Topic: would dpa ever make mini-cardioids..?

[zhianosatch]

can i call my own zing?

[Tim]

can i call my own zing?

I think you just did. Must be okay....

[zhianosatch]

fuckin a

[BC]

I think if you really want super-stealthy cardioids (instead of omnis) for typical taping situations, I think the mini-cardioids from Audio-technica, AKG, Countryman, etc... would probably give better results than these DPA mini cardioids. No personal experience with these other mics, but that response curve for the DPA's looks WAY too bright for our purposes. -6dB @ 600 Hz,   -8dB @ 200Hz  is just not acceptable for taping a concert. I think it is pretty clear from looking at the response curve that these mics are intended specifically for human voice pickup, not recording the wide range of frequencies present in music. Even taking the "far field" response with a grain of salt, if we guess the actual roll off to be just half of this, -4dB rolloff at 200 Hz is still a heck of a lot of rolloff! Of course, just MHO.

Take care,
Ben


PS: The answer to the mini-cardioid problem? DPA 402x!!!     

[Todd R]

not sure about the low end response but as far as a high frequency boost for vocals that could actually be useful for taping as higher frequencies dissipate at a greater rate than low frequencies. Doug Oade incorporated a switchable high frequency boost into the the m248 for just this reason. The Schoeps V caps and mk5 also incorporate a high frequency boost. I can't speak for these mics specifically but I don't think you should write them off just because of a high frequency boost.

Ok, bit of a thread hijack here:  I always hear about this issue of high frequency dissipation and how it relates to taping, and I'm just not sure I get it.  The way it is discussed seems more useful in regards to taping unampified instruments at a distance, not taping PA stacks.  Afterall, the soundman does not mix the sound for how it comes out of the PA stack (meaning how it sound 1 meter off the stacks).  The sound guy will presumably mix it to sound right where he's listening at the FOH console.  So if you are taping at the soundboard or in the taper section right behind it, the high end should be just about right.  I would only think you'd need that high frequency boost if you were taping significantly behind the soundboard. 

But nobody talks about FOB in relation to this high frequency dissipation.  If the sound guy is mixing so it sounds good at FOH, with the greater high frequency decay, that means the sound coming off the PA stacks is really too bright for what you want, and consequently that there will be too much high frequency emphasis FOB (so that it will have the right balance back by the soundman).  So there would already be too much high frequency emphasis FOB, even without mics that emphasize the high end -- it'd get that much worse FOB if you used the schoeps V caps or other mics with a high end emphasis (eg, neumann SD mics).

Does this sound about right, or am I barking up the wrong tree?

[Tim]

I'm going to have to think about this one... Todd if you check that Yamaha book I gace you there should be some info about dissipation of high and low frequencies.

[BC]

not sure about the low end response but as far as a high frequency boost for vocals that could actually be useful for taping as higher frequencies dissipate at a greater rate than low frequencies. Doug Oade incorporated a switchable high frequency boost into the the m248 for just this reason. The Schoeps V caps and mk5 also incorporate a high frequency boost. I can't speak for these mics specifically but I don't think you should write them off just because of a high frequency boost.

Ok, bit of a thread hijack here:  I always hear about this issue of high frequency dissipation and how it relates to taping, and I'm just not sure I get it.  The way it is discussed seems more useful in regards to taping unampified instruments at a distance, not taping PA stacks.  Afterall, the soundman does not mix the sound for how it comes out of the PA stack (meaning how it sound 1 meter off the stacks).  The sound guy will presumably mix it to sound right where he's listening at the FOH console.  So if you are taping at the soundboard or in the taper section right behind it, the high end should be just about right.  I would only think you'd need that high frequency boost if you were taping significantly behind the soundboard. 

But nobody talks about FOB in relation to this high frequency dissipation.  If the sound guy is mixing so it sounds good at FOH, with the greater high frequency decay, that means the sound coming off the PA stacks is really too bright for what you want, and consequently that there will be too much high frequency emphasis FOB (so that it will have the right balance back by the soundman).  So there would already be too much high frequency emphasis FOB, even without mics that emphasize the high end -- it'd get that much worse FOB if you used the schoeps V caps or other mics with a high end emphasis (eg, neumann SD mics).

Does this sound about right, or am I barking up the wrong tree?

This sounds reasonable to me. One thing to consider is that for a conventional PA system, when up FOB you are off axis to the stacks, perhaps as far as 60° (if you are in the equilateral triangle spot). In this spot the HF output of the stacks should be considerably reduced as compared to the on-axis output. So this probably helps in not hearing too much high end when up close.

[Todd R]

This sounds reasonable to me. One thing to consider is that for a conventional PA system, when up FOB you are off axis to the stacks, perhaps as far as 60° (if you are in the equilateral triangle spot). In this spot the HF output of the stacks should be considerably reduced as compared to the on-axis output. So this probably helps in not hearing too much high end when up close.

Good point Ben, I think you'd be right about the off axis response of the PA.  That effect might counter-balance the effect I'm talking about, so maybe the sound should be fairly well balanced both fob and back towards the soundboard.  It does still seem to say though that the need for a high frequency bump would only be important if you were taping behind the soundboard a bit.

[F.O.Bean]

i haVE 210>v3 tapes from mid-x and i believe D and I were too FOB, the high freq sux on those tapes and they just dont sound right, hence the equilateral triangle thing

i believe the equilateral triangle is a good suggestion when taping, too far front, sound like crap, too far back, too much chatter/bs