Topic: NOS vs. DIN

[voltronic]

I had great success with the schoeps mk22 NOS this year for phish at msg:

Here's 1/2:

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=584225

Not surprising, since the MK 22 is an open/sub-cardiod pattern and you're getting a SRA only a couple of degrees off from DIN with cardiods.  NOS is considered the "default" spacing for the CM3 also (same general pattern as the MK 22).  Of course, it's not truly NOS anymore since by definition you should be using cardioids, but I say "NOS" since everyone knows what that angle/spacing is.

Here's a folder of CM3 samples.  All were NOS spacing, but a variety of perspectives ranging from football stands (MB), balcony (Beethoven), taper/AUD (Trumpet Quartet), and on-stage (all the others).
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fgauh6pswkgpx67/AABZiWgBRjCMXWS55Vk1eV5Wa?dl=0

I have no actual cardioids at the moment to try a "real" NOS pattern width.  The next time I use the CM3s alone in a good acoustic, I may try a "wide ORTF" sort of pattern (again, what you're pointing away from) to maybe get a bit better imaging / separation.

[mfrench]

I ran 15"@50->60º quite often in acoustic chamber and orchestral music, and really liked the sound.  Anything less than 50º combined-axis create a bit too much cross-talk between the mics (sub-cards, most typically).

[goodcooker]

I ran NOS with Neumann KM143 subcards and it was excellent indoors and out.

[Gil]

NOS is horrible, especially with cards not on-stage. Complete waste of time imo.

I use it (or a variation) in just about every scenario, often with terrific results.