Ok, so do you think the DPA 4098 hypers are on par with the Gefell m21/Milab VM-44 link/Schoeps mk41? I haven't heard them, but they are small, more affordable, and sounds like you think pair nicely with the dpa 406x's I want to get for outdoor recording (currently using SP C4' omni's split 3'). I ultimately want a good, affordable active or mini hypercard to pair with my AKG 461 and what ever omni I choose to use.
No I don't. I hesitate to recommend DPA 4098 for most tapers, even though for me they have provided an optimal solution. Let me explain that a bit-
Used on their own as a stereo pair, my Gefell M21s (and M94 cards) produce raw recordings which sound significantly better to me than the DPA 4098. The low frequency pattern-inherent rolloff of the 4098 is greater (less bass), they seem slightly less smooth through the mids and highs, and the Geffs seem to portray a greater sense of depth and detail. The Geffs just have a sort of high-end mic magic ju ju to them. Also, the form factor of the 4098 is odd and quite unlike typical mics, which is also true of the DPA 406x, but even more so with the 4098 due to it's integral goose-neck and miniature interference tube. Now I've found I can EQ a 4098 pair recording to be much closer to a M21 pair recording, compensating for the low frequency rolloff and greater brightness of the 4098 to a great degree, and doing so levels the playing considerably if not quite gaining the same smoothness, depth, and magic ju ju qualities (remember, M21 is my favorite "reference" super/hyper), but I recognize that most tapers don't want to have to EQ their recordings.
When used not as a typical stereo pair but rather as part of my 6-channel surround/stereo rig, those differences become minimal and sufficiently inconsequential such that I've been very pleased to switch out the M21s and M94s and move to using the 4098s based on size, minimal weight aloft, low-voltage powering of all mics in the rig, far greater resistance to moisture/weather concerns, and cost. In this rig the microphone arrangement with a combination of 4 supercards pointing forward, back, and to either side, effectively covers for the less perfect polar pattern control, and the low end roll-off of the 4098 may actually be a desirable feature, allowing the wide-spaced 4061 omni pair to take over the low-frequency stuff cleanly.
[Edit- would a near-spaced or coincident pair of 4098 in combination with a wide-spaced pair of 406x omnis work equally well? The honest answer is I don't know as I don't use them that way. I suspect it could work quite nicely. But I would recommend using them along with omnis in any case.]
So it's not that I don't love the 4098. I do, as it has been perfect for my application. It's just that it's 1) not a typical mic and 2) not in the same quality category as Gefell M21 and Schoeps MK41. I'm not as intimately familiar with the VM-44 supercards so I can't credibly compare the 4098 with them.