Topic: MBHO general thoughts

[DaryanLenz]

I was just curious what everyone else thinks of these mics, just generally speaking.  I for one have fallen in love with mine, especcially considering I payed less that half of retail for them.  The one thing they lack, IMHO, is presence as one gets farther from the source.  Anyway, just curious!

Daryan

[creekfreak]

I ran the MBHO's for about 15 shows. I used the 603 body with the KA200 cardiod cap.

For the money the MBHO is an excellent mic, especially since they are modular and can also use active cables.

I found that their biggest strength is their crystal clear highs. My biggest problem with them is the lack of a phat, smooth low end. I also agree that they lack presence the farther away you get from the source, and I also found the soundstage to collapse at high SLP's.

If you like a really bright mic with an excellent high end then the MBHO's are the way to go.

I upgraded looking for a phatter low end, but they are a nice mic for the money

[DaryanLenz]

Thanks, anyone else?  I love the mbho combined with the sax, really makes those highs sing even more!  I played with some 140's at moe in philly, and did like the nice bass in em!  What do you all think about gefells?  Come on, anyone?  

Daryan

[creekfreak]

I went to schoeps after the MBHO's. I also know the Geffells are excellent mics that are liked my many.

[jlykos]

I know that I am totally biased, but I simply love my Gefells.  There is not another mic in their price range that even compares.  I like guitar-oriented music and the Gefells excel in this area; it makes guitars sound like they are literally coming out of the speakers.  Their spatial imaging is second to none of any mic.  The only downside is a slightly heavy low end.  Not boomy or pronounced, but like a weight that anchors the sound.  They have the best midrange of any mic in its class (dpas are better, but cost twice as much) and that is what I care about the most.

I am not the biggest fan of the MBHOs for many of the reasons that creekfreak mentioned.  Their biggest downside is the soundstage collapse at high SPLs.  Very squashed and closed-sounding.  I have heard that they are great for classical music, but I really don't listen to that.

[Brian Skalinder]

I enjoyed my MBHOs a LOT.  Never encountered the soundstage collapse others mention - but then again, I tape mostly amplified acoustic/bluegrass with some jambands thrown in for good measure.  

With a band like WSP that hammers you with sound, yeah, I could see
something like that happening.

And I agree with the previous comments, the MBHOs do better up close than in the TS.  Obviously, most mics do, but the MBHOs seem to suffer more than usual from the greater distance.

I switched over to KM140s, not due to dissatisfaction with the MBHOs, but b/c I got a good deal on 'em and it was simply time for a change.  I'd recommend them to anyone wanting to take the step to HQ, low profile mics.

[creekfreak]

actually, just listened to one of my recordings I did with the MBHO's, was able to set up real close, dead center, only had to run my stand at about 7 feet, killer recording, wonderful stereo image...up close these things do very well

[DaryanLenz]

Yeah, that is kinda what I was thinking.  Up close, they rock...but farther back, I am not so sure something else would not do better.  I think I really like the highs, and good equiptment behind them does more for these mics, IMHO, then any other microphone I have ever heard.  Some mics seem to do OK by themselves, but MBHO's to me, and this is biased because I use them, do better with as much HQ stuff as you can put behind them in the chain.  I ran them striaght into a da-p1, a UA5, an ad1k, and now an sonosax sx-m2->ad1k, and thew differences between all of the tapes is much much more noteworthy than I had ever imagined...to ME!

Daryan

I like the low end of the km140 setup, and may try those next if I get a realy good deal on them!

[creekfreak]

If you like a nice phat low end, with also very nice highs I would also look at the schoeps, but as you said yourself, I am biased since I use them

[DaryanLenz]

I think I like the high end more than the low end, in general on my recordings...if that makes sense at all.  I love really rich highs, and can overlook the lows, if the highs sing.  I would like to hear some recent schoeps cards recordings of moe or something of that nature.  Anyone have any?  I got a friend here in iowa, who I see from time to time, that runs mk21's.  While that may be OK here, in small ass venues, it would not be what I want to have long term.  Anyone

Daryan


How would one compare schoeps and mbho as far as the highs?

[creekfreak]

I think the highs with the schoeps are just as good as the MBHO's, I have used the mk41's and mk4's. Up close using the mk4's you get an kick ass recording through out the entire spectrum, IMO

I have a ton of recent stuff with the mk41 and mk4's