Topic: v3 vs 722

[jmerin]

I just got a 722 and i just want to get opions on what people prefer thanks     I would run schoeps>722 or schoeps >v3>722 ad

jon

[bkirby]

I would say the V3 pre sounds better to my ears, but the 722 AD sounds better! Please specify whether you mean analog or digital out of the V3. All in all, I prefer the M148>722!!! To each their own...

[jmerin]

I would say the V3 pre sounds better to my ears, but the 722 AD sounds better! Please specify whether you mean analog or digital out of the V3. All in all, I prefer the M148>722!!! To each their own...

i would run 722 ad

[terrapinj]

i think i'm starting to think that one pre isn't better than the other per se, just different

V3 pre is much cleaner and tighter than the 722 but can be a little sterile depending on the room and the mics. 722 pre is warmer and while not quite as tight on the low end, still very very good.

i do prefer the A/D in the 722 though

[F.O.Bean]

i think i'm starting to think that one pre isn't better than the other per se, just different

V3 pre is much cleaner and tighter than the 722 but can be a little sterile depending on the room and the mics. 722 pre is warmer and while not quite as tight on the low end, still very very good.

i do prefer the A/D in the 722 though

agreed 100%

[F.O.Bean]

so jon, how did YOU like your chitown tapes?

[Kevin Straker]

i think i'm starting to think that one pre isn't better than the other per se, just different

V3 pre is much cleaner and tighter than the 722 but can be a little sterile depending on the room and the mics. 722 pre is warmer and while not quite as tight on the low end, still very very good.

i do prefer the A/D in the 722 though

IMO cleaner and tighter = better
I wonder if floppiness is sometimes described as warmth?
obviously ymmv.

[thegreatgumbino]

Someone tell me again why Doug won't mod the 722 pre's?  It seems like it would be right up his alley.  I realize they are more expensive boxes than his other mods, but realistically if 722 owners are going to run a $1k + pre in front of the 722 it would be worth at least a couple hundred bucks.  If he could do an ACM/T+/W+ type mod to the 722 he'd be banking and we'd all be carrying a lot less shit.

Sorry for the thread hijack.

I obviously run far too much in the M148 > V3 > 722 and have toyed with the idea of selling off the V3.  I loved the M148 > V3 sound that I got before the 722 though, and the general consensus is that the 722 AD is better than the V3, so why not?  Honestly I haven't run any of the combinations with the 722 enough to tell one way or the other, so it's a mute point for me. 

I just want a bad ass pre and the rest of the capabilities of the 722.  Is that too much to ask?   

[terrapinj]

i think i'm starting to think that one pre isn't better than the other per se, just different

V3 pre is much cleaner and tighter than the 722 but can be a little sterile depending on the room and the mics. 722 pre is warmer and while not quite as tight on the low end, still very very good.

i do prefer the A/D in the 722 though

IMO cleaner and tighter = better
I wonder if floppiness is sometimes described as warmth?
obviously ymmv.

i wouldn't describe the 722 pre as sloppy on the low end, just not at tight as the v3, perhaps that is warmth over transparency, but to be honest i've always found just about any term to describe audio quality quite subjective. only way to really find out is to listen for yourself - and even then there are so many variables.

in some cases i find the v2 to almost be a little thin sounding behind the mod 460s - so cleaner and tighter is not always better with my mics. then again if Merin is running schempz he's gonna need all the help he can get (i keed i keed)

my .019999999 YMMV BYOB ETC 

[grayp]

I would say the V3 pre sounds better to my ears, but the 722 AD sounds better! Please specify whether you mean analog or digital out of the V3. All in all, I prefer the M148>722!!! To each their own...

best advice i have.   i didn't want to carry around the m148 after i got the 722 but without a doubt it sounds better

[mmedley.]

I have run the V2 and V3 in front of the 722 with the MK4V's. That being said...

The 4V > V2 > 722 is my favorite. That little bit of extra "warmth" from the V2 really sounds good to me and sounds good on my playback. I think with the HF bump on the 4V's that the V2 rounds it out nicely. Very robust sound.

The 4V > 722 is my next favorite combo. It is hard to beat this combo to keep it simple. This is primarily what I run.

The 4V > V3 > 722 was my least favorite. It sounded fantastic, but too clean and crisp for my tastes. The downloaders love this combo though because it is so stereo friendly on the low end.


I would say run a few comps and see what you like best...of course.


All in all, I have no desire to buy a V2 or V3. I find it tough to justify the money spent when the 4V > 722 sounds great to me. It has been nice to have the V2 and V3 on loaner though. The other major reason I must pass on an external pre is simply for weight factor...the pre and battery more than double my gearbag weight...which I hate more than anything.

Enjoy the 722. It is hands down my favorite piece of gear ever owned.

[F.O.Bean]

Enjoy the 722. It is hands down my favorite piece of gear ever owned.

QFMFT, i know everyone says mice are the most important part of the chain and i agree, but i think i will work my rig around the 722, not around my mics from now on

so the 4v's have a HF bump? i take it the 41v's do too been itching to run such a simple and light setup

[mmedley.]

Enjoy the 722. It is hands down my favorite piece of gear ever owned.

QFMFT, i know everyone says mice are the most important part of the chain and i agree, but i think i will work my rig around the 722, not around my mics from now on

so the 4v's have a HF bump? i take it the 41v's do too been itching to run such a simple and light setup

Yes, the 4V's have a bump right around 10kHz. I am not sure if the 41V's do though. I would imagine probably so. The 41V's run laps around the 41's though if you ask me. I am not a fan of the 41's at all.

[F.O.Bean]

Enjoy the 722. It is hands down my favorite piece of gear ever owned.

QFMFT, i know everyone says mice are the most important part of the chain and i agree, but i think i will work my rig around the 722, not around my mics from now on

so the 4v's have a HF bump? i take it the 41v's do too been itching to run such a simple and light setup

Yes, the 4V's have a bump right around 10kHz. I am not sure if the 41V's do though. I would imagine probably so. The 41V's run laps around the 41's though if you ask me. I am not a fan of the 41's at all.

i have some of peter aka sleepypedro's stuff and he runs the 4v's>vms02ib>r4 and i love the sound, i would imagine i could do 41v>actives>sax/722 and be a happy camper til. i can use hypers ANYWHERE, just gotta mess around with the configs

mk4>v3 sound sloppy to me, really muddy, merins latest 41>actives>722 from moe 11/25 sounds GREAT tho, i think it sounds better than a v3 would have honestly, at lkeast with the schoeps

what i have found is that the v3>xlr>722 has more punch than just straight 722, with my 480's thats a great thing, with schoeps bass, not so much IMO

if i were merin id sell that v3 in a second and if he wants a pre around and i know how much he likes grace, sell the v3 and buy a sax/v2 combo actives>722 cant be beaten for size either

[Brian Skalinder]

Yes, the 4V's have a bump right around 10kHz. I am not sure if the 41V's do though. I would imagine probably so. The 41V's run laps around the 41's though if you ask me. I am not a fan of the 41's at all.

Interesting.  I've not run the Vs, but from the diagrams it looks like the Vs are just a little more open in the front than the 4/41s, and looks like the Vs pick up "significantly more" rear MF/HF content than the 4/41s.  Interesting...never looked at the V diagrams much before.

MK4


MK4V


MK41


MK41V

[F.O.Bean]

hmmm, mk41v is RULER flat, especially compared to the mk4v, BUT thats kind of apples/oranges isnt it, the mk4/41 have the xt bodies and the 4v/41v have the cmc6 bodies in those diagrams

[Brian Skalinder]

hmmm, mk41v is RULER flat, especially compared to the mk4v

Pretty darn close to the 41s, but as the polar diagram suggests, more of the MF/HF content is coming from the rear on the Vs than the 41s.

BUT thats kind of apples/oranges isnt it, the mk4/41 have the xt bodies and the 4v/41v have the cmc6 bodies in those diagrams

I don't think so.  As I read the charts, only the last freq response curve in each diagram corresponds to the XTs.  The first freq response curve and polart diagram correspond to the CMC6s.  At least that's how I read the charts.

[F.O.Bean]

hmmm, mk41v is RULER flat, especially compared to the mk4v

Pretty darn close to the 41s, but as the polar diagram suggests, more of the MF/HF content is coming from the rear on the Vs than the 41s.

BUT thats kind of apples/oranges isnt it, the mk4/41 have the xt bodies and the 4v/41v have the cmc6 bodies in those diagrams

I don't think so.  As I read the charts, only the last freq response curve in each diagram corresponds to the XTs.  The first freq response curve and polart diagram correspond to the CMC6s.  At least that's how I read the charts.

duh! my bad

hmmm, instead of the 41v's having a HF bump, seems they actually DROP at the 15k mark 

at least with the cmc6, maybe the xt's are diff

id like to see a chart with the 4/41v+cmcxt too

anyhow, wonder what youre actually getting when going mk4v/41v>lemosax? guess the capsule diagram would come into play more than anything

i think the v's have more off-axis sounds because the capsule is a bit differently made and side-address, seems like the v's have more mic capsule surface anyway, maybe thats why?

sorry for the thread highjack jon

[bkirby]

The Schoeps XT bodies will only present extended frequencies with the standard capsules, and NOT the "V" caps. Using the XT bodies with any of the V caps will produce identical results to using the standard CMC6 bodies. Just an FYI...

[it-goes-to-eleven]

i think the v's have more off-axis sounds because the capsule is a bit differently made and side-address, seems like the v's have more mic capsule surface anyway, maybe thats why?

Question is...  Is schoeps rating the polar response with the V capsule in a vertical orientation?  I know a lot of folks run them horizontal.

I can imagine that the larger and more open grid/capsule mounting of the V may be what gives it a more even polar frequency response at say 90 degrees.  But I wonder if that consistency still applies when run horizontal?  In that case, you have the top of the cap housing possibly creating a shadow/comb/whatever.. I think it must be different on that axis.

It would be an interesting question for schoeps and a very interesting comp.

[ghellquist]

The 4V > V3 > 722 was my least favorite. It sounded fantastic, but too clean and crisp for my tastes. The downloaders love this combo though because it is so stereo friendly on the low end.

I run a 722 without any V3 and would really like to understand what this difference is. I mean, if you enable the high-pass filter on the V3 it would be obvious, otherwise the difference should be really, really tiny. In another thread lil kim jong il posted a comparison and I must say that apart from difference in levels I cannot really hear at all what people are talking about.

Just maybe, why not high-pass a bit in post processing. With a good program it will add quite a bit to the experience. And set levels up to normal (because we all do have quite a bit of headroom on 24 recordings, do we?).

Just wondering? Are there samples anywhere?

Here are (for a short time) two short samples of my recordings:
http://hem.bredband.net/b121263/F1.mp3
http://hem.bredband.net/b121263/M1.mp3

Gunnar

[BC]

But I wonder if that consistency still applies when run horizontal?  In that case, you have the top of the cap housing possibly creating a shadow/comb/whatever.. I think it must be different on that axis.

I agree, I bet the off-axis response is quite different depending on the orientation of the capsule. Just my guess though.

[jmerin]

its either schoeps>v3(pre)>722 ad

or schoeps>722(pre)(ad)

thanks

jon