Topic: Old taper getting back in the game... hopefully

[MakersMarc]

sell the muddy schweps and get some dpa fire!   

LOL.  Funny how we hear those brands exactly and completely opposite but that's how ears are...

You think DPAs are muddy?  First time I have heard anyone say that; usually, it is the opposite ("clinical" seems to be a favorite adjective)...

I suppose we shouldn't derail this thread, but yes, I've always felt (having owned both) that DPAs were really, really flat and Schoeps are more "musical" (even though a frequency response chart would say both these mics are extremely flat). In my experience, when a room and the sound in it are flawless, you're possibly a slight amount better off with DPAs. For what most of us are doing (recording PA systems and otherwise not-perfect mixes of things) Schoeps tend to sound a little better, to me. But I have recordings with both that I think are basically perfect. If I were just throwing money around, I'd probably get some DPAs again.... Hmm....

I got yer transparent Dutch mikes.......

[gewwang]

^ agree. Keep that sax or sell it to me. Buy and M10. Dump the ADC etc.

If you want things simpler but still HQ, you could get a used Sound Devices 702 or 722 for not much more than you can get for that used Sax.

Get a KCY PFA from Naiant (music@naiant.com) for stealth.

I have a sonosax, m10, and 722 (and many other recorders I never bothered selling). But IMO, the easiest to deal with is running the 722 especially when running lo-pro. 1 less box to deal with, 1 less pair of cables to worry about. And whether it's fair or not, I feel alot more secure taping to the 722 than the m10. I also have alot more confidence checking levels in a dark arena or theater with the colorful 722 lights than the 2-color m10 display.

[bombdiggity]

You think DPAs are muddy?  First time I have heard anyone say that; usually, it is the opposite ("clinical" seems to be a favorite adjective)...

I do, though that may be from hearing the results of a lot of people using omni versions of them in rooms or places in rooms they're really ill suited for.  I don't like the signature 406x sound at all... though that may be that they're just not the right choice for how most people use them, though I know a few people who know what they're doing like them. 

[aaronji]

^ That must be what it is, because they really aren't muddy (at all, in my opinion) compared to the comparable Schoeps mic.

To be very honest, I think the differences are pretty small. I very much like the DPA "house sound", but I think I would be very happy with Schoeps too...

[bombdiggity]

To continue the threadjack... 

^ That must be what it is, because they really aren't muddy (at all, in my opinion) compared to the comparable Schoeps mic.

To be very honest, I think the differences are pretty small. I very much like the DPA "house sound", but I think I would be very happy with Schoeps too...

There's a major helping of personal preference in it... 

As I said I don't like the 406x (seemingly the default for DPA audience tapers) in a standard audience setting.  I'd much prefer an MK4.  They are however very different mics and different patterns.  There's likely a reason Schoeps audience tapers essentially don't (to my knowledge) use MK2's though    (or extremely rarely might).  I might prefer a 406x to an MK2 in the same spot out in the hall as I suspect that difference may not be small.  I don't want to hear the house as much as the music (though that admittedly overstates the case).  But yeah to clarify I think the 406x (DPA's most widely used flavor in taping circles) sound muddier than I'd want where they're most widely used. 

[gewwang]

406x (seemingly the default for DPA audience tapers) in a standard audience setting.

406x (DPA's most widely used flavor in taping circles)

I'm not sure I'd agree with either of these statements. 406x is mostly just used by stealth tapers that (I guess) prefer using omnis to cards.

Most tapers I know that use DPAs for open taping use the 402x cards and/or subcards and rarely use omnis.

[aaronji]

^^ As gewwang said, 4060s aren't really the appropriate standard of comparison. I would compare 4006 to MK2, 4011 to MK4, etc.

For what it's worth, omnis can make great audience recordings in the right circumstances.  Perhaps also worth mentioning that the proximity effect in directional mics condition their users to expect less bass, so that even when they hear an omni recording from ideal circumstances, it sounds more bassy or muddy to them.  Similarly, people that are used to omnis often think card recordings sound thin...

[Jeff F]

Thanks for the threadjack guys,

I'm hoping sometime this weekend or so I'll figure out where the problem lies in my set-up. For me, I enjoy most of the set-ups and don't really say one is better over the other. Since I run Schoeps, I tend to gravitate to those recordings more but I don't shove off DPA or others. I can see your point of the lights for the 722. I ran stealth with the JB3 and those levels really sucked since they weren't very accurate and hard to read. I figure that m10 will be steps ahead of what I used to have. I'm hoping I can figure out and fix the issues as my itch to record is coming back.

[justink]

M10 with a 32gb card and you're set!

That's all you need. Maybe some good rechargeable AA's.