Topic: Schoeps mk22 vs mk21 vs mk4 vs mk41

[JasonSobel]

a couple of days ago, Andy and Rob ran four sets of schoeps into two R-44's.
all mics were on-stage, and each set of mics was setup how one might "typically" setup each of the different mic patterns.  All the details are below.  I volunteered to host the files, so here we go...
I picked two 1-minute clips.   One from "Life of the Mind" and one from "The Tingler"
The same two 1-minute segments are provided from each of the sources.
I normalized each 24/96 file to -1dB, and the amount of gain needed for each clip (no peak at -1dB) is listed below.

in addition to the normalized 24/96 files, I also resampled/dithered the files to 16/44.1 with r8brain v1.9
both the 24/96 and 16/44.1 files are available.

also, in addition to all the Schoeps mics, I was running my Microtech Gefell m200's.  I have included the gefells here, just for fun.  Ken was also running his Neumann km143 > m148 > 702... but I don't have his files here to include.  and the schoeps comp is the primary focus of this whole thing anyway...

Club d'Elf
February 6, 2009
The Lizard Lounge
Cambridge, MA

Duke Levine - guitar
Paul Schultheis - rhodes & moog
Jerry Leake - tablas & percussion
Vicente Lebron - congas & percussion
Dean Johnston - drums
Mike Rivard - bass & sintir

source A
Schoeps mk21/cmc6 > Edirol R-44 (@ 24 bit / 96 kHz)
on-stage, wide ORTF (25cm, 110 degrees)

source B
Schoeps mk22/cmc6 > Edirol R-44 (@ 24 bit / 96 kHz)
on-stage, wide ORTF (21cm, 110 degrees)

source C
Schoeps mk4/cmc6 > Edirol R-44 (@ 24 bit / 96 kHz)
on-stage, ORTF (17cm, 110 degrees)

source D
Schoeps mk41/cmc6 > Edirol R-44 (@ 24 bit / 96 kHz)
on-stage, XY at 90 degrees

source E
Microtech Gefell m200 > Grace Design Lunatec V3 (S/PDIF out) > Tascam HD-P2 (@ 24 bit / 96 kHz)
on-stage, angled 90 degrees, spaced appox. 10 inches


all sources normalized to -1 dB

for The Tingler
source A = +7.06 dB
source B = +1.83 dB
source C = +6.72 dB
source D = +5.67 dB
source E = +4.68 dB

for Life of the Mind
source A = +8.99 dB
source B = +7.59 dB
source C = +8.34 dB
source D = +7.11 dB
source E = +6.03 dB


all normalizing done in Samplitude SE v9.1.1 and done at original 24/96 resolution
resampling from 24 bit / 96 kHz to 16 bit / 44.1 kHz done with r8brain v1.9

here are all the files.  please download them to your computer and listen locally, to minimize the amount of bandwidth needed.  thanks.

Life of the Mind - 16 bit files
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_mind-norm-mk22.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_mind-norm-mk21.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_mind-norm-mk4.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_mind-norm-mk41.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_mind-norm-gefells.flac

Life of the Mind - 24 bit files
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_mind-norm-mk22.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_mind-norm-mk21.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_mind-norm-mk4.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_mind-norm-mk41.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_mind-norm-gefells.flac

The Tingler - 16 bit files
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_tingler-norm-mk22.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_tingler-norm-mk21.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_tingler-norm-mk4.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_tingler-norm-mk41.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/16bit_tingler-norm-gefells.flac

The Tingler - 24 bit files
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_tingler-norm-mk22.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_tingler-norm-mk21.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_tingler-norm-mk4.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_tingler-norm-mk41.flac
http://www.turtleside.com/misc/schoeps-comp/24bit_tingler-norm-gefells.flac

[andyjah]

Thank you Jason for all the transfer work. Much appreciated.

[dennisrtyler]

thanks!

[J.T.L]

fun wins in my ears

[grtphl]

gonna dig into this later tonight...

[newplanet7]

Just a quick review after listening.
Liked the 41's the least even though they sounded great. Smaller sound stage, sounded too cramped to me.

The mk4's seemed to pick up the least low-end even though they sounded great also.

I couldn't really even tell the difference between the 21's and 22's to be honest. I liked them the best out of the schoeps.

The gefells I thought were a little more clear and had more air in them, openness I guess you could say.
maybe it had something to do with an external pre?

Thanks for the comp and all the work fellas.

[JD]

Out of the Schoeps caps I liked the mk22 samples the most, overall I think the Gefell sample sounds the best.

[dactylus]

With just a quick listen I'll have to say that my unbiased opinion is that the Gefell samples sound the best to my ears - would the V3 make that huge of an impact on the Gefell "detail, openess and clarity"?

What I'd love to hear now would be the same mics, 75' -100' from the stage, with the same pre's behind them...

The idea of the mk22 being somewhere in between the mk4 and the mk21 in the "impact zone range" is what interested me in the first place, as I'm sure that it did others here.  Most of my recordings would not be stage lip, thus my keen interest in caps that could provide more low end than the mk4 and more directionality than the mk21.  Looking forward to hearing a few "distant" recordings with the mk22's.


Hampton?


Thanks for your hard work guys!!  All of the samples sound good.

[JasonSobel]

interesting comments thus far.  I'm sure that the V3 pre-amp with the Gefells has something to do with the opinions expressed thus far.  That, and the fact that the Gefells are better mics   but seriously, we (Andy, Rob, and myself) all would have preferred to run external pre's for the Schoeps, but overall, we thought consistency among the gear run behind all the different Schoeps mics would be better for a true comp.  and we didn't have 4 of the same external pre-amps to choose from (at our disposal were two Sonosax SX-M2's, two Mini-me's, one Aeta PSP-3, and one V3.  though we might have been able to get our hands on a second V3.)

Anyway, while it's great to hear what everyone thinks of the Gefells, let's try to foster a discussion about the differences between the Schoeps caps...  sort of like Todd's (newplanet7) thoughts.  anyone else care to describe the differences they hear between the recordings...

What I'd love to hear now would be the same mics, 75' -100' from the stage, with the same pre's in front them...

Hampton?

I know at least one pair of the Boston area mk22's will be making the trip down to Hampton.  I don't know what, or if, any comparisons are planned...

[Matt Quinn]

You guys can borrow my V3 next time. Maybe a 21>V3 vs 22>V3?

[newplanet7]

I thought more people would be all over this comp. 

[Əkoostikal]

To my ears I would have to agree with the consensus that the MG's sound best in this comparison. I will also agree that it is most likely due to the V3 in this situation.


Of the Schopes caps I could not tell a huge difference between the 21's and the 22's..... The 21's did seem to have just a little extra kick in the low end over the 22's but are a bit more harsh in the mid range than the 22's. To me the 22's excel over the 4's just for the extended low freq. response. That is why I have always preferred the 21's over 4's. I am definitely looking foreword to hearing some more recordings of the 22's though. I think they could become my new favorites I think it would be very interesting hearing the 22's at a place like Hampton as well (although not a Phish Phan) but I am interested to see how these preform in a big arena like that. I have a feeling in that particular situation I would actually prefer the 4's..... What I personally am really wanting to hear is a large outdoor show or fest. situation between the 21's and 22's. Recordings made with 21's in outdoor settings where there is no reflected sound are by far my favorite to listen to. I think the 22's would really shine in this situation and sound stellar. Overall I will say I am very pleased with the sound of the new mk22's from what I have heard here. Thanks for the comparison!

[Matt Quinn]

I thought more people would be all over this comp. 

I'm dying to dig into it, but don't want to taint my opinion by listening on my crappy work speakers.

[bobbygeeWOW]

Right on man, thanks - great opportunity!
I'm quite interested in the possibility of having a cap that rejects a little more than the 21's but still has more of that openess than a straight card.
Couple notes - the mk41's are coincident unlike the others and the geffels boosted highend + grace certainly sound very different.
For a laugh later on I put a slope from 0db at 1k up to 5db at 10k on the mk4 to approximate the geffs, which really highlighted the character of the pres.

Also found the left channel on the mk22 version of tingler quite a bit lower in amplitude than the right channel so I normalized each channel independently to -1db then recombined.

Then, very interesting listen. I found that really I ultimately liked them in ascending order of wideness..
One off, next time I'd go straight for the 21's in that place. Directional omni's rule!

Loosely, my thing with running subs is choosing when to move to a more rejective pattern, based on general room ambience/chattiness/etc, and distance.
The mk4's of course have fantastic rear rejection that still surprises me sometimes (like the chatty table a foot away right at stage lip that you can barely make out).
So funnily enough I'm more interested in what the mk22's don't pick up!
Something that sits right between the 21's and 4's sure could be sweet!

 -Cheers!

[JasonSobel]

One off, next time I'd go straight for the 21's in that place. Directional omni's rule!

if you look at the Club d'Elf section on the archive, you'll find tons of mk21 tapes from the past, I don't know, 5 or 6 years - almost all in the Lizard Lounge