinds of questions that are rampant on all of the other forums, but not here.

Many of the questions here are legitimate, detailed questions about specific items (notice how much information about pipe organ recording has been given out here...)

I like Recording.org, but I wouldn't so easily lump the Acoustic Music forum into the same ball as the rest of them on RO - the questions, answers and attitudes are all different.

J.

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. :D

Whether it's dead or alive, I'm glad this forum is still here! I've been away for almost a year, so it is good to catch up.

I don't have any AB side-by-side comparison info for you, but I do have subjective impressions of both rigs gleaned over time. I doubt they'll make me very popular, but these are my subjective opinions only and so arguments about whether I'm right or wrong are irrelevant.

Most of my early experiences with MS were with Sennheiser's MKH series, and the combination never EVER impressed me - whether it was choral, piano, quartet, orchestral, whatever. The sound always felt cold, sterile and dissonant. Sure, it was quiet and accurate and so on, but I found it would always repel my ears after a few minutes of listening. I didn't like it at all, but in those days I did not know if it was the MS technique, the mics, or both. I suspected it was the mics, because I've had the same impression when using MKH series previously. It *sounds* like there's some form of intermodulation distortion going on, adding overtones that don't belong there - it is reminiscent of listening to an amplifier circuit that has excessive intermodulation distortion. But that's a subjective impression only, I'm not trying to qualify it objectively.

[I am sure the indignant MKH fans here will shoot back a list of specs and so on that prove the IMD is way down. Whatever... Like I said, this is what it sounds like to *me*. I haven't bothered doing any measurements because there would be no point - it's not going to change what they sound like!]

About two years ago I tried a Schoeps MS pair (CCM4Lg/CCM8Lg) and was well-impressed. In fact, the Schoeps rig converted me to the wonders of the MS technique. I bought the rig as soon as I could afford it. Where the Sennheisers sounded cold and sterile and dissonant, the Schoeps just sounded natural and real. And that is what most people say about the recordings I've made with them; I consider that a good sign.

As for LF roll-off, I am very happy with the Schoeps. If the MKH bidirectional achieves its extended LF response through built-in EQ (as has been suggested here), I'm certainly not interested in it. I'll do whatever EQ is needed with linear phase EQ in my DAW (on the S channel only before decoding from MS if necessary), at least as well as some ultra-miniature low-powered analog circuit crammed into a microphone body can do it, and with less noise and other artefacts.

Finally, still on the topic of LF roll-off, comparing microphone specs from different manufacturers is fraught with peril. Unless you know the methods and - most importantly for directional microphones - the distance from the sound source that the response was measured at, you are really comparing apples with oranges because LF response changes with distance.

I hope some of this has been helpful...

- Greg Simmons

Since the file is still hosted on Jeremy's server, here is an example of an acoustic recording done over the holidays with the Schoeps CMC54/58 MS pair.

(Dead Link Removed)

[If you downloaded it on the other thread, please pass.]

No experience with the Senns, but this is why I LOVE the Schoeps. 8-)

Michael

Hey Greg!

Welcome back! I think we're all glad to see that you haven't been eaten by the Yeti.

Do you have any good stories to share with us while you are connected??

Cucco wrote: Hey Greg!

Welcome back! I think we're all glad to see that you haven't been eaten by the Yeti.

Do you have any good stories to share with us while you are connected??

Thanks Jeremy! The Yeti took one bite, spat me back out and said, "Urgh, tastes like beer. Must be an Aussie..."

Story? Okay...

About two weeks ago I went to a beautiful little lakeside town called Pokhara (a popular destination in Nepal), at the base of the snow-capped Annapurna mountain range. I found a cave full of bats and tried to record the sound of them leaving en-masse at dusk (or thereabouts) to feed on insects. I was sitting patiently at the entrance of the cave with my recording equipment, it was pitch black (a moonless night), and I couldn't see anything at all except stars in the sky. Oh, and the gently flashing red LED of the Nagra V indicating it was in record pause mode with the 20 second pre-record buffer running. I had the headphones on, waiting to hear the sound of the bats coming out, when suddenly I heard some rather un-bat-like noises followed by a very low growl.

I cautiously turned on my head-torch and saw a pair of large green eyes reflecting straight at me, about 3m away, in the mouth of the cave. That was one of the scariest things I've ever seen! If it hadn't been so willy-shrivelling cold I would've definitely created a temporary warm place in my trousers. I was so scared that I neglected to flick the Nagra V into record mode, which would've captured the previous 20 seconds - including the growl. Dammit!

Further foolhardy investigations proved it be a jungle cat (also known as a 'bamboo tiger', but nowhere near as big or ferocious as a real tiger). It was hunting bats and I was in its territory - hence the warning growl. Turns out there were two of them, a mating pair. No bats came out that night, for obvious reasons, so all I have is a story and one very low-res blurry picture of a large feline crouching in the mouth of a cave. No bat sounds, and no recorded growl.

A week later (now one week ago) I was in the jungles of Chitwan National Park and got too close to a Royal Bengal Tiger. We'd been following its fresh footprints for about two hours, and had gone way off the trails, finding ourselves pushing and tripping through the ferns, vines and undergrowth of the jungle. I stopped to record a beautiful bird sound (a black-hooded oriel, IIRC), and we stood there silently for about five minutes as the recording progressed. When I turned off the recording equipment and started to move away, something very large growled at me. My guide indicated it was the tiger we'd been tracking, and he looked very scared - tigers often kill people in the jungles of Nepal! I couldn't see it, only hear it, but it was very close, less than 4m away. (Camouflage is quite an amazing thing: a tiger is big and covered in black and orange vertical stripes, you'd think it would be clearly visible in a jungle of green ferns and so on, but it isn't.) We all froze, terrified. While I stood there motionless, trying to make out the shape of this large thing that I could hear slowly stalking through the undergrowth, my mind wandered back to the jungle cat growl a few days earlier and I said to myself, "Record! Record!" Again, I had the Nagra V's 20 second pre-record buffer running and the growl was clocking through it. But the Nagra was on the ground, I was standing upright, and I was kind of, er, frozen. I certainly wasn't going to bend down and take my eye off the undergrowth just to put the Nagra into record mode. I'm stupid, but not THAT stupid!

After a minute or so of being scared to death and pondering the Boolean logic of my last requests (don't bury me in Melbourne, don't bury me in a suit, and don't bury me in a suit in Melbourne), a flock (?) of startled jungle chickens squawked out of the undergrowth about 15m in front of us, and we knew the tiger had moved away. We hightailed to the river bank (where we'd be able to see anything approaching us) and had a very nervous packed lunch, deciding it was not a good idea to follow fresh tiger tracks any more. What was I thinking, anyway? Fresh tiger prints lead to fresh tiger, right? Jeez...

Sorry for hi-jacking the thread.

Wow!!!

God, that sounds like amazing fun!!! Do you have a good camera with you?

I do actually have a funny (though less life-threatening) story similar to those.

I was recently in South Central Alaska (last August) and I had some free time to kill. Since my wife is a photographer and she has a couple Digital SLRs, I took one of them with me to document what I could while I hiked a 20 mile stretch along some local glaciers. Well, I took an amazing 50-500mm lens (Sigma) but a puny tripod. So, to get the camera to work with the crappy tripod which shook rapidly with wind or even a slight touch to the camera (even to press the shutter release) and I forgot to bring the cable release, what I did was set the camera's 10 second timer, pressed the shutter release and stood back. The 10 seconds was enough for the camera to stabilize on the tripod and snap a clean picture.

Well, anyway, I was standing on the side of a small road when a very large Bald Eagle approached me and literally landed no more than 10 feet away from me. Given the lens I had attached, I certainly had my choice of how I wanted to focus on and frame this bird. So I quickly turned towards the bird, (he wasn't afraid of my motions as the bird was as tall as my waist and probably weighed almost 40-50 lbs and had talons that could make me into ground beef if I pissed it off) raised the camera to my eye and pressed the shutter release button.

To my dismay, I heard the chirping of the self timer going off since I had forgotten to switch it back to regular exposure mode. It wasn't the chirping that sent the bird fluttering away; it was my extremely loud explative that seemed to cause the bird to take flight.

Anyway, between the two of us, we've now completely derailed this thread. In any case, we're glad to see you're safe and having a hell of a time!

J.

I can testify to just how terrific the M/S recordings Greg has made are as I have heard several snippets that were up on the web through Audio Technology's website. Stereophohnic imaging is stunning with a very real sense of being there. And that was apparent even with MP3 files.

In fact, Greg, you may remember that I sent you a fawning email about the recording. Don't want to piss in your pocket, but I still listen to them to this day every time I want to "travel" to Tibet.

It was in fact listening to THOSE recordings that made me wonder about the MKH M/S set up that I have.

Rob

rcastiglione wrote: I can testify to just how terrific the M/S recordings Greg has made are as I have heard several snippets that were up on the web through Audio Technology's website. Stereophonic imaging is stunning with a very real sense of being there. And that was apparent even with MP3 files.

Ah, very kind words for the Schoeps there, and I couldn't agree with you more. As much as I'd like to take some credit for those recordings, the reality is that all I was doing was choosing the setting. The imaging and sense of 'being there' is just the technology doing its thing - in this case, a Schoeps MS pair and a Nagra V for acquisition, and Wavelab running the ToolsOne plug-in to decode the MS. Oh, and Waves lowband LinEQ as a high pass filter. No other EQ needed...

As a matter of interest, the sensitivity of the two capsules is such that the cardioid (M) is 2.1dB hotter than the bidirectional. Rather than allowing for that when setting gain in the field, I keep the gains matched and set the M channel to be 2.1dB when decoding MS. That restores the image nicely...

rcastiglione wrote:
In fact, Greg, you may remember that I sent you a fawning email about the recording. Don't want to piss in your pocket, but I still listen to them to this day every time I want to "travel" to Tibet.

Ah, you're THAT "rcastiglione"! Of course I remember you, I just didn't make the connection. I'm too busy pissing in my own pockets most of the time...

rcastiglione wrote:
It was in fact listening to THOSE recordings that made me wonder about the MKH M/S set up that I have.
Rob

Sorry... FWIW, when I'm setting up and checking my Schoeps MS pair, I spend a bit of time getting the alignment just right between them - making sure the front edge of the M capsule aligns with the centre of the S capsule. It's hard to do because I'm nudging fractions of a millimetre, and it's hard to see the M capsule's diaphragm so there's a bit of guesswork and trial and error involved. But I find when I get it right, the imaging kind of snaps into focus and becomes very three-dimensional. Sometimes it takes my breath away, and I wonder why we need surround sound systems at all. Maybe it's all in my mind (or in my damp pockets), either of which are highly likely, but I fiddle with it anyway.

Maybe try that with your Sennheisers?

Greg,

No, sorry you have destroyed my confidence in the Senneiser M/S array completely...

But seriously, please dont be concerned: what you describe as your subjective experience with the MKH stuff has been one of my own reasons of my dissatisfaction for some time. A kind of mildness? Blandness? A certain lifelessness? I DO like the MKH40 which I also have and also the MKH50 and MKH60 shotgun.

Thanks for the tip with aligning the capsules more closely to get better localisation. Interesting point. Some guys have actually told me to do the reverse to introduce slight time arrival differences to actually try and get a bit more "spaciousness".

After much soul searching, I have actually decided to sell the MKH30 to a friend of mine who does a lot of film foley. He has coveted (and borrowed frequently) my MKH30 for MS recording. I will go with the Schoeps. I have already got one amplifier body and the MK41 (terrific) cap so it makes a lot of economic sense for the future as well - next I plan to get the MK21 wide cardiod caps for ORTF and so on til I am completely broke and my family is living on the street and the only thing we possess is my film and sound gear (and my integrity).

About the recordings you made which I heard: the imaging is very strong. Startling sense of depth and as you say a three dimensional quality. Now thats stereo! There is one bit with a young girl singing and it is maybe her mother or a friend standing next to her prompting her when she forgets the words. Well you can just see her standing there as you listen.

Good fortune for the rest of your amazing journeying - we all want to hear the recordings.

And Jeremy as to the off topic stuff, its been great: when I was at Uni one of my teachers always said that it was the book NEXT to the one that you came to look for in the library that was most interesting.

Rob

Hello Greg,

According to Schoeps, and my experience agrees, if the rear of the two amplifier bodies are aligned, the M and S capsule alignment should be correct. This is much easier than trying to align based on the 'middle of the capsule' as you mention above. [Oh... just re-read your post and you are using CCM, not CMC. I guess those are more difficult to align...]

Michael

mdemeyer wrote: Hello Greg,

According to Schoeps, and my experience agrees, if the rear of the two amplifier bodies are aligned, the M and S capsule alignment should be correct. This is much easier than trying to align based on the 'middle of the capsule' as you mention above. [Oh... just re-read your post and you are using CCM, not CMC. I guess those are more difficult to align...]

Michael

The same is true of the CCMs, again, according to Schoeps but I've found it to work well in practice.

Simmosonic wrote: Most of my early experiences with MS were with Sennheiser's MKH series, and the combination never EVER impressed me - whether it was choral, piano, quartet, orchestral, whatever. The sound always felt cold, sterile and dissonant. Sure, it was quiet and accurate and so on, but I found it would always repel my ears after a few minutes of listening.

rcastiglione wrote: But seriously, please dont be concerned: what you describe as your subjective experience with the MKH stuff has been one of my own reasons of my dissatisfaction for some time. A kind of mildness? Blandness? A certain lifelessness?

I'm so glad it's not just me who feels this way about the MKH MS pairs! Thin, lifeless, limp, gutless, etc. etc.. I've tried them dozens of times but almost every time I've felt that there's something wrong; they seem to suck the life out of whtever I point them at. On all but one or two occasions I've ended up taking them down and going back to Schoeps/a mixture of DPA and Schoeps/ AKG C426.

I spend a lot of time on another forum and whenever the subject of a totally clean, quiet, low distortion condensor mic comes up, the Sennheiser MKH series is held as the yardstick by which all others are judged. I'm often asked why I never recommend them when all the other long established forum members fawn over them. I don't dispute that their technical spec is superb (albeit achieved with a measure of "cheating") but I simply can't recommend something that I wouldn't use myself and which I dislike the sound of. It's curious that something, which on paper is so right, can to me sound so wrong on virtually every musical sound on which I've tried it.

Cucco wrote: Do you have a good camera with you?

I wish. I was stupid, actually. I had intended to buy an 800Mpixel camera at the airport before I left, I even looked at some. It's a long story, but the end result is that I don't have one. Fortunately, I've had some friends travelling with me who have cameras, albeit 3.2Mpixel cameras.

There's the great problem of taking too much stuff. As one of my friends said when I started looking at the big SLR type digital cameras: "How much stuff are you going to carry with you? Are you recording sounds or taking pictures?" It seemed like good logic at the time...

Cucco wrote: To my dismay, I heard the chirping of the self timer going off since I had forgotten to switch it back to regular exposure mode. It wasn't the chirping that sent the bird fluttering away; it was my extremely loud explative that seemed to cause the bird to take flight.

Don't you hate it when that happens!

The other thing I hate is when I've had people taking photos of me making spontaneous on-the-spot never-to-be-repeated recordings, and their naturally silent digital cameras play little shutter sounds and beeps and so on. Bummer... I've got to keep asking them to check that their cameras are in silent mode.

Hate that...

mdemeyer wrote: Hello Greg,

According to Schoeps, and my experience agrees, if the rear of the two amplifier bodies are aligned, the M and S capsule alignment should be correct. This is much easier than trying to align based on the 'middle of the capsule' as you mention above. [Oh... just re-read your post and you are using CCM, not CMC. I guess those are more difficult to align...]

Michael

But I am sure the same logic applies, now that you mention it. I find that once I've got them sounding right, the bodies seem to be aligned at the rear. There is a fine line around them, perhaps a join from where one part threads into another, and those join lines always seem to align.

Perhaps I should stop being so pedantic and just line up the lines...

0VU wrote:
The same is true of the CCMs, again, according to Schoeps but I've found it to work well in practice.

Ah, thanks for that info...

0VU wrote:
I spend a lot of time on another forum and whenever the subject of a totally clean, quiet, low distortion condensor mic comes up, the Sennheiser MKH series is held as the yardstick by which all others are judged.

From time to time I work with some local producers and alongside other engineers who swear by the MKH series. I am sure they are thinking only in terms of low noise or similar technical prowess. If I'm expected to do the engineering using the MKH, I feel kind of lost because I don't get anything from them that I like. I'm sure you've had the experience of having to spend hours and hours concentrating intently on a sound that is not enjoyable to listen to, especially when you know you could do it so much better with your preference. (Of course, "your preference" being the operative phrase, because obviously MKH is their preference!)

I hate being so critical of a manufacturer like Sennheiser, I really like the company and their thinking. Their HD600s have been my favourite headphones for years...

I have seldom read as glorious reviews of anything as of the Schoeps mics. If I would agree with half of it after testing, decisions will be easy. Think I have to get my hands on a pair as well (renting or borrowing will be a good start before plunging the currently non-existant money).

So what do you say:
CMC5 or CMC6? I do not need the 12V option as I always have 48V along. The price difference is not worth mentioning, so it goes down to sound. 30 instead of 20 Hertz, or are there more differences?

MK4 or MK41 or maybe even MK21 for the Mid? Your ideas welcome.
And the MK8 I think.

(I have access to a MKH30/MKH40 pair so I might be able to do some comparisons at some later time).

Intended usage, the obvious: choirs, chamber music, orchestras.

Gunnar

ghellquist wrote: So what do you say:
CMC5 or CMC6? I do not need the 12V option as I always have 48V along. The price difference is not worth mentioning, so it goes down to sound. 30 instead of 20 Hertz, or are there more differences?

MK4 or MK41 or maybe even MK21 for the Mid? Your ideas welcome.
And the MK8 I think. Gunnar

I bought the CMC5's in the end, after agonising over this. I figured the extra octave was not needed, neither was 12V, the electronics must be simpler in the CMC5 and the phase behaviour better with a 6dB/oct filter at the bottom than a 12dB/oct. But most others swear by the CMC6, and all the little CCM's are CMC6 powered.

I bought 2 MK4's and 2MK21's so far, about to buy 2 MK8's probably in CCMLg form, so that I can make up the sexiest, tiniest Blumlein pair on the planet.

I do only classical and chamber music particularly and the MK21 caps are my favourite. The MK4's are the best sounding cardioids I have ever heard and the MK8's are beyond criiticism as well. If you need omnis, I would go for the MK2H, the best option for critical distance placement.

I have been trying to think strategically about what Schoeps caps to get as well. I just ordered the MK8 and already have the MK41.

Anyway, the following is a plan at least for what I want to do ( thanks to Steve Hilmy from another forum and following his well thought out plan):

MK8
MK21 x2
MK5
2 CCM5 amplifiers (dont need 12v )

There are many possibilities with these: M/S with MK21 for classic coincident X - Y and using the excellent characteristics of the MK21; ORTF with MK21: A-B with MK21: M/S with either cardiod or omni as centre.

Rob

ghellquist wrote: I have seldom read as glorious reviews of anything as of the Schoeps mics. If I would agree with half of it after testing, decisions will be easy.

Of course, now we run the riskof creating a higher-than-realisable expectation for Schoeps in your mind...

ghellquist wrote: CMC5 or CMC6? I do not need the 12V option as I always have 48V along. The price difference is not worth mentioning, so it goes down to sound. 30 instead of 20 Hertz, or are there more differences?

I personally wouldn't be stressing over 30Hz or 20Hz for any microphone decision (unless I was trying to record the subsonic communications of elephants, who are continually chatting away to each other below our LF threshold - you can feel their ribs vibrating when you're riding them - and hence we think they're kind of silent until they trumpet). There's rarely anything musically important below 40Hz or so anyway, let alone anything useful or helpful! I find that for most of my recordings I run a HPF at somewhere between 40Hz and 60Hz anyway, it just seems to clean things up nicely.

Unlike others who agonise over which microphones and models to buy, my decision to go with Schoeps was simple. I had always been fond of DPA's microphones (I still am), but they STILL don't make a bidirectional despite years of my nagging. So they were not a contender when it came to choosing an MS rig. That left Sennheiser and Schoeps, and, for reasons that are explained elsewhere in this thread, I chose Schoeps. One of the best decisions I've ever made, and one of the easiest lessons of my life.

Another of my best decisions was deciding that using ball bearing races for all four wheels on my billy cart was kind of stupid, because those polished metal rings have no friction and therefore no steering ability on tarmac at high speeds downhill. Unlike the Schoeps decision, that lesson was not learnt so easily.

DavidSpearritt wrote: I bought 2 MK4's and 2MK21's so far, about to buy 2 MK8's probably in CCMLg form, so that I can make up the sexiest, tiniest Blumlein pair on the planet.

My good friend, fellow Nagra V user and recording buddy Mr G has recently bought the Schoeps Blumlein adapter, for use with two CCM8Lgs (his one and my one). We haven't tried it yet (that will have to wait until I return to Australia in March - unless he gets impatient and orders himself a second CCM8Lg), but we are both holding high hopes for it. In fact, after hearing my Schoeps rig, Mr G went crazy and bought a pair of CCM4Lgs and a CCM8Lg so he can do MS, ORTF and XY. (He also bought the Schoeps MS and ORTF mounts for the CCM series, and both work nicely.)

Like you, Mr Spearritt, we have always been fans of the Royer SF24 for strings. But since using the Schoeps in MS on string quartet, we're thinking a Schoeps Blumlein pair ought to be the bees knees, given a good concert hall.

ghellquist wrote:
Intended usage, the obvious: choirs, chamber music, orchestras.

Gunnar

For what it's worth...

I do a few live concert recordings per year that involve orchestra and choir. I do most of these recordings in partnership with my good friend Mr G, and we pool our resources. Often we have very little time to set up, so we tend to go for ORTF. Our starting point these days is a pair of DPA 4023s in ORTF over the choir, and a pair of Schoeps CCM4Lgs in ORTF over the orchestra. Nice tall and lightweight Manfrotto stands and stereo cables allow us to set up very quickly, so there's more time for positioning of microphones.

All of those mics are so small and light and visually unobtrusive, the conductors love them. And both DPA and Schoeps make ORTF mounting kits that take all the fiddly calibration out of the equation while also allowing rapid adjustment without upsetting the configuration.

If time permits, we'll put up some spots, typically some DPA omnis or wide cardioids for vocal soloists, another Schoeps on the harp, and so on. We prefer the sound of the Schoeps on strings, but prefer the DPAs for the choir and solo voices.

Our collective opinion is that the Schoeps sound a bit warmer and fuller, making them well-suited to strings, while the DPAs sound a bit brighter, making them good for vocal articulation. Either can do a fine job of either, by the way...

In praise of the Schoeps CCM8Lg: in one of the concerts described above we had a vocal soloist who was required to sing while standing above the orchestra, immediately next to the rukpositiv of the organ, which was playing during her singing part. I used a CCM8Lg to mic up her voice, mounting it on the end of a mic stand hanging over the balcony to place it at her waist height and about 1.5m from her mouth. We rotated the null of the mic to point at the nearest organ pipes, and were quite tickled at how well it rejected the organ - certainly enough for a spot microphone...

rcastiglione wrote: ...the following is a plan at least for what I want to do ( thanks to Steve Hilmy from another forum and following his well thought out plan):

MK8
MK21 x2
MK5
2 CCM5 amplifiers (dont need 12v )

There are many possibilities with these: M/S with MK21 for classic coincident X - Y and using the excellent characteristics of the MK21; ORTF with MK21: A-B with MK21: M/S with either cardiod or omni as centre.

Rob

Looks like a well-considered plan!

However, I'm not sure that doing ORTF with wide cardioids is a good idea. By "not sure", I mean exactly that - I honestly don't know! My only experience using wide cardioids in ORTF was with DPA's 4015s; they have a presence boost on axis (about +3dB at 12k, IIRC), and when angled 110 degrees apart you notice a 'hole in the middle' on the HFs only because the axis of the presence boost is quite narrow.

(If you've got and read Stereophonic Zoom, you can make a crocodile and then set up your own special version of near-coincident to suit your MK21s, customising it to suit each particular recording job. That'd be cool - remember, ORTF is just one configuration of a near-coincident technique...)

Also, using a wide cardioid like the MK21 in MS will decode to classic coincident XY (cardioids at 90 degrees) but I'm not sure that's what you really want. Most people here tend to agree that cardioids at 90 degrees is a boring kind of stereo... Also, considering that it was my MS recordings that got you thinking about Schoeps, perhaps it is wise to get the same gear: a Schoeps bidirectional and a Schoeps cardioid. When decoded from MS, it results in coincident hypercardioids (or similar, very close) at about 120 degrees IIRC. THAT'S the MS you've been impressed by, so I reckon THAT'S the MS you ought to be chasing. Replace the MK21s on your list with MK4s and you'll have it and more...

Waddya reckon?

"Also, using a wide cardioid like the MK21 in MS will decode to classic coincident XY (cardioids at 90 degrees) but I'm not sure that's what you really want. Most people here tend to agree that cardioids at 90 degrees is a boring kind of stereo"

Ok, I've revised my plan.

I'll get the MK5 first and try it out as the mid. I HAVE wondered whether the wide cardiod I have been using as a centre has indeed been a bit dull.

One story that sort of confirmed my feelings about the Sennheisers vs Schoeps (I agree that I too hate dissing such a great brand as Sennheisers so will stop after this): I recorded a choir recently using MKH40/30 and decided to add a Schoeps MK41 as a bit of spot on some instruments in the middle. I played the MKH pair first without any Schoeps and there were just polite smiles. Then I brought in some of the Schoeps and suddenly there was life, energy and detail to the music. THAT was the sound they wanted.

We've all gone Schoeps mad.

Rob

rcastiglione wrote: I'll get the MK5 first and try it out as the mid. I HAVE wondered whether the wide cardiod I have been using as a centre has indeed been a bit dull.

I don't think all wide cardioids are dull, it was only the DPA 4015s. They weren't dull, it was just that they were a few dB brighter directly on axis. The rest of the response is fine. In fact, that on-axis peak makes them great for miking from a distance (for ambience) while still retaining articulation. I love using them as spot mics on vocal soloists in choir/orhestral recordings for this very reason. The sound blends nicely with the main pair, and it can be placed a bit further away to give a more natural sound on the voice without losing any articulation. An interesting microphone, actually. (Oh oh, I've got that feeling of deja vu, have I written this before?) (Have I written THAT before?) (er...)

Regarding the MK5:

I was initially going to choose the MK5 because it offers two patterns, mechanically switchable, and that seemed like a great idea, especially for MS - I could quickly change responses without pulling the rig apart and changing microphones. There are times when I wish I had a 360 degree pickup in stereo (which the omni M capsule provides). It would've been very handy when making dawn and dusk recordings in the jungle, for example, where I don't want to focus on a particular diretion.

However, the Australian importer for Schoeps advised me against it, saying the mechanical switching caused some problems in the field. Apparently the slider over the rear ports (which is used to change the pattern) can fill with dust and become difficult to close and/or open, so you cannot get the true cardioid and omni responses. I am glad of this advice because it would be a real problem for me, you ought to see the fine dust that gets into EVERYTHING after a week of trekking in the incredibly dry Himalayan winter. I remember hand-washing my fleece jacket after a couple of weeks of trekking, and you could've held a mud-wrestling bout in the bucket! No doubt it would've got into those ports given half a chance, although the Rycote seems to do a good job of blocking most of it.

Aussie location sound guy extraordinaire, Michael Gissing, has been using a pair of MK5s in ORTF for years. I asked him about this problem, thinking he'd be able to set me straight. But he's never really needed to switch them to omni, so he doesn't know... Nonetheless, I am wondering if the dust isn't getting into his ports and altering his cardioid response. Then again, he has his ORTF rig in modified Rycote (he uses it sideways).

Perhaps this is totally irrelevant if your use is concerts and other indoor applications. But if you're intending to work outdoors, it might be something to consider.

So, in conclusion, I have no conclusion, just wanted to present a few things to consider re: MK5. Just wanted to present a few things to consider re: MK5. Did I write this before? Did I write THAT before? (But with parenthesis?) Er... Deja vu, again? Again?

rcastiglione wrote:
We've all gone Schoeps mad.
Rob

Or perhaps that should say "We've all gone Schoeps sensible"...