Gear / Technical Help > Microphones & Setup
MK21 vs MK22?
MakersMarc:
anyone care to comment on the differences?
Thanks!
noahbickart:
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 is 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)
DSatz:
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.
jerryfreak:
would you say the mk21 is inferior to the mk22 for our application when it comes to stereo imaging?
weroflu:
Dsatz: care to comment on proximity effect of the mk21?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version