Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?  (Read 12976 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
I've always loved the MK4V tapes I've heard & wonder what else is out there with a similar sound signature? It seems I tend to prefer that little boost they offer in the high end so without having to go back to the dark side & sell all my AKG gear what are my other choices??
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2277
"Similar" would be an illusion at best I'm afraid. 

One way :  >:D

There are some other mics with a bit of a bump up there but despite what the plots and charts and all that say those can't capture the tone. 
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline perks

  • Trade Count: (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5171
    • Recordings uploaded to TTD
Mk5's  ;D
Mics: Schoeps MK5's, Schoeps MK41's, AT853's (C,SC,H,O), DPA 4061's
Preamps/converters: Schoeps VMS52UB (x2), Nbox (x2), E.A.A. PSP-2 (x2) Grace Lunatec V2, Sound Devices MP-2, DPA MMA6000, Naiant Tinybox v1.5, Naiant PiPsqueak, Church Ugly, Apogee Mini-Me, Benchmark AD2k+
Recorders: Tascam DR-680, Korg MR-1, Edirol R-05, Sony PCM-M10 (x2), Tascam DR-07, Marantz PMD-661, Sound Devices Mixpre-3

Offline carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
You guys are KILLING me!  :facepalm:
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Offline flipp

  • resident curmudgeon
  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
Some think the Milab VM44 sounds more like some Schoeps caps than other mics. I'm not sure if the Milabs are the links or the full-sized bodies but look around for shows with both sources and compare for yourself.

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8388
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
Some think the Milab VM44 sounds more like some Schoeps caps than other mics. I'm not sure if the Milabs are the links or the full-sized bodies but look around for shows with both sources and compare for yourself.

This is my best guess. The milab's are brighter than the front-ended mk caps, but they might compare to the V line. The Milab 44s come in both full bodies and links, and they are the same caps, just a different connection as I understand it.
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams

Offline weroflu

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 343
I don't know how much km184's sound like schoeps, but they do have the hf lift, and in the mid or far field they are very good.

MBHO would be something to look at too with transformerless bodies.

Beyer mc930??

schoeps circuit modded oktava's?

« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 05:05:11 PM by weroflu »

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2277
Some think the Milab VM44 sounds more like some Schoeps caps than other mics. I'm not sure if the Milabs are the links or the full-sized bodies but look around for shows with both sources and compare for yourself.

Listen carefully to the Milab's if you consider them.  I don't like the high end and the overall tone becomes wearying (they sound overly bright rather than natural to me).  They may have been after a similar effect but IMO missed. 

A friend had them and we recorded a number of the same things at a fest (at the same distance but not quite the same placement).  There was a substantial difference in tone and listenability. 
« Last Edit: July 25, 2014, 05:15:52 PM by bombdiggity »
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15731
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
I was also thinking KM184 might be a possibly.  MBHO came to mind but I don't know that line and sound very well. Some MBHO recordings I have heard have the HF lift but seem less smooth up there to me, sort of like the diggity's take on the VM44, perhaps more so.  Sort of the same deal with AKGs sometimes to my ear.

The MC930 doesn't have that 'diffuse field curve' type HF lift and top-end extension to my ear, but might be more Schoeps-like at the bottom end than KM184.

There is a more pronounced yet smooth HF lift I like with the MG M94 cardioids I have (unless used too close when it's a bit much, although its smooth enough that I find it easily EQ-able), but the response shelves down a bit much at the bottom end.  I don't have other modern MG cardioids to compare (only their supercards which are flatter), but my impression is they are less HF-lifted than the M94 and perhaps more akin to MK4 than MK4V.
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 carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
The 184 suggestion is one I've thought of but haven't really heard. I priced out the Milab 's & surprised to see how much they go for on Full Compass, close to the cost of the 4V caps. I also liked the sennheiser 8050`s, with remote cables can I mount it in an active bar?
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Online tim in jersey

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3795
  • Gender: Male

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8388
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
The 184 suggestion is one I've thought of but haven't really heard. I priced out the Milab 's & surprised to see how much they go for on Full Compass, close to the cost of the 4V caps. I also liked the sennheiser 8050`s, with remote cables can I mount it in an active bar?

Yeah, the Senns can be mounted if you get custom cables and don't use their XLR adaptors (may require a special bar). Otherwise it's jury-rigging something that uses the two clips it has.

The beyers do have the bottom end, but you'd have to EQ them up top. I like the coloration better, but you sacrifice some other things. Nice mics, but I don't think they are the answer to this question. The Milabs are closer to the AKGs which you already run.

The Nuemanns have a coloration that I find I either love, or hate, there isn't a middle ground and it's genre dependent.
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams

Offline johnw

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3818
  • Gender: Male
    • My cd List
The Milabs might be close. Never heard the 8050s. Honestly the mk4V is pretty close to the ideal cap both in sound and physical layout IMHO. If you want one, then that's what you should get. Don't settle.

Regarding cost - the Milabs used would be cheaper. I think the 8050s would be hard to find used. Both are going to be more expensive new than a used pair of 4Vs.

Milab VM44-link pair is $2400 from Full Compass (maybe cheaper if you call)
Sennheiser 8050 + remote cables is $2440 from B&H

These days if you are patient, you can find a pair for around $1500. Add in another $400-500 for a pair of cables and PFAs and you've got the mic you want for less than the next best thing  >:D
Schoeps MK41 & MK4V  |  Schoeps CMC6, Schoeps KCY, AKI/2C, PFA, Nbox Cable/PFA  |  Grace V2, Nbox Platinum  |  SD744T, SD MixPre 6, Sony PCM M10

Canon 16-35mm/2.8L mkii, 24-70mm/2.8L, 70-200mm/2.8L IS, 50mm/1.8 mkii, 135mm/2L, 100mm/2.8L IS, Sigma 35mm/1.4 A  |  Canon 5D mk4

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5845
  • Gender: Male
I've always loved the MK4V tapes I've heard & wonder what else is out there with a similar sound signature? It seems I tend to prefer that little boost they offer in the high end so without having to go back to the dark side & sell all my AKG gear what are my other choices??

Milab VM-44 Links are much less expensive and have an accentuated high end and good clarity. They sound more like MK41 than 4V, but that's as close as you will get.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
If I wanted the MK4V sound, then I'd go with MK4V or I wouldn't be happy because I'd always be comping my new gear against my 'standard'.  I did that for years and once I finally went to the dark side, it ended my mic upgrade itch.

To my way of thinking, if other mics satisfied you, then you'd probably already have keyed in on their sound as your 'standard' instead of the MK4V.

So I'd suggest applying a HF bump in post as an interim solution while you save for MK4V capsules.  Added bonus...it's free.

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
I wouldn't consider the Neumann KM 184/KM 140 to be a very close approximation to a Schoeps with the MK 4 V capsule; the treble bump in the Neumann mikes is narrower, and they also have a slight upper-midrange elevation not shown in the spec-sheet curves (it falls within their 2 dB tolerance limit above the flat response line that they publish), while the Schoeps mikes are flatter in that region.
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

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...
why not just apply an eq curve that matches the mk4v to the ck61 capsule you already own?
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 carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
Noah, it's a very valid point. In the past I have been opposed to any eq for the purity of blah blah blah but I am starting to see the benefit. It's painstakingly slow with Audacity though & it might benefit me to learn & adapt in the long run anyway. I've always enjoyed the MK 4V recordings I've heard & fortunately I'm not lusting over making the change. I've also started to enjoy the MKH 8040/50 recordings I've been listening too but who knows what kind of eq has been applied in post, although they still tend to bass monsters, not too heavy but definitely more pronounced than other microphones. What it's taught me though is while I think I can enjoy the sonic signature of a given mic I may not be hearing it in its absolute raw form so who knows. Although I can say regarding the MKH series the engineering seems to appeal to me & I really like the concept of what they claim with the supercard.

I can say that I'm struggling with my AKG recordings, it's a new rig & hasn't given me the results I'd hoped for, maybe my personal tastes have changed, maybe there's something slightly off in my signal chain, maybe it's a symmetry issue or just the rooms I've taped in. Unfortunately not at all confidence inspiring & many variables to take into consideration. In the past I knew what I was coming home with when I taped a show, it was pleasing to my ears & consistently made great recordings that I enjoyed. Now not so much which is why I've even considered selling everything & starting over from scratch, quite a drastic approach which may not be at all necessary. I've been enjoying this discussion & I'm learning which at the end of the day is what we're here for.
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5845
  • Gender: Male
Noah, it's a very valid point. In the past I have been opposed to any eq for the purity of blah blah blah but I am starting to see the benefit. It's painstakingly slow with Audacity though & it might benefit me to learn & adapt in the long run anyway. I've always enjoyed the MK 4V recordings I've heard & fortunately I'm not lusting over making the change. I've also started to enjoy the MKH 8040/50 recordings I've been listening too but who knows what kind of eq has been applied in post, although they still tend to bass monsters, not too heavy but definitely more pronounced than other microphones. What it's taught me though is while I think I can enjoy the sonic signature of a given mic I may not be hearing it in its absolute raw form so who knows. Although I can say regarding the MKH series the engineering seems to appeal to me & I really like the concept of what they claim with the supercard.

I can say that I'm struggling with my AKG recordings, it's a new rig & hasn't given me the results I'd hoped for, maybe my personal tastes have changed, maybe there's something slightly off in my signal chain, maybe it's a symmetry issue or just the rooms I've taped in. Unfortunately not at all confidence inspiring & many variables to take into consideration. In the past I knew what I was coming home with when I taped a show, it was pleasing to my ears & consistently made great recordings that I enjoyed. Now not so much which is why I've even considered selling everything & starting over from scratch, quite a drastic approach which may not be at all necessary. I've been enjoying this discussion & I'm learning which at the end of the day is what we're here for.
If you aren't bothering to EQ your recordings, you certainly shouldn't be spending money on Schoeps, or any other professional grade equipment for that matter. Every recording you have ever heard that was made by a professional is EQ'd, not to mention the sound from the PA systems you're recording that some here claim is somehow "pure" when it emerges from said PA system. The whole "don't EQ because of purity" thing is, at best, nonsense from the pre-digital era when some really bad EQ jobs were more common. Nowadays there is no excuse not to.

I'd first suggest buying a decent software platform that allows real-time monitoring of EQ. I use Audacity for tracking, but it's definitely subpar for EQ. I use the Izotope Ozone 5 VST running in Adobe Audition, and it allows you to listen in real time to what your EQing is doing. Izotope Ozone I'd recommend to anyone; as to the platform to run it on, anything that allows real-time VST (Audacity doesn't; it's one of its few weaknesses) should do it. Lots of folks seem to like Soundforge and Wavelab; I've never used either. The $500 or whatever that you spend on those options is a lot, lot less coin than what you'd spend restarting on your rig or buying Schoeps.

I don't think the problem you're having is that your AKGs are insufficiently good mics; the problem is that your AKGs are making more accurate recordings and you aren't maximizing their quality with EQ. What you are liking about MK4Vs is probably the HF bump that makes vocals more clear. While no EQ can make some other mic sound "like Schoeps", it can certainly make your recordings more pleasing to the ear and, ultimately, better than what you were getting before.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
I agree with acidjack's attitude about EQ and supposed "purity"--I could say even more along those lines, but I won't (for now at least).

However, there are also limits to what you can do with EQ. You can set the 0-degree (on-axis) response of any microphone equal to the 0-degree response of any other microphone, but different microphones have different relationships between their on-axis and off-axis response, and EQ can't bridge those differences. When recordings are made at any real distance in a space that has normal reverberance, a large percentage of the sound energy arrives off-axis--so this is a big part of what makes one microphone sound (and behave) differently from another microphone that has the same nominal pattern (e.g. cardioid).

That's no argument against doing what can be done with EQ, however, as far as it goes.

--best regards
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4116

If you aren't bothering to EQ your recordings, you certainly shouldn't be spending money on Schoeps, or any other professional grade equipment for that matter. Every recording you have ever heard that was made by a professional is EQ'd, not to mention the sound from the PA systems you're recording that some here claim is somehow "pure" when it emerges from said PA system. The whole "don't EQ because of purity" thing is, at best, nonsense from the pre-digital era when some really bad EQ jobs were more common. Nowadays there is no excuse not to.

I'd first suggest buying a decent software platform that allows real-time monitoring of EQ. I use Audacity for tracking, but it's definitely subpar for EQ. I use the Izotope Ozone 5 VST running in Adobe Audition, and it allows you to listen in real time to what your EQing is doing. Izotope Ozone I'd recommend to anyone; as to the platform to run it on, anything that allows real-time VST (Audacity doesn't; it's one of its few weaknesses) should do it. Lots of folks seem to like Soundforge and Wavelab; I've never used either. The $500 or whatever that you spend on those options is a lot, lot less coin than what you'd spend restarting on your rig or buying Schoeps.


Agreed - don't be afraid to EQ!  I only record acoustic classical / jazz, and care very much about capturing the "purity" of the performance.  But you need to ask yourself - are you going for the "purity" of what your recording chain captured, or what you heard with your own ears?  And if those two things are not exactly the same, are you willing to make adjustments to make them more so?  Careful use of EQ has helped me in this regard a number of times.

I also use Ozone and LOVE it, especially the EQ section.  After using it, I can't understand why anyone buys expensive outboard analog EQs anymore that are so extremely limited and colored by comparison.

As for a program to host VSTs (and an outstanding DAW in general), I will recommend Reaper every opportunity I get.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2277
There's a whole lot of useful discussion in this thread. 

why not just apply an eq curve that matches the mk4v to the ck61 capsule you already own?

That may go some way toward the "similarity" concern but no amount of eq will really match different mics.  There are aspects of the sound of mics that don't show up in spec sheets/frequency plots (as dsatz starts to discuss above).  I perceive or label those differences as "tone" and "soundstage" (some may group them as "signature") though it involves many different more specific aspects (a lot of which I'm sure I can't explain though I hear the accrual of their impacts).  Applying an eq curve to the results of a $20 or $200 mic isn't going to make it match a much better one.  Even applying a curve to several different very expensive mics won't make them completely match each other.  Of course not all can hear or appreciate the subtleties (see the comment elsewhere by an experienced taper who can't hear a difference between MP3 and wav). 

On the EQ topic (which was well covered elsewhere) I will again say I EQ when I feel something needs it but more often just leave them as they recorded because I'm fortunate to be able to run them in really good settings most of the time.  The caveat is that I tend to record acoustic unamplified jazz at essentially stage lip position.  An accurate mic captures what things sounded like and that's usually great, so I don't want to mess with it.  If you record anything that's going through a PA or from further back in a room (or both), each of those factors tends to necessitate some eq for correction of conditions that are adding to or changing the natural sound. 

Beyond the natural tone there's also a spatial referencing that may be even more unique  Though I'm recording with cards essentially right on the source the recordings have an amazing sense of the soundstage with very precise locational imaging.  When you play them you hear exactly where each instrument was on the stage and in reference to each other.  I recently did a three horn thing where the mics were centered and it has a surround field thing with a perfect left/center/right (from a pair of cards at less than a foot from the "center" instrument).  The depth and imaging is really great and something I don't get from other mics. 

I've got lots of examples of flat untouched recordings from the 4V's, but I don't think you're really on the fence about what the mics are capable of.  They are the very best stuff I've recorded in over 30 years of attempts.  They always sound far better than what I heard in the room even before any adjustments and I rarely do anything other than boost the levels in post to maximize the output/eliminate the cushion required in the live setting. 

If your mics require a lot of eq and the same sort of eq every time to get things the way you want to hear them then I'd suggest you're not using mics that are right for what you want to hear. 

You didn't say what or how you tend to record.  IME the 4V's are best (in a relative sense) at some distance (I mean that IMO you'll notice the greatest advantage from them relative to another capsule or mic with at least a moderate distance from the stage).  That lift and signature really helps to cut through the crap aspects of the sound as you go further back in a room.  For instance I came back with what I thought was a truly amazing recording from the nosebleeds (near last row) in a crappy and very echoey mid sized hall (others thought it was the best sounding recording from the tour, even relative to a lot of them recorded right up front in the first couple rows).  The mics far exceeded my expectations (as well as what I heard there). 

Notice though that I almost never use mine in the setting in which I think they most excel.  If you're usually close in good rooms the 4's might be an option you'd like.  If you  >:D the 4V's vertical orientation is something I haven't quite reconciled (in terms of hard core very low profile use), though I have used them that way it was a stretch to call that spectacle >:D but it got things done.   

Also if you're looking at Milabs new I'd totally agree with the other commenter who says wait and look for some used 4V's.  They don't come up often but you could likely get a used pair for roughly the cost of new Milabs.  If your budget is large enough for a used set of 4V's don't even consider anything else especially if you've liked how the V's sound.  I often smile that if you have the shift on typing both characters 4V is $V, but occasionally you do get what you pay for.  They're worth every penny, especially if you can find a nice used pair. 

 

« Last Edit: July 28, 2014, 11:46:36 AM by bombdiggity »
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline hi and lo

  • Trade Count: (38)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2294

There are aspects of the sound of mics that don't show up in spec sheets/frequency plots (as dsatz starts to discuss above).  I perceive or label those differences as "tone" and "soundstage" (some may group them as "signature") though it involves many different more specific aspects (a lot of which I'm sure I can't explain though I hear the accrual of their impacts).


Let's keep in mind that these are all measurable characteristics (frequency response and polar pattern). It's just that you can't independently EQ them (i.e. response at a specific angle/axis) in post; you can only EQ the overall frequency response.

Quote
If you  >:D the 4V's vertical orientation is something I haven't quite reconciled (in terms of hard core very low profile use), though I have used them that way it was a stretch to call that spectacle >:D but it got things done.   

The trick is to run them horizontally, not vertically, otherwise you're gonna need a sombrero. There is a unique method for running them low-profile while oriented vertical, but it's less ideal and is more of an X-Y method.

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2277

There are aspects of the sound of mics that don't show up in spec sheets/frequency plots (as dsatz starts to discuss above).  I perceive or label those differences as "tone" and "soundstage" (some may group them as "signature") though it involves many different more specific aspects (a lot of which I'm sure I can't explain though I hear the accrual of their impacts).


Let's keep in mind that these are all measurable characteristics (frequency response and polar pattern). It's just that you can't independently EQ them (i.e. response at a specific angle/axis) in post; you can only EQ the overall frequency response.


Perhaps to an extent though I don't think any eq is fine enough to actually match up even the frequency response.  Part of it is how they sound across the entire range which involves every point from 0 Hz to 30+ kHz.  If the graphs at least some manufacturers publish overlook variances on the order of 2 dB then I'm not sure how one would arrive at any way of matching things. 

Quote
If you  >:D the 4V's vertical orientation is something I haven't quite reconciled (in terms of hard core very low profile use), though I have used them that way it was a stretch to call that spectacle >:D but it got things done.   

The trick is to run them horizontally, not vertically, otherwise you're gonna need a sombrero. There is a unique method for running them low-profile while oriented vertical, but it's less ideal and is more of an X-Y method.

Interesting.  Do tell (perhaps offline)...  I had heard some mention of this perspective but had not really arrived at a practical approach.  I've been thinking of how I might jerry rig something to move toward them exclusively.  The PITA factor has dissuaded me but every time I make an A/B with any other mic I think the difference is so huge I gotta figure it out for the shows I don't use them at...  I used to tell myself the crap halls just don't sound good enough to worry about it then I run them there and realize they're always a lot better. 
« Last Edit: July 28, 2014, 03:54:31 PM by bombdiggity »
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
There's a whole lot of useful discussion in this thread. 

why not just apply an eq curve that matches the mk4v to the ck61 capsule you already own?

That may go some way toward the "similarity" concern but no amount of eq will really match different mics.  There are aspects of the sound of mics that don't show up in spec sheets/frequency plots (as dsatz starts to discuss above).  I perceive or label those differences as "tone" and "soundstage" (some may group them as "signature") though it involves many different more specific aspects (a lot of which I'm sure I can't explain though I hear the accrual of their impacts).  Applying an eq curve to the results of a $20 or $200 mic isn't going to make it match a much better one.  Even applying a curve to several different very expensive mics won't make them completely match each other.  Of course not all can hear or appreciate the subtleties (see the comment elsewhere by an experienced taper who can't hear a difference between MP3 and wav). 

On the EQ topic (which was well covered elsewhere) I will again say I EQ when I feel something needs it but more often just leave them as they recorded because I'm fortunate to be able to run them in really good settings most of the time.  The caveat is that I tend to record acoustic unamplified jazz at essentially stage lip position.  An accurate mic captures what things sounded like and that's usually great, so I don't want to mess with it.  If you record anything that's going through a PA or from further back in a room (or both), each of those factors tends to necessitate some eq for correction of conditions that are adding to or changing the natural sound. 

Beyond the natural tone there's also a spatial referencing that may be even more unique  Though I'm recording with cards essentially right on the source the recordings have an amazing sense of the soundstage with very precise locational imaging.  When you play them you hear exactly where each instrument was on the stage and in reference to each other.  I recently did a three horn thing where the mics were centered and it has a surround field thing with a perfect left/center/right (from a pair of cards at less than a foot from the "center" instrument).  The depth and imaging is really great and something I don't get from other mics. 

I've got lots of examples of flat untouched recordings from the 4V's, but I don't think you're really on the fence about what the mics are capable of.  They are the very best stuff I've recorded in over 30 years of attempts.  They always sound far better than what I heard in the room even before any adjustments and I rarely do anything other than boost the levels in post to maximize the output/eliminate the cushion required in the live setting. 

If your mics require a lot of eq and the same sort of eq every time to get things the way you want to hear them then I'd suggest you're not using mics that are right for what you want to hear. 

You didn't say what or how you tend to record.  IME the 4V's are best (in a relative sense) at some distance (I mean that IMO you'll notice the greatest advantage from them relative to another capsule or mic with at least a moderate distance from the stage).  That lift and signature really helps to cut through the crap aspects of the sound as you go further back in a room.  For instance I came back with what I thought was a truly amazing recording from the nosebleeds (near last row) in a crappy and very echoey mid sized hall (others thought it was the best sounding recording from the tour, even relative to a lot of them recorded right up front in the first couple rows).  The mics far exceeded my expectations (as well as what I heard there). 
 

Agreed, there's a lot of great discussion in this topic & I'm glad I asked the question since this has opened up some other possibilities for me. It's also forced me to reevaluate my stance on the eq use. Last night I spent some time in foobar creating a similar curve as the 4v, it's pleasing, a definite improvement in fact & not unsurprisingly similar to my old C34 recordings. The C34 uses the CK1 cap which has a similar HF lift which is why the 4V appeals to me.
Also yes, I don't doubt what the 4V is capable of, I understand that no microphone from another brand will have the same sound regardless of eq applied, it goes for all the top tier microphones out there, each brand has it's benefits & use. I'm sorry, I forgot to mention my intended use. I'm so used to being here in the past where this was a smaller community so we all knew each other personally. Anyway, I'm an open taper, no stealth, hardly ever onstage. I'm a WSP taper mostly which is why I've run AKG's always as well as some short stints with MK4's & 4023's, I tape fob which is why a low profile active solution is almost mandatory for me. So not much if any jazz, the occasional bluegrass show but otherwise it's a rock & roll show.
As far as imaging, don't get me started since I've always been an imaging freak with my home stereo & headphone rigs. Most of the shows I attend are mono pa feeds. Ugh, such a shame to lose that important aspect of recordings with the typical sub par mono feed into a giant stereo stack, it's been a treat the few times I've run onstage & it's too bad that the bands I tend to enjoy aren't they types of bands you would tape onstage. Anyway, back to the discussion at hand, thank you all for your insight, it's really appreciated!
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15731
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Let's keep in mind that these are all measurable characteristics (frequency response and polar pattern). It's just that you can't independently EQ them (i.e. response at a specific angle/axis) in post; you can only EQ the overall frequency response.
Perhaps to an extent though I don't think any eq is fine enough to actually match up even the frequency response.  Part of it is how they sound across the entire range which involves every point from 0 Hz to 30+ kHz.  If the graphs at least some manufacturers publish overlook variances on the order of 2 dB then I'm not sure how one would arrive at any way of matching things.

Measure the on-axis response of both microphones at the intended usage distance, subtract one from the other to calculate the difference between them, invert that curve and apply as a correction.   That will match any on-axis minimum phase fequency response differences.  It will also affect but will not match the off-axis response. 

Carl essentially did that last night in foobar roughly by ear measurement, rather than precisely by more accurate means.
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 hi and lo

  • Trade Count: (38)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2294

Let's keep in mind that these are all measurable characteristics (frequency response and polar pattern). It's just that you can't independently EQ them (i.e. response at a specific angle/axis) in post; you can only EQ the overall frequency response.


Perhaps to an extent though I don't think any eq is fine enough to actually match up even the frequency response.  Part of it is how they sound across the entire range which involves every point from 0 Hz to 30+ kHz.  If the graphs at least some manufacturers publish overlook variances on the order of 2 dB then I'm not sure how one would arrive at any way of matching things. 

Right. For the purposes of this discussion, we should keep our frame of reference in the world of theory rather than reality. Factually speaking, it's possible to scientifically measure the entire range of frequency response for a given microphone and, using modern EQ tools with the most granular controls, also possible to match frequency response (assume at 0-axis) exactly.

You bring up the point of variation through the audible range of frequencies, which is a good one. I would take it a step further to also point out that every single microphone produced will have some variance from the published response charts, such that overlooked variances are going to be a problem right down to the actual microphones being tested. At some point, we have to respect the law of diminished returns and say that a match is 'close-enough,' both from the standpoint of manufacturing and purchasing microphones and for subsequent evaluations and EQ processing.

The whole point of this is to say that there isn't anything 'magical' to a microphone's signature. Everything can be measured and is quantifiable.

Quote
If you  >:D the 4V's vertical orientation is something I haven't quite reconciled (in terms of hard core very low profile use), though I have used them that way it was a stretch to call that spectacle >:D but it got things done.   

The trick is to run them horizontally, not vertically, otherwise you're gonna need a sombrero. There is a unique method for running them low-profile while oriented vertical, but it's less ideal and is more of an X-Y method.

Interesting.  Do tell (perhaps offline)...  I had heard some mention of this perspective but had not really arrived at a practical approach.  I've been thinking of how I might jerry rig something to move toward them exclusively.  The PITA factor has dissuaded me but every time I make an A/B with any other mic I think the difference is so huge I gotta figure it out for the shows I don't use them at...  I used to tell myself the crap halls just don't sound good enough to worry about it then I run them there and realize they're always a lot better.

No problem. I'll try to shoot you a PM later today.

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
so without having to go back to the dark side & sell all my AKG gear what are my other choices??

Avoid the moor in those hours of darkness when the powers of the Schoeps are exalted.

Offline nebulax

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #28 on: October 14, 2014, 12:39:04 AM »
I haven't actually used a modded Oktava mic myself, but I hear good things about them.  - http://www.oktavamodshop.com/product_info.php?cPath=2_30&products_id=81
"Write a wise saying and your name will live forever."
-*Anonymous*

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Team Schoeps Tapir that
  • Trade Count: (126)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40690
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
    • MediaFire Recordings
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #29 on: November 06, 2014, 05:11:31 AM »
Noah, it's a very valid point. In the past I have been opposed to any eq for the purity of blah blah blah but I am starting to see the benefit. It's painstakingly slow with Audacity though & it might benefit me to learn & adapt in the long run anyway. I've always enjoyed the MK 4V recordings I've heard & fortunately I'm not lusting over making the change. I've also started to enjoy the MKH 8040/50 recordings I've been listening too but who knows what kind of eq has been applied in post, although they still tend to bass monsters, not too heavy but definitely more pronounced than other microphones. What it's taught me though is while I think I can enjoy the sonic signature of a given mic I may not be hearing it in its absolute raw form so who knows. Although I can say regarding the MKH series the engineering seems to appeal to me & I really like the concept of what they claim with the supercard.

I can say that I'm struggling with my AKG recordings, it's a new rig & hasn't given me the results I'd hoped for, maybe my personal tastes have changed, maybe there's something slightly off in my signal chain, maybe it's a symmetry issue or just the rooms I've taped in. Unfortunately not at all confidence inspiring & many variables to take into consideration. In the past I knew what I was coming home with when I taped a show, it was pleasing to my ears & consistently made great recordings that I enjoyed. Now not so much which is why I've even considered selling everything & starting over from scratch, quite a drastic approach which may not be at all necessary. I've been enjoying this discussion & I'm learning which at the end of the day is what we're here for.
If you aren't bothering to EQ your recordings, you certainly shouldn't be spending money on Schoeps, or any other professional grade equipment for that matter. Every recording you have ever heard that was made by a professional is EQ'd, not to mention the sound from the PA systems you're recording that some here claim is somehow "pure" when it emerges from said PA system. The whole "don't EQ because of purity" thing is, at best, nonsense from the pre-digital era when some really bad EQ jobs were more common. Nowadays there is no excuse not to.

I'd first suggest buying a decent software platform that allows real-time monitoring of EQ. I use Audacity for tracking, but it's definitely subpar for EQ. I use the Izotope Ozone 5 VST running in Adobe Audition, and it allows you to listen in real time to what your EQing is doing. Izotope Ozone I'd recommend to anyone; as to the platform to run it on, anything that allows real-time VST (Audacity doesn't; it's one of its few weaknesses) should do it. Lots of folks seem to like Soundforge and Wavelab; I've never used either. The $500 or whatever that you spend on those options is a lot, lot less coin than what you'd spend restarting on your rig or buying Schoeps.

I don't think the problem you're having is that your AKGs are insufficiently good mics; the problem is that your AKGs are making more accurate recordings and you aren't maximizing their quality with EQ. What you are liking about MK4Vs is probably the HF bump that makes vocals more clear. While no EQ can make some other mic sound "like Schoeps", it can certainly make your recordings more pleasing to the ear and, ultimately, better than what you were getting before.

You can listen in real time in WaveLab 6 as well. VERY useful function for editing your recordings! And I agree, I kinda used to be a purist as well, but it literally takes me no time at all to EQ a show to where I'm happy with it and I'll UL it! It just makes sense in the end. I certainly dont do it to everything, but if something needs EQ'd and it will sound better in the end, then why not take the 20 minutes to make it better? And awesome software like WaveLab and Adobe Audition allow you to listen to your EQ in real time, so you can really dial in your mixes ;)

And since owning Schoeps in 2011, I too, have ZERO desire to switch mics!!! And not to mention, EQ'ing Schoeps is the easiest EQ'ing Ive EVER done!!! EQ'ing AKG's and even MBHOs was such a PITA. It usually takes just a few tweaks with my Schoeps and I'm done! But for me, most of my Schoeps recordings sound killer just the way they are. So if it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?
Schoeps MK 4V & MK 41V ->
Schoeps 250|0 KCY's (x2) ->
Naiant +60v|Low Noise PFA's (x2) ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's (x3) ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean
http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420
http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php
http://www.mediafire.com/folder/j9eu80jpuaubz/Recordings

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #30 on: November 07, 2014, 10:03:24 AM »
If all your processing is being done in Audacity, that would seem to be the weak link in your recording chain at the moment, IMO.  Audacity is incredible freeware, but you would find more advanced software helpful after getting past the learning curve.

I wonder which microphones each of us would pick if they were all priced the same at $500 each so that it really became an issue of how we liked them instead of an issue of what we can afford.   


Offline Bruce Watson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2014, 12:26:52 PM »
I've always loved the MK4V tapes I've heard & wonder what else is out there with a similar sound signature? It seems I tend to prefer that little boost they offer in the high end so without having to go back to the dark side & sell all my AKG gear what are my other choices??

Consider the Sennheiser MKH 8040. Similar pattern, and it has a little high end and low end boost to give it "character". Sennheiser did this (reportedly) because the MKH 40 was flat as a ruler. And much as people said that's what they wanted, that's not what they bought, because people said the 40 was too "bland". Thus, the 8040. Which is a pretty darned good, if underrated, cardioid.

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5845
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2014, 04:19:33 PM »
I've always loved the MK4V tapes I've heard & wonder what else is out there with a similar sound signature? It seems I tend to prefer that little boost they offer in the high end so without having to go back to the dark side & sell all my AKG gear what are my other choices??

Consider the Sennheiser MKH 8040. Similar pattern, and it has a little high end and low end boost to give it "character". Sennheiser did this (reportedly) because the MKH 40 was flat as a ruler. And much as people said that's what they wanted, that's not what they bought, because people said the 40 was too "bland". Thus, the 8040. Which is a pretty darned good, if underrated, cardioid.

This is all just opinions here, but I could not disagree more. The MK4V is my favorite microphone and I <B>hate</B> the MKH-8040, which I have recorded next to numerous times (not to mention in similar situations in the same position in the same room) and recorded with myself a couple. Whereas the MK4V has a musical warmth and a nice presence bump, the 8040 has bloated, undefined and overaccentuated bass and generally a very uneven and unpleasant response. If I weren't willing to spend Schoeps money there are numerous other mics I would go to before the 8040; in fact, I personally would only use that mic as a "beater" or a doorstop (I'm being dramatic, but you get my point).

I can only comment on the applications in which I would use it; maybe this bizarre sounding microphone is great in some other application than recording rock concerts. But I don't think it's very good at that.

Of course, this whole thread is kind of silly; if you want an MK4V, you need to buy one. It's like saying "I really like the Ferrari Testarossa; what can I buy that costs half as much?"
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline edtyre

  • Trade Count: (85)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2261
  • Gender: Male
  • Team Philly " No Excuses, Just Tapes"
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #33 on: November 07, 2014, 07:43:19 PM »
As a very recent owner of a set of MK4V caps, i have to say i am thrilled with them and having used a lot of different Schoeps
caps in the last 8 years i can't believe it took me this long to get to the best sounding ones for the types of shows i do in the
various rooms i record in. After doing a dozen shows with them, i am sold for life!! These won't be leaving my bag for any reason.

Some of the recordings i make with the Schoeps caps sound kinda dull or flat compared with how it sounded "live" at the venue,
it's after some type of EQ and other processing that i can hear a recording that really sounds nice and more like what i heard at the show.
Keeping the recordings "pure" is a joke to me. Hey whatever works for you, i'll do it my way for me  8)

Two years ago i started using Adobe Audition with Ozone 5 and the results have been very nice indeed. This is not a cheap way to go, but why
buy expensive professional gear and use cheap or free software.
music>mics>pre>recorder

Online tim in jersey

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3795
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #34 on: November 08, 2014, 12:12:15 AM »
As a very recent owner of a set of MK4V caps, i have to say i am thrilled with them and having used a lot of different Schoeps
caps in the last 8 years i can't believe it took me this long to get to the best sounding ones for the types of shows i do in the
various rooms i record in. After doing a dozen shows with them, i am sold for life!! These won't be leaving my bag for any reason.

'Bout time, Ed. ;)

Offline Bruce Watson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #35 on: November 08, 2014, 02:05:01 PM »
This is all just opinions here, but I could not disagree more.

That's OK, I don't mind. None-the-less, Sennheiser manages to sell quite a few 8040s, and they have rather wide spread use in acoustic and classical music recording. I doubt the people buying them think they are bad. That said, I don't actually own any 8040s, I'm just answering the OPs question.

Offline Hypnocracy

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (46)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2011
  • Hypnocratic Missionary
    • Hypno on teh LMA
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #36 on: November 14, 2014, 09:39:16 AM »
From Leftover Salmon Live at Ziggy's on 2014-06-07

Gefell M200
https://archive.org/download/los2014-06-07.Ziggys_Gefell/los20140607_Ziggys_08.mp3

Schoeps MK4V
https://archive.org/download/LoS2014-06-07/LoS2014-06-07S1t.08.mp3

I was surprised by the similarity.
_____________
hypno on teh Archive

This must be heaven -- 'cause here's where the rainbow ends
If this ain't the real thing, then it's close enough to pretend

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2277
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #37 on: November 17, 2014, 12:20:09 PM »
From Leftover Salmon Live at Ziggy's on 2014-06-07

Gefell M200
https://archive.org/download/los2014-06-07.Ziggys_Gefell/los20140607_Ziggys_08.mp3

Schoeps MK4V
https://archive.org/download/LoS2014-06-07/LoS2014-06-07S1t.08.mp3

I was surprised by the similarity.

The M200's sound good too but not necessarily within a high range of similarity by my lights.  More similar than some other mics but still different.  Comps are often interesting.  Thanks.
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #38 on: November 22, 2014, 07:33:26 AM »
FWIW I don't find this discussion silly, I think it's been a good discussion & I appreciate all the insight. With that being said I bought the Telefunken's & while they are not the MK4V's they have given me the sound I was after, very pleasing to my ears, possibly due to the HF lift they have, the tubes or the overall design principle. One thing I have noticed & enjoyed is that the hyper caps sound full & lush while still rejecting the typical room junk you want to avoid when using a hyper, I'd say they sound closer to a super card with excellent off axis rejection vs the typical hyper patterns I've used in the past while still retaining a full bottom end minus the room chatter & garbage,win win for my applications. Either way I'm happy. I may end up with the 4V's when I want an active set up again but for now I am more than happy with the tubes, thanks to all!
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #39 on: November 22, 2014, 07:53:10 AM »
edtyre, would you be willing to share some of the EQ settings that you've found useful? Audition has very well-labeled controls, so anything that you set in that software ought to transfer to other software or even (for those who may have them) to analog equalizers.

Granted, it's a matter of personal tastes and expectations, plus you're always equalizing for your particular playback setup.

--best regards
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline carlbeck

  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2811
  • Gender: Male
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #40 on: November 22, 2014, 08:07:43 AM »
Granted, it's a matter of personal tastes and expectations, plus you're always equalizing for your particular playback setup.

--best regards

Agreed, also thanks to this discussion I've started to eq my recordings as necessary in addition to some eq settings during playback.
I know you like, tape for people's approval and stuff, and wave your tapes around like they're your dick...  but even you can't actually think section tapes from philips sound good.  



Mics: Telefunken Elam 260, 61, 62, MBHO KA200, KA500 > Niant PFA's, AKG C34L-MS
Preamps: Grace Lunatec V2, Shure FP24
Decks: Tascam DR-2d, Zoom F8

Old rig: Recording: AKG C34 & AKG CK1X or CK2X > MK46 > 460 > Aeta Mix2000 > Sound Devices 702

Playback: Thorens TD125, Denon DVD-2900> Bel Canto DAC-1 > Audible Illusions 3B > Rogue Atlas >ZU Wax Shotgun> Hyperion 938
ALL TUBES BABY!!!

Offline F.O.Bean

  • Team Schoeps Tapir that
  • Trade Count: (126)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40690
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
    • MediaFire Recordings
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #41 on: November 22, 2014, 08:20:42 AM »
FWIW I don't find this discussion silly, I think it's been a good discussion & I appreciate all the insight. With that being said I bought the Telefunken's & while they are not the MK4V's they have given me the sound I was after, very pleasing to my ears, possibly due to the HF lift they have, the tubes or the overall design principle. One thing I have noticed & enjoyed is that the hyper caps sound full & lush while still rejecting the typical room junk you want to avoid when using a hyper, I'd say they sound closer to a super card with excellent off axis rejection vs the typical hyper patterns I've used in the past while still retaining a full bottom end minus the room chatter & garbage,win win for my applications. Either way I'm happy. I may end up with the 4V's when I want an active set up again but for now I am more than happy with the tubes, thanks to all!

Glad you found something that you're happy with, Carl ;) Even though they're not Schempz lol ;D 8) But seriously, when you find the sound you've been chasing for awhile, it can be total nirvana ;D
Schoeps MK 4V & MK 41V ->
Schoeps 250|0 KCY's (x2) ->
Naiant +60v|Low Noise PFA's (x2) ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's (x3) ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean
http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420
http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php
http://www.mediafire.com/folder/j9eu80jpuaubz/Recordings

Offline Matt Quinn

  • No Ceilings
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2471
  • Gender: Male
  • beep boop
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #42 on: December 11, 2014, 03:28:37 PM »

I wonder which microphones each of us would pick if they were all priced the same at $500 each so that it really became an issue of how we liked them instead of an issue of what we can afford.


I sold my Schoeps>V3>671 combo to exclusively run my AT853s>Marantz 620 because I'm convinced that between being able to position myself in the best spot in the room (far & away the most important factor IMO) and EQing/Compressing the tape after the show, the difference in end results was not worth the difference in price. Nice software is magical.
In: AT853>PMD620
Out: PC>MOTU Ultralite AVB>M-Audio BX8a/Grace m900

DAW: Ableton Live 10

My LMA Recordings

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15731
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #43 on: December 11, 2014, 05:08:34 PM »
^^
Knowledge is more powerful than pedigree.  Although both working together appropriately often forms the killer combo.  Knowing how to use something most effectively and mastering the appropriate techniques for getting the most out of the result are the keys to getting the best results out of any gear.  We can then get the best out of things which are even more important over which we have no control- the program, the performance, the audience, the acoustics..
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)

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #44 on: December 13, 2014, 09:20:15 AM »
On the subject of EQ'ing my recordings, for me I can't say there's any specific EQ that I do.  Some shows need more warmth, some need more presence.  If I had to guess, I'm adding presence more times than I'm adding warmth.  To my ears, I love  hearing detail in my recordings and an upper middle bump often adds a pleasing sparkle or shine.

Seems that the room, the band amp settings, and the FOH engineers PA sound varies enough from show to show that there's never a one-size-fits-all setting that I can apply to all of my recordings.

That said, after I get home from a festival where I have say 40 sets to master, it's often a real time saver to figure out a general EQ profile I got from a certain stage, save it, and apply it to all of the recordings from that particular stage...and tweek from there.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15731
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2014, 12:33:22 AM »
Words of wisdom there.
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 F.O.Bean

  • Team Schoeps Tapir that
  • Trade Count: (126)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 40690
  • Gender: Male
  • Taperus Maximus
    • MediaFire Recordings
Re: Something similar to Schoeps MK4V without having to go to the darkside?
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2014, 03:18:46 AM »
No doubt. I just EQ when I need to, and go from there!
Schoeps MK 4V & MK 41V ->
Schoeps 250|0 KCY's (x2) ->
Naiant +60v|Low Noise PFA's (x2) ->
DarkTrain Right Angle Stubby XLR's (x3) ->
Sound Devices MixPre-6 & MixPre-3

http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/diskobean
http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/Bean420
http://bt.etree.org/mytorrents.php
http://www.mediafire.com/folder/j9eu80jpuaubz/Recordings

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.25 seconds with 72 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF