Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: scb on September 16, 2013, 07:40:47 PM
-
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/News/Archive/Press%20Releases/DPA-Diversifies-Its-Highly-Directional-Microphone-Palette.aspx
-
Pretty cool. First ive heard of the mmp-er and mmp-es active cables.
So a 4011 capsule and a mmp-es is like a 4021 and the mmp-er is like a 4022
-
http://dpamics.smugmug.com/Photos/dpareferencestandard/23776784_D6Vkqx/2621830900_4LqncGJ#!i=2621831139&k=NpcmQ42&lb=1&s=M
-
Yeah, I saw the remote cabling earlier. The 4018 (non-V) version is a pleasant surprise though. No graphs/specs on either edition posted yet.
-
This is huge for DPA. The lack of a hyper option was close to the only reason I sold mine.
-
Nice! Hopefully they will consider a fig8 as well
-
Nice! Hopefully they will consider a fig8 as well
I sent them an email about it a year or so ago and they said it was on the drawing board, but behind other projects which they wouldn't talk about. The remote cables and this can be construed as those projects.
But that's a good reminder, I should poke them and see if they will consider it again.
-
I might have to try these hypers out 8)
-
Looks to me like a hybrid short gun, like the 4017, only made for the vocal mic preamp body, like podium and boom mounts.
-
huh?
-
Looks to me like a hybrid short gun, like the 4017, only made for the vocal mic preamp body, like podium and boom mounts.
That IS a 4017. The press release (http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/News/Archive/Press%20Releases/DPA-Diversifies-Its-Highly-Directional-Microphone-Palette.aspx) is somewhat confusing since the first photo near the top shows the 4017 and the photo of the 4018 is farther down.
This is the 4018-
[edit- removed the image link plucked from the press release since the image was massive. It looks just like a MMC4011 with with MMC4018 printed on it.]
-
As I read it, there is a 4018 and 4018V. Like the schoeps mk4 and mk40.
Without graphs, I can't confirm either way.
-
Slightly different press release with photo of the d:dicate modular line- http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/news/archive/press%20releases/dpa-microphones-introduces-the-new-d-dicate-recording-microphone-range.aspx. (http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/news/archive/press%20releases/dpa-microphones-introduces-the-new-d-dicate-recording-microphone-range.aspx.) There is a 4018 page on the DPA site but no data or images there yet.
The 'V' variant is the d:facto vocal mic version. Presumably the identical capsule with a different windscreen housing and connnector. The vocal cap housing & windbasket might change response slightly compared to the d:dicate version. A Google search for DPA 4018 turned up DPA FA4018VSL1B d:facto™ II Vocal Microphone at vendors..
B&H-
(http://static.bhphoto.com/images/images200x200/965707.jpg)
The Pro-Sound site hosts the capsule image, specs and graphs below-
(http://www.pro-sound.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/SDPAFA4018VSL1B.jpg)
Note: All specifications measured with the DPA d:facto II Adapter
Directional pattern: Supercardioid
Frequency range, ± 2 dB, at 12 cm (4.7 in): 100 Hz - 16 kHz with 3 dB soft boost at 12 kHz. Permanent 3rd order low-cut filter (-3 dB at 80 Hz).
Sensitivity, nominal, ± 2 dB at 1 kHz: 5 mV/Pa; -46 dB re. 1 V/Pa
Equivalent noise level, A-weighted: Typ. 19 dB(A) re. 20 μPa (max. 21 dB(A))
S/N ratio (A-weighted), re. 1 kHz at 1 Pa (94 dB SPL): Typ. 75 dB(A)
Dynamic range: Typ. 120 dB Max. SPL, peak before clipping: 160 dB
Power supply (for full specifications): 48 V Phantom power (± 4 V)
(http://www.dpamicrophones.com/~/media/Tradelink/Varebilleder/FA4018VSL1B/Diagrams/dfacto-freq.png?mw=333)
(http://www.dpamicrophones.com/~/media/Tradelink/Varebilleder/FA4018VSL1B/Diagrams/dfacto-polar-pattern.jpg?mw=333)
-
OOoo. That is an attractive hyper pattern though...
I knew of the vocal variant and housing, but didn't know they had posted diagrams of it yet.
-
So the MMP-E active cable is designed for use with the MMP-C pre and the all the MMC caps? Even the 2011's? I've been on the fence about the ST2011C set since January. These active cables and hyper caps make it more attractive. Although the 4018's will probably be around $1300 per cap. Maybe a 2018 twin D hyper? :P
-
So the MMP-E active cable is designed for use with the MMP-C pre and the all the MMC caps? Even the 2011's? I've been on the fence about the ST2011C set since January. These active cables and hyper caps make it more attractive. Although the 4018's will probably be around $1300 per cap. Maybe a 2018 twin D hyper? :P
the MMP-E *is* a preamp. You don't meed the MMP-C preamp because the MMP-E is already a preamp.
-
So the MMP-E active cable is designed for use with the MMP-C pre and the all the MMC caps? Even the 2011's? I've been on the fence about the ST2011C set since January. These active cables and hyper caps make it more attractive. Although the 4018's will probably be around $1300 per cap. Maybe a 2018 twin D hyper? :P
the MMP-E *is* a preamp. You don't meed the MMP-C preamp because the MMP-E is already a preamp.
So a pair of MMC 40xx caps and MMP-ER cables will probably reach the cost of the 402x series, but at least give the user the ability to switch caps. Any hints on the cost of the cable?
-
So a pair of MMC 40xx caps and MMP-ER cables will probably reach the cost of the 402x series, but at least give the user the ability to switch caps. Any hints on the cost of the cable?
I've only seen one place, a Swiss audio company, that has prices listed so far (http://www.gotham.ch/de/index.php?page=2092 (http://www.gotham.ch/de/index.php?page=2092)). Assuming those are close to accurate, and the franc/dollar ratios are the same as with other DPA stuff they sell, it looks like these may come in around $400 or $415 each. Which would make them similar, or maybe even a bit cheaper (~ $100 or $125 less), than the 402x.
-
So a pair of MMC 40xx caps and MMP-ER cables will probably reach the cost of the 402x series, but at least give the user the ability to switch caps. Any hints on the cost of the cable?
I've only seen one place, a Swiss audio company, that has prices listed so far (http://www.gotham.ch/de/index.php?page=2092 (http://www.gotham.ch/de/index.php?page=2092)). Assuming those are close to accurate, and the franc/dollar ratios are the same as with other DPA stuff they sell, it looks like these may come in around $400 or $415 each. Which would make them similar, or maybe even a bit cheaper (~ $100 or $125 less), than the 402x.
Oh well. I refuse to spend more than 1500 on mics for this hobby. Looks like I'll have to revisit the 2011c option.
-
Looks like I'll have to revisit the 2011c option.
I don't think the 2011c setup would be bad at all.
-
I'd like to hear this new mic. I dig negative polarity rear lobes.. assuming the off-axis pattern and response is smooth so it doesn't sound oddly nasil or pinched, and I don't expect a DPA 4018 would.
-
Oh well. I refuse to spend more than 1500 on mics for this hobby. Looks like I'll have to revisit the 2011c option.
The first set of mics I ran where well over the $1500 mark and my first owned set was over 2x this mark - this was over ten years ago though
I guess it's more than a hobby to me :)
$1600 - 1700 for these mics is a great deal - DPA is really stepping up to the plate
I wish Schoeps would come out with a similar Extension Preamp design as the MMP-E
-
Oh well. I refuse to spend more than 1500 on mics for this hobby. Looks like I'll have to revisit the 2011c option.
The first set of mics I ran where well over the $1500 mark and my first owned set was over 2x this mark - this was over ten years ago though
I guess it's more than a hobby to me :)
$1600 - 1700 for these mics is a great deal - DPA is really stepping up to the plate
I wish Schoeps would come out with a similar Extension Preamp design as the MMP-E
Agree, but just don't know much about the short interference tube dual card cap deal. Only found one recording with 20ll's.
-
Small update from DPA: retail price for the active cables is $410 each. Still no word on the 4018 caps...
Looks like I'll have to revisit the 2011c option.
I don't think the 2011c setup would be bad at all.
I have a pair of the 2006c and I am very happy with them. That doesn't say much about the 2011, of course, but I would be willing to give them a try on the basis of my 2006 experience.
-
Small update from DPA: retail price for the active cables is $410 each. Still no word on the 4018 caps...
I'd expect a pair of 4018 caps to be in the (usd) price range of $2500.
-
I might have to break my no-hypers rule for these
-
Modify that into a no off sounding hyper rule.
That way it will still apply, with this new prospective member hopefully amongst a small handful of exceptions.
-
i always said "if I need hypers, I'm too far away"
but I want to try these
-
if I need hypers, I'm too far away
That remains true.
I use hypers up close mostly for two reasons (other than an occasional spot): modified Blumlien, where it adds enough forward bias that it works far more often than crossed 8's do; and L/C/R three main mic setups where I need the additional side rejection of the pattern to have all three mics angled at reasonable forward angles, otherwise the outside pair would need to be pointing fully sideways or even backwards. For both of those things my Gefells and ADK TLs in hyper work great and sound very good.
I don't use them because I'm far away, that's just a crutch supporting broken location for me. Might help limp home but the broken leg is still there. :P
But that's just my MO, I don't mean to offend bar tapers who use them to reject the yap!
-
I use hypers mainly because they sound good. Doesn't matter how far or close I am to the sound source ;)
-
scb wrote:
> I might have to break my no-hypers rule for these
A rule like that would rarely need be broken, because very few actual hypercardioid microphones exist. Most microphones that are said to have a hypercardioid pattern are closer to being supercardioids. That's true of Neumann, AKG, Beyer and others, while Schoeps and Sennheiser call theirs supercardioids (although their actual directional patterns are hardly any different from those of Neumann or AKG).
The polar diagram of a true hypercardioid would look much like that of a figure-8, but with a somewhat shrunken rear lobe; its sensitivity at 180° is only 6 dB less than its sensitivity at 0°. (For a true supercardioid that difference is around 11.7 dB.)
--Just one note about the polar diagrams that were posted earlier in this thread, which as someone pointed out, are NOT those of the model that this thread is mainly about: Any variation in the pattern at different frequencies means that for different angles of sound incidence (arrival), the microphone will have different frequency response, i.e. sound arriving at different angles won't sound the same. That's no problem in typical studio applications--but it's a severe disadvantage for stereo recording with coincident or closely-spaced pairs of microphones.
--best regards
-
scb wrote:
> I might have to break my no-hypers rule for these
No, I don't think you would, since the polar diagram posted earlier in this thread doesn't indicate anything close to a hypercardioid pattern. Rather, the pattern appears to be somewhere between cardioid and supercardioid, depending on the frequency.
DPA hasn't posted a diagram for the new 4018 yet. I think the diagram posted was for their 4018v vocal mic. So maybe the 4018 pattern will be different
But thanks for the explanation anyway :)
-
done
-
I just heard that the 4018 caps are now available on a limited basis (guessing for top customers). Prices and specs should be out very soon!
-
About to go to dpa booth at AES. Will be looking for 4018 info
-
^^^ Cool! Are you going to check out the strain relief on the active cables too?
-
they didn't have the actives there or the hypers
-
^^^ That's too bad. Any other interesting things coming from them?
-
they mentioned possibly a 3rd kind of active cable. Since the 2 announced are side and rear cable, I have to wonder if there will be a lemo one....
-
pricing for the 4018 seems to be the same as the 4011
-
(http://www.dpamicrophones.com/~/media/Tradelink/Varebilleder/4018A/Diagrams/4018A-Frequency.png)
(http://www.dpamicrophones.com/~/media/Tradelink/Varebilleder/4018A/Diagrams/4018A--polar-plot.png)
-
If what's just above this message is DPA's set of polar diagrams for the new microphone, then scb, you wouldn't need to break your "no hypers" pledge for this microphone, because the curves show something that's between a cardioid and a supercardioid (depending on frequency).
- DPA generally publishes frequency response curves "corrected" for a 30 cm measurement distance, while most other major manufacturers use 1 meter. So if you compare DPA's graphs to those of other manufacturers, subtract several dB of low-frequency response from whatever DPA says,
(This doesn't apply to their omnidirectional microphones, of course, which are pressure transducers.)
--best regards
-
I guess I should change the thread title - DPA calls it a Supercardioid :)
and thanks again for the excellent information!
-
I've been told there may be a MMP-EL "lemo" style active cable in early 2014. Not sure on the name, but since MMP-ES is "side" and MMP-ER is "rear," I assume the lemo might be MMP-EL
-
Sweet! I always preferred the lemo connectors for the B+Ks/DPAs as well! Ive never personally run them, but ive recorded on the same stand as the 4023s many times, and the lemos seem like the way to go! Much easier to coil up the cables at the end of the night, and you can store your 4023 caps/bodies in a small padded case ;)
-
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/~/media/Tradelink/Varebilleder/4018A/Diagrams/4018A-Frequency.png
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/~/media/Tradelink/Varebilleder/4018A/Diagrams/4018A--polar-plot.png
Allsum. Just allsum.
-
Looks good!
-
resurrecting this thread, sorry
has anyone used the 4018V or VL vocal mic caps? these are more common and can be had for ~$800 ea
specs seem identical to the 4018 except for the fact they are are less sensitive (5mv/PA vs 12 for the regular 4018), and the steep rolloff below 100K (EDIT: testing confirms rolloff is when used with the vocal mic body that has a second-order rolloff built in. when used on regular mic bodies they appear to be similar to the usual 4018 capsules) . would these be unsuitable for our use when combined with the proximity effect?
does the cap have a drastically different response, or is the 100Hz rolloff a result o the vocal mic enclosure?
4018: https://www.dpamicrophones.com/ddicate/4018-supercardioid-microphone
4018V/VL: https://www.dpamicrophones.com/dfacto/vocal-microphone
-
The 4018 MMP ER is looking pretty sexy there. Would the MMP-C 4018 sound better/different?? MMP-C uses xlr cables opposed to being hardwired.
-
The 4018 MMP ER is looking pretty sexy there. Would the MMP-C 4018 sound better/different?? MMP-C uses xlr cables opposed to being hardwired.
from what i gather sound should be the same but headroom is reduced
somehting like
A body = 138 dB SN
C body= 136
E =131
G (microdot) = 122
122 is still pretty far above a mic capsule's S/N ratio, and WAY above the S/N of a room youd be field taping in. it *might* be a compromise for a studio application but not for ours
E should be nearly identical to the old 402x series
there may be some sonic differences from what i gather with the mini ones like E and G because i think they use different circuits ased around thin film FETs but thats out of my wheelhouse.
C should sound similar to A though some have described it as different ("warmer"?)
-
resurrecting this thread, sorry
has anyone used the 4018V or VL vocal mic caps? these atre more common and can be had for $700 ea
specs seem identical to the 4018 except for the fact they are are less sensitive (5mv/PA vs 12 for the regular 4018), and the steep rolloff below 100K. would these be unsuitable for our use when combined with the proximity effect?
does the cap have a drastically different response, or is the 100Hz rolloff a result o the vocal mic enclosure?
4018: https://www.dpamicrophones.com/ddicate/4018-supercardioid-microphone
4018V/VL: https://www.dpamicrophones.com/dfacto/vocal-microphone
There is no compensating low frequency boost due to proximity effect at the distances from which we are recording when taping. Proximity effect typically begins to occur once the microphone is moved to a position about one meter away from the source and becomes significant at distances about half that.
If mixing with omnis or subcards the low-frequency roll off ceases to be a problem for music recording, and could actually be considered a feature. If using the V or VL version as a single pair for music recording, the low-frequency roll off will be less desirable and will generally require EQ to compensate, unless it happens to be appropriate for reducing bloated bass from overdriven subs.
My interpretation-
~The low frequency roll off of both the V an VL version is presumably built into the capsule, but could be applied in the amplifier/handle, or may be combination of to two.
~Other than the low frequency roll-off, the VL version (L= Linear) has about the same response as the standard 4018, other differences in the response and polars at high frequencies at are probably due to the housing/mesh-screen surrounding the capsule and not from the capsule itself.
~The V version includes a high frequency shelf boost. It appears less peaky and lower in level than the boost of other vocal mics, and is similar to the response of as some other taper mics, including the miniature DPAs. That could serve as a feature rather than a bug, providing compensation for thick windscreens and high frequency attenuation at typical taper distances, although in general folks who are attracted to these mics typically are looking for a flat response.
What do the standard 4018 caps sell for, comparatively?
-
bare 4018 caps are $1300 list, can be haggled down near $1200. getiing into any new cap + any of the dpa preamps starts around $1500
ive seen those vocal mics on ebay for $700-$900 new/NOS. technically if you had phantom you could mount those right on a stand as is and go to town
while i have your ear, and pursuant to a conversation across several other threads now, would you say that larger diameter supercardshypercards (mk41, 4018, ak50, etc) have less of a problem with proximity effect than smaller diameter microphones (4098,4099, at853, etc).
-
while i have your ear, and pursuant to a conversation across several other threads now, would you say that larger diameter supercardshypercards (mk41, 4018, ak50, etc) have less of a problem with proximity effect than smaller diameter microphones (4098,4099, at853, etc).
As far as I'm aware, proximity effect correlates with how much bi-directional component there is in the pickup pattern, not diaphragm or housing size. The closer to figure-8 the pattern is, the more bass-boost will occur from proximity effect at close mic-ling distances. Perhaps DSatz may clarify for us, as he has far deeper knowledge on these things.
Of the supercards I have on hand, I don't detect more proximity effect in the DPA 4098 than the Gefell M210. I can't recall testing the proximity effect of the supercardioid pattern on the large diaphragm ADK TLs I have, but I expect they would fall in line similarly.
What is most influential is the intended use of the microphone, as the microphone's frequency response is tailored for achieving a particular response at a mic'ing distance typical of that intended use, taking proximity effect into account. If the microphone is intended for producing a flat low-frequency output when used for close instrument or vocal mic'ing (ignoring the common midrange contouring of vocal mics), the native response of the microphone will be tailored so as to attenuate the lower frequencies which are boosted by proximity effect when the microphone is placed close to the source, with the overall end result being a flat response. That same microphone will have attenuated low frequency content for the pickup of any sources located farther away.
By contrast, a microphone intended to have a flat response at greater mic'ing distances will have a native response with increased low frequency response, such that when used up close it will sound very bass-heavy, but when used at the intended distance it will produce the intended response, and when used farther away than that it will have reduced bass response, if not nearly as much as the previous microphone.
In other words, proximity effect is an aspect of directional microphone patterns and bass response for most directional mics will vary with mi'cing distance due to it. Most the variation occurs in close proximity to the microphone. In the significantly more distant range from which we are taping music it's not really varying dramatically anymore, and may either be compensated for via the native response of the microphone, via EQ boost afterwards, or via mixing in another source with increased low-frequency content such as a pair of omnis.
An interesting exception is EV's variable-D technology which reduces proximity effect variation at close-mic'ing distances. It strikes me as perhaps being a cousin to the principle behind interference tube microphones, yet with the multiple tuned path port lengths used on the rear vent entry side of the capsule rather than the front as in a shotgun mic.
EV variable-D https://youtu.be/0MDxZ2LDANA (https://youtu.be/0MDxZ2LDANA)
-
The "correct" answer is to use a microphone intended for the application. DSatz has stated many times on TS that cardioids intended for close vocal pickup or instrument mic'ing (most of them) are not really appropriate for stereo pair recording of music at greater distances. Yet there is a long history of tapers using microphones and other gear intended for alternate applications, so discussion of viable "work arounds" which compensate for the mismatch between intended application of a microphone and the way we are using it are not out of place here at TS.
Proximity effect (or rather the lack of it's low frequency reinforcement) causes the 4098 sound thin on its own with distant sources, yet makes it sound nice and rich when I sing or play guitar into it at close distance.
I've posted elsewhere about how I was able to substitute DPA 4098 in place of MG M210 in my OMT rigs even though the 4098 has significantly less bass response at the distances from which I'm recording, because I always use them in combination with a pair of DPA 4061 omnis. In those arrangements the response of the 4098 serves as a "pre-EQ" feature rather than a just a negative feature, sort of like a built in complementary EQ curve that works well with the response of the 4061 omnis.
The V versions of the 4018 may be able to be used similarly, although the non-V versions would typically be prefered for a straight stereo pair taper recording.
-
bare 4018 caps are $1300 list, can be haggled down near $1200. getiing into any new cap + any of the dpa preamps starts around $1500
ive seen those vocal mics on ebay for $700-$900 new/NOS. technically if you had phantom you could mount those right on a stand as is and go to town
while i have your ear, and pursuant to a conversation across several other threads now, would you say that larger diameter supercards/hypercards (mk41, 4018, ak50, etc) have less of a problem with proximity effect than smaller diameter microphones (4098,4099, at853, etc).
was browsing B&H
new MMC caps:
4018: $1310
4018V: $820
WTF?
-
^ Priced to suit what the market will bear. The vocal mic market is far more competitive, and DPA doesn't have history there. But that's just a guess.
-
i picked up a used 4018VL with an SL1 adapter for shure/sony/lectro wireless mics. i believe this is the SM58 standard and should provide 5V bias to the mic (via the adapter in this case) , so there might be an opportunity to reverse engineer the circuit in the adapter that takes 5V and powers the cap
I will compare the VL next to the 4099, and possibly the regular 4018 which i plan on borrowing from DPA this summer. im not 100% convinced the rolloff is in the capsule itself, it might be in the handle or adapter. check out this blurb from the DPA manual for the d:facto series (emphasis mine)
https://www.fullcompass.com/common/files/28939-DPAdfactoUsersManual.pdf
"Please note that all electric and acoustic specifications apply to the wired DPA Handle unless otherwise stated. The DPA Handle is designed with a permanent 3rd order low-cut filter (-3 dB at 80 Hz) to remove unwanted handling, pop and wind noise."
in any case, if i cant get around the rolloff,a Q about expected roll off response when combined with proximity effect.
I couldnt find a proximity effect graph for the supercards here is the proximity effect of a 4011 card.
(https://i.imgur.com/ZXsztE7.png)
and a 4026 subcard (this one has 10m mark so we can somewhat judge relative effects at large distances)
(https://i.imgur.com/MavR37W.png)
compare that to the 4018VL response, its 3rd order HPF is pretty similar to the proximity rolloff at 10m
(https://i.imgur.com/f7KQbbv.png)
so will these rolloffs be doubled up when VL series is used at a distance, or would the combined effect be slightly reduced relative to simply summing them?
-
I took a look at the manual you posted a link to above.
Other DPA capsules than the 4018V can be used with the D:facto II handle. The permanent 3rd order low-cut filter (-3 dB at 80 Hz) in the handle is in series with (is subtracted from) the native response of whatever capsule is used with it.
The graphs for the 4011 and 4028 above show the response of those capsules at various measurement distances without that low-cut filtering applied.
The graph for the 4018V shows the response of that capsule at a single measurement distance (12cm) and does include the low-cut filtering of the handle.
Unfortunately there are no response curves for the 4018V at measurement distances greater than 12cm, but that measurement distance is similar to the 0.1m measurement line on the 4011 and 4026 graphs. Given that, we can only really make a direct comparison of the 4018V's on-axis curve (at 12cm) against the 1.0m measurement distance lines of the 4011 and 4026 graphs above 100Hz. Doing so eliminates the filtering influence of the handle, but includes proximity response of the as near equivalent close measurement distances.
Comparing responses at 100Hz at a 10 to 12cm measurement distance:
4028 (subcardioid) looks to be about +7dB up
4011 (cardioid) looks to be about +9dB up
4018V (supercardioid) looks to be -2.5dB down
We know that all else being equal, the impact of proximity response becomes greater as pattern directionality is increased from subcardioid to cardioid, and again from cardioid to supercardioid. Because of that, if the 4018V did not have a "vocal mic tailored response" it would be expected to have a response up more than the 4011. Lets assume up by +2dB, which is the difference between the subcardioid 4028 and the cardioid 4011. That would make it +11dB rather than -2.5dB if it did not have "low frequency vocal tailoring".
So we can assume that the difference of around -14dB at 100hz and that measurement distance is due to the "low frequency vocal tailoring" of the 4018V. Keep in mind that figure is just my wild approximation and is probably not accurate, but does illustrate the general trend.
Quoted from the manual-
"To gain full flexibility of your d:facto II, more MMC modular capsules
are available, but only the MMC4018V has been tweaked for close
vocal use with lowered sensitivity and application tailored low frequency response."
-
Anyone running a set of the 4018's?? There are a few shows on LMA, but wanted some user opinions. I'm planning on grabbing a set with indoor taping around the corner.
-
Anyone running a set of the 4018's?? There are a few shows on LMA, but wanted some user opinions. I'm planning on grabbing a set with indoor taping around the corner.
I've run my 4018's a few times, but mainly due to Covid I really don't have a large sample size. I think that I've only run them indoors once. My overall impression is that they're great mics, as you would expect. What I really need to do is to run them head to head with Gefell 210's, Schoeps 41V's and Milab VM-44-Link supercards.
-
I don't usually run hypers outdoors, but use them for indoor shows. Thanks for the feed back. David looks like you have enough hyper caps you could sell me those 4018's ;D
Anyone running a set of the 4018's?? There are a few shows on LMA, but wanted some user opinions. I'm planning on grabbing a set with indoor taping around the corner.
I've run my 4018's a few times, but mainly due to Covid I really don't have a large sample size. I think that I've only run them indoors once. My overall impression is that they're great mics, as you would expect. What I really need to do is to run them head to head with Gefell 210's, Schoeps 41V's and Milab VM-44-Link supercards.
-
Have a pair of 4018 and really like them. Have run them indoor and outdoors. Usually use them for indoor venues that don't sound great. Have more high end and less bass then 4011. Seem clearer to me and I run them with the "C pre-amps". Haven't tried them with the ER pre-amps yet.
Outside show - mix 90% 4018 10% 401X.
https://archive.org/details/CSF2022-08-05
Inside show - Mix 90% 4018 10% 401X.
https://archive.org/details/MelvinSeals2022-07-04
-
I don't usually run hypers outdoors, but use them for indoor shows. Thanks for the feed back. David looks like you have enough hyper caps you could sell me those 4018's ;D
Anyone running a set of the 4018's?? There are a few shows on LMA, but wanted some user opinions. I'm planning on grabbing a set with indoor taping around the corner.
I've run my 4018's a few times, but mainly due to Covid I really don't have a large sample size. I think that I've only run them indoors once. My overall impression is that they're great mics, as you would expect. What I really need to do is to run them head to head with Gefell 210's, Schoeps 41V's and Milab VM-44-Link supercards.
^^
:yack:
-
Has anyone run the 4018VL caps for section style taping? Given how much cheaper they are, I'm tempted. I rarely tape back there, but it's a good tool for the arsenal if they work well.
-
Supposedly the only difference is sensitivity. There is a sample of UM on LMA with the 4018vl cap and 4018 of the same show.
Has anyone run the 4018VL caps for section style taping? Given how much cheaper they are, I'm tempted. I rarely tape back there, but it's a good tool for the arsenal if they work well.
-
I don't have any particular information about DPA microphones but in general, whenever there's a difference in sensitivity between two related types where the acoustical design is the same, be sure to look for possible effects on maximum sound pressure level and/or inherent noise level. Those parameters are nearly always interrelated.
Increased sensitivity without a corresponding increase in the maximum output voltage, for example, implies a lower maximum SPL; reduced sensitivity, on the other hand, generally (though not always) implies a higher equivalent noise level.
--best regards
-
Thankfully, being dpa those specs are still pretty respectable
-
Supposedly the only difference is sensitivity. There is a sample of UM on LMA with the 4018vl cap and 4018 of the same show.
It looks like the VL has quite different frequency response as well and that is measured at a closer distance than the regular 4018. I would guess that, at the same distance, the VL would have even more pronounced roll-off compared to the regular version. No experience with either, though...
-
it’s measured at the distance a singer would use it, so proximity effect is present. That’s why I am looking for real world comparisons. I’ll be looking for the referenced comparison recordings mentioned above.
-
The VL version of the 4018 capsule is less sensitive, and therefore likely to have somewhat higher self-noise, yet I don't expect that will a problem for most concert tapers here. I say that because I use DPA 4098H miniature hyper/supercards without any apparent self-noise problem, which I'm certain have a higher self-noise than the 4018VL.
We discussed and speculated on the differences between 4018 and 4018VL back in 2019 in this thread, beginning with this post by Jerryfreak- https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=164474.msg2292820#msg2292820 That included some discussion/analysis of response curves including proximity response effect, complicated by different measurement differences being used between the various capsules (appropriate to the different target applications, yet makes it harder to compare them on an objective basis). After all that JF did some testing and subsequently edited a few of those posts. Seems he concluded that the primary difference in the capsule itself was the reduced sensitivity, and low frequency filtering circuitry present in the vocal amplifier handle, which would not be in circuit when the capsule is used with an alternate amplifier. I don't recall a definite conclusion on other response differences.
Quoted from the DPA d:facto vocal microphone system user manua (https://www.fullcompass.com/common/files/28939-DPAdfactoUsersManual.pdf)l- "Please note that all electric and acoustic specifications apply to the wired DPA Handle unless otherwise stated. The DPA Handle is designed with a permanent 3rd order low-cut filter (-3 dB at 80 Hz) to remove unwanted handling, pop and wind noise."
I don't know if JerryFreak is currently active on TS, but you might reach out to him for sample recordings.
-
Okay, so I lied it was the 4018V, but similar cap! I believe the 4018VL has a more similar response to the 4018. I'm no expert. Here are the links
https://archive.org/details/um2019-07-06.4018V
https://archive.org/details/um2019-07-06.4018
-
i just realized I started this thread 9 years ago
i finally picked up a pair of 4018 caps last year. I've only run them 2 or 3 times, but really like them so far
-
Recently grabbed a set of 4018's! I'll break them in at Billy Strings Halloween run.
i just realized I started this thread 9 years ago
i finally picked up a pair of 4018 caps last year. I've only run them 2 or 3 times, but really like them so far
-
Recently grabbed a set or 4018's! I'll break them in at Billy Strings Halloween run.
i just realized I started this thread 9 years ago
i finally picked up a pair of 4018 caps last year. I've only run them 2 or 3 times, but really like them so far
:cheers: