Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Poll

Which do you prefer?

I prefer A
I prefer B
I like both cannot tell the difference
I like both I can tell the difference
Don't like any sound

Author Topic: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1  (Read 11969 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« on: May 09, 2007, 09:08:11 PM »
You need very sensitive ears to do this test :) You might have to listen to it a few times. But the result is quite impressive.

I won't tell anyone the results until I have enough feedback (6-10?).

You don't need to tell us what you think it is because it's not really needed.

A:

http://www.mytempdir.com/1323668


B:

http://www.mytempdir.com/1323675

Edit: You need to wait a long time depending on internet speed - ignore the pop ups (sorry!) because it's a free up load site. The last page has the audio link to download.

It is solo piano from a live recital (2nd movement of Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata).

Below is the mic setup pictures from before the event so you know how the mics were placed.

Setting on the V3 = 24bit 96kHz (gain 35, trim 5)

MT 24/96 converted to 16/44.1 (digital coax from V3) conversation made using SF8
MR-1 DSDIFF 1-bit/2.8 MHz to 16/44.1 (anal from V3) zero gain.
Piano Steinway concert grand model D

Thanks  ;D
Simon

PS I'll put another poll up...comparing Schoeps CCM2S omnis vs. DPA 4052 omnis next.

 
« Last Edit: May 09, 2007, 09:12:26 PM by scyue »
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline taug

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #1 on: May 09, 2007, 10:07:27 PM »
Thanks for posting this Simon.  By any chance, do you have any similar comparisons done with string instruments? I'm wondering if the overtone complexity would make the differences more striking.

You're right about listening to this several times. My preference grew stronger with each listening.
« Last Edit: May 09, 2007, 10:10:07 PM by taug »

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2007, 10:26:51 PM »
Hmm, I could have done this Quartet

http://concerts.newenglandconservatory.edu/index.php?Date_Year=2007&Date_Month=05&Date_Day=09

tonight. Now it's too late. In the future I'll do it.

I've also used my MR-1 with the MixPre....That combo sounds amazing, too. Specially the wide dynamic range and the silence (pauses/rest in the music performance). I'm sure you could even hear a pin drop clearly. Even this simple small track will impress a lot of members here and will have difficulties deciding which one they prefer.

Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline mmedley.

  • is on a salty highway burning up a lucky streak
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6077
  • Gender: Male
  • CAR RAMROD
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2007, 11:02:48 PM »
Very nice test! Thanks for taking the time. I listened 5-6 times each and voted B...then coming to reply I listened a few more times and now without a doubt I prefer A.  ;D

I don't know just where I'm going
But I'm gonna try for the kingdom, if I can

Offline gratefulphish

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1568
  • Gender: Male
  • Gone Tapin'
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2007, 11:05:44 PM »

MT 24/96 converted to 16/44.1 (digital coax from V3) conversation made using SF8
MR-1 DSDIFF 1-bit/2.8 MHz to 16/44.1 (anal from V3) zero gain.
Piano Steinway concert grand model D

Thanks  ;D
Simon
 

I didn't know that V3s went both ways.  I am going to have to keep it in a separate compartment in the gear bag from now on.  >:D
4 channel: Neumann TLM-170R>Segue Dogstar>SD 722   2 channel: Neumann TLM-170R>Segue Dogstar>Lunatec V3>SD 722
               Linked to Lunatec V3>MT 24/96                                     (Hi-Ho Silver Interconnects)     

Other gear: AKG C451Es, Tascam DA-P1, Sony D-8

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2007, 11:08:49 PM »
Thanks for the FIRST feedback  ;D !!!
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline divamum

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 411
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #6 on: May 09, 2007, 11:59:13 PM »
It's late so I could only listen a couple of times.  My first impression was definitely to prefer B ("Test 2") - I find it cleaner and "sparklier" and I think it handles the pedalling overtones with more clarity.

My biggest problem in listening to this stuff when I wasn't in the house live and thus have THAT mental comparison is that I start to listen to the performance instead of the recording!

I think I want to listen again before I vote, but for the moment, I'm either "B", or "I can tell the difference but like them both".
DPA4060
R09

Offline taug

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2007, 01:23:46 PM »
Hmm, I could have done this Quartet

http://concerts.newenglandconservatory.edu/index.php?Date_Year=2007&Date_Month=05&Date_Day=09

tonight. Now it's too late. In the future I'll do it.

I've also used my MR-1 with the MixPre....That combo sounds amazing, too. Specially the wide dynamic range and the silence (pauses/rest in the music performance). I'm sure you could even hear a pin drop clearly. Even this simple small track will impress a lot of members here and will have difficulties deciding which one they prefer.



That quartet has been recording their own concerts for years:
http://www.borromeoquartet.org/recordings/laindex.html

I don't know what stuff they use but I bet you could get them excited about your MR-1...

Offline Nick's Picks

  • Trade Count: (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10260
  • Gender: Male
  • I thought I heard.......
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2007, 01:37:05 PM »
I just finished listening a few times through my system, which I think is pretty revieling....., and B sounded far more realistic to me.  A seemed muted, much less "resolved" sounding.  not nearly as pronounced in the attack of the keys when the pianist starts to get on it.  the tone sounded too soft.  On target, but the presentation seemed like it was missing something.

I'll shit if A is the Korg.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2007, 02:07:01 PM by Nick's Picks »

Online WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #9 on: May 10, 2007, 01:59:17 PM »
I picked B as well.  It seems crisper and less muddy to me.

Sometimes I find if I listen the next day, my preferences change.  This is not a good thing for decisive choosing, but it's the way my ears work, unfortunately.

Jeff

Offline Filharmoniker

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #10 on: May 10, 2007, 02:03:33 PM »
For me it was difficult to here any difference. I liked them both, but with a slight preference for A.

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #11 on: May 10, 2007, 02:28:05 PM »
Hmm, I could have done this Quartet

http://concerts.newenglandconservatory.edu/index.php?Date_Year=2007&Date_Month=05&Date_Day=09

tonight. Now it's too late. In the future I'll do it.

I've also used my MR-1 with the MixPre....That combo sounds amazing, too. Specially the wide dynamic range and the silence (pauses/rest in the music performance). I'm sure you could even hear a pin drop clearly. Even this simple small track will impress a lot of members here and will have difficulties deciding which one they prefer.



That quartet has been recording their own concerts for years:
http://www.borromeoquartet.org/recordings/laindex.html

I don't know what stuff they use but I bet you could get them excited about your MR-1...

I actually know the violinist (Nick Kitchen)...he uses his own gear = Schoeps MK4 directly into the stock Tascam HD-P2. But when they play at Jordan Hall, the Hall records for them using DPA 4006 (don't know what preamp/A/D converter).
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #12 on: May 10, 2007, 02:48:29 PM »
Interesting listening.  Thanks for posting!  I've not made up my mind yet - need to listen more to familiarize myself with the content as my ears/brain are not accustomed to lisetning critically to recordings of acoustic instruments.

FYI, your V3's digital outputs are inverted relative to your analog outputs (or vice versa).  This is a known issue and Grace will fix under warranty.
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline noam

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #13 on: May 10, 2007, 03:35:16 PM »
I'll shit if A is the Korg.

Why? Every digital signal starts its life as DSD and ends up as whatever you convert it to. Unless you can burn SACD's from these files, what we get is the converted files - so the comparison is (mostly) between the V3 A/D converter and the Korg A/D converter. Which one would you expect to sound better?

Noam
« Last Edit: May 10, 2007, 03:37:33 PM by noam »

Offline BC

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
  • Gender: Male
  • Bongo Bongo
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #14 on: May 10, 2007, 04:44:34 PM »
do you use an attenuator between the V3 and Korg?

In: DPA4022>V3>Microtracker/D8

Out: Morrison ELAD>Adcom GFA555mkII>Martin Logan Aerius i

Offline BC

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
  • Gender: Male
  • Bongo Bongo
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2007, 04:45:52 PM »
I'll shit if A is the Korg.

Why? Every digital signal starts its life as DSD and ends up as whatever you convert it to.
Noam

 ??? Are you sure about this? Even high-res PCM starts as DSD? Seems strange to me.

In: DPA4022>V3>Microtracker/D8

Out: Morrison ELAD>Adcom GFA555mkII>Martin Logan Aerius i

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2007, 04:53:47 PM »
do you use an attenuator between the V3 and Korg?



Yes I did ... because the signal is so high it is a must.
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #17 on: May 10, 2007, 04:55:29 PM »
Interesting listening.  Thanks for posting!  I've not made up my mind yet - need to listen more to familiarize myself with the content as my ears/brain are not accustomed to lisetning critically to recordings of acoustic instruments.

FYI, your V3's digital outputs are inverted relative to your analog outputs (or vice versa).  This is a known issue and Grace will fix under warranty.

But the strange thing is when I format my CF and reboot my MT, the channels are okay. So I'm thinking it might be my MT which is the problem.
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline BC

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2269
  • Gender: Male
  • Bongo Bongo
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2007, 05:28:17 PM »
Interesting listening.  Thanks for posting!  I've not made up my mind yet - need to listen more to familiarize myself with the content as my ears/brain are not accustomed to lisetning critically to recordings of acoustic instruments.

FYI, your V3's digital outputs are inverted relative to your analog outputs (or vice versa).  This is a known issue and Grace will fix under warranty.

But the strange thing is when I format my CF and reboot my MT, the channels are okay. So I'm thinking it might be my MT which is the problem.

Dunno if this is related, but I noticed getting inverted polarity after dithering my 24/44.1 files down in SF6 using waves L2. Unfortunately I have been lazy and didn't do any troubleshooting on this issue.



In: DPA4022>V3>Microtracker/D8

Out: Morrison ELAD>Adcom GFA555mkII>Martin Logan Aerius i

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #19 on: May 10, 2007, 05:31:22 PM »
FYI, your V3's digital outputs are inverted relative to your analog outputs (or vice versa).  This is a known issue and Grace will fix under warranty.

But the strange thing is when I format my CF and reboot my MT, the channels are okay. So I'm thinking it might be my MT which is the problem.

Not sure I was clear.  I've seen an occasional L/R channel swap with my old MT, but always identified it easy enough.  In this case, it isn't that the channels are swapped L and R, but the polarity of the digital outputs (both L and R) relative to the analog outputs (both L and R).  See attached pics and circled "peaks" as a reference:  in testing1 the left (top) channel "bunch" of peaks point up, right (bottom) channel peak points down;  in testing2, the opposite:  the left (top) channel "bunch" of peaks point down, right (bottom) channel peak points up.  Not really an issue unless you try to mix the V3's digital output with its analog output routed through another ADC.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2007, 05:39:54 PM by Brian Skalinder »
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline Nick's Picks

  • Trade Count: (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10260
  • Gender: Male
  • I thought I heard.......
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #20 on: May 10, 2007, 06:21:00 PM »
B 3 - 1
BINGO!!!
PM me the answer, i'm dyin.  I wont blow it.

Offline noam

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #21 on: May 12, 2007, 08:27:07 AM »
At the risk of making a total fool of myself, I heard no difference on the speakers. I saved the files and burned a CD. On headphones (digi out>Benchmark DAC1> Sennheiser HD600) I thought there was a tiny-tiny-tiny difference initially, that B was muddier on SOME notes. But after switching back and forth a dozen times I lost any ability to hear any difference. I compare recordings all the time and if there is a difference here it is less than subtle. I would have liked to hear this at the original resolution.

Noam
« Last Edit: May 12, 2007, 08:31:04 AM by noam »

Online WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #22 on: May 13, 2007, 12:29:24 AM »
One thing to note, we are not really comparing the V3 > MT with just the V3 (analogue) > MR-1, but with V3 (analogue) > MR-1 > Audiogate conversion to pcm.  Are the files from the MR-1 (in any of the DSD formats) playable and convertable on the Tascam DSD machine, and what sort of a job does that machine do on the pcm conversions?  Has anyone been able to run them through a high-end DSD editor?

Jeff

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2007, 02:41:15 PM »
Tonight I will post the results of this poll so if you haven't listened to the tracks/posted a vote by today, you will not be able to vote after tonight. Hope you can vote because the more vote the better even though you cannot hear the diference between the 2 tracks. Thanks everyone for your time.  ;D
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline sygdwm

  • unknown sleath taper
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8747
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2007, 04:49:08 PM »
i prefer b. i, too, would like to hear the original files, but i understand thats not really possible. i guess a=mr1 and b=mt but i have no basis for this.
mics: (4)akg c460b(a60,mk46,ck1x,ck1,ck2,ck3,ck61,ck63)
pres: oade m148/edirol wmod ua5
recorders: marantz stock671/oade acm671/fostex busman vintage fr2le

(P.S.: On a threaded discussion board like this one, there's no need to repeat someone's post when you reply to them; everyone can see all the messages in the thread.)

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #25 on: May 15, 2007, 03:32:51 AM »
So here is the results:
 
Before the time of posting the results there were 20 votes all together.

15 people liked B (2 of which also liked A and cannot tell the difference) vs. 6 people liked A (2 of which also liked B and cannot tell the difference)

13 people prefered B vs. 4 people prefered A

AND:
1 person did not like the sound of Schoeps>V3 !!!


A is V3>MR-1 (V3 preamp only)
B is MT (direct digital feed from V3)



« Last Edit: May 15, 2007, 03:36:20 AM by scyue »
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Offline Nick's Picks

  • Trade Count: (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10260
  • Gender: Male
  • I thought I heard.......
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #26 on: May 15, 2007, 07:04:21 AM »
and that kills me to think I heard such a great difference between the two.  I liked B for all the reasons listed, and knew that I'd be looking at the PCM copy for some reason.  Just my luck.

I still like my DSD recorder though.
go figure !

these tests just prove that we should all be using any' ol thing we want to record with and that reaching for the gold ring...., well...you know how that ends.  something about it just slips away when I try.

Online WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #27 on: May 15, 2007, 11:44:49 AM »
and that kills me to think I heard such a great difference between the two.  I liked B for all the reasons listed, and knew that I'd be looking at the PCM copy for some reason.  Just my luck.

I still like my DSD recorder though.
go figure !

these tests just prove that we should all be using any' ol thing we want to record with and that reaching for the gold ring...., well...you know how that ends.  something about it just slips away when I try.


It's a nifty little machine, feels great, and MAYBE it'll be as good as the V3 if they fix AudioGate (or one of us buys the $$multi$K DSD editing software that makes it sound as good as the V3) (ps and just tell me that there is such software and I'll spend my gold ring fund on it).

Jeff

Offline mmedley.

  • is on a salty highway burning up a lucky streak
  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6077
  • Gender: Male
  • CAR RAMROD
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #28 on: May 15, 2007, 12:13:35 PM »
Thanks again for the comp.
I don't know just where I'm going
But I'm gonna try for the kingdom, if I can

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2554
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2007, 10:13:55 PM »
The fact that so many of us who prefered B (I was one) noted that it was, ideed, very close, says a great deal aboutt he quality of the MR-1.

-Noah
Recording:
Capsules: Schoeps mk41v (x2), mk22 (x2), mk3 (x2), mk21 & mk8
Cables: 2x nbob KCY, 1 pair nbob actives, GAKables 10' & 20' 6-channel snakes, Darktrain 2 & 4 channel KCY and mini xlr extensions:
Preamps:    Schoeps VMS 02iub, Naiant IPA, Sound Devices Mixpre6 I
Recorders: Sound Devices Mixpre6 I, Sony PCM m10

Home Playback: Mac Mini> Mytek Brooklyn+> McIntosh MC162> Eminent Tech LFT-16; Musical Fidelity xCan v2> Hifiman HE-4XX / Beyerdynamic DT880

Office Playback: iMac> Grace m903> AKG k701 / Hifiman HE-400

Offline sygdwm

  • unknown sleath taper
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8747
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2007, 10:35:06 PM »
The fact that so many of us who prefered B (I was one) noted that it was, ideed, very close, says a great deal aboutt he quality of the MR-1.

-Noah

i didnt like A at all. /ducks
mics: (4)akg c460b(a60,mk46,ck1x,ck1,ck2,ck3,ck61,ck63)
pres: oade m148/edirol wmod ua5
recorders: marantz stock671/oade acm671/fostex busman vintage fr2le

(P.S.: On a threaded discussion board like this one, there's no need to repeat someone's post when you reply to them; everyone can see all the messages in the thread.)

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #31 on: May 15, 2007, 11:07:23 PM »
Just got time to listen a few times tonight before checking the thread & finding results.  I found testing 1 clean and sharp sounding with more transient on the attack of the notes, which sounded more immediate & 'real' to me the first time through.  But I quickly began to become attracted to the seemingly richer spaciousness and depth in the the reverbish tail of the notes in testing 2.  After going back and forth a few times I was swayed towards testing 2 more & more.  Seemed smoother. 

As for which was which I guessed the opposite :-\, though I really had nothing on which to base that assumption.

Thanks, for putting this up.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #32 on: May 17, 2007, 12:06:58 PM »
So the v3 a/d beat out the MR-1 3:1...  The r09 was preferred over the v3 a/d 3:1 in one comp we did (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,84330.30.html).

Here's another v3 vs. r09 comp.. If the r09 beats the v3 a/d again, does that mean the r09 sounds better than the mr1?  ;) :P

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,84616.0.html

Offline noam

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #33 on: May 17, 2007, 01:04:21 PM »
So the v3 a/d beat out the MR-1 3:1...  The r09 was preferred over the v3 a/d 3:1 in one comp we did (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,84330.30.html).

Here's another v3 vs. r09 comp.. If the r09 beats the v3 a/d again, does that mean the r09 sounds better than the mr1?  ;) :P

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,84616.0.html


There has been a lot of ink as well as bandwidth spent about the issue that when people are comparing audio and expect to hear a difference, they will hear a difference even when there is none (false +)

A better comparison design would have been to complicate the test by including a third and a 4th file, which are simply a copy of another, so that you don't know if any 2 files are really different.

(It would also reduce placebo/suggestion effect, IMVHO, not to preface the comparison with tantalizing comments about needing very sensitive ears or that the result is quite impressive.)

Noam

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #34 on: May 17, 2007, 01:07:57 PM »
A better comparison design would have been to complicate the test by including a third and a 4th file, which are simply a copy of another, so that you don't know if any 2 files are really different.

(It would also reduce placebo/suggestion effect, IMVHO, not to preface the comparison with tantalizing comments about needing very sensitive ears or that the result is quite impressive.)

Doesn't listening in an ABX environment address these concerns (at least the first)?
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #35 on: May 17, 2007, 01:12:12 PM »
A better comparison design would have been to complicate the test by including a third and a 4th file, which are simply a copy of another, so that you don't know if any 2 files are really different.

A fine idea but I think it is already a challenge to get sufficient numbers of folks participating in comps (hence mentioning it in this thread). I think placebo's would erode interest.

Offline SClassical

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 821
  • Gender: Male
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #36 on: May 17, 2007, 01:52:16 PM »
Since I also have the R-09...I'm planning to do another poll in the near future using these:

MT, R-09 and MR-1

This time I might use my DPA4060>MMA6000 instead because this combo is more popular and affordable to many tapers and can give a good comparison for anyone consider purchasing any of these recorders/mics/preamp.

I know all 3 recorders are different...So I think the best thing to do is to set my MT, R-09 and MR-1 @ 24/48 and an extra track with my MR-1 @ DFF (DSD). That will give us 4 tracks to compare. That will really be interesting to see the final poll results  ;D

and obviously using one editing program (SF8) to convert all PCM 24/48 to 16/44.1 (and using AG to do the DFF to 16/44.1)
« Last Edit: May 17, 2007, 01:55:45 PM by scyue »
Mics: DPA3552 kit/DPA3521 kit/DPA SMK4081 kit/DPA SMK4060 kit/Schoeps 2X MK21, 2X MK22 and 2X MK4v and 2X Schoeps CCM2S
Mixers/preamps: Sonosax SX-M32/Sonosax SX-M2 LS/Grace Design V3/DPA MMA6000/Millennia HV-32P
Recorders: SD722/PCM-D50/MT2
Playback: Grace m903 - Sennheiser HD650 / Bowers & Wilkins Nautilus 805s

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #37 on: May 17, 2007, 03:48:56 PM »
Since I also have the R-09...I'm planning to do another poll in the near future using these:

MT, R-09 and MR-1

This time I might use my DPA4060>MMA6000 instead because this combo is more popular and affordable to many tapers and can give a good comparison for anyone consider purchasing any of these recorders/mics/preamp.

I know all 3 recorders are different...So I think the best thing to do is to set my MT, R-09 and MR-1 @ 24/48 and an extra track with my MR-1 @ DFF (DSD). That will give us 4 tracks to compare. That will really be interesting to see the final poll results  ;D

and obviously using one editing program (SF8) to convert all PCM 24/48 to 16/44.1 (and using AG to do the DFF to 16/44.1)

I'm very interested in this potential comp. I primarily run 4060>MMA6000>R-09 & have been considering another recorder, both for my other rig (ADKTL>V3>?) & for backup.  I'm considering all three of these options as well as others.  I'm sure 16/44.1 is best for many here, but I'd prefer to hear the 24/48 files as well since that's the format I use for both recording & playback.

I suppose it's time for me to finally load the ABX software to eliminate any self-bias.
Thanks again for doing these comps! Plus tee to you scyue.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #38 on: May 17, 2007, 03:52:40 PM »
Do the results dissapear once the poll is locked?  I know the general consensus from reading the thread, but I'd like to see the results.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #39 on: May 17, 2007, 03:54:04 PM »
The results don't appear until you've voted. If you didn't vote before the poll is locked, I'm not sure what happens but they display for me.

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #40 on: May 17, 2007, 04:40:00 PM »
The results don't appear until you've voted.

That's as it should be.

Quote
If you didn't vote before the poll is locked, I'm not sure what happens but they display for me.

I didn't get a chance to listen & vote before lockage.  It appears the results are then permanently unavailable for non-voters.  :-\ Hey helpful admins, I'd like to suggest making the results appear for everyone once a poll is locked if possible.  I can't think of a good reason why not.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline firebaugh

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 132
  • Gender: Male
    • NOLA Underground
Re: Schoeps CCM2S > V3 > MT vs. MR-1
« Reply #41 on: May 17, 2007, 04:42:46 PM »
Do the results dissapear once the poll is locked?  I know the general consensus from reading the thread, but I'd like to see the results.

I prefer A     - 5 (22.7%)
I prefer B    - 14 (63.6%)
I like both cannot tell the difference    - 2 (9.1%)
I like both I can tell the difference    - 0 (0%)
Don't like any sound    - 1 (4.5%)
   
Total Voters: 22
M-Audio Pulsar II > UA-5 Oade wmod > R-09 (temp)
Soundboard > ST-9100 v.3 > Tascam DR-07

"When anybody asks me 'what kind of music I play' I say depression era metal." - Scott H. Biram

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.18 seconds with 73 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF