Topic: Schoeps or AKG ?

[eclark]

Can anyone comment on the internals of the AKG vs Schoeps vs et al SD mics? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the stock 460s are transformer based (what does this mean?!), the 460 mod removes the transformer, and the 480s are transformer-less. What about Schoeps? I'm not too sure how these mics actually work, and what inside makes them unique.

[page]

I still think it's better to think in terms of color/texture/character rather than tonal balance. You can generally fix that (but it would be nice if it wasn't required), but if you don't like the warmth/smoothness/grain/grit or color that comes across in a recording, you're SOL.

[hi and lo]

I agree with everything Acidjack said, 110%.

[acidjack]

I agree there is a more pronounced mid-range with the Gefells. One thing I do that helps alot with bringing in the low end is to use the right pre-amp. A transformer based pre-amp like the Neve Portico 5012 or Aerco MP-2 really brings in some great low end to the mix. A V3 is just too clean and didn't do it for me, but the transformer based pre's help out with that a lot. I'm about ready to post my pull from the Panic show in Boston, i'll post a link once it's done. If you don't think the Gefell's can give you the bottom end you want, check out my Jane's Addiction pull from the Vibes in the kickdown section.

Yeah, like I said, I was only commenting on my own experience (which I guess everyone is) and not the mic generally.  There are obviously fewer Gefell pulls in general to make comparisons against than Schoeps/AKG, too.  I will listen to those samples.

[Todd R]

I agree with everything Acidjack said, 110%.

I respect most of what acidjack says, though I don't agree with it since I really don't care for the schoeps sound.  His attack on my beloved Gefells that I sold to him, well that was just uncalled for. 

Lots of good info and opinions in this thread, felt I could reply and respond to almost every post.  In general, I am ok with the AKG sound (esp the 460/480 sound since I owned them and know them), and I don't like the schoeps (small diameter) sound -- worse with the mk4's compared to the 41's or 4v's, but across the range, I'm just not a schoeps fan.  (Their product range is just to die for though -- man what options!).  So overall, I'd always choose AKGs over schoeps.

I agree with Page though on the 10k-ish Hz hash for the 460/480s.  It doesn't bother me as much as Page, since I still am ok with AKG sources, but I do hear it and notice it.

On the Gefells -- one of my favorite mics I've owned (which is a fair amount), and I like them right up there with DPAs and Milabs.  I agree though that they seem to emphasize the midrange.  Overall, I generally liked this for PA recordings since the subwoofers are almost always up too high so there is too much bass in the room/recording, and I think esp with line array systems, soundmen seem to really push the treble, so toning down the low and the highs of PA recordings and accentuating the mids helps to my ear.  Again, this is what works against the AKGs for me (though Chuck prefers it) -- there is a slight scooping of the mids on AKGs which I don't prefer.

My favorite mics of the typical taper mics?:  of my favorites, DPA, Milab, and Gefell first.  Followed by Neumanns, followed fairly closely by AKGs, and Audio Technicas for that matter (AT4041 which I owned, AT4022 which I own, AT4051's -- all very, very underrated in my book).  Schoeps and MBHOs -- really don't even make it in my list, I find I just don't like their sound all that much. (My apologies to the rather extensive MBHO and schoeps loving CO Crew.)


willdmb -- never heard anyone argue that AKG 483's aren't the best hyper?  Man, how could you miss all the Gefell m210 disciples and their fluffing? 

[Todd R]

Oh, I forgot -- I'd put Beyerdynamics right up there with Neumanns, or close anyway, and ahead of AKGs.  I've got Acidjack's old pair of Beyer mc950's that I really like.  They have a very different sound than DPAs, Milabs, or Neumanns, and are definitely in the dark sounding camp for me. 

I have never liked any of the mics that I would characterize as dark sounding, my ear is just not tuned to it, but the mc950s are dark sounding, but still I love them.  For mics in the midrange of expense level (as opposed to high cost schoeps, neumanns, DPAs, and Senns), I think more people should think about Beyers.  Esp on a value vs cost comparison, which seems to be where AKGs fall, I think the Beyers give AKGs a run for their money.

[Myco]

I agree there is a more pronounced mid-range with the Gefells. One thing I do that helps alot with bringing in the low end is to use the right pre-amp. A transformer based pre-amp like the Neve Portico 5012 or Aerco MP-2 really brings in some great low end to the mix. A V3 is just too clean and didn't do it for me, but the transformer based pre's help out with that a lot. I'm about ready to post my pull from the Panic show in Boston, i'll post a link once it's done. If you don't think the Gefell's can give you the bottom end you want, check out my Jane's Addiction pull from the Vibes in the kickdown section.

Yeah, like I said, I was only commenting on my own experience (which I guess everyone is) and not the mic generally.  There are obviously fewer Gefell pulls in general to make comparisons against than Schoeps/AKG, too.  I will listen to those samples.

This Panic from 9/16 will be the best one to check out. If you check out the jane's show, go to about the 3rd song in and from there on the soundguy was able to get his kick-drum mix under control, for the first two songs he had them way too high in the mix. Some other taper's did bass roll-off, but I didn't for that one, I just tried to manipulate it through the mixing percentages of the omni's & card's. I posted the show as a omni's & hyper's mix, but I didn't realize until later that I was actually running my card's instead of the hypers. D'oh!

[Myco]

Oh, I forgot -- I'd put Beyerdynamics right up there with Neumanns, or close anyway, and ahead of AKGs.  I've got Acidjack's old pair of Beyer mc950's that I really like.  They have a very different sound than DPAs, Milabs, or Neumanns, and are definitely in the dark sounding camp for me. 

I have never liked any of the mics that I would characterize as dark sounding, my ear is just not tuned to it, but the mc950s are dark sounding, but still I love them.  For mics in the midrange of expense level (as opposed to high cost schoeps, neumanns, DPAs, and Senns), I think more people should think about Beyers.  Esp on a value vs cost comparison, which seems to be where AKGs fall, I think the Beyers give AKGs a run for their money.

I tend to agree with you on this.

Generally speaking though, when it comes down to it, it all depends on your preferences when listening to music. Some like darker sounding sources, some like a little brighter sounding sources, I like a nice clear sounding recording, with a little added thump. To say one is truly better than the other would be like saying the best flavor of ice cream is....., there will never be a consensus. Let your ears tell you what's right for you is what I think.

[acidjack]

It seems to me that dark vs. bright is one of the most common distinctions in taste.  Also seems Gefell aficionados use the term "smooth" a lot.    I think what I may think of as "midrange-y" may be what others think of as "smooth" - and by the way, I suspect that smooth sound is much better for some kinds of music than others (FWIW I liked recordings Todd and Joe have made with that same pair of mics; just didn't like mine).   

To me Schoeps are not as "smooth" but have more "punch" to how they sound in the bottom and mid-bottom end.  I love how drums sound with them, for example.  For the music I often record, I find that to be a pleasing characteristic, but maybe if I were recording a lot of jazz, maybe not (like a lot of people, I checked out that old onstage comp of several flavors of Schoeps and one set of Gefells; in that comp, I'd agree the Gefells won). 

Part of why I like the Schoeps MK5 so much is that, to my ear, it retains that nice low end punch, but adds that brightness and sparkle up top.  I've heard those mics (well, hi and lo's set, specifically) sound great on NOLA jazz, indie rock, electronic music, etc.  They sound, un-EQ'd, about the way I am to get my DPA pulls post-EQ.

[Todd R]

On the Gefells, I should add:  for awhile, I had traded in my V3 for an EAA PSP2, and I think all of the recordings I made with the Gefells (or close to it) used the PSP2.  It might be that it was the m210>PSP2 pairing that worked best.  I think someone earlier noted that the Gefells pair well with a transformer preamp, that could be the case.

[hi and lo]

It seems to me that dark vs. bright is one of the most common distinctions in taste.

There are many ways to describe a microphone and this is, without question, my least favorite set of adjectives. They're thrown around far too often and do such a disservice to the nuances that make or break a live recording. You *might* get me to say that universally MBHO's and Neumann KM150's are bright, but there are no other microphones that I would call dark or bright.

Part of why I like the Schoeps MK5 so much is that, to my ear, it retains that nice low end punch, but adds that brightness and sparkle up top.  I've heard those mics (well, hi and lo's set, specifically) sound great on NOLA jazz, indie rock, electronic music, etc.  They sound, un-EQ'd, about the way I am to get my DPA pulls post-EQ.

 

Having owned 4s, 4vs, 5s and 41s, I can confidently tell you that the 5s are my favorite. I appreciate that their HF bump is smoother than the 4vs and of course who can argue with two patterns in one! They always sound so much more natural and pleasing than the 41s and while they might not always be as appropriate in certain situations as the hypers, pound-for-pound I will appreciate a perfect 5 recording more than a 41 recording.

[page]

On the Gefells, I should add:  for awhile, I had traded in my V3 for an EAA PSP2, and I think all of the recordings I made with the Gefells (or close to it) used the PSP2.  It might be that it was the m210>PSP2 pairing that worked best.  I think someone earlier noted that the Gefells pair well with a transformer preamp, that could be the case.

agreed, the psp2 can a nice compliment in color/texture to the gefell series. Texturally I find the gefell m2x series have a grit in the presence range which reminds me of a schoeps/sonosax or beyer/sonosax combo. The PSP2 adds a layer of butter smoothness to it to reduce that grit (whether warrented or not) and add some warmth in the low-mid range. Really a nice pairing depending on what your taping. Not sure which is easier anymore, finding a PSP2 or replicating the sound... 

I remember when you did the comp between a INA163 chipset (that the V3 uses) and the PSP2 with the gefells.

[hi and lo]

The PSP-2 is lightyears ahead of every modern day 2-channel preamp.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

The PSP-2 is lightyears ahead of every modern day 2-channel preamp.

Agreed.   Still, there are still a lot of things I like the v3 for.

The psp-2 is a *very* sophisticated design in terms of what is in that little box.  There are four circuit boards. It's really well engineered and well packaged.  It's also extermely miserly in terms of power consumption.


Regarding Schoeps, the folks over on Gearslutz generally *love* them.  They love the mk2, mk21 and mk4 for classical music recording, and other live recording.  So say what you will about bloat or dark, or whatever; when it comes down to recording actual instruments in great rooms.........  I really like the mk21's. For cards and hypers, I prefer the Gefells.

[Fried Chicken Boy]

The PSP-2 is lightyears ahead of every modern day 2-channel preamp.

Not biased, are you? 

Regarding the OP's question, I've heard many great Schoeps pulls and many great AKG pulls.  Conversely, I've heard a lot of crappy pulls with both mics, too.  This is just my own experience, but there was a time where I would talk with tapers who bragged about running Schoeps and getting their "sick pulls", I would listen to them and they sounded like ass to my ears.  I realized after that there are/were a group of noob tapers who feel that just because they have the most expensive and regarded microphones, that automatically means they'll get the best recordings.  Tantamount to thinking that if you own a Ferrari, you'll automatically drive as well as Ben Collins or Mario Andretti.  The case was that they really didn't know what they were doing and that their bad results were due to the user and not the mics. 

All that said, my preferences run to AKG and DPA, but I wouldn't mind a set of MK41's or MK5's.