Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: nebulax on December 17, 2021, 10:02:02 PM
-
So Neumann finally comes out with a electret condenser microphone. Wonder if it'll suitable for stealth mic use?
https://www.soundonsound.com/news/miniature-instrument-mics-neumann (https://www.soundonsound.com/news/miniature-instrument-mics-neumann)
-
Interested in seeing the frequency response graph.
-
OMG I WANT TWO OF THEM.
If they suck I'll figure out what to do with them.
-
from that page:
On its own, a KK 14 capsule is set to cost €279, but Neumann are also introducing a large range of attachment and connection options, the latter including mini-XLR, 3.5mm jack, Lemo and MicroDot connectors, and the former comprising nine mounts for various instruments including brass, strings, piano and percussion. Complete sets comprising a capsule, a gooseneck, cables, an XLR adaptor, an instrument mount and a windshield are priced at €629.
-
Looks nice, hope it can handle high rockconcert db's...
Found this on: https://www.thomann.de/gr/neumann_mcm_kk_14.htm
"Neumann MCM KK 14; capsule head of the Miniature Clip Microphone System MCM; electret technology; polar pattern: cardioid; max. SPL: 152 dB; native interfaces to most transmitter bodypacks (3.5 mm jack / MicroDot / Lemo / 4-pin mini-XLR); titanium housing"
-
Interesting it's numbered 14; related to sennheiser ke14 (Ambeo)?
-
Me too! These look pretty sweet. I wonder when U.S. vendors will have them.
OMG I WANT TWO OF THEM.
If they suck I'll figure out what to do with them.
-
Interesting they can terminated to microdot. I wonder if the DPA MMA-A can power them?
-
some pics on Instagram and this article
https://en.soundlightup.com/archives-3/reports/neumann-mcm-ein-stern-ist-geboren.html
-
B&H has them up for pre-order, but the listing is light on specs. The B&H summary mentions a 12mm diaphragm, while the article linked above mentions something about 8mm. The DPA 4006 etc. caps are about 18mm in diameter and can be powered by an MMA-A and DPA active cables. It's not yet clear how much smaller the Neumann kk14 will be, nor what voltage will be needed for them.
-
Thanks for the link and frequency graph. These things look like the roll off A LOT of bass.
some pics on Instagram and this article
https://en.soundlightup.com/archives-3/reports/neumann-mcm-ein-stern-ist-geboren.html
-
That rolloff is typical of directional microphones designed for placement close to their sound sources. Neumann typically shows on-axis response at a 1-meter pickup distance. Other manufacturers may use shorter measurement distances (30 or even 15 cm).
The reason this matters so much is proximity effect. At 15 or 30 cm (ca. 6" - 12") it boosts the bass and midbass significantly across a wide range of frequencies. So if you plot a graph for such close placement (as DPA does, and Audio-Technica for some graphs), the graph may show full low frequency response--but at greater miking distances, that bass won't be there in nearly the amounts shown. It's not a small effect--it can very well be 10-12 dB of bass boost close up. If that boost is what creates flat low-frequency response at close range, you need to deduct that amount to understand what you will get for more distant pickup.
Consider the two graphs that I've attached, from two older, closely-related Neumann microphones (identical amplifiers; different capsules based on the same acoustical design). These curves were both made at a 1-meter distance (OK, actually they were almost certainly taken from farther away, then adjusted to approximate a 1-meter response--and obviously smoothed for presentation; all of that is typical practice). The point is that if you measured the KM 85 from 15 cm, where there's much more proximity effect than at 1 meter, its curve might look almost exactly like the KM 84's 1-meter curve. Then if you went by the curves and didn't consider measuring distances, you might buy the "speech cardioid" KM 85 without realizing that it was a microphone for close pickup, rather than a general-purpose studio cardioid.
Often we as consumers don't know how the manufacturer's curves were obtained. Even if we do know, how exactly does one convert a 15- or 30-cm curve into a 1-meter curve? There's no fixed formula. And even at one meter there is still some proximity effect. It's an industry-wide problem but it persists because the manufacturers don't seem interested in solving it--or more precisely, no one wants to be the first to show realistic performance curves at various distances, and thus risk losing customers to the other manufacturers who reveal less, and let consumers keep their illusions. When a manufacturer says that their microphone was designed mainly for a certain type of use, we should understand that it probably isn't equally good for other situations that have very different technical requirements.
(Pressure transducers don't have proximity effect--single-diaphragm omnidirectional microphones--but all directional microphones do have it to some extent.)
--WiFiJeff, the article seems to say that smaller diameters such as 8 mm were considered, but 12 mm was ultimately chosen. That dimension normally refers to the active area of the diaphragm (i.e. the part of the Mylar that gold is evaporated onto) rather than its entire physical size. 12 mm is only slightly smaller than average as the diameter of the active area for small-diaphragm condenser microphones.
--best regards
-
I wonder if the cable will be easily able to be separated from the gooseneck. I don't see any pictures of the mics without.
-
Looks like you buy the caps and then the goose neck or a cable system for p48 adapters or minixlr's
I wonder if the cable will be easily able to be separated from the gooseneck. I don't see any pictures of the mics without.
-
Has anyone tried this one yet? any more info on of it is useful to us?
-
holy moly these are tiny tiny. same size as the mics on my pcm-a10. MK4 for reference
(https://i.imgur.com/RJadTVz.jpg)
now to attempt to measure those threads
-
Have you had a chance to use them at a show?
-
Have you had a chance to use them at a show?
they literally arrived an hour ago. havent even figured out how i am going to mount and connect to them. leery to spend an additional $400 on the goosenecks to cut up
-
cool, please more pics and whats up with the goosenecks?
-
is there a way to strip the cable out of the gooseneck and use it as a regular cable with XLR?
-
cool, please more pics...
here ya go. i think i got the threads sized but not 100%. need to bug my machinist buddy, the plug and ring gauges to measure those threads arent cheap
note how it is similar size to a TBxM mini xlr
(https://i.imgur.com/IbHfRG0.jpg)
can you imagine a pen-sized body with a TB3M mini-xlr in the back? would be the size of one of those keychain maglights and useful for open taping
(https://i.imgur.com/3UDK0Gx.jpg)
-
...and whats up with the goosenecks?
is there a way to strip the cable out of the gooseneck and use it as a regular cable with XLR?
whats up with the goosenecks is they are really expensive for what they do. not only are they $199 a pop they come with a proprietary coax connector which necessitates another cable. $39 for AC31 locking minijack, $99 for AC32 lemo, $89 for AC33 microdot, $69 for AC34 4pin mini XLR
to get them to XLR/phantom you need the $109 MCM100 output stage which is similar to the DPA DAD6001 except it is locking minijack instead of microdot. i imagine the standard dpa (or chinese knockoffs) would work with the neumann microdot cables
but using factory components with no hacks, per channel, after $299 for the capsule, you're looking at $350 for the rest ($199 gooseneck+ $39 AC31 + $109 phantom adapter)
im going to grab a gooseneck and an AC31 for testing purposes and will eat restock on them. i need to put a meter to the gooseneck and make sure it is passive. its tiny and i suppose there could be an FET in there but not sure. Apart from that i know the voltage requirements from the specs and will try the various 2-wire interfaces i have. once i know i can power the cap its just a matter of machining male ends that are cheaper and smaller than the goosenecks. i need to source a 1mm spring pin contact like the goosenecks use
-
^Watching this with interest. Thanks for the pictures
-
...and whats up with the goosenecks?
is there a way to strip the cable out of the gooseneck and use it as a regular cable with XLR?
whats up with the goosenecks is they are really expensive for what they do. not only are they $199 a pop they come with a proprietary coax connector which necessitates another cable. $39 for AC31 locking minijack, $99 for AC32 lemo, $89 for AC33 microdot, $69 for AC34 4pin mini XLR
to get them to XLR/phantom you need the $109 MCM100 output stage which is similar to the DPA DAD6001 except it is locking minijack instead of microdot. i imagine the standard dpa (or chinese knockoffs) would work with the neumann microdot cables
but using factory components with no hacks, per channel, after $299 for the capsule, you're looking at $350 for the rest ($199 gooseneck+ $39 AC31 + $109 phantom adapter)
im going to grab a gooseneck and an AC31 for testing purposes and will eat restock on them. i need to put a meter to the gooseneck and make sure it is passive. its tiny and i suppose there could be an FET in there but not sure. Apart from that i know the voltage requirements from the specs and will try the various 2-wire interfaces i have. once i know i can power the cap its just a matter of machining male ends that are cheaper and smaller than the goosenecks. i need to source a 1mm spring pin contact like the goosenecks use
Thanks, which you all the best figuring this out. Following this close. 8)
-
^Watching this with interest. Thanks for the pictures
Same, this looks nice.
-
Wow. Suddenly a whole new world is opening up ...
Electret capsules should be able to power from a battery box .. or plug in power.
-
Wow. Suddenly a whole new world is opening up ...
Electret capsules should be able to power from a battery box .. or plug in power.
per the limited specs we have they want 5-10V
Maximum SPL 153 dB SPL, with Supply = 10 V, Rfeed = 20 Kilohms, for THD < 0.5%
143 dB SPL, with Supply = 5 V, Rfeed = 8.25 Kilohms, for THD < 0.5%
ill test them with as many devices as i can. looking like a homemade battery box would want the current limiting resistors to be 10-15K ohms for a typical 9V battery
-
It would be cool if the Microdot cables worked with a d vice or mma 6000
-
It would be cool if the Microdot cables worked with a d vice or mma 6000
yeah it would
will certainly be testing that tomorrow but i have to do it on the bench with a microdot pigtail, alligator clips, and an AC31 cable, as the AC33 microdot cable is not available yet anywhere.
electrically it should be the same. hopefully the KK14 has the right impedance to turn the d:vice on, unlike line-in hacks which need a resistor to fool the d:vice into turning on
-
I'm very curious about how these will perform at any kind of distance.
The frequency graph https://en-de.neumann.com/kk-14#technical-data (https://en-de.neumann.com/kk-14#technical-data) shows linear response at 15cm distance down to 20hz but the "farfield" response shows significant roll off starting at 350hz and down to -20dB at 20hz.
This is what you want to limit proximity effect when you are close miking an instrument but not necessarily what you want when you are more than a few feet away from the source.
-
coming along. got the gooseneck and was able to do a variety of tests. not going to type out all here until posts start going through, which hasnt happened since i had to start a new acct.
lets just say the audio tests exceeded my expectations
mounting sans gooseneck is coming along. pics of a crude mount are below but say they are yet to be approved by moderator so you probably cant see them yet.
now that i have the threads sized im working on a more elegant solution, stay tuned
--------------
edit: giving up on attachments images still "awaiting approval" days later, here's an imgur link
https://imgur.com/a/l7QHRF9 (https://imgur.com/a/l7QHRF9)
-
a few more details now that my posts are working
test setup: KK14 capsule+MCM100 gooseneck+AC31 cable (sennheiser style trs)
microdot cables arent available anywhere yet so i had to do my microdot testing with some pigtails and alligator clips
first test i did was just PIP on the A10 - it worked well and i could not see any audible or visual distortion in the waveform by generating the loudest sound i could with a monitor. also worked with a church ugly 9V to similar results
for microdot tests i used two pieces of gear. it worked fine on an MMA6000, ran a KK14 on one channel and a 4011+MMP-G on the other. the 4011 was about 10dB more sensitive as expected, as the KK14 are very low sens - 3.6 mv/Pa vs the typical ~11mV/Pa for a 4011.
so that's a consideration. 4060s are around 20 mV/Pa, 4061s about 6mV/Pa. the 4071 "extreme" version is 2mV/Pa. typically as sensitivity goes down, self-noise goes up. that 406x series are 23, 26, and 33 dBA self-noise respectively. of course diaphragm size helps, and the 11mV/PA 4011s clock in at 18 dB.
The KK14 is somewhere in between the miniatures and a ("full size" for our typical use) condensor. its 3.6 mV/PA low-sens comes in at a respectable 23 dBA. so, directionality aside, it has a noise floor as low as a 4060, yet a max SPL higher than a 4061. So pretty ideal for our application
ok so back to the tests, with the gain set 10dB higher for the neumann, i tested both an audio source then put it outside to record 'silence' (rural area at night=pretty quiet). the resulting noise looked the same on both, the noise floor was below ambient. id have to build a soundproof box to test them better than that (and i might...dont threaten me with a good time!)
so a pretty good test if it can hang with a 4011. sound-wise they were comparable but i realize the limitations of a home test so ill save that for a real venue test.
ok so on to the d:vice. unfortunately it wasn't plug and play. the kk14 is higher impedance and lower current draw than either of the dpa microdot mics, and the d:vice wouldnt recognize it. easily defeated with the addition of a load resistor in parallel, so this would need to be built into the cabling. i could be wrong, but my guess is the microdot accessory cable is a straight wire and it wouldn't make a difference if i had the actual cable. Again it works fine with a passive pre like the MMA6000 but the d:vice needs to see the right load to fire up.
So if you want an off-the-shelf solution for the d:vice this isnt it, and i wouldn't recommend doubling the price of your capsule by adding a gooseneck and cable anyway. measuring the gooseneck, it appears completely passive. resistance was 5 ohms including the extension cable, and the continuity/diode test worked both ways.
ive already sized the threads per the pic above and have some additional parts on the way including what i need to make that center contact. there's enough real estate inside the cap that i should be able to make cable ends that are darn near flush with the back of the cap. like 3/16" or less deep with a side cable exit
i have a show on friday and will try to take it with me and find a loud AF spot to test it with the A10 with and without the ugly BB. thats the only real field-worthy setup i have right now and i will be wired up with my d:vice so i dont want to be tinkering with that inside
while it did seem to work great on PIP with the A10 (likely due to the capsule's low current consumption) keep in mind the two caveats:
1. i am not able to generate super loud sounds at home
2. that is still only one capsule and the A10 powering two caps might look different as its probably one current-limited power rail split to 2 channels
so i can do a kinda test this week but not a full test until i build out my own cable ends, id rather not buy another gooseneck right now. That said im confident that if it works that well on PIP that battery solution would be light. a 28A would run a pair of these forever
will report back
-
I'm very curious about how these will perform at any kind of distance.
The frequency graph https://en-de.neumann.com/kk-14#technical-data (https://en-de.neumann.com/kk-14#technical-data) shows linear response at 15cm distance down to 20hz but the "farfield" response shows significant roll off starting at 350hz and down to -20dB at 20hz.
This is what you want to limit proximity effect when you are close miking an instrument but not necessarily what you want when you are more than a few feet away from the source.
not uncommon with pressure gradient condensers
from another thread:
4011 cardioid
(https://i.imgur.com/ZXsztE7.png)
not *that* much different than the KK14, though they dont tell us what distance "freefield" is. assuming its 1m or more its not much different than we would expect from the 4011... its always a challenge to compare different mfr's measurements apples-to-apples... we will see when we put it in an actual room
(https://i.imgur.com/mqu3ftp.jpg)
-
- All pressure gradient microphones have proximity effect, not only condensers (unless we get into "variable-D" microphones which no one here is using TTBMK).
- "Free field" effectively means direct and anechoic rather than any particular measuring distance. It's "free" in the sense of "unobstructed", with room boundaries considered as obstructions if any sound bounces off of them and then reaches the microphone indirectly.
- The DIN/IEC standard refers to "plane wave" conditions, which would mean that no proximity effect should be included at all. But nothing in the real world generates true plane waves, so the effect can only be approximated. Proximity effect trails off gradually as you get farther away from the sound source, though, and typically is still evident at 1 meter, assuming a point source or the like. To reduce it to where it's negligible, you would generally need a greater distance, depending on the geometry of the capsule. This is particularly true for supercardioid or figure-8 patterns, where the effect is greater than for an equivalent cardioid, and for larger microphones in general.
The thing is, I know of no manufacturer that follows this rule to the letter. Neumann, Schoeps, Sennheiser, I believe AKG when they still existed, and many/most other European manufacturers of studio microphones as well as some in other countries, generally have used a 1-meter (or calculated equivalent) measurement distance. They do it because they have always done it and because the others are doing it and they don't want to be the only one that looks bad.
Nowadays some manufacturers specify different models differently, depending on the intended application. Microphones designed for very close miking might be measured at 15 or 30 cm (about 6 or 12 inches). This makes the graphs easier to interpret for people who really use microphones at such distances. But such graphs are difficult to interpret for other miking distances, and can deceive those who don't understand the issue, or who set their concern aside out of sheer enthusiasm when they see a bright, shiny object that they want to own. (Of course that could never happen here ...)
Even if you know what measurement distance was used (which the manufacturers don't often tell you), there's no set formula for converting a 15 or 30 cm curve to a 1-meter curve. It depends, as I said, on the acoustical design and physical dimensions of the capsule. So I'm always glad when a manufacturer indicates the low-frequency response at various distances.
--best regards
-
what is that? 🤤
-
its a work in progress of the first prototype of a small cable end to replace the gooseneck - a part that otherwise doesn't yet exist in nature (that we know of)
-
so great you do this, have you tried them in the field yet?
-
so great you do this, have you tried them in the field yet?
i only had one gooseneck and i handheld it at points in a recent gig where i had a stereo pair of subcards in my hat. it was extremely loud stack taping situation and it didnt overload. beyond that im reserving judgement on overall sound until i can give it a fair fight as a stereo pair next to another pair of cardioids
-
Nice work and exploration of these thus far, Mountainhop.
I somehow missed this thread when it originated, but happy to find, join and follow it now. The KK14 is a very cool development that strongly piques my interest as it makes for a potentially attractive alternative to the DPA 4098H miniature supercardioids I currently employ in my surround/stereo recording rig (5 of 8 total channels) .
A few comments:
This microphone system appears designed to address market currently dominated by the now ubiquitous miniature DPA goose-neck directional mics intended to be clamped directly to instruments. Because of that, in addition to the mounts and goosenecks, the measurements, response tailoring, and SPL handling all reflect that kind of close-mounted use. In comparison to the DPA "on-instrument" mics, the DPA 4098H I use is (was?) designed for installed hanging choir microphone and podium applications. As such it has a somewhat higher sensitivity, lower self-noise and max SPL (think 4060 verses 4061) and uses a slightly longer tiny interference tube grid, yet otherwise essentially shares the same design lineage.
In our concert taper applications, the KK14's response is likely to produce a very similar low-frequency proximity roll off in comparison to the DPA 4098, producing a "clean and lean" sound direct to the recorder. In my experience that proximity roll off is very linear and can be rather easily compensated for with EQ. Sometimes with overdriven PA bass the inherent proximity roll off at typical taper distances is just about right on its own - in any case it is less severe, more musical, and easier to manage than the insertion of a low-cut filter. I use 4098 in combination with a pair of 4061 omnis to achieve flexibility over LF response and also collective pattern at the array level, and could not effectively run an 8 channel array if the microphones were not miniature.
..beyond that im reserving judgement on overall sound until i can give it a fair fight as a stereo pair next to another pair of cardioids
That's what it takes. ..along with LF EQ as long as one is open to doing so. I used MG M21 supercards as comparison reference when initially assessing the DPA 4098H.
-
Marking the thread so I can geek out with everyone else from a safe distance. Thank you for your work mountainhop. I noticed your old account died and a new one went up so I am glad to see you are back.
-
I noticed your old account died and a new one went up so I am glad to see you are back.
His old account (https://taperssection.com/index.php?action=profile;u=836) is still active, it appears...
-
Nice work and exploration of these thus far, Mountainhop.
I somehow missed this thread when it originated, but happy to find, join and follow it now. The KK14 is a very cool development that strongly piques my interest as it makes for a potentially attractive alternative to the DPA 4098H miniature supercardioids I currently employ in my surround/stereo recording rig (5 of 8 total channels) .
A few comments:
This microphone system appears designed to address market currently dominated by the now ubiquitous miniature DPA goose-neck directional mics intended to be clamped directly to instruments. Because of that, in addition to the mounts and goosenecks, the measurements, response tailoring, and SPL handling all reflect that kind of close-mounted use. In comparison to the DPA "on-instrument" mics, the DPA 4098H I use is (was?) designed for installed hanging choir microphone and podium applications. As such it has a somewhat higher sensitivity, lower self-noise and max SPL (think 4060 verses 4061) and uses a slightly longer tiny interference tube grid, yet otherwise essentially shares the same design lineage.
In our concert taper applications, the KK14's response is likely to produce a very similar low-frequency proximity roll off in comparison to the DPA 4098, producing a "clean and lean" sound direct to the recorder. In my experience that proximity roll off is very linear and can be rather easily compensated for with EQ. Sometimes with overdriven PA bass the inherent proximity roll off at typical taper distances is just about right on its own - in any case it is less severe, more musical, and easier to manage than the insertion of a low-cut filter. I use 4098 in combination with a pair of 4061 omnis to achieve flexibility over LF response and also collective pattern at the array level, and could not effectively run an 8 channel array if the microphones were not miniature.
..beyond that im reserving judgement on overall sound until i can give it a fair fight as a stereo pair next to another pair of cardioids
That's what it takes. ..along with LF EQ as long as one is open to doing so. I used MG M21 supercards as comparison reference when initially assessing the DPA 4098H.
well these are cards not supercards of course
the 4099 (similar to 4098) always seemed to have a strange response/pattern to my ears that wasnt ideal for our application. not sure if that was due to the tight pattern or the interference tube design. the interference tubes are somewhat delicate for our use as well
as you know, pattern alone doesnt make a mic as it is frequency dependent, and in ambient/room situations that can certainly add color, for better or worse
but youre right, these do appear far more linear in LF response, if neumanns plot is to be believed
Marking the thread so I can geek out with everyone else from a safe distance. Thank you for your work mountainhop. I noticed your old account died and a new one went up so I am glad to see you are back.
yeah those few dozen posts are orphaned, which makes searching a little more challenging, but theyre still there it seems. not a lot of content in any case, and largely in same threads
-
success
https://soundcloud.com/kk14-368445704/bench-test-of-kk14-with-custom-cable
(https://i.imgur.com/yCD6gOF.jpg)
-
success
https://soundcloud.com/kk14-368445704/bench-test-of-kk14-with-custom-cable
Hell yah, nice work!
-
good prototype i need to find some more appropriate cable like some dpa 1.6mm or 2.2mm microdot
-
yeah!! here is my money 😂
-
Here's one option:
https://www.cdint.com/catalog/category/Cables/10-32
^
Choose appropriate microdot termination (size 10-32, straight female, straight or right angle male), preinstalled on whatever length of cable you want. Their standard RG174 cable works nicely for my applications. For this kind of thing I tend to purchase a single cable pre-terminated with dots at both ends that is twice my required length, cut it in half and re-terminate the cut ends to mini-xlr or whatever you need at the other end to create a pair.
RG174 is nicely jacketed, robust, and the center conductor is far easier to solder than the cable DPA uses.
-
sorry for the ignorance but how many volts do you need to power this setup? 9V?
-
i think the next set will have mmcx jacks built in to the housing to use common headphone cables for PIP, or the microdot to mmcx cables on that site interchangably
-
sorry for the ignorance but how many volts do you need to power this setup? 9V?
i was able to run one mic on PIP. now that i have this cable built i technically have a pair, so i will attempt to test if the A10 can power a pair.
based on my observations so far, as well as neumann's spec sheet, 2.5-10V is the range. higher obviously better for high SPL though the <3V PIP did fine in a quick test at a loud show (with a single mic, aka half the required current)
-
what is cdint's turnaround time? and what is the diameter of their RG174. the cable on the prototype i built is RG174, marked 'bedea #1098 RG174 made in Germany". i have a few of these pigtails around but the cable is a bit thick for this purpose, imo
-
Around 5 business days for my RG174 back in July
-
Around 5 business days for my RG174 back in July
do you know the diameter?
-
Around 5 business days for my RG174 back in July
do you know the diameter?
~2.6mm according to my inexpensive calipers
-
success
https://soundcloud.com/kk14-368445704/bench-test-of-kk14-with-custom-cable (https://soundcloud.com/kk14-368445704/bench-test-of-kk14-with-custom-cable)
(https://i.imgur.com/yCD6gOF.jpg)
wow. this kinda shit makes my day :)
-
Very exciting!
-
did a little more testing today. I got my "YPA" (chinese knockoff) versions of the DAD3056 microdot to 5-pin lectrosonics servo input so i could use microdot mics with the SPDR i picked up recently. Fortunately the knockoffs passed all tests on being electrically identical to the DPA versions (pin 1 was properly grounded to chassis, pins 2&4 were shorted to tell the input to produce 4V PIP, and there was the proper 3K9 resistor on pin 3 mic input)
neumann's KK14 specs are as follows:
Maximum SPL 153 dB SPL, with Supply = 10 V, Rfeed = 20 Kilohms, for THD < 0.5%
143 dB SPL, with Supply = 5 V, Rfeed = 8.25 Kilohms, for THD < 0.5%
I was unable to get any response from sennheiser/neumann tech support, but lectro support suggested 6.6K resistor with the 4V their input provides
it did seem to work fine with the default 3.9K resistor in the adapter, i imagine this slightly lower resistance would only bump up output a bit on this very low-sens mic. any advice on the practical considerations here, or if i am putting the caps at risk, would be welcomed. technically the 3K9 resistor at 4V will allow up to about 1mA of current for these caps that want a max of 0.26 mA, so not sure if thats bad necessarily. Unless there is some other purpose than current-limiting for that resistor in that circuit. I would find it hard to believe that neumann would provide a mic with microdot out that wasnt compatible with the common DPA/lectro/countryman/etc microdot inputs, without providing specific guidance otherwise
so i did a home speaker test handholding the KK14 (on custom cable) next to a 4011GS, both single mics into the SPDR. Not an ideal test but at least a good comp. Adjusted the input levels on the channels independently on the recorder to get reasonably similar waveforms
The distance i was holding them can definitely be considered 'nearfield'. 15-30cm to the sound source
The KK14 definitely had less bottom end, but seemed to me to have a bit more clarity than the 4011s (which are kind of known by some for their 'dark' sound'). Per gutbucket's suggestion i did a little EQ on the bottom end and was satisfied with the result
the three files (4011 untouched, KK14 untouched, and KK14 eq'd) are here: https://mega.nz/folder/tPEWkLIB#nSlOB2jQ1tQpAlD3gqR2hQ
considering im usually removing low end from my recordings in post, this may not be objectionable in practice. Still, the proof wont be in the pudding until i get them in a free-field environment at a show, which i have a few coming up in the next few weeks (and should have a pair of second-gen cables by middle of this coming week)
-
can’t wait to hear the results
-
SNIP < considering im usually removing low end from my recordings in post, this may not be objectionable in practice. > SNIP
This is where the rubber meets the road in a lot of what we are doing taping live shows. If the low end roll off is similar to what you are often doing in post then it all works out for the intended use.
-
success on friday night. got the parts just in time on thursday to build the field-worthy version. got it dialed in where i was able to build a half-dozen of the center spring pin assemblies (by far the trickiest part) in a few hours and bat 1000 on location to the tiny center pad on the capsule. so i built out one complete pair using mmc-x connectors, these worked splendidly with an off-the-shelf mmc-x headphone cable (albeit a tad short), Like most IEMs, when properly seated it is a robust connection.
i ran KK14>church ugly 9V bat box>A10 successfully. i ran without the bat box for the opening DJ set which was reasonably loud (albeit maybe a tad shy of the headliner volume) with no ill effects. ill try to do more tests sans bat box in an extreme stack environment in the future
so the million-dollar question: how do they sound? I would say i was pleased with their perfomance but technical limitations prevent a straight apples-to-apples with the 4011s i hoped to compare them to. namely:
1. i boned it and the 4015s were still in my hat from the last gig so id be comparing subcards with cards
2. the 4015s were in a proper mount at approx 70 deg and ~110mm for this stack tape. lacking a proper mount for these (because i built them too small, and was also rushed to get out to the show), i jammed them in there on the outside of the 4015s in some little windtech windscreens i had lying around, and so they were effectively A-B at about 150mm with the other mics and kinda my forehead as a bit of a baffle
3. the KK14s were in the windscreens which had potential to muffle the highs relative to the 4015s that were naked and right up against the thin fabric of the k****l v**t**r. The windscreens are technically deeper than my side-cable setup would allow. my best measurement is that there is a 10mm void space in front of the capsule before the foam, and then 15 mm of foam in the front and 9mm on the sides. It is good that windscreens exist for these! i bet they would do well outdoors
(https://i.imgur.com/Trvi9Ec.png)
as expected the 4015s need rolloff work but the KK14s seem to need nothing. bottom end is there but not overpowering. hope to run next to the 4011s later this week in a proper setup. i might literally epoxy the KK14 cable ends right to the 3d-printed 110 70 deg mount, because i have the extra parts
im not sure i will post this show publicly, so if you want samples, message me and ill link you to a 4ch polywav with the two sources
-
this seems well-built and will be the next one i try. 6.5 feet so it can actually go up over my head and reach to the bottom of my pants pocket unlike the 4' cable i previously tried
https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=30362
the good thing about most mmc-x cables is they are built with enthusiasts in mind so at least they have twisted pairs/oxygen free/the proper amount of snake oil, so at least there is some standard vs the super cheap off-the-shelf $1 mini to mini patch cords where the molded end eventually craps out on you
this doesnt really solve the microdot connection issue, microdot to mmc-x cables are over $40 a pop. cheaper to build ones with dedicated fixed microdot cables since those cable ends will need dedicated circuitry to work with the d:vice anyway
-
Excellent!
-
success on friday night. got the parts just in time on thursday to build the field-worthy version. got it dialed in where i was able to build a half-dozen of the center spring pin assemblies (by far the trickiest part) in a few hours and bat 1000 on location to the tiny center pad on the capsule. so i built out one complete pair using mmc-x connectors, these worked splendidly with an off-the-shelf mmc-x headphone cable (albeit a tad short), Like most IEMs, when properly seated it is a robust connection.
i ran KK14>church ugly 9V bat box>A10 successfully. i ran without the bat box for the opening DJ set which was reasonably loud (albeit maybe a tad shy of the headliner volume) with no ill effects. ill try to do more tests sans bat box in an extreme stack environment in the future
so the million-dollar question: how do they sound? I would say i was pleased with their perfomance but technical limitations prevent a straight apples-to-apples with the 4011s i hoped to compare them to. namely:
1. i boned it and the 4015s were still in my hat from the last gig so id be comparing subcards with cards
im not sure i will post this show publicly, so if you want samples, message me and ill link you to a 4ch polywav with the two sources
:clapping:
Thanks for the testing.
I'll send you a PM so that I can listen to the 4ch polywav with the two sources.
-
all set up for show tomorrow (pardon the sloppy hot glue job)
not ideal spacing but should be best comp yet as both pairs will be running into d:vices
(https://i.imgur.com/AmHcbEx.png)
-
all set up for show tomorrow (pardon the sloppy hot glue job)
not ideal spacing but should be best comp yet as both pairs will be running into d:vices
:clapping:
-
LOL @ hot melt glue.
perfect
-
ok time for the weirdest set of comp files ever
included are samples of the raw files as recorded (normalized to -20dB RMS), as well as attempts using izotope 10's 'match EQ feature' to make them sound like each other, at 50% and 100% settings
note i made no attempt to make the recordings sound as good as i could (feel free to if you care), just a simple mic to mic comp, of two very different-sounding mics
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LlRhv-GAs-jdldCo9F53hXTm-K96eGXD/view?usp=sharing
-
added file "ch1-2-4011-ch3-4-kk14.wav" which is a medley of different dynamic sections including some "bass bombs", drum solos and quieter guitar parts, better than the randomly chosen sample in the EQ files which is a little loud/chaotic
https://drive.google.com/file/d/12UAmkFFC_IzcK0R-cP6Vze4KZZ1dyIag/view?usp=sharing
this is a polywav but note the sources are not necessarily perfectly time-aligned, a bit of drift towards the end
-
ok time for the weirdest set of comp files ever
included are samples of the raw files as recorded (normalized to -20dB RMS), as well as attempts using izotope 10's 'match EQ feature' to make them sound like each other, at 50% and 100% settings
note i made no attempt to make the recordings sound as good as i could (feel free to if you care), just a simple mic to mic comp, of two very different-sounding mics
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LlRhv-GAs-jdldCo9F53hXTm-K96eGXD/view?usp=sharing
Thanks for this. Good methodology I think and very informative to compare both raw files and the match EQ'd versions. I've not listened to the polywav version yet.
-
try as i might they sound nothing alike.
i do think the kk14s would kick ass in an OMT with an omni or two
-
I found it especially interesting to compare the differences in the mid and high frequency range of the match-EQ'd versions.
Granted some of the difference there may be attributable to the mounting differences.
-
I found it especially interesting to compare the differences in the mid and high frequency range of the match-EQ'd versions.
Granted some of the difference there may be attributable to the mounting differences.
i have open-taping theater shows with a bigger PA this weekend. will try to stand mount in identical configurations. since these will be section tapes i will prob do KK14+4011+4018 into the F6. 4011+4018 always bats 1000 from the section and we get a comp as well. directionality aside the kk14s kinda sound more like the 4018 tbh. (less bottom end)
-
These things are so small
-
These things are so small
welcome to team tiny neumann!
-
they're gonna make great earbuds for wearing to concerts :)
-
any recent new in field experiences?
-
I've got someone making connectors for me, so I haven't been able to use mine yet. Mountainhop isn't on the forum any longer.
-
I've got someone making connectors for me, so I haven't been able to use mine yet. Mountainhop isn't on the forum any longer.
welcome to team tiny neumann!
Another check for updates -- this thread has amazing info! Would love to hear more once you all run these mics. Also, looks like Mountainhop may be back? If so, I would love to see some details of what you built to run these caps.
-
any recent new in field experiences?
-
Jamie's fine tuning the active cable setup, so I haven't gotten them out in the field yet.
-
https://www.liambyrne.net/micshoot?fbclid=IwAR1cWnQMz1XOgpF8-JB58kCfiaTP_VzJm98_ow52pjtuy7pY3kapJJLyCWo
shows using them as intended (clip on/close-spot), but interesting comparison.
-
Found this one from JerryFreak and asked him if he would like to comment on theses mics. Sounds great sofar!
https://archive.org/details/um2023-02-24.KK14 (https://archive.org/details/um2023-02-24.KK14)
-
Who's making active cables for these mics? I saw this mount https://www.shapeways.com/product/XWJKNYWGB/hybrid-kk14-110-70?optionId=286102064&li=shops
-
Jerryfreak has made cables and been running them for shows.
Who's making active cables for these mics? I saw this mount https://www.shapeways.com/product/XWJKNYWGB/hybrid-kk14-110-70?optionId=286102064&li=shops
-
Jerryfreak has made cables and been running them for shows.
Who's making active cables for these mics? I saw this mount https://www.shapeways.com/product/XWJKNYWGB/hybrid-kk14-110-70?optionId=286102064&li=shops
Thanks, send him an e-mail.
-
https://imgur.com/a/hscsGVV
-
wow. here is my money.
-
https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=202927.msg2398718#msg2398718
-
Nick (SchoepsNBox) making actives for these too.
-
Nick (SchoepsNBox) making actives for these too.
I thought that was for the bigger version of the capsule, not the kk14.
-
Nick (SchoepsNBox) making actives for these too.
I thought that was for the bigger version of the capsule, not the kk14.
Nick will confirm but I thought he said he had built some for the new Neumanns
-
I checked with Nick, it’s for the kk18x only
-
I picked up a pair of the MCM 114 (guitar) mic's & tried them out tonight at the JBLZE. I was disappointed w/ the sound, at the venue, as I was 12th row, center & the FOH was going right over our heads. The sound was boomy & lacking midrange.
When everybody stood up in front of us & we stood too, there was a better mix, by about 60%. You could now hear guitar & the vocals sounded full throated. But, I was doing a stealth recording, so, when everyone sat back down, I had to sit too...
Anyway, I did some EQ, balance & a little compression, & here's a track. Recorded w/ the Zoom F3 192kHz/32bit. I used the mic's in a typical x-y, w/ the polar patterns criss-crossing each other similar to this, maybe a little closer together, & less of a spread (angle)...
(https://i.imgur.com/oAPB9K8.png)
sample:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/uetbvxai0npbmgvik1ago/Kashmir-JBLZE.flac?rlkey=c1ontufaanm4p6g7v9w42q9sq&dl=0