Topic: Mic flavors chart

[SmokinJoe]

I found this somewhere, not sure if it was a thread here or elsewhere.  I'm not sure how someone came up with this chart, probably just their own "expert opinion".  It's interesting to look at and debate.   

Please don't quote it as gospel.

[page]

yeah, last revised around 2006 or 2007. I used to have the original link somewhere from the guy who did it and had a studio and a ton of gear. It showed up on GS shortly after that time. Thats my contribution to the thread.

[jnorman34]

having used many of those mics, i would have to disagree with many of the placements.  eg, the royer r121 is certainly brighter than the coles 4038, and the c42 is way edgier than km184.  the U47 is certainly not a dark mic.  and while the C414 XLII is moderately bright, the C414b uls is a relatively flat response mic.  the schoeps models i have used surely have some definte color to them, as does the venerable sony c800.  etc.

do not trust anyone's opinion of mics or other gear - use your own ears.  there are lots of mic comparison clips and samples around these days if you cant hear them in person.   

[Myco]

Totally subjective, and IMHO, wrong.

[page]

I don't think they are far off, yeah there is some stuff I don't necessarily agree with, but there is a lot that I do. We can't use field recordings to really base something on whether it's bright or dark since our typical environment has more bass than most are expecting.

Look at the DPA, AKG 414, Gefell 295, Neumann km184, and AKG D12. I agree with general placement of all of those. ymmv.

[newplanet7]

Echoing pages statement, and adding most of the mics listed you won't see on our recordings lineages.
Also, a huge unknown factor here was the rest of the gear used in conjunction with the micss.
Power/pre/ad??

[SmokinJoe]

I agree DPA and Earthworks are transparent. I agree 451's are bright. I find it interesting how ADK TL, TC, and TT are cast to different corners, and how Vienna and Hamburg are so close, when ADK portrays them as being quite different. Similarly the different Peluso models are all over the place, which may be correct, I don't have experience with them except the CEMC6, which I would call a bit "less bright and more colored.

I had 414XLS and I don't think they are bright at all. Frequently my tapes were very warm, approaching muddy, to the point the never got released.

[acidjack]

I don't think they are far off, yeah there is some stuff I don't necessarily agree with, but there is a lot that I do. We can't use field recordings to really base something on whether it's bright or dark since our typical environment has more bass than most are expecting.

Look at the DPA, AKG 414, Gefell 295, Neumann km184, and AKG D12. I agree with general placement of all of those. ymmv.

Among stuff I've listened to much, the call on DPA was uncontroversial and right, same as on KM184.  I think with 414s it really depends.  As noted, the 414-TLII is very different than the B-XLS version I have, which is flatter.

The big ticket item for debate up there is Schoeps.  People say they're colored, and relative to DPA I suppose they are.  If anything, I'm surprised they were located on the slightly bright end of the spectrum.  Again, I suppose relative to DPA they are; relative to many of the other choices, they're not at all.

[DSatz]

I remember when this chart first appeared. The thing is, a microphone that's "transparent" (at least as I would use the word, meaning that it doesn't audibly change the sound that it picks up) by definition can't be either "bright" or "dark." Or another definition could be that "color" = upper midrange response while bright vs. dark = high-frequency response. But either way the logical problem is the same. The field ought to be triangular or wedge-shaped, starting from a point of convergence on the "transparent" side and growing taller toward the "color" side.

And unfortunately, either way, many of ratings seem to be just plain cuckoo wrong. Plus, in many cases the person just put a manufacturer's name on the chart as if that company only made one microphone type that mattered (e.g. Schoeps and DPA). In other cases he put a model number with the name, but that model has multiple capsules or pattern settings that sound different (e.g. the AKG mikes).

The sad thing is, this chart has axes that are at least potentially definable objectively, and if someone were to state those definitions clearly and measure the microphones under fair and equal test conditions, a scatter chart might really tell the world something useful. And that wouldn't even be super-hard to do, at least for the on-axis response of the mikes.

Of course, then I'd want to see a similar chart for diffuse-field response, since I don't do much of my recording work in anechoic chambers--for some reason people just don't put on operas and recitals in them ...

--best regards

[myke2241]

ya, i dont know where this guy got the idea that a U87 is on the "bright" side of things. maybe the guy was listening to a pair on overheads.... either way the guy is smoking crack to me!

[Gutbucket]

The field ought to be triangular or wedge-shaped, starting from a point of convergence on the "transparent" side and growing taller toward the "color" side.

That was the first thing that jumped out at me concerning the idea for this chart, regardless of actual placement inaccuracies.

Bring on the direct and diffuse triangular scatter plots! If nothing else we can have more fun arguing about appropriate mic placement on those.

[page]

Bring on the direct and diffuse triangular scatter plots! If nothing else we can have more fun arguing about appropriate mic placement on those.

+1