Topic: Most "transparent" omni mic (for binaural): DPA406x? others?

[poorlyconditioned]

OK, I've decided to do some serious binaural recording.  Put in earplugs and get up real close.  Not a "stack" tape, but something that mixes stage and PA sound.

I've tried the Sennheiser MKE2, and actually, I found my original WM61a's seemed more "transparent".
That is, I could close my eyes (and maybe take my drug of choice  ) and believe I was in the room.
The MKE2 were undistorted and balanced, but sounded like I was listening through a piece of plastic or something.  Well, that might be right, because they have an extra diaphragm to keep the sweat out.

OK, what is going to sound transparent?  Some people say the DPA406x sound "colored" whatever that means.  Any opinions?  Any heady binaural samples out there I can hear?

Thanks in advance,
  Richard

[stirinthesauce]

Well, they are a little big for being head worn, but the Avenso sto-2 is a dead flat, very transparent, unhyped omni. 
Not too expensive either, at around 499-599 for a matched pair.

Earthworks QTC-1 are also a "tell it like it is" omni mic, more expensive though.

[shaggy]

I certainly would not define 406Xs as being 'colored'.  I think the problem with the 406X is the bass response being a little thick, only b/c most stack and near stage lip recordings have alot of LF info in them.

This is my best binaural recording and someone (thank gawd) is still seeding it:

Racheal Yamagata 6-28-2004 http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=5704

It is pretty frickin' amazing.  Very, very representative of the ideal 406X sound.  I was quite close and apparently is the sweetest spot in the room.  Probably one of the best early Yamagata recordings out there.

Yes, the WM61 capsule is pretty impressive.  I am still liking the CSB stuff I did years ago; I am still this sweet recording right now (I have super fast UL speeds, should take less than an hour to get it):

John Cale 4-27-2001 http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=139552

[poorlyconditioned]

I certainly would not define 406Xs as being 'colored'.  I think the problem with the 406X is the bass response being a little thick, only b/c most stack and near stage lip recordings have alot of LF info in them.

This is my best binaural recording and someone (thank gawd) is still seeding it:

Racheal Yamagata 6-28-2004 http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=5704

It is pretty frickin' amazing.  Very, very representative of the ideal 406X sound.  I was quite close and apparently is the sweetest spot in the room.  Probably one of the best early Yamagata recordings out there.
+
Yes, the WM61 capsule is pretty impressive.  I am still liking the CSB stuff I did years ago; I am still this sweet recording right now (I have super fast UL speeds, should take less than an hour to get it):

John Cale 4-27-2001 http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=139552

Thanks for the help.  So, would you say that 406X more or less "transparent" than the CSBs?
Also, I can't get any action on the 406X recording.  Is there any way you could take a snippet and Email it to me?  Even MP3 would be fine.  (My Email is : mannr@uwaterloo.ca)

+Thanks,
  Richard

[headroom]

The Audio technica 3032 its very good + rejects more backgroundsound.
Has more HF energy the naked 4061 is a bit rolling off there.

[John Willett]

You could also try the Sennheiser MKE Platinum...



The frequency response is different from the MKE 2 and the cable is *very* tough and only 1mm in diameter, so it's virtually invisible. 

[guysonic]

My company 'Sonic Studios' has been solely specializing in HRTF headworn/baffled omni mic systems for over 22 years.  Most agree DSM(tm) 'dimensional stereo-surround microphones' are the some of the most transparent 'color-free' mics for this purpose.

Ambient sounds recordings at www.sonicstudios.com/mp3.htm
Music session/live performance at: www.sonicstudios.com/mp3_2slp.htm

NOTE: There are several types of HRTF recording methods, and 'in-ear' Binaural is just one type, while DSM is another method, differences explained at www.sonicstudios.com/multitrk.htm

[divamum]

Does anybody have comp recordings of the DPA and SS mics running side-by-side? I am JUST about to take the plunge on this  and, while I think I need to go with the DPAs because of their diminutive size, I'd still love to hear the SS mics in direct comparison - I"ve been VERY impressed by the clips on his site, but for a n00b like me it's hard to judge that against completely different clips/acoustics etc!

PM if you don't want to post here.

[Javier Cinakowski]

Wow, those MKE platinum look freaking amazing.  The frequency responce looks perfect.  If they sound better than the MKE2 I would be blown away.  Sure the WM61's sound very transparent, but not as musical and warm as the MKE2...  I love the MKE2 sound...

[divamum]

Wow, those MKE platinum look freaking amazing.  The frequency responce looks perfect.  If they sound better than the MKE2 I would be blown away.  Sure the WM61's sound very transparent, but not as musical and warm as the MKE2...  I love the MKE2 sound...

Agreed - would love to hear clips of those, too!

[wbrisette]

Wow, those MKE platinum look freaking amazing.  The frequency responce looks perfect. 

The MKE platinum as well as the MKE gold are used quite a bit for lav mics on actors. The same for the Countryman B6 (smaller than the MKE line or any other line for that matter), Sanken COS-11b and DPA 406x. All of these are top notch mics. The Sanken mic is favored by a lot of the sound mixers I know. Unfortunately it doesn't play well with some lines of wireless transmitters (but Sanken knows this and claims they will fix it in the future).

For binarual recordings, I wouldn't hesitate in using a pair of any of these, but the entry price will be a bit steep. The DPA & Sennheiser mics are around $320-330 each, the Sanken mic just under that at around $290 or so (although I have seen a few of these cheaper). So when all is said and done, you're in the $600-700 market. If you're doing this for your own pleasure then that's probably more than you want to pay.

There are cheaper options (core sound, Sound professional, sonic studios), which might work as well depending on the price/performance curve you're willing to accept.

Good luck with the search. Keep us posted. (oh, and on the QTC-1 recommendation, ignore it, that is unless you can provide power and don't have to try to hide the mics, and you can rig something up to hold full-size mics in the right position).

Wayne

[poorlyconditioned]

OK, thanks for the comments, here and via PM.

Keep 'em coming...

  Richard

[stirinthesauce]

Good luck with the search. Keep us posted. (oh, and on the QTC-1 recommendation, ignore it, that is unless you can provide power and don't have to try to hide the mics, and you can rig something up to hold full-size mics in the right position).

Wayne

yeah, re-reading the topic, I now see the binaural reference.  My apologies for suggesting mics that are not compatible for that technique.

[Will_S]

How do you like your AT853 omnis in this application?

[poorlyconditioned]

How do you like your AT853 omnis in this application?

I have not tried the AT853O.  But I have tried card and subcard.  I like them quite a bit, but they are not quite there in terms of "transparency".  It is one thing to have great sound (like the MKE2), but quite another to have the impression "holy sh*t I'm in the room".  I'm going for the later...

After a while (and some intoxicating substances help open up a whole new clarity of listening for me   ) you get the "feeling" of the mics.  My feelings (so far) are as follows:
- WM61a.  Pretty transparent, but a bit "tinny" or maybe resonant, at upper mid frequencies
- MKE2. Very balanced in frequency, but a bit muffled.  Sounds like listening though a plastic bag or something
- AT853.  Moderately transparent, but seems a bit 'dark' on the high end, maybe a *slight* resonance on mids.  Hard to describe
- AT944.  TBD.  I'm wondering if this is different than the AT853
- CK91. Perfectly balanced, but not as clear/transparent as it could be
- AT822. Less balanced than the CK91, but seems more transparent

So it goes.  It seems every capsule has it's own "flavour" if you could call it that...

  Richard

[wbrisette]

I was talking with the folks at Coffey Sound today about some cables and I asked them the price on the Sennheiser pretty much floored me. The Platinum mic costs $499 dollars each. The DPA 4063 is $416... That's a pretty big difference for what I've been told was not a huge difference in sound.

Wayne

[poorlyconditioned]

I was talking with the folks at Coffey Sound today about some cables and I asked them the price on the Sennheiser pretty much floored me. The Platinum mic costs $499 dollars each. The DPA 4063 is $416... That's a pretty big difference for what I've been told was not a huge difference in sound.

Wayne

I really lucked out.  I scored a pair of MKE2-5-5 (gold) pigtail, for $52 each!!!  Would have never bought near new price.

Be careful out there.  If you buy make sure they are three wire.  They are all three wire, but the MKE2-4-x series have the third wire shorted to the ground *at the capsule*.  You need three wire (or 4.7k mod) to run these things.

  Richard

[Gutbucket]

I was talking with the folks at Coffey Sound today about some cables and I asked them the price on the Sennheiser pretty much floored me. The Platinum mic costs $499 dollars each. The DPA 4063 is $416... That's a pretty big difference for what I've been told was not a huge difference in sound.

Wayne

Any one know of any difference in sound with the 4063 vs the other 406x mics?  As I understand it the other mics in the series have varying sensitivity & noise, but I think that one is designed to run at a lower voltage (something like 3V vs. 5V)?  Always been curious.

[wbrisette]

but I think that one is designed to run at a lower voltage (something like 3V vs. 5V)?  Always been curious.

I bought the 4063 because I'm using it with a wireless unit and needed a mic that could run at 3 volts.

Wayne

[Gutbucket]

but I think that one is designed to run at a lower voltage (something like 3V vs. 5V)?  Always been curious.

I bought the 4063 because I'm using it with a wireless unit and needed a mic that could run at 3 volts.

Wayne

OK, that makes sense. 

[poorlyconditioned]

This is my best binaural recording and someone (thank gawd) is still seeding it:

Racheal Yamagata 6-28-2004 http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=5704

It is pretty frickin' amazing.  Very, very representative of the ideal 406X sound.  I was quite close and apparently is the sweetest spot in the room.  Probably one of the best early Yamagata recordings out there.

i listen to this recording all the time.  it's a sick performance and sounds great on headphones as well as on my big system. it's definitely one of the best 4061 recordings i've heard.  thanks for circulating it andy.

If that is the best, it is not transparent.  I've got WM61a recordings where I can get distracted by talking so much because I can hear all the words people are saying at the other side of the room.  That is transparent.  Now the 4061 sound way better, and sometimes even more enjoyable than the detailed recording.  They are just not as transparent (to my ears anyway).

Hmm.  Maybe the "vertical" diaphragm has some directional character.  I dunno.

  Richard

[shaggy]

They are just not as transparent (to my ears anyway).

All a matter of opinion, I suppose.  Transparent to me is forgetting you have headphones on, I agree about those distracting ambient noises being a good earmark for transparency BUT I do not think you should be able to hear conversations going on across the room.  Honestly, I am not trying to grandstand here.  I have had alot of people tell me that they are stunned by the realism of that Yamagata recording.  I gave you the other torrent with a Cale show recorded with CSBs and I agree totally with you on your assertion that they are very transparent but that they have some odd characteristics in the high frequencies.  If you are really looking to go tru-binaural, size is gonna be a factor....unless you want to run a sphere or dummy head.  I have used the AT853Rxs (O,C, HC), CSBs, DPA4061s and mk4Vs extensively on my head.  For transparency/sonic faithfulness, hands-down...I go with the DPA4061s.  For practical concert recording in an audience full of distracting noises, hands down...the mk4vs.  Those 853s always sounded metallic and not very transparent to me and I tried to use them with the omni cap with was horrible with kick drums up close.

As far as the nature of the vertical diaphragm, yes...they are directional in the higher frequencies, just as those forward facing capsules are.  Those diaphragms are facing out like a pair of CSB would face.  I am a freak about this type of positioning even to the point of making sure the vents of the 4061 capsules are facing out (in the same orientation).  I kept a set of CSBs around for a while, I like them but to be completely honest, the only reason was to run them in a horribly sweaty and smoky environment...b/c I was not going to do that to my prized set of matched 4061s.

[musicsherlock]

I like mine... http://akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/71/C577WR_CK74055c24812c1f.pdf

I'll try and get a sample up Monday as I'm having cd drive problems here at home...

[poorlyconditioned]

They are just not as transparent (to my ears anyway).

All a matter of opinion, I suppose.  Transparent to me is forgetting you have headphones on, I agree about those distracting ambient noises being a good earmark for transparency BUT I do not think you should be able to hear conversations going on across the room.  Honestly, I am not trying to grandstand here.  I have had alot of people tell me that they are stunned by the realism of that Yamagata recording.  I gave you the other torrent with a Cale show recorded with CSBs and I agree totally with you on your assertion that they are very transparent but that they have some odd characteristics in the high frequencies.  If you are really looking to go tru-binaural, size is gonna be a factor....unless you want to run a sphere or dummy head.  I have used the AT853Rxs (O,C, HC), CSBs, DPA4061s and mk4Vs extensively on my head.  For transparency/sonic faithfulness, hands-down...I go with the DPA4061s.  For practical concert recording in an audience full of distracting noises, hands down...the mk4vs.  Those 853s always sounded metallic and not very transparent to me and I tried to use them with the omni cap with was horrible with kick drums up close.

As far as the nature of the vertical diaphragm, yes...they are directional in the higher frequencies, just as those forward facing capsules are.  Those diaphragms are facing out like a pair of CSB would face.  I am a freak about this type of positioning even to the point of making sure the vents of the 4061 capsules are facing out (in the same orientation).  I kept a set of CSBs around for a while, I like them but to be completely honest, the only reason was to run them in a horribly sweaty and smoky environment...b/c I was not going to do that to my prized set of matched 4061s.

I'm not dissing the sound of the DPA at all.  If I want to listen *for pleasure* than the DPA are probably the best I've heard.  The "warm" and "clear" sound combined with an HRTF soundstage is wonderful.  Sennheiser MKE2 sound pretty good as well, but maybe not quite as good as the DPA.

But this is just like headphones.  If I want to listen for pleasure I might use Grado or something.  But for
"transparency" and a real "clinical sound" I will use Sony MDR-7506 or the like.  I also agree that while the WM61a (CSBs and similar) are transparent *in places* there is something wrong at high frequencies and there are some wierd resonances (?) in the upper mids.  What these mics do is show that transparency is *possible* but they don't completely achieve it.

Also, I *finally* noticed the coloration of MD encoding with the experiment.  Listen with WM61a MD (HiSP) compared to Edirol R09 WAV for example and I can hear *much* more subtle detail (voices at the other side of the bar ) in the WAV than in the ATRAC recording.  The ATRAC sounds great (just like a "warmer" mic) but not transparent.

Oh yeah, I've been playing with some AT822 recordings recently.  What I did was try to EQ the spectrum to get it more "flat" and *wow* does this sound a lot better.  These mics (and maybe AT mics in general) have a lot of detail, it seems more than AKG blueline, but the spectrum is messed up a bit.  I have heard of people apply EQ in post to correct for cheaper mics, and some of the AT mics seem like good candidates.

I'm not sure what I *want* yet, but I'm trying to answer some questions along the way.

  Richard

[poorlyconditioned]

I like mine... http://akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/71/C577WR_CK74055c24812c1f.pdf

I'll try and get a sample up Monday as I'm having cd drive problems here at home...

Thanks!  That would be great.

I just bought a set of AKG HM1000 (damn, Ebay).  These have slightly bigger capsules (CK3x series) and are for hanging mics or goosenecks.

So now I have a whole bunch of "lav"/"goosenec"/"hanging" mics: AT853, AT943 (smaller ones), Shure MX183/5, Sennheiser MKE40, and now CK3x.  The only ones tested extensively so far are the AT853.  I have to do a "bake off" I guess to compare all these.  Or maybe I should do a "sell off" and regain my sanity!!!

  Richard

[musicsherlock]

I've found that the AKG CK3x to be a bit too sensitive for my tastes...ymmv

[Gutbucket]

I have no experience with the AT mics.   I've used WM61 based mics, but mostly use the DPA's now.  FWIW, I find the 4060's noticeably directional at high freq's.  I'm not certain if they are directional from one side to the other with the standard short grid (interference tube) on, but there is a definite HF roll-off as you move from the front of the grid around to the back where the cable exits.  I have not used the mics extensively without any grid, but I suspect any side to side directionality would be much more apt to manifest in that case with the capsule exposed to the side (normally obscured by the grid tube).  I do orient the mics so the capsule vent sides are symmetrical in my mic setups.  Sometimes that setup is HRTF or taped to a flat surface (ball, arm, pole, etc) where I do not want the important side of the capsule obscured by the surface it's mounted on.  I find that small changes in mounting (distance of the caps from my head, the size of the glasses arms, caps flush in the surface of the ball vs, taped tangentially to it) make a significant difference in the HF response and resulting 'transparency' of the resulting recording using the same mics.

[RebelRebel]

Josephson c617 bodies with Gefell mk221 or mk202 capsules.

those are actually measurement capsules, and as such are very , very flat/natural.

mercenary audio has them.

[2amuse]

>Racheal Yamagata 6-28-2004 http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=5704

>It is pretty frickin' amazing.  Very, very representative of the ideal 406X sound.  I was quite close and apparently >is the sweetest spot in the room.  Probably one of the best early Yamagata recordings out there.

I picked that up, yes it is very good.  Just so I am understanding your mic setup, the mics were headworn and facing out in binaural style?  For most concerts, do you prefer "to the side" or facing forward.  I have the CSBs, I like them, and thinking about going up to the 4061's so I am quite interested in results I like and how tapers achieved them.

Ray
rays@sonic.net if you prefer

[Gutbucket]

From the TXT file notes on the recording:
Field: DPA 4061 > MPS 6010 > Oade SONY 2mod SBM-1 > SONY PCM-M1
Location: 12 feet back from stage 3 feet left of center, HRTF caps towards stage, vents facing outside.

I read that as the mics facing towards the stage on either side of the head in front of the ears.  If you remove the grid/boost tube from the mic, you'll see the tiny 406x capsule (a rectangular gold thing with holes on one side, normally hidden inside the housing & grill) actually points to the side, not directly forward... so the mic body is facing forward with the grills pointing towards the stage, but the body of the mic is rotated so that the hidden vents in the actual capsule are oriented to the outside, away from the head.

I assume that the short grids were used for this recording. That's the standard configuration and what most people use.  In that case I'm not convinced that there is much left/right HF directional difference since the capsule is completely inside the tube (like most omni's I can hear a on/off axis, front/back bias). Rotating the mic bodies may not make a big difference with the grids mounted, but I also orient the vents this way just to be safe and cross my T's.  I think there might be more of a side bias to the HF response with the grid completely removed, since half of the capsule vents would be exposed above the mic housing, but the more noticeable effect in that case would be an overall reduced HF response.

Just finished downloading this recording, I'll give a listen tonight.

[2amuse]

>I read that as the mics facing towards the stage on either side of the head in front of the ears.  If you remove the grid/boost tube from the mic, you'll see the tiny 406x capsule (a rectangular gold thing with holes on one side, normally hidden inside the housing & grill) actually points to the side, not directly forward... so the mic body is facing forward with the grills pointing towards the stage, but the body of the mic is rotated so that the hidden vents in the actual capsule are oriented to the outside, away from the head.<

That is the way I read it too but was thinking he was making a binaural recording.  I did not know that about the DPA construction.  I wonder if the CSB's are the same way.  Ray

[Gutbucket]

The Core HEB's are 4061's so they are the same.  I haven't seen the CSB's but they probably have the capsule facing forward like most mics do.

[2amuse]

The Core HEB's are 4061's so they are the same.  I haven't seen the CSB's but they probably have the capsule facing forward like most mics do.

I am liking the sound from many 4061 concerts I have heard.  I am trying to understand what the "best" mic orientations for the 4061s might be.  Len's typical setup is very compact, both for his bi's and HEBs, no fuss, a solid batt box and the mics with solid connectors, that's it.  Can't get much simpler than that.  I have enjoyed the CSBs, they sound good and are quite forgiving.  Nicely finished too.

[davebl]

The best MS is from matched SDC's, I use Sennheiser MKH series or Shoeps for film work. Mismatched mics can work but dont have as good Mono or setero compatibility. Look at DMS also, some infor on the schoeps site for more info.

For the music work try Omni, figure 8 which is prefered, Placement is critical as always. MKH20/30 or Schoeps mk2h or 2s/mk8 would work well. Broad cardiod is next prefered, Shopes mk21h/mk8. using Cardiod MKH20/30. Schoeps mk4/mk8 set ups are fine, this will reject more room and will be of use for more film work rather than orchastral set ups. Hyper or super cardioid set ups, MKH 50/60 and 30 or Schopes CMIT or hyper carioud is ok for dialogue for Film work but definitly not for Atmos or wildtracks as the resultant stero is not good.

Dave
UK

[shaggy]

>I read that as the mics facing towards the stage on either side of the head in front of the ears.  If you remove the grid/boost tube from the mic, you'll see the tiny 406x capsule (a rectangular gold thing with holes on one side, normally hidden inside the housing & grill) actually points to the side, not directly forward... so the mic body is facing forward with the grills pointing towards the stage, but the body of the mic is rotated so that the hidden vents in the actual capsule are oriented to the outside, away from the head.<

Yep, the vents are where the capsule faces 'forward'.  These I always have pointed out perpendicular to the stage, cliped with the DPA clips onto my glasses just behind my temples.  This, I believe, is 'true' binaural.  There is some directionality to this with respect to the higher frequencies (like 8KHz and above) but I think it is only down 8-10dB at the rear.  I know some people who work it so the vents face forward, but it is trickier to do it that way.

Noticed the total downloads on this old 6-28-2004 Yamagata torrent of mine clicked up about 30-40 more in the last two weeks!  Hope you all like it!

[Gutbucket]

...
Yep, the vents are where the capsule faces 'forward'.  These I always have pointed out perpendicular to the stage, cliped with the DPA clips onto my glasses just behind my temples.  This, I believe, is 'true' binaural.  There is some directionality to this with respect to the higher frequencies (like 8KHz and above) but I think it is only down 8-10dB at the rear.  I know some people who work it so the vents face forward, but it is trickier to do it that way.

Noticed the total downloads on this old 6-28-2004 Yamagata torrent of mine clicked up about 30-40 more in the last two weeks!  Hope you all like it!

"True" binaural would have the mic capsules inside your ear canal, incorporating the effect of your external ear or 'pina'.  That's in contrast to the glasses mounted technique most refer to as HRTF (head related transfer function).

I'm one of the 30-40.  She's talented, thanks & nice work.

[grider]

per Bruce Myers of DPA USA, it does not matter what direction the mics are pointed, front/back/up/down will all produce the same recording, exactly; that said, pointed up toward the ceiling, similar to a large diaphram mic like the AKG 414, is my preference

[Gutbucket]

per Bruce Myers of DPA USA, it does not matter what direction the mics are pointed, front/back/up/down will all produce the same recording, exactly; that said, pointed up toward the ceiling, similar to a large diaphram mic like the AKG 414, is my preference

That's the official line.  Others here may claim there is a side to side bias.  What I know is that monitoring the signal directly from the MMA6000 with Etymotic ER-4S's and a small headphone amp, I notice a slight roll-off of the sparkly high end when moving off axis around the capsule towards the cable exit side.  I've tested this simply by rubbing my fingers together to get some high frequency 'ssss' noise (using the short boost grids on the 4060's) and moving them around the mic, while listening.

[poorlyconditioned]

per Bruce Myers of DPA USA, it does not matter what direction the mics are pointed, front/back/up/down will all produce the same recording, exactly; that said, pointed up toward the ceiling, similar to a large diaphram mic like the AKG 414, is my preference

That's the official line.  Others here may claim there is a side to side bias.  What I know is that monitoring the signal directly from the MMA6000 with Etymotic ER-4S's and a small headphone amp, I notice a slight roll-off of the sparkly high end when moving off axis around the capsule towards the cable exit side.  I've tested this simply by rubbing my fingers together to get some high frequency 'ssss' noise (using the short boost grids on the 4060's) and moving them around the mic, while listening.

That is what the specs say too (look at the polar plot, say 15kHz and above).  Looking at the plot, it seems the most "stable" part is with capsules pointing perpendicular to sound source.  By "stable" I mean the response changes the least as you change the angle to the sound source.  I have not tried these capsules (yet) though.

  Richard