Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: MK21 vs MK22?  (Read 4480 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MakersMarc

  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6421
  • Gender: Male
  • 😈
MK21 vs MK22?
« on: October 27, 2020, 12:42:04 PM »
anyone care to comment on the differences?

Thanks!
😈 Mk4v/41v>nbob actives>Baby nbox>Oade warm mod Marantz 620.

Open: 4v/41v>nbobs>Nicky mod Naiant PFA>Oade warm mod 661.

Home: the Stereo Hospital budget refurb rig: Lappie>DragonFly Cobalt/Red with Jitterbug>Nikko NR520 amp>B&W V202 speakers.

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2512
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2020, 03:18:25 PM »
I'm attaching pictures of their polar patterns which is basically the difference. Links to Phish MPP II from last summer below.

The mk21 is halfway between the mk2 omni and the mk4 card- it's a classic "subcardioid," and sounds much like an omni, except that you can aim it. It's great for use outside, onstage, FOB or anywhere the sound sis good and louder than the crowd. Big bass response. I love using a mk21 as a mid in a m/s (like this: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1c_ea6rAmjD-72IB8SlVWPp6GyUBGsLAF?usp=sharing, or this from MGB at the egg in Albany: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Bz8U0q5zboSE7mHc4b-pGt0HnnzuFXED?usp=sharing)

The mk22 is halfway between the mk21 and the mk4, so a slightly tighter pattern which still retains the open sound of a sub card. It's useful everywhere, and I run it at every show- OTS, On Stage, FOB, everywhere. It's open enough to capture everything, and yet directional enough to reject enough of the room and the crowd to make a good audience tape even from a compromised location.
If I could only have one schoeps pair it would be the mk22 (Same show with the mk22 pair: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/18RIQ1zUWsbA3WfMRHNj2Ym4AmxkoBTy-?usp=sharing)

When you get the mk22 in the right spot it can be magic: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1XAdOA9jVlqK1zygWw_sOd9i5LYVHyGmz?usp=sharing (That's 6/28/16 Mann Music center, from the DFC Balcony rail)
« Last Edit: October 27, 2020, 03:23:59 PM by noahbickart »
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 DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3169
  • Gender: Male
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2020, 10:19:45 PM »
For the type of recording I mostly do (classical ensembles and opera), the MK 22 has wider application than the MK 21. It's become my favorite capsule.

However, there have been a few times when I've become aware that the MK 21 would be just the right thing for a particular situation--and then it was sensational. One of the best-sounding concert recordings that I've ever made was made with the MK 21. Basically I think of the MK 21 as an omni that can nonetheless be used on a stereo bar of reasonable length to get a recording with a reasonable stereo image. That way you get 80% or more of the yummy, fun goodness that makes people want to use omnidirectional microphones, but you also get consistent (if not too emphatic) localization and no "phasiness".

The MK 22's advantage is that it helps to sort out multiple, diverse sound sources, where the MK 21s blend them together somewhat more. However, that's a concern that may not apply to arena recording where the main sound source is a P.A. system in which all the instruments and microphone signals are already mixed together, I dunno.
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline jerryfreak

  • No PZ
  • (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 6206
  • The plural of anecdote is not data
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2020, 11:38:08 PM »
would you say the mk21 is inferior to the mk22 for our application when it comes to stereo imaging?
currently "banned" for this "controversial" post
email me if you need to connect, as i am not allowed to send PM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
for sale (email in profile):
Mixpre6 v1 (NIB)
CA14 cards
(2) Manfrotto 099B mic poles

---------------
(1) Phish LA Forum tapers ticket

Offline weroflu

  • (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 338
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #4 on: October 30, 2020, 07:00:04 AM »
Dsatz: care to comment on proximity effect of the mk21?


Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3376
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #5 on: October 30, 2020, 08:32:55 AM »
^ I don't know specifically about the MK21, but the DPA4015 has a similar polar pattern and, I would guess, a more-or-less similar proximity effect. Here is DPA's graph for the 4015; maybe this helps...

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3169
  • Gender: Male
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #6 on: October 30, 2020, 09:33:22 AM »
aaronji, that's a very interesting set of graphs. Thanks for posting it. That's the kind of thing I wish more manufacturers would do.

weroflu, I've never used either type of capsule for close-up recording and your question makes me realize that I've never seen measurement results of proximity effect for any Schoeps microphones. Proximity effect depends on the physical geometry of a capsule, so it's not something that should vary much among microphones of the same general size / shape / operating principle. All other things being equal, the greater the proportion of pressure gradient sensitivity that a microphone has (i.e. the more it is like a figure-8 and the less it is like an omni), the greater the proximity effect.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2020, 12:16:58 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline wforwumbo

  • (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #7 on: October 30, 2020, 10:11:15 AM »
I’ve run my 21s next to Noah’s 22s a handful of times. DSatz’s assessment is fairly accurate - the 22 in practice seems to give slightly more defined imaging of sources, and the 21 gives a more “realistic/hi-fi” capture of the room, which can give a “hazier” image.

My thoughts for taping: The 21’s bass response is noticeably better than the 22’s to my ear. The 21 reaches deeper and maintains its definition to lower frequencies. Though this isn’t to say the 22 lacks bass by any means. I also prefer the 22’s treble to the 21’s: I hear a softer and more pleasant mild roll off in the top end of the 22, whereas the 21’s treble is aggressively honest and at times unpleasant. This said, I’ve preferred my results on the 21 when massively cutting the angle to much lower than we as tapers are used to using - the best results I’ve gotten from it are in A-B, followed by 30cm/60 degrees. I think the 21 is a LOT more open than we give it credit for. To wit, a good comparison I think would be to think of the 21 more as an omni you can aim, whereas the 22 is more of a cardioid that brings in the bass. The 21 definitely captures way more room and the 22 captures less room, when deployed similarly. From OTS, I think the 22 is a more forgiving cap and will be more likely to pull a tape that is more enjoyable to listen to, though there’s something to be said about “getting it right” with the 21 (which is still something I don’t feel I have figured out just yet).

It isn’t a 1-1 mapping, but on 12/31/18 Noah and I both ran out mics on the same stand 15’ up in the air. I believe Noah ran his mk22 pair at 50ish cm PAS, and I ran my 21s in 35 cm/65 degrees. We both used Mixpre-6’s, Nbob KCYs, and Naiant PFAs (though Noah’s run 60V and mine 48V). This should give you a better idea of their similarities and differences. If the etree links are dead just poke us and we would both be happy to get the tapes in your hand so you can spin for yourself.

In the studio, I only have experience with the 21. I don’t experience much proximity effect on guitars or drums, which is mostly what I use it on. Certainly nowhere near what I get with the mk4. I like this a lot actually, as I can throw a cmc521 on my guitar cabs and get an honest omni-like capture of my Mesas while getting *some* rear rejection of me playing in front of my amp. The treble is also a lot more manageable on a source up close, ime.
North Jersey native, Upstate veteran, proud Texan

2x Schoeps mk2
2x Schoeps mk21
2x Schoeps mk4
2x Schoeps mk41v
1x Schoeps ccm8

Grace Lunatec V3
2x Schoeps cmc5
2x Schoeps KC5
2x Nbob KCY
2x Naiant PFA

Sound Devices Mixpre-6

Offline prepschoolalumniblues

  • (5)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 105
  • Scents and subtle sounds
    • Phish.net Profile
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #8 on: October 30, 2020, 11:19:44 AM »
I’ve preferred my results on the 21 when massively cutting the angle to much lower than we as tapers are used to using - the best results I’ve gotten from it are in A-B, followed by 30cm/60 degrees.

I really enjoyed reading your detailed post — thanks. What does your spacing tend to look like for A-B?

Offline wforwumbo

  • (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #9 on: October 30, 2020, 11:35:36 AM »
I’ve preferred my results on the 21 when massively cutting the angle to much lower than we as tapers are used to using - the best results I’ve gotten from it are in A-B, followed by 30cm/60 degrees.

I really enjoyed reading your detailed post — thanks. What does your spacing tend to look like for A-B?

Cheers. Also, a+ avatar - always fun finding another Spacemen 3 fan in the wild. Fun story for another time: my best friend and his old bandleader (The Lilys, if you know them) were invited in the early aughts to become their guitar section for a one-off tour, one of his biggest regrets is saying no due to health issues he was facing.

For A-B, I've used 30, 35, 45, and 60 cm. I find that with the 21 - and, for that matter, most Schoeps capsules I have used - there is a massive amount of bass response gained when you move to 30 cm, and past that it's just "more or less spacious/image of the room" with a bigger hole in the middle, and outside of that there's not a massive gain in bass response to my ear in the section. I prefer running at 30-35 cm for practical reasons.

This is, of course, assuming amplified rock music. I have yet to experiment with wider splits for classical, based on intuition I would expect for something like pipe organ (which one of my mentors, David Griesinger, has discussed with me at length) I would probably want a split of upwards of 25-30 feet.
North Jersey native, Upstate veteran, proud Texan

2x Schoeps mk2
2x Schoeps mk21
2x Schoeps mk4
2x Schoeps mk41v
1x Schoeps ccm8

Grace Lunatec V3
2x Schoeps cmc5
2x Schoeps KC5
2x Nbob KCY
2x Naiant PFA

Sound Devices Mixpre-6

Offline MakersMarc

  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6421
  • Gender: Male
  • 😈
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #10 on: October 30, 2020, 12:23:34 PM »
Thanks all! Fascinating stuff.


😈 Mk4v/41v>nbob actives>Baby nbox>Oade warm mod Marantz 620.

Open: 4v/41v>nbobs>Nicky mod Naiant PFA>Oade warm mod 661.

Home: the Stereo Hospital budget refurb rig: Lappie>DragonFly Cobalt/Red with Jitterbug>Nikko NR520 amp>B&W V202 speakers.

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2512
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #11 on: October 30, 2020, 05:47:10 PM »
I’ve run my 21s next to Noah’s 22s a handful of times...  It isn’t a 1-1 mapping, but on 12/31/18 Noah and I both ran out mics on the same stand 15’ up in the air. I believe Noah ran his mk22 pair at 50ish cm PAS, and I ran my 21s in 35 cm/65 degrees. We both used Mixpre-6’s, Nbob KCYs, and Naiant PFAs (though Noah’s run 60V and mine 48V). This should give you a better idea of their similarities and differences.

Here's my tape from that night:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16PK63wwpO-mTHbLxqgBo2UmDgwXv3JSm?usp=sharing
Phish
Madison Square Garden
December 31, 2018

Schoeps Schoeps mk22 (PAS ~65° @ 45cm)> nbob kcy> Schoeps VMS 02ib (+20db)> Sound Devices Mixpre6 (Channels 5 & 6 Line in @ 24bit / 48kHz)
Location: OTS, DFC. Clamped above padelimike's centered stand, ~16' High.
Transfer: Sound Devices Mixpre6> USB-C> Macbook Pro> Sound Studio (Tracking & Fades)> xAct (SBE & Tags)

Recorded and transferred by Phishrabbi <noahbickart@gmail.com>

Set I:
Intro
The Moma Dance
Stray Dog
555
Sand
Lawn Boy
Steam >
Chalk Dust Torture >
What's The Use?
Play By Play
Waste
Ass Handed
Run Like An Antelope
Outro

Set II:
Intro
Down With Disease
Farmhouse
Seven Below >
Twist
Harry Hood
Passing Through
Harry Hood
Outro

Set III:
Intro
Mercury
Auld Lang Syne
Say It To Me S.A.N.T.O.S.
Simple >
Saw It Again
Limb By Limb
Rock And Roll >
Suzy Greenberg
Encore Break
The Lizards
Character Zero
Outros
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 DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3169
  • Gender: Male
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #12 on: October 31, 2020, 10:35:54 AM »
wforwumbo, this gets to the question of the minimum spacing for good-sounding A/B recordings. The dominant tradition in U.S. classical recording has been very wide spacing (think microphones at the 1/3 and 2/3 points along the stage width), while "Decca Tree" recording is more moderate, but still several times wider than you're talking about.

In most of continental Europe the spacings have generally been smaller, more like what you're talking about--which American-trained engineers who've never tried it sometimes look at, and ask in all sincerity, "But how can you possibly get enough separation for stereo that way?"

It's interesting that you report, 'there is a massive amount of bass response gained when you move to 30 cm, and past that it's just "more or less spacious/image of the room" with a bigger hole in the middle, and outside of that there's not a massive gain in bass response to my ear in the section.' The increase in spaciousness gained by increasing the microphone spacing is just what one would expect--but ordinarily I wouldn't expect the overall quantity of bass pickup to be affected by stereo vs. mono recording, unless it was mono recording from a particularly bass-deprived spot in a hall that has severely irregular reinforcement of low frequencies to begin with, i.e. a bad choice and/or really bad luck. Even then I would expect the comparable stereo recording to sound imbalanced (I mean L vs. R) in the bass. What do you think creates the impression of "more bass" assuming that it sounds balanced in your recordings?

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

Offline wforwumbo

  • (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #13 on: October 31, 2020, 09:54:42 PM »
wforwumbo, this gets to the question of the minimum spacing for good-sounding A/B recordings. The dominant tradition in U.S. classical recording has been very wide spacing (think microphones at the 1/3 and 2/3 points along the stage width), while "Decca Tree" recording is more moderate, but still several times wider than you're talking about.

In most of continental Europe the spacings have generally been smaller, more like what you're talking about--which American-trained engineers who've never tried it sometimes look at, and ask in all sincerity, "But how can you possibly get enough separation for stereo that way?"

It's interesting that you report, 'there is a massive amount of bass response gained when you move to 30 cm, and past that it's just "more or less spacious/image of the room" with a bigger hole in the middle, and outside of that there's not a massive gain in bass response to my ear in the section.' The increase in spaciousness gained by increasing the microphone spacing is just what one would expect--but ordinarily I wouldn't expect the overall quantity of bass pickup to be affected by stereo vs. mono recording, unless it was mono recording from a particularly bass-deprived spot in a hall that has severely irregular reinforcement of low frequencies to begin with, i.e. a bad choice and/or really bad luck. Even then I would expect the comparable stereo recording to sound imbalanced (I mean L vs. R) in the bass. What do you think creates the impression of "more bass" assuming that it sounds balanced in your recordings?

--best regards

I want to respond to this a bit more when I get back from dinner, but my thesis statement will be along the lines of: I suspect that 30 cm is a “lower limit” for capturing pleasant interaural time difference cues. It’s not that we don’t get “better” or “more” at wider distances, it’s that ~30 cm happens to be a heuristic minimum distance for pleasing the temporal side of the binaural system.
North Jersey native, Upstate veteran, proud Texan

2x Schoeps mk2
2x Schoeps mk21
2x Schoeps mk4
2x Schoeps mk41v
1x Schoeps ccm8

Grace Lunatec V3
2x Schoeps cmc5
2x Schoeps KC5
2x Nbob KCY
2x Naiant PFA

Sound Devices Mixpre-6

Offline fireonshakedwnstreet

  • (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 280
  • Gender: Male
  • David
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #14 on: November 01, 2020, 01:13:36 AM »
I’ve run my 21s next to Noah’s 22s a handful of times...  It isn’t a 1-1 mapping, but on 12/31/18 Noah and I both ran out mics on the same stand 15’ up in the air. I believe Noah ran his mk22 pair at 50ish cm PAS, and I ran my 21s in 35 cm/65 degrees. We both used Mixpre-6’s, Nbob KCYs, and Naiant PFAs (though Noah’s run 60V and mine 48V). This should give you a better idea of their similarities and differences.

Here's my tape from that night:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16PK63wwpO-mTHbLxqgBo2UmDgwXv3JSm?usp=sharing
Phish
Madison Square Garden
December 31, 2018


This is a great tape. Nothing else to add except that these are dream mics.
Mics: AT 3031; AT 853Rx (C,O); AT 835b; Studio Projects C4 (C,O,H); Samson CO2; Nady RSM-5
Recorders: Tascam DR-680 MkII; Tascam DR-70D
Pres: Sound Devices MixPre; Edirol UA-5 (Oade PMod); Shure FP11 x2 (w/Rolls PB224 Phantom Power Supply)
Cables: Gepco 8 Channel Snake

Offline rigpimp

  • (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Gender: Male
  • Jarts don't kill people!
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #15 on: November 01, 2020, 12:32:14 PM »
I'm simply posting here to track all of the Schoeps Genius comments on two caps I know very little about. 

When I first saw the polar pattern chart at the top it occurred to me that the mk21 might be better at rejecting wind noise due to its shape being more like a pure omni.  Does anyone have experience running these outdoors in windier environs? 

I already own pairs of CCM4, MK8, and MK5 so I feel that I could probably get close to recreating the sound of a 21 or 22 in post-production with an M/S pair.  I guess I am trying to justify why I need the 21 or 22.

Mics: Schoeps MK5 G MP, Schoeps CCM 4 Lg MP, Schoeps MK8 MP, nBob cables > PFA, KCY 250/5 > PFA
Pre/A>D/P48: Sonosax SX/M2-LS, E.A.A. PSP-2, Naiant Tinybox, Neumann BS48i-2 (for sale)
Recorders: Sound Devices Mixpre-6, Sony PCM-M10
Playback: McIntosh MC 2105 > McIntosh MX 130 > Von Schweikert VR-4 JR
http://archive.org/bookmarks/kskreider
https://archive.org/details/thespps

Offline wforwumbo

  • (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #16 on: November 01, 2020, 01:55:12 PM »
I'm simply posting here to track all of the Schoeps Genius comments on two caps I know very little about. 

When I first saw the polar pattern chart at the top it occurred to me that the mk21 might be better at rejecting wind noise due to its shape being more like a pure omni.  Does anyone have experience running these outdoors in windier environs? 

I already own pairs of CCM4, MK8, and MK5 so I feel that I could probably get close to recreating the sound of a 21 or 22 in post-production with an M/S pair.  I guess I am trying to justify why I need the 21 or 22.

I ran them next to you in NOS at Gorge ‘18 nights 1 + first half of night 2. I have also run them at Dick’s.

They are not impervious to wind noise, but they are *significantly* more resilient than the 4.

Edit: given were both Bay Area tapers, next time shows are allowed you’re welcome to take a patch off me, or you’re welcome to borrow my 21s. Better yet, if I get a pair of 22s between now and then we can run em head to head.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2020, 01:57:13 PM by wforwumbo »
North Jersey native, Upstate veteran, proud Texan

2x Schoeps mk2
2x Schoeps mk21
2x Schoeps mk4
2x Schoeps mk41v
1x Schoeps ccm8

Grace Lunatec V3
2x Schoeps cmc5
2x Schoeps KC5
2x Nbob KCY
2x Naiant PFA

Sound Devices Mixpre-6

Offline jerryfreak

  • No PZ
  • (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 6206
  • The plural of anecdote is not data
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #17 on: November 01, 2020, 07:21:26 PM »
if you guys ever do get together for your open card/subcard showdown, it would be cool to throw some 4015s in the mix. the pattern has characteristics of both MK21 and MK22. probably closer to MK22



also provides a bit of HF lift that some people like. MK22 is relatively flat. MK21 has a 2dB bump from 10-20kHz. the DPA is a lil more pronounced



« Last Edit: November 01, 2020, 07:46:17 PM by jerryfreak »
currently "banned" for this "controversial" post
email me if you need to connect, as i am not allowed to send PM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
for sale (email in profile):
Mixpre6 v1 (NIB)
CA14 cards
(2) Manfrotto 099B mic poles

---------------
(1) Phish LA Forum tapers ticket

Offline jerryfreak

  • No PZ
  • (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 6206
  • The plural of anecdote is not data
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #18 on: November 01, 2020, 07:25:00 PM »
does anybody know what this chart means? its from Schoeps MK22 page

currently "banned" for this "controversial" post
email me if you need to connect, as i am not allowed to send PM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
for sale (email in profile):
Mixpre6 v1 (NIB)
CA14 cards
(2) Manfrotto 099B mic poles

---------------
(1) Phish LA Forum tapers ticket

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2512
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #19 on: November 01, 2020, 07:25:25 PM »
I’ve run my 21s next to Noah’s 22s a handful of times...  It isn’t a 1-1 mapping, but on 12/31/18 Noah and I both ran out mics on the same stand 15’ up in the air. I believe Noah ran his mk22 pair at 50ish cm PAS, and I ran my 21s in 35 cm/65 degrees. We both used Mixpre-6’s, Nbob KCYs, and Naiant PFAs (though Noah’s run 60V and mine 48V). This should give you a better idea of their similarities and differences.

Here's my tape from that night:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/16PK63wwpO-mTHbLxqgBo2UmDgwXv3JSm?usp=sharing
Phish
Madison Square Garden
December 31, 2018


This is a great tape. Nothing else to add except that these are dream mics.

Thanks for the kind words, enjoy!!

Here's the rest of that run with the mk22:
12/30: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1JF7goqh_QZwVSKTP6-ThgPyZgZv-xBky?usp=sharing
12/29: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17_cz9WbtVgwsFBx2z9HZjfAa4vnpFTnr?usp=sharing
12/28: [was Shabbat, sorry]

Compare to the mk41v:
12/31: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jZd86lFVE3dMPHGOjfG1MvaDb5yr3xqk?usp=sharing
12/30: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1YLJ0BD3WgtzpOXY_SZo2rUHCJCTTigs0?usp=sharing
12/29: [some sort of user error, Sorry]
12/28: [was Shabbat, sorry]

and the mk3 Omnis:
12/31: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1IEVjICMlWZbB4XQmopLWaXzHgQT6Ws64?usp=sharing
12/30: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1u9KIe-ktGn7kkeqe8ueI6_9m7KkEXr4p?usp=sharing
12/29: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1F8VuUyt-ycOUjgK9QgQaYe9fVdazVC0B?usp=sharing
12/28: [was Shabbat, sorry]
« Last Edit: November 01, 2020, 10:21:00 PM by noahbickart »
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 aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3376
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #20 on: November 01, 2020, 07:48:53 PM »
Stereophonic Zoom.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14377
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #21 on: November 02, 2020, 09:12:36 AM »
does anybody know what this chart means? its from Schoeps MK22 page


Stereophonic Zoom.

It is a plot showing expected stereo imaging based on intensity / time-of-arrival tradoffs of various angle/spacing relationships between a stereo pair.

It is useful for estimating the effective inclusive stereo imaging angle upon playback over a standard 60° speaker setup, given various combinations of spacing (X axis) and angle (Y axis) between a stereo pair of microphones with the polar characteristics of the MK22, derived from data extrapolated from a series of listening tests. 

The curved lines with angles in bubbles indicate the "angle of acceptance" (deemed "Orchestra Angle" in Williams' Stereo Zoom parlance),  inside of which individual sound sources of interest can be expected to be heard upon playback to be spatially arrayed between the speakers, whereas sources outside that angle are reproduced so as to appear to be spatially compressed around one speaker or the other.  The shaded areas indicate regions of increased spatial distortion in the playback image.

[edit- Noah's recording notes indicate that he positioned the MK22 pair 45cm and 65° apart for that recording.  According to the chart, that should result in an stereo pickup angle (Orchestra Angle) of around +/- 30° or about 60° total when reproduced over a 60° playback speaker arrangement]
« Last Edit: November 02, 2020, 03:44:40 PM by Gutbucket »
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 Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14377
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #22 on: November 02, 2020, 10:23:48 AM »
Can anyone comment on the qualitative and quantitative differences between MK21 and MK22 with regards to far off-axis sources? Essentially across the "rear hemisphere" of the pattern, specifically across the region between 120° through 240° or so?   I'm interested in the difference in subjective sound quality as well as the difference in sensitivity between the front and back averaged across that relatively wide angle, rather than as measured specifically at 180°.

Although this question is relatively straight forward, my reason for asking is in regards to a rather atypical application.  I've long thought about using these types of patterns in place of omnis in the wide A-B portion of my arrays, which serve a dual roll of low frequency pickup and ambient/audience/reverberant capture.  For the purpose of low frequency pickup the omnis are unsurpassed.  Yet for the purpose of ambient/audience/room capture there is too much pickup of direct arriving sound from the front to allow for the most optimal balance with the other microphones dedicated to frontal direct-arrival pickup and imaging.  This places the two roles at odds.  A rear-facing wide A-B pair of cardioids sufficiently limits sensitivity to direct arrival from the front, yet lacks the low bass response (and sufficient ambient openness). And used in this way, a cardioid may adversely color pickup of the dominant front-arriving sound if its response across it's region of minimal sensitivity is not especially well behaved.  Fortunately in general, with greater sensitivity to the rear comes increased smoothness across that region (more open patterns being generally better behaved across their least sensitive quadrant).

Its my speculation that a rear-facing A-B pair of subcardioids or open cardioids in place of omnis could sufficiently reduce sensitivity to the front while retaining sufficient low frequency sensitivity and openness.  I'd love to experiment with a pair of A-B fig-8's coincident with the omnis to really get a handle on dialing in the front/back sensitivity balance afterward, but based on my experience I expect a subcardioid or open-cardioid type pattern would be just about right.
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 rigpimp

  • (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Gender: Male
  • Jarts don't kill people!
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #23 on: November 02, 2020, 02:04:29 PM »
I'm simply posting here to track all of the Schoeps Genius comments on two caps I know very little about. 

When I first saw the polar pattern chart at the top it occurred to me that the mk21 might be better at rejecting wind noise due to its shape being more like a pure omni.  Does anyone have experience running these outdoors in windier environs? 

I already own pairs of CCM4, MK8, and MK5 so I feel that I could probably get close to recreating the sound of a 21 or 22 in post-production with an M/S pair.  I guess I am trying to justify why I need the 21 or 22.

I ran them next to you in NOS at Gorge ‘18 nights 1 + first half of night 2. I have also run them at Dick’s.

They are not impervious to wind noise, but they are *significantly* more resilient than the 4.

Edit: given were both Bay Area tapers, next time shows are allowed you’re welcome to take a patch off me, or you’re welcome to borrow my 21s. Better yet, if I get a pair of 22s between now and then we can run em head to head.

I remember you ran one of them but was unsure which.  Can you pm me a link to your pull from night 1?  I'd like to A:B it with my pull.  I just listened to parts of my CCM4 pull and the MS pull so I have a good idea of where the windy spots are.
Mics: Schoeps MK5 G MP, Schoeps CCM 4 Lg MP, Schoeps MK8 MP, nBob cables > PFA, KCY 250/5 > PFA
Pre/A>D/P48: Sonosax SX/M2-LS, E.A.A. PSP-2, Naiant Tinybox, Neumann BS48i-2 (for sale)
Recorders: Sound Devices Mixpre-6, Sony PCM-M10
Playback: McIntosh MC 2105 > McIntosh MX 130 > Von Schweikert VR-4 JR
http://archive.org/bookmarks/kskreider
https://archive.org/details/thespps

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2512
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #24 on: November 02, 2020, 02:16:59 PM »
[edit- Noah's recording notes indicate that he positioned the MK22 pair 45cm and 65° apart for that recording.  According to the chart, that should result in an stereo pickup angle (Orchestra Angle) of a bit less than +/- 30° or 60° total when reproduced over a 60° playback speaker arrangement]

And it's all your fault.

I had a special bar made to allow for wider spacings and narrower angles and infinite adjustment of each for your PAS theory......
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 Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14377
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #25 on: November 02, 2020, 03:43:17 PM »
^ And my thanks to you for putting the technique to such good use.  Your recordings are THE proof of it working as well as I originally expected and hoped.

To explain to others, we are talking about the Improved Point At Stacks technique as described in this thread- https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=167549.msg2087409#msg2087409 (which is also linked in my signature line as Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<<).  It takes the audience-taper-specific PAS microphone technique and applies to it the intensity/time-of-arrival trade-offs described above, in order to determine the most optimal spacing to use between the microphones.  In that way it solves for the special situation where it is desirable for the Orchestra Angle to be the same as the angle between the microphones, whereas generally those two angles are not the same.  It makes determining the optimal spacing between microphones easy via a single lookup table, given the PAS angle and the pickup pattern of the microphones.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2020, 03:47:14 PM by Gutbucket »
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 MakersMarc

  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6421
  • Gender: Male
  • 😈
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #26 on: November 05, 2020, 03:46:00 PM »
Anyone run mk21/22 in a hat or by other lopro mounting? Ok to PM probably should.
😈 Mk4v/41v>nbob actives>Baby nbox>Oade warm mod Marantz 620.

Open: 4v/41v>nbobs>Nicky mod Naiant PFA>Oade warm mod 661.

Home: the Stereo Hospital budget refurb rig: Lappie>DragonFly Cobalt/Red with Jitterbug>Nikko NR520 amp>B&W V202 speakers.

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • (33)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2512
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #27 on: November 15, 2020, 12:42:29 AM »
Anyone run mk21/22 in a hat or by other lopro mounting? Ok to PM probably should.

PM sent

also here's a good mk22 source (Phish 6/28/16 Mann from DFC Balcony): https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1XAdOA9jVlqK1zygWw_sOd9i5LYVHyGmz?usp=sharing
« Last Edit: November 15, 2020, 12:46:06 AM by noahbickart »
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 MakersMarc

  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6421
  • Gender: Male
  • 😈
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #28 on: November 28, 2020, 05:19:00 PM »
Thabks Noah!
😈 Mk4v/41v>nbob actives>Baby nbox>Oade warm mod Marantz 620.

Open: 4v/41v>nbobs>Nicky mod Naiant PFA>Oade warm mod 661.

Home: the Stereo Hospital budget refurb rig: Lappie>DragonFly Cobalt/Red with Jitterbug>Nikko NR520 amp>B&W V202 speakers.

Offline wforwumbo

  • (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #29 on: November 05, 2021, 10:48:24 PM »
To update this thread…

I ran the mk21 for nights 3 and 4 this weekend at Phish in Vegas. I was FOB, and the mics were more or less pointed at the stacks. The results from n3, which I think is a slightly cleaner tape compared to night 4, are here:

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=614316

My read is that this microphone is much more demanding with respect to being set up correctly… but when in the right spot and in the right configuration it makes absolutely sublime recordings. Realistic, not as hard edged in the treble as I’m used to it sounding, extremely accurate in the bass, and a stellar blend of band sound and the room.

If I wanted to spend less time thinking about set up, I’d get the 22. But this cap is going to demand much of me, requiring that I become a better taper. But it’ll be worth it whenever I pull a tape I’m proud of.

I remember you ran one of them but was unsure which.  Can you pm me a link to your pull from night 1?  I'd like to A:B it with my pull.  I just listened to parts of my CCM4 pull and the MS pull so I have a good idea of where the windy spots are.

I just saw this, apologies for delay. My tape is on relisten/phish in, if you want lossless PM me and I’ll upload the tape for you.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2021, 11:13:05 PM by wforwumbo »
North Jersey native, Upstate veteran, proud Texan

2x Schoeps mk2
2x Schoeps mk21
2x Schoeps mk4
2x Schoeps mk41v
1x Schoeps ccm8

Grace Lunatec V3
2x Schoeps cmc5
2x Schoeps KC5
2x Nbob KCY
2x Naiant PFA

Sound Devices Mixpre-6

Offline checht

  • (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 424
  • Gender: Male
  • Old and in the Way
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #30 on: November 05, 2021, 11:40:29 PM »
Exactly.

Ran 621's from 1996-2003. In the right spot, aimed well, in the right venue, with a great FOH engineer they are sublime.

Ended up not having that combo enough so switched to mk4's then mk41's, all in an attempt to find more forgiving setup that didn't pick up as much crowd crap.

Now considering adding a pair of 21's back to my kit for when I have the perfect situation.


Schoeps MK41s > nbob KCY >
Naiant PFA 60v > Sound Devices MP-6 II  or  Naiant IPA > Roland R-07
Recordings at LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=subject%3A%22Chris+Hecht%22&sort=-date

Offline JiB97

  • (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2572
  • Gender: Male
    • My Archive Bookmarks
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2021, 04:02:03 PM »
To update this thread…

I ran the mk21 for nights 3 and 4 this weekend at Phish in Vegas. I was FOB, and the mics were more or less pointed at the stacks. The results from n3, which I think is a slightly cleaner tape compared to night 4, are here:

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=614316

My read is that this microphone is much more demanding with respect to being set up correctly… but when in the right spot and in the right configuration it makes absolutely sublime recordings. Realistic, not as hard edged in the treble as I’m used to it sounding, extremely accurate in the bass, and a stellar blend of band sound and the room.

If I wanted to spend less time thinking about set up, I’d get the 22. But this cap is going to demand much of me, requiring that I become a better taper. But it’ll be worth it whenever I pull a tape I’m proud of.

I remember you ran one of them but was unsure which.  Can you pm me a link to your pull from night 1?  I'd like to A:B it with my pull.  I just listened to parts of my CCM4 pull and the MS pull so I have a good idea of where the windy spots are.

I just saw this, apologies for delay. My tape is on relisten/phish in, if you want lossless PM me and I’ll upload the tape for you.

Vegas was a nice chance to hear a lot of gear, especially since we were in a very similar spot each night, and on pretty much a similar plane too with the mic bars being shared.

I linked all the sources uploaded so far in this post: https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=198193.0

If I can remember I will try to update that page whenever a new source gets upped.
 
Nice to meet you, hope you made that Monday flight back to Austin without issue!
AKG ck3/ck8 | c460b  + Naiant Actives | PFAs
Audio Technica u853r (omnis/mini-guns)
Tascam DR-70D

My Archive Links

Offline cd2go

  • (10)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 484
  • Gender: Male
    • Strictly Slambovian
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2021, 08:14:16 PM »
Great info and examples here, but now I’m starting to question the pair of CCM 4 I have on order  :facepalm:

Offline wforwumbo

  • (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #33 on: November 09, 2021, 11:03:03 AM »
Great info and examples here, but now I’m starting to question the pair of CCM 4 I have on order  :facepalm:

Don’t question your order.

For nights 1 and 2 of Vegas, I ran the mk4 in exactly the same configuration as I ran the 21 nights 3 and 4 - 30 cm, 60 degrees. That can be found here: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=614288

I think the mk4 is a fine cap capable of stellar recordings, and I’m very happy with this tape. The mk4 is a much more forgiving cap w/r/t set up and sensitivity, and if I weren’t in a great sounding spot I’m confident it still would have made a great tape. A good way for me to word it is - I think the mk4 has a lower ceiling than the other Schoeps caps (the mk21 and mk22 sound we all lust after), but it also has possibly the highest floor of any cap. To my ear, it’s got plenty of bass, decent audience chatter rejection, a pleasant and musical treble, and the sweetest midrange of any microphone I have ever heard. It will always be the cap I reach for first, and I will always love the sound of tapes made with the mk4.

Arguably, only the 41 is a more reliable cap as far as pulling a “clean” tape, but I’ve heard many mk41/mk41v tapes that I liked but didn’t love, and I’ve never heard a mk4 tape I didn’t love.

Take it from someone who bought, sold, then bought again a pair of 4’s. Keep them, you’ll love the tapes you make with them. Add a pair of 21s or 22s to your locker down the line.
North Jersey native, Upstate veteran, proud Texan

2x Schoeps mk2
2x Schoeps mk21
2x Schoeps mk4
2x Schoeps mk41v
1x Schoeps ccm8

Grace Lunatec V3
2x Schoeps cmc5
2x Schoeps KC5
2x Nbob KCY
2x Naiant PFA

Sound Devices Mixpre-6

Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3376
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #34 on: November 09, 2021, 11:47:33 AM »
Great info and examples here, but now I’m starting to question the pair of CCM 4 I have on order  :facepalm:

Out of curiosity, why did you choose CCMs over one of the CMC1 options? It's nice to be able to swap out capsules, I think.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14377
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #35 on: November 09, 2021, 12:27:44 PM »
For nights 1 and 2 of Vegas, I ran the mk4 in exactly the same configuration as I ran the 21 nights 3 and 4 - 30 cm, 60 degrees. That can be found here: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=614288

I think the mk4 is a fine cap capable of stellar recordings, and I’m very happy with this tape. The mk4 is a much more forgiving cap w/r/t set up and sensitivity, and if I weren’t in a great sounding spot I’m confident it still would have made a great tape. A good way for me to word it is - I think the mk4 has a lower ceiling than the other Schoeps caps (the mk21 and mk22 sound we all lust after), but it also has possibly the highest floor of any cap. To my ear, it’s got plenty of bass, decent audience chatter rejection, a pleasant and musical treble, and the sweetest midrange of any microphone I have ever heard. It will always be the cap I reach for first, and I will always love the sound of tapes made with the mk4.

I was just listening to the recording linked above last night.  It's a great example of mk4 used in an optimal stereo arrangement for that room and recording position and one I believe any taper here would be proud of. I was listening specifically to provide wforwumbo personal feedback on that recording, and in addition to the well-balanced room / direct sound and stereo imaging qualities, I took note of the portrayal of the midrange in particular.  That recording is an excellent example of the right pattern used the right configuration for the situation, imho.

The optimal microphone will vary with situation (and recording approach), and the situations one finds oneself in most frequently also varies from taper to taper.  Given all that, the mk4 pattern is the most widely applicable pattern of the range, all things considered.   To me it represents a reference baseline for a straight 2-channel stereo-pair recording - the solid Goldilocks middle around which the other patterns apply in more specific ways.
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 DavidPuddy

  • (14)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1190
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #36 on: November 09, 2021, 12:57:57 PM »
Great info and examples here, but now I’m starting to question the pair of CCM 4 I have on order  :facepalm:

Out of curiosity, why did you choose CCMs over one of the CMC1 options? It's nice to be able to swap out capsules, I think.

+1. Going with the MK4 + CMC1L saves you $55 over the CCM4, plus you get the ability to swap capsules. The modular version is only 1.5mm longer and weighs the same.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2021, 01:08:06 PM by DavidPuddy »
mk41/mk22 > CMC1L > Mixpre 6ii

Offline checht

  • (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 424
  • Gender: Male
  • Old and in the Way
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #37 on: November 09, 2021, 02:08:03 PM »
Great info and examples here, but now I’m starting to question the pair of CCM 4 I have on order  :facepalm:

Don’t question your order.

For nights 1 and 2 of Vegas, I ran the mk4 in exactly the same configuration as I ran the 21 nights 3 and 4 - 30 cm, 60 degrees. That can be found here: http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=614288

I think the mk4 is a fine cap capable of stellar recordings, and I’m very happy with this tape. The mk4 is a much more forgiving cap w/r/t set up and sensitivity, and if I weren’t in a great sounding spot I’m confident it still would have made a great tape. A good way for me to word it is - I think the mk4 has a lower ceiling than the other Schoeps caps (the mk21 and mk22 sound we all lust after), but it also has possibly the highest floor of any cap. To my ear, it’s got plenty of bass, decent audience chatter rejection, a pleasant and musical treble, and the sweetest midrange of any microphone I have ever heard. It will always be the cap I reach for first, and I will always love the sound of tapes made with the mk4.

Arguably, only the 41 is a more reliable cap as far as pulling a “clean” tape, but I’ve heard many mk41/mk41v tapes that I liked but didn’t love, and I’ve never heard a mk4 tape I didn’t love.

Take it from someone who bought, sold, then bought again a pair of 4’s. Keep them, you’ll love the tapes you make with them. Add a pair of 21s or 22s to your locker down the line.

QFT.
I've been using 41's mostly because I don't record in taping sections, and have developed an intollerance for crowd noise. Otherwise I'd stick w 4's. Soo much time spent in RX spectral repair these days...
Schoeps MK41s > nbob KCY >
Naiant PFA 60v > Sound Devices MP-6 II  or  Naiant IPA > Roland R-07
Recordings at LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=subject%3A%22Chris+Hecht%22&sort=-date

Offline JiB97

  • (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2572
  • Gender: Male
    • My Archive Bookmarks
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #38 on: November 10, 2021, 11:24:41 PM »
Great info and examples here, but now I’m starting to question the pair of CCM 4 I have on order  :facepalm:

Out of curiosity, why did you choose CCMs over one of the CMC1 options? It's nice to be able to swap out capsules, I think.

+1. Going with the MK4 + CMC1L saves you $55 over the CCM4, plus you get the ability to swap capsules. The modular version is only 1.5mm longer and weighs the same.

I didn't even know Schoeps made this type of thing, that's a great idea similar to the DPA 4023, or whatever the ID that DPA has going on with their removable capsule lemo-connector series of mics.
AKG ck3/ck8 | c460b  + Naiant Actives | PFAs
Audio Technica u853r (omnis/mini-guns)
Tascam DR-70D

My Archive Links

Offline cd2go

  • (10)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 484
  • Gender: Male
    • Strictly Slambovian
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #39 on: November 11, 2021, 08:22:28 AM »
Out of curiosity, why did you choose CCMs over one of the CMC1 options? It's nice to be able to swap out capsules, I think.

You are not wrong, but I don’t forsee room in the budget for more than one Schoeps capsule, and for the amount and situations I record in, it’s the Goldilocks pattern for me. I have never felt the *need* for hypers, and while useful they never sound quite natural enough for me to want own a pair. I would like to add a set of omnis, but that can be done with sufficient sound quality with less costly options. I like the compactness, reliability and simplicity of the single-cap hardwired setup, I ran 4022 for 10 years and loved them for that.

But alas, the 21/22 will have to be dream mics deferred…can’t wait to play with the 4’s  :headphones:

Don’t question your order.

A good way for me to word it is - I think the mk4 has a lower ceiling than the other Schoeps caps (the mk21 and mk22 sound we all lust after), but it also has possibly the highest floor of any cap.

Thanks for the reassurance, ha. I like this analogy, good way to think about it.

Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3376
Re: MK21 vs MK22?
« Reply #40 on: November 11, 2021, 12:52:58 PM »
^ Gotcha. Like I said, I was just curious. No doubt they sound great!

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.116 seconds with 64 queries.
© 2002-2021 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF