Gear / Technical Help > Microphones & Setup
DPA 2012 & 2015
aaronji:
Which clearly look like a response to the MMP-C...
Honestly, I think these mics are still new enough that you can't expect too many samples as of yet. A lot of people are hesitant to be an early adopter. The reviews will start trickling in as more people give them a shot (and as DPA loans out a bunch to good customers to try); that's pretty much what happened when they first introduced the modular line-up.
voltronic:
--- Quote from: aaronji on December 25, 2023, 04:34:41 PM ---Which clearly look like a response to the MMP-C...
Honestly, I think these mics are still new enough that you can't expect too many samples as of yet. A lot of people are hesitant to be an early adopter. The reviews will start trickling in as more people give them a shot (and as DPA loans out a bunch to good customers to try); that's pretty much what happened when they first introduced the modular line-up.
--- End quote ---
Right, and the people who record the stuff I do aren't likely to try these mics as mains because they already own the 4000 series, Schoeps, Senn MKH, etc. and assume (perhaps correctly) that these new "stage" DPAs won't be quite as good so they won't bother trying them. Although many of these same people own Line Audio mics which are WAY cheaper...
Organfreak:
Last year I have been searching for a complementary pair to my DPA 4090 mics and I had both a set of DPA 2012 and a set DPA 2015 home for a few weeks to try. Kindly arranged with the Belgium/Dutch DPA importer (Amptec).
I did some pipe organ recordings with 2x2012 + 2x2015 + 2x4090 all into my F6.
The sound signature of the 2012 and 2015 was very similar, also similar to the 4090. Both 2012 and 2015 are clearly designed for close recording; they work best at a distance where my 4090 still does a good job so for me they were not complementary, rather alternative options.
Compared with some other microphones I tried (KM184, KM140, KM143) they have notable more bass. I found that remarkable for directional microphones.
The DPA 4090 is however still more neutral than both the 2012 and 2015.
Compared with the DPA2015 the KM143 is much brighter and needs to be used quite far from the organ to sound balanced. It has also less bass. For a standalone microphone I would have selected the DPA2015. However, for use together with my DPA4090 (4 mics on one bar), the KM143 is a better addition (for application in huge acoustics or when the organ is too high for my stand).
I had a chance to exchange a pair brand-new pair of KM184 against a pair of KM143. That was what I finally did. I hope this was a good deal.
The KM143's were just used for voice amplification purposes, so they have got a better life now :D.
HealthCov Chris:
--- Quote from: Organfreak on January 19, 2024, 11:17:38 AM ---Last year I have been searching for a complementary pair to my DPA 4090 mics and I had both a set of DPA 2012 and a set DPA 2015 home for a few weeks to try. Kindly arranged with the Belgium/Dutch DPA importer (Amptec).
I did some pipe organ recordings with 2x2012 + 2x2015 + 2x4090 all into my F6.
The sound signature of the 2012 and 2015 was very similar, also similar to the 4090. Both 2012 and 2015 are clearly designed for close recording; they work best at a distance where my 4090 still does a good job so for me they were not complementary, rather alternative options.
Compared with some other microphones I tried (KM184, KM140, KM143) they have notable more bass. I found that remarkable for directional microphones.
The DPA 4090 is however still more neutral than both the 2012 and 2015.
Compared with the DPA2015 the KM143 is much brighter and needs to be used quite far from the organ to sound balanced. It has also less bass. For a standalone microphone I would have selected the DPA2015. However, for use together with my DPA4090 (4 mics on one bar), the KM143 is a better addition (for application in huge acoustics or when the organ is too high for my stand).
I had a chance to exchange a pair brand-new pair of KM184 against a pair of KM143. That was what I finally did. I hope this was a good deal.
The KM143's were just used for voice amplification purposes, so they have got a better life now :D.
--- End quote ---
So, sounds like you feel they may not be ideal for our purposes of field recording at a distance from the stage?
Organfreak:
Hello Chris, in the pipe organ recording world close distance is ~5 meters while far is ~11 meters. I do not know how that translate to tapering of amplified shows.
If you send me a PM I may send you the complete 6 channel F6 recording file (32 bit, 44,1 kHz) via WeTransfer.
The DPA4090 stereo track can be used as reference to judge and compare the DPA2012 and DPA2015 tracks.
I used several stops when playing the pipe organ; certain stops like Cornet and Trumpet reveal the differences between the mikes more than the round sounding flutes.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version