Hi! I have tried sennheisers new mic MKH 8020 now in afternoon, and this is what we recorded. Next week I shall try DPA:s 4003 and 4006TL side by side on my tripodstand and make a interesting A-B test. Something about the Sennheiser mic, i think its a weery good mic It will become interesting to compare Sennheiser MKH 8020 against DAP:s 4003 and 4006TL -->LINK<--
Thanks ... this I am really looking forward to. A side-by-side-by-side comparison of 8020/4003/4006TL. It would be great if you could throw in Schoeps CMC6-MK2S too!
It will be an interesting comparison. If the 8020 is anything like the MKH800, the sound of it versus the DPAs will be completely different - night and day. I'm curious though. I too would like to hear it compared to the MK2s
In what sense? They are entirely different (as I'm sure you are aware of), true pressure transducer vs. dual diaphragm SDC... And I'd also like to hear some more details about these recordings. They seem to have been made at a good distance from the organ. I wonder why Seenheiser appear to have dropped the free/diffuse field switch of the MKH20. Daniel
The capsules really haven't been the issue - it's been the equalization circuitry on board. I've found the MKH800s and the MKH20/40 to be too unrealistic in the mid range providing a sort of euphoric sense to everything. They haven't been my taste in mics since the beginning.
A number of people claim MKHs do something strange to esp. lower mids... I believe the 80x0s are actually designed for a touch of "wamth" there.
Designed as in the same EQ circuitry or just happens to be that way? I prefer the sound of the MKH800 over the MKH20/40, but it's not enough of a preference to warrant $2000 extra each.
Can't find the quote I had in mind, but the frequency response graph does reflect that up to a point.. The inherent EQing is due to the MKH technology as such, but I don't claim to understand that in great depth... :roll:
I have done little changes, made new mp3 in higher resolution, is there any changes in the sound, what do you think ? I do not have access to Schoeps CMC6-MK2S, so i can't make any a-b test between DPA and Schoeps The recording was made with Fireface 800 and Apogee MP on MKH 8020 and my "little" laptop Dell XPS M2010 with Win-vista ultimate :shock:
"The capsules really haven't been the issue - it's been the equalization circuitry on board. I've found the MKH800s and the MKH20/40 to be too unrealistic in the mid range providing a sort of euphoric sense to everything. They haven't been my taste in mics since the beginning." Cucco, yes, I've heard others refer to Senn. sounding like this. Sounds processed already. Good if that's what you want. Not good if ya don't.
New soundfiles is coming out tomorrow, its a new recording with DPA 4003 and MKH 8020. It's a tremendous difference from my last recording, please forget my last recording. This recording is maybe to close to the organ, i did not had the energy to move my tripod in the middle of the night. Hmm, something seems to be broken in my Fireface 800? It's lose all communication with my computer when i touch the volume knob
Now i upload samples from the last recording and it's not any a-b test, my second micpreamp was broken I had to change mic cables to the preamp when we compared the microphones. So it's only a comparisons between DPA vs Sennheiser.
I did a piano mic shootout last week between two sennheiser 8040 and two schoeps cardioid. The sennheisers were much truer to the source than the schoeps. I think the new 8000series is better than the mkh40 and brothers. Tamas Dragon
I recently made a comparison of recording a classical guitarist in a small sound absorbant room, comparing a Royer sf24 with two Senn800 placed further away set to cardioid, and also comparing the sound of the mics added together. The Royer sounded near perfect and warm on it's own, while the Sennheisers sounded impressive initially but on carefull listening they were less accurate than the Royer on small details, and with an emphasis in higher frequencies which gets tiring, and they did not seem to improve the Royer by blending them with it. On another recent recording of classical piano and guitar, recorded with Senn800's and an AKG426, the mics combined together sounded better than either on it's own, as the two different mic characters complimented one another creating a full and accurate sound.
New files are out on my server, this is from a recording i have done to day. Now it's DPA 4006TL on review, what do you think about this mic vs 4003. I was surprised how good these mic sounds.
How do you feel the mics have represented the instrument coupled with the room? I like this recent batch of recordings but find the low end to hang a little and the top trumpet pipes to be a bit forward. Is this how it sounds in the room? Don't get me wrong, I'd still pay for the recordings - they're still quality. I literally just mean to ask how you feel this set of recordings represents the instrument. If perfectly, then I'd say you've found a match made in heaven. If otherwise...well, it's still not a bad set. ;-)
My personal thought, i have never use microphones on this level, that can capture a church organ like this. It does not sound exactly like this in the church, it's a short cathedral, but it is very high to ceilings. When I buy these microphones or 4003, I shall put more time to place out microphones and be more careful with my headphones, they can really swindled my ears. And thanx for your time and that you take time to listen on my recordings. I have upload some more files, enjoy this fantastic musician
Absolutely. And please don't think I was criticizing the recording itself. I think it sounds fantastic. I'll agree regarding headphones and pipe organ. I've found that while recording pipe organ, a full range monitor system is crucial to getting the microphones set up correctly. Earphones lie way too much.
