Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Omnis with HF boost  (Read 2254 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • the data guy
Omnis with HF boost
« on: December 14, 2019, 12:57:43 AM »
this grew out of the 'baffled omnis' thread http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=191567

there was some discussion over there of application of omnis with HF boost, designed for (or coincidentally) the compensation of HF response in diffuse field (diffuse field = far from source, which for most of our purposes is relevant regardless of distance to stage, even FOB is 'diffuse field' relative to close mic'ing instruments and vocals.)

The gist of the discussion is that the response in diffuse field is nearly as important as on-axis frequency

i thought it was thread-worthy to assemble the specs for all the mics of that type

Schoeps MK2XS (aka MK3) https://schoeps.de/en/products/colette/capsules/omnis/mk-2xs.html




Schoeps MK2S https://schoeps.de/en/products/colette/capsules/omnis/mk-2s.html




Schoeps MK5 (omni)



DPA4006 with supplied diffuse field grid https://www.dpamicrophones.com/pencil/4006-omnidirectional-microphone



DPA4006 with nosecone accessory https://www.dpamicrophones.com/accessories/nose-cone-for-4006-pencil-microphone



DPA 406x, with supplied soft and high boost grids https://www.dpamicrophones.com/lavalier/4060-series-miniature-omnidirectional-microphone



also of note is this capsule which has an HF boost of a different nature

DPA 2006







« Last Edit: December 14, 2019, 03:32:29 AM by jerryfreak »
team schoeps, dpa, benchmark, and zoom mostly... subject to change without warning

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • the data guy
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2019, 02:19:40 AM »
Pattern

all the schoeps as well as the "diffuse field" DPA have similar off axis response in 4, 8, and 16K

the "nose cone"  is somewhat directional at 8 and 16K, and has much more uniform off axis response, <5dB at all frequencies in rear axis

the DPA 406x has the flattest off-axis response of all of them

Response

the diffuse field DPA4006 and 406x with high boost grid offer the most HF lift, up 7 dB at 10K, and above 5dB starting at 7-8K. 406x is a few DB higher boost in the 12-15K range on top of that

the nose cone DPA4006 has slightly less HF lift, up 5dB at 10K and above 3dB from 8-15K

MK3 (MK2XS) and MK2S boost similar frequencies. while the frequency range of boost is different, the extent of boost provided by MK3 is most similar to 4006 diffuse and the MK2S is closer to the nosecone DPA. MK5 is similar to both of these albeit flatter (up 2-4 dB above 3K)

406x soft boost grid has a very slight 2-3 dB bump starting at 8K or so

so ranking them in terms of HF lift:
high boost 406x
diffuse 4006
MK3 (MK2XS)
nose cone 4006
MK2S/MK5*
soft boost 406x
2006

*frequency at which HF boost starts on MK5 is slightly lower than MK2S. possibly very similar/indistinguishable

These acoustic modification balls by DPA are also interesting, though i dont see published graphs for them
https://www.dpamicrophones.com/accessories/acoustic-pressure-equalizer-ball-for-4006
« Last Edit: December 14, 2019, 03:34:20 AM by jerryfreak »
team schoeps, dpa, benchmark, and zoom mostly... subject to change without warning

Offline EmRR

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 507
    • ElectroMagnetic Radiation Recorders
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2019, 07:52:15 AM »
 MKH 20.  Switchable plus a directional / boost ring, so 4 total treble options.
Mics: DPA 4060 w/MPS 6030 PSU/DAD6001/DAD4099, Neumann KM 131, KMR 81i, Oktava MK 012, Sennheiser MKH 105, MKH 20, MKH 30, MKH 40, MKH 800 TWIN, lots of other studio appropriate choices
Recorders: Zoom F8n, Sony MZ-R50, portable MOTU based multitrack DAW for client work

Offline goodcooker

  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3354
  • Gender: Male
  • goes to 11
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2019, 08:48:18 AM »
The Oktava omni capsule has a HF booost that make it particularly pleasing for outside concert recording



The graphs that were included with my matched pair are similar but a little more smooth than this one I pinched off the web
« Last Edit: December 14, 2019, 08:55:23 AM by goodcooker »
Joly Mod Oktava MK012 C,H,O  or NakCM300 > Sound Devices 442 or Reference Audio Designs MS2 > Tascam DR701d
Transfers - Tascam DA30 (dats) or Nak MR2 (cassettes) > Sound Devices USB Pre

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/goodcooker

"Are you the Zman?" - fan at Panic 10-08-10 Kansas City
"I don't know who left this perfectly good inflatable wook doll here, but if I'm blowing her up, I'm keeping her." -  hoppedup

Online heathen

  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2853
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2019, 02:12:26 PM »
Comparing the different manufacturers' graphs/measurements isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison...
Recordings on LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=taper%3A%22Lucas+Lorenz%22
Mics: AT4050ST | AT4031 | AT853 (C/SC) | Line Audio CM3 | Sennheiser e614 | Sennheiser MKE2 | DPA 4061 | CA-14 omni Pres: CA9200 | DPA d:vice Decks: Zoom F8 | Roland R-05

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • the data guy
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #5 on: December 14, 2019, 11:19:53 PM »
Comparing the different manufacturers' graphs/measurements isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison...
definitely

lots of salt to be had

there are standards for microphone distance from sound source etc, but they are not the same from mfr to mfr. same for published specs like distortion (at what % THD), etc.
team schoeps, dpa, benchmark, and zoom mostly... subject to change without warning

Offline EmRR

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 507
    • ElectroMagnetic Radiation Recorders
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2019, 01:45:25 AM »
Comparing the different manufacturers' graphs/measurements isn't necessarily an apples to apples comparison...

Indeed.  My MKH 20 set flat and my KM 131 are very different sounding omnis, both ruler flat on paper. 
Mics: DPA 4060 w/MPS 6030 PSU/DAD6001/DAD4099, Neumann KM 131, KMR 81i, Oktava MK 012, Sennheiser MKH 105, MKH 20, MKH 30, MKH 40, MKH 800 TWIN, lots of other studio appropriate choices
Recorders: Zoom F8n, Sony MZ-R50, portable MOTU based multitrack DAW for client work

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2903
  • Gender: Male
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #7 on: January 01, 2020, 05:25:28 PM »
Here's how I break this issue down. I almost never record with omnidirectional microphones any more, but I used to do it a lot, and I still appreciate the qualities that they can offer.

Fact #1 is that the type and size of the microphone or capsule make fundamental differences. There are many good single-diaphragm omnidirectional condenser microphones with diameters of ~20-21 mm. There are also many that are larger, smaller, not condenser microphones, or that use dual-diaphragm capsules. They will behave quite differently, and should be considered separately. (I'm not knocking them, but there can be pitfalls if we breeze past certain implicit assumptions.)

Fact #2 is that in any normal, enclosed space, the farther you are from any sound source, the higher the proportion of reflected sound you will get in your ears or microphones, and the lower the proportion of direct sound will be.

Fact #3 is that most folks who make recordings know fact #2, but few realize the true extent of it, or the amazing variety of different paths that sound can travel between a source and your ears (or microphones), or the amazing amounts and kinds of unconscious processing that go on in our brains before we actually experience what we hear. People usually way underestimate how much our brains are doing to make speech or music "listenable."

Fact #4 is that the frequency response curves that are usually published for microphones show their on-axis response--but even if those curves are scrupulously honest and detailed, the way that pressure transducers of the usual size work (see Fact #1), that curve (or straight line) applies ONLY to sound arriving within a narrow range of angles in front of the microphone. For all other sound you'll get a significant reduction at high frequencies.

Thus the applications for omnidirectional microphones that have flat response on axis (e.g. the Schoeps MK 2) are really rather limited. They're beautiful at close range, but not on sound sources that extend across a wide angle. Spot miking a solo instrument or voice in a studio, fine. Otherwise, much of the direct sound will arrive off-axis--and if you back off the mike(s) in order to fit the sound sources into a narrow enough overall angle, then most of your sound will no longer be direct because of the distance involved.

Fact #5 (or maybe it should be Fact #0?) is that it is far easier to show why a certain type of microphone is inappropriate for a given application than it is to deduce from first principles what type of microphone ought to be used. A microphone or capsule that is designed to give flat response in a diffuse sound field (e.g. Schoeps MK 3, renamed a few years ago to MK 2 XS) won't necessarily be a satisfying choice, either, even in a highly reverberant space; it can be too edgy sounding (though maybe for some of the music that people here are recording, and some rooms and sound systems, that may be less of a risk than it is for the unamplified classical music that I generally record).

We don't always get a choice as to where we can place our microphones, but when we do, I'd say that most experienced recordists look for a position where there's a favorable balance between direct and reflected sound. Thus some kind of in-between response curve will be most likely to give you pleasing results most often, all other things being equal. I wouldn't start out with either extreme.

Fact (or editorial assertion) #6, before I sign off, is, don't be superstitious about equalization--all four Schoeps omni capsules, for example, have identical polar response, and a recording made with any of them can be equalized to be sonically indistinguishable from a recording made in the same mike position with any of the others.

And fact (or suggestion) #6-1/2 is to consider sphere attachments. They can make a very useful difference for not much money.

--best regards
« Last Edit: January 02, 2020, 05:49:42 AM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (32)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2342
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2020, 10:30:17 PM »
mk3 pull of Phish 12/28/19:

12/28 mk3 24bit: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=608085
12/28 mk3 16it: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=608086

mixed with mk41v x/y 12/29:
12/29 mk41v (X/Y PAS) + mk3 (50cm AB) 24 bit: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=608098
12/29 mk41v (X/Y PAS) + mk3 (50cm AB) 16 bit: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=608096
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 rocksuitcase

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6121
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #9 on: January 02, 2020, 12:54:03 PM »
We own the 406X series (4060 sk) and my experience is they have hotter output and a punchier high end than the AKG ck22's we also use. I would bet the differences between those two are useful for differing location situations. My only complaint about the 4060's flimsy cabling has nothing to do with their HF response fer sure.
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG460|CK61|CK1|CK3|CK8|Beyer M 201E|DPA 4060 SK
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • the data guy
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #10 on: January 03, 2020, 01:34:42 AM »
We own the 406X series (4060 sk) and my experience is they have hotter output and a punchier high end than the AKG ck22's we also use. I would bet the differences between those two are useful for differing location situations. My only complaint about the 4060's flimsy cabling has nothing to do with their HF response fer sure.

they do make a heavy duty version  (4660/4661) with a 2.2mm cable
team schoeps, dpa, benchmark, and zoom mostly... subject to change without warning

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3057
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #11 on: January 03, 2020, 05:57:24 AM »

Fact (or editorial assertion) #6, before I sign off, is, don't be superstitious about equalization--all four Schoeps omni capsules, for example, have identical polar response, and a recording made with any of them can be equalized to be sonically indistinguishable from a recording made in the same mike position with any of the others.


This is great advice.  I use some treble EQ on all of my recordings made with my 4061s, with very satisfying results.  (Credit to Gutbucket for getting me started on some specifics there.)

I also played around with the choir samples that DPA used to have on their old website (sadly removed) which compare different mics, and I was able to EQ the 4060 recording to sound almost indistinguishable from the 4006 recording, even though those mics are very different.

EQ used to be something I didn't want to use, because I wanted to be like those audiophile record labels that touted "no equalization, effects, or other processing".  Now I realize that's pretty silly.
DPA 4061 | Line Audio CM3 | Naiant X-Q | AT 853
Naiant PFAs | Shure FP24
Zoom F6 | Sony PCM-M10

Team Line Audio
Quote
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.    ///    If a composer could say what he had to say in words he would not bother trying to say it in music.
- Gustav Mahler

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3910
  • the data guy
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #12 on: January 03, 2020, 06:28:23 AM »

Fact (or editorial assertion) #6, before I sign off, is, don't be superstitious about equalization--all four Schoeps omni capsules, for example, have identical polar response, and a recording made with any of them can be equalized to be sonically indistinguishable from a recording made in the same mike position with any of the others.


This is great advice.  I use some treble EQ on all of my recordings made with my 4061s, with very satisfying results.  (Credit to Gutbucket for getting me started on some specifics there.)

I also played around with the choir samples that DPA used to have on their old website (sadly removed) which compare different mics, and I was able to EQ the 4060 recording to sound almost indistinguishable from the 4006 recording, even though those mics are very different.

thats impressive. like $4000 impressive ;)

EQ used to be something I didn't want to use, because I wanted to be like those audiophile record labels that touted "no equalization, effects, or other processing".  Now I realize that's pretty silly.

i used to be like that but being as i do so much stack taping it always seems to need at least some rolloff
team schoeps, dpa, benchmark, and zoom mostly... subject to change without warning

Online aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2816
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #13 on: January 06, 2020, 09:22:38 AM »
I was able to EQ the 4060 recording to sound almost indistinguishable from the 4006 recording

I would love to hear those clips. I assume the mics were pretty close to the performers?

Offline muj

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1544
  • Gender: Male
  • Certifiable Nevaton Fluffer
Re: Omnis with HF boost
« Reply #14 on: January 10, 2020, 03:38:58 AM »
deom experience  ..IDEAL hf boost would be from 9k, so the dpa has a nice lift

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.061 seconds with 57 queries.
© 2002-2020 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF