Topic: Mic Comp: DPA4060 vs. Nevaton MCE400

[JD]

Here is a very unscientific comparison of my DPA4060s and my MCE400

One rig was; DPA4060>DPA DAD6001(Microdot to XLR adapters)>SD722
The other; Nevaton MCE400 >SD722

The mics were worn by two of us sitting side by side in the 6th row of a sit-down theater with pretty good sound.
Thanks to Tom for the second 722.

Sample A   http://www.sendspace.com/file/e8ayn1
Sample B   http://www.sendspace.com/file/4a14ar

The only editing done to the recordings was a quick adjustment to make the levels closer.

[stevetoney]

I'm not totally familiar with these two mics, so I ended up totally guessing whether my preference was the DPA or the Neveton but my 'guess' was somewhat educated based on some comments I'd read about the differences between these two.  Overall, they both sound nice and I wouldn't have a problem listening to the entire length of a show made with either one of these mics.  I chose B though as that was my preference.

[newplanet7]

Sample A is my choice. It had a more robust low-end which helped with the over-all balance of the recording.
Sample b was still good but had more of a focus on the highs IMO

EDIT TO ADD:
I think sample A is The Nevs and that's what I chose.

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

No question, I like B better.

Now to see what source it is.

I've been pretty vocal about my love of the Nevaton's over the DPA's (regardless of cost). I wouldn't be surprised if B is the DPA's though. Sounds a little more open. Source A sounds a little more directional (less omni) to me. I've found that I like the Nevaton's better in situations with talkers around. The crowd (if any) was extremely well behaved in these samples, so in this situation I'd give the edge to DPA.

Both are great though. About as good as I've heard for body worn mics.

[newplanet7]

Both are great though. About as good as I've heard for body worn mics.

Truth ^^^
I think A is the Nevs and that's what I chose in the poll.

[JD]

Great comments so far. Keep em coming...

The crowd (if any) was extremely well behaved in these samples, so in this situation I'd give the edge to DPA.

Believe it or not, we were sitting amongst about 200 people for this recording. It was at the Sellersville Theater, which for the most part, attracts well-behaved/polite crowds.
Except for the occasional loud clapper/whistler/talker sitting immediately around me, I usually do pretty well recording in that room.

The artist in those clips, BTW, is Sierra Hull & Highway 111. They were the supporting act for Seldom Scene.
If there is any interest, I can post a couple of samples from the Seldom Scene set too?

[aaronji]

I prefer B.  Fuller bass and a little less emphasis on the highs, in my opinion...A bit more open and natural.  I guess they are the DPAs, but I have proven to myself over time that I'm not much better than chance with these comps!

Thanks for your time and trouble, JD.  I'm really curious to see which source is which...

[MarkE]

I liked "A" better. They both are excellent sounding, I prefer a little extra in that 1~3k freq. like A seems to have. B is flatter and great in different ways, but I gotta say for sure Nevaton is A and Dpa is B.
MarkE

[it-goes-to-eleven]

I always try and check levels before listening to a comp.   Level differences that are not apparent can influence our preference.  In this case, I notice the RMS average level of A is about 1.5 dB louder:

  RMS
  level                peak         
-12.3936dBFS 0.0000dBFS    sample a.wav
-13.9046dBFS -1.4883dBFS   sample b.wav

I matched the RMS levels before listening.  I am listening with headphones.

These do not seem to have been recorded from the same location.  The coughs in B are not heard in A.
It almost seems as though A is sourcing a single PA speaker.  It seems as though B is picking up the feed from two speakers, or maybe a bit more stage.

The config/pattern of these omnis seems different.   But that could be the location difference.

a = Fairly narrow soundstage.
Vocal a bit boxy.  Maybe slightly grating?

b= much wider soundstage and difference between capsules
Wondering if there is a response difference between the capsules

I prefer B, and find it less fatiguing than A.  Which capsule that is, I do not know.

[newplanet7]

I love the comps and comments.
It shows what one person hears could be the direct opposite as the next.

[OOK]

                         

[bhadella]

I strongly prefer the soundstage and "stereo-ness" of B.   Fuller and more lifelike.  Both are very nice tapes, amazingly quiet crowd.   

[Gutbucket]

Cool to see a comp with lots of variation in preference both ways.

B- More depth, sense of the space, more balanced frequency response, cleaner, more extended highs, open, a bit overbright up top, a bit recessed in the upper mids.
Listening straight out of the laptop on HD650s and asjusting foobar EQ for preference I make shallow valleys centered around 300-440Hz and 14kHz and broad flat hills centered at 70-100Hz, and 3.5kHz.. above that dropping down.

Before EQ, A has what sounds like a peaky midrange honk that bothers me, rolled off highs, less clarity and space. Listening straight out of the laptop on HD650s I EQ in a deeper valley centered around 620Hz and a smaller dip around 7-10kHz in a generally rising response with a hill cresting at 3.5kHz, and rising again from 10-20kHz.

EQ'd they are much closer, but I prefer B (4060)

[nardo]

I prefer B, sounds much more balanced. A almost gave me a headache for some reason, not that it sounds bad in general, not at all, but I find it tiresome to listen to - I think A is DPA.

[Gutbucket]

I'll add that I think B is the DPAs for two reasons. One, I know their sound well and recognized the sonic signature, and two, the foobar EQ curve I dialed in for preference approximates a 'classic 4060' correction curve I often end up using for my recordings using these mics.  The combination of both makes me pretty certain.

[dbindc]

Have to think sample B is DPA mainly because it sounds a lot like the recordings of bluegrass acts I make with head mounted 4061's.

I liked the clarity of sample  A, but the high end was a bit grating and it seemed to be lacking in the 200-500 khz range.

[illconditioned]

Something about sample A is bothering me.  Everything is there, detail and frequency range.  It just sounds "thin".  B sounds more "rich" if I could say that.  I would really need to listen more, but I find A to be not enjoyable.  My guess is that B is the Nevatons, but I could be wrong.

There are some other differences as well (EQ, position, etc), but in the end my question is, after listening to 90seconds, which did I enjoy more.  I kept forgetting A was music, listening for sounds, not  music or individual instruments.  I would suggest trying a longer sample, which sounds better after a whole song.

Finally, I think someone should do a comparison of mics side-by-side, on the same hat!  I did this comparing capsules in the past (not DPA vs Nevaton), and it is informative.

  Richard

[JD]

Here are some longer samples from the headlining act, Seldom Scene.
I used the same sample letters with the same mics.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/sl9smo

http://www.sendspace.com/file/lzr9tq

[illconditioned]

Here are some longer samples from the headlining act, Seldom Scene.
I used the same sample letters with the same mics.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/sl9smo

http://www.sendspace.com/file/lzr9tq

Wow, that's a great clip!  Sounds like you're getting a lot of direct (acoustic) sound.  Did they come out to the audience or something?
OK, I have a strong preference for B over A again.

  Richard

[nicegrin]

I´d say B is the DPAs. It sounds more open, has fuller bass and not the same high end bump as the Nevatons.
I also guess the Nevatons are more directional than the dpas. Atleast comparing these 2 clips A sounds more directional.
I Usually prefer Nevaton to DPAs though...

N.

[JD]

I expected mics "B" to be the most preferred here, but I am kind of surprised how its evenly split it is as to which mics they are.

I'll identify the samples this coming weekend. If you really want to know in the meantime, send a PM.

[newplanet7]

Ok JD. Your comp, your mics..... which do you prefer?   

-todd

[JD]

Ok JD. Your comp, your mics..... which do you prefer?   

-todd

I am happy with them both, but overall I prefer sample B.
I think it is just more pleasent to listen too. Something in A just sounds slightly off to me. I hear it mostly on some of the banjo notes and in the tail-end of her voice at times.
Sample B sounds more open and more life-like to me.
jd

[acidjack]

B is much brighter, which given what I know of my 4061s and their 'soft boost' grids suggests that it's them.  I also feel like there's more air around the vocals on b and the other instruments are more pronounced.  The bass is more pronounced, although pleasantly rendered, in A - in fact I'd say I prefer it and that B is verging on thin.  But otherwise I think B is much better.  I could also see people saying B has that "harshness" that people accuse the 406x of, and that A is "smoother" (a characteristic I normally associate with DPA, but not with the 4061). 

Listening on Macbook Pro>Fubar IV Plus DAC/Amp>ATH M50s.

[TNJazz]

Overall I preferred the openness of B, although the clarity of A was excellent.  It just sounded a little "pinched" and narrow.  Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

I won't say anything more because I already know which is which.   

[Chuck]

I have no guess as to which pair is which.

I liked B for the openness. Sample A sounded congested and not as real on Sennheiser HD 280 headphones.

[SmokinJoe]

I have no guess as to which pair is which.

I liked B for the openness. Sample A sounded congested and not as real on Sennheiser HD 280 headphones.

Bingo.  Same cans too.

On the poll I had to choose something so I said B is the Nevatons just because I recall seeing the curve and it had a big presence hump.  Not as big as DPA with the high grids, but I assume the DPAs are running flat, no grids.

[aaronji]

^^^ I was curious about the grids too.  Soft boost?  No grid at all? 

[dactylus]

Here are some longer samples from the headlining act, Seldom Scene.
I used the same sample letters with the same mics.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/sl9smo

http://www.sendspace.com/file/lzr9tq

I was unable to download the comp because I keep getting a video codec download page popping up.  Is there any chance that you could post this here:
 

http://iput.it/about


A free site without the annoying ads.

I own dpa 4061's & the mce400's and I would love to hear your comp.

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

Sample A: http://iput.it/82b108
Sample B: http://iput.it/bcff94

[dactylus]

Sample A: http://iput.it/82b108
Sample B: http://iput.it/bcff94

Thanks Mike!

Sample B is preferred by me.  Sample A sounds thin, brittle, tinny...

I think that sample B = DPA

[acidjack]

Sample A: http://iput.it/82b108
Sample B: http://iput.it/bcff94

Thanks Mike!

Sample B is preferred by me.  Sample A sounds thin, brittle, tinny...

Interesting... while I preferred B, I'd have said B was the clearly more bright one.  I like that sound, but it certainly had more high end. I thought A had somewhat flabby bass and didn't have as much air between intstruments.

Could be a matter of very different playback gear, but your response almost makes me wonder if the two were switched!

[dactylus]

Sample A: http://iput.it/82b108
Sample B: http://iput.it/bcff94

Thanks Mike!

Sample B is preferred by me.  Sample A sounds thin, brittle, tinny...

Interesting... while I preferred B, I'd have said B was the clearly more bright one.  I like that sound, but it certainly had more high end. I thought A had somewhat flabby bass and didn't have as much air between intstruments.

Could be a matter of very different playback gear, but your response almost makes me wonder if the two were switched!

Hmmm, maybe they were switched.  The sample A that I listened to was definitely the brighter one.

[TNJazz]

Hmmm, maybe they were switched.  The sample A that I listened to was definitely the brighter one.

Agree. 

A is significantly brighter than B. 
B has a much wider soundstage than A.

I was wondering about files maybe being switched myself, based on some of the comments above.

My reference monitors are flat, so I wonder if the headphone listening might be impacting it as well?

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

I don't think I switched anything. Same files as I downloaded from the first post.

[Gutbucket]

I think the issue is one of words.

On the originally posted files both have emphasised regions in the upper half of the spectrum.  A's emphasis is more of a broad peak in the presence region,  B's empahsis starts a bit higher in frequency and remains booted more like a shelf EQ.

The difference in perception and interpretation of that into words gets confusing.  Thin brittle and tinny might acurately describe the presence region boost.  More high end boost and airy may accurately describe the higher shelf boost.  I think brighter is the somewhat more confusing term use used here, as it could describe either, depending on perspective.

Dancing about architecture.

[JD]

^^^ I was curious about the grids too.  Soft boost?  No grid at all?

The grids where on, whichever ones come on the mics. I think the longer ones?
I have never had them off.

[SmokinJoe]

^^^ I was curious about the grids too.  Soft boost?  No grid at all?

The grids where on, whichever ones come on the mics. I think the longer ones?
I have never had them off.

OK then, I'm flipp flopping.  I prefer B on the shorter samples (haven't listened to the longer ones).  Now I think that is the DPA's.

Come on JD, time to pop the secret... which is which?

[asobriquet]

Source "A" sounds similar in character to my dpa4061's, so I'm guessing "A" is the dpa pull and "B" is the Nevaton source.

[JD]

[Come on JD, time to pop the secret... which is which?

PM sent.

I'm going to post which mics go with which samples tomorrow night.
Anyone else want to take a listen and make a guess?

[Gutbucket]

Sticking with B = 4060s, and willing to guess that it was made using the short grids.

short low boost grid-


long high boost grid-


Just found what has previously been a rather elusive reponse graph for the 406x without grids and posted it here-
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=147921.msg1894491#msg1894491

[tcf]

As a nevaton owner I love the whole nevaton line. I've run both the b&ks and have owned three sets of mce400s. I've always preferred the 400s and would recommend them to everyone. I've used the 4060s with fantastic success so please do not think I am a dpa hater. No matter what this is a great comp.

Good job

[JD]

I'm willing to guess that it was the short grids on the 4060s.

short low boost grid-

Correct U are!  That's the one on my mics

[Lonman]

I choose B and think it was the Nevetons. I have seen this artist at least 10 times in the past 3 years and have recorded her a few times as well but never with my Nevetons. I am half deaf and EQ'd sample A  to see if I could make it work for me and I couldn't. Right off B struck me as, yup I pic this one! Also banjo player has been on Hulls right I believe and he comes in thru the left channel like he is on the right and I could not tell that with sample A.  Bottom line, dunno' nothin' but I be liken' B.
Lon

[bugg100]

my pref, B

my guess, a, nev
b, dpa

these don't really seem to be from the same location...

Thanks for the comp!
Joe

[Cheesecadet]

So when is the big reveal on the sources?

[OOK]

I know a secret......

[JD]

Sample A = DPA 4060
Sample B = Nevaton MCE400
 


I'll post more in a bit, got to shut the PC down till a storm passes.

[Gutbucket]

Doh!   

[acidjack]

Damn ... wow.  Nevaton is making some nice mics!

[tcf]

Ok now we need a mk4 - mc49 comp

[it-goes-to-eleven]

What about the location?

Why are we hearing coughing in one sample but not in the other?

[dactylus]

Sample A = DPA 4060
Sample B = Nevaton MCE400
 


I'll post more in a bit, got to shut the PC down till a storm passes.

Granted dpa 4061's are not 4060's and I guessed wrong, but I have never heard my 4061's sound that crappy.   

[JD]

OK, here are some details about the recording.
Both recordings were made in the center of the 5th or 6th row of the theater. There was three of us taping, we all sat side by side, and I was in the center seat wearing the nevatons.
The DPA recording was made one seat to my right, still very much near the center of the row.

We all ran low-pro because the theater frowns upon mics in people's sight-lines down front and I usually do just as good wearing the mics there.

When these recording were made, I had no intentions of doing a mic comp or I would have tried to be more exact.
It was months later, I realized when comparing the two recordings, that the rigs were almost identical and that it would make a reasonable good comparison.
Fortunately, Tom and I almost always swap our CF cards when we record together with our 722s, so I had a copy of each master on hand.

Now here is the biggest difference in how we ran our mics, Tom wore the DPAs on his shirt collar, probably about a 4" to 5" spread.
I wore the Nevatons on the front of my shoulders, at I think about a 12" spread, maybe as much as 14" being I was flanked on both sides by a taper.
I wear the mics slightly down on the front of my shoulders so that my body acts as a baffle giving me less audience noise from behind. I am
taller than Tom, but being I wear my mics lower, I have to say that both pairs were at about the same height.

So the biggest difference between the two was the spread of the mics, which can be clearly heard. Here is something interesting to try though,
take a single channel from each sample make a mono recording and compare. I still find that the Nevaton samples are still more pleasant to listen to
and sound more open and life-like.


A note about the room, there is a caberat seating area directly in front of the stage, about 18' deep, then the rows start, so I would guess we were about 30' from stage lip.
The PA is hung high at the stage corners and aimed somewat downward, almost directly at were we were seated (that is why I can get away with wearing my mics so low)

I love my DPA 4060's, but in this theater, especially with acoustic music, I think I consistently do better with the nevatons.
Also, I think that the 4060s sound much better with the DPA MMA6000 pre than they do with the phantom adapters into the 7xx recorders and I think
the nevatons pair very well with the 7xx recorders.  All a matter of opinion though...

Thanks for all of the excellent feedback! I'll try to do this comp again wearing both sets of mics on one hat as suggested, when I can

jamie

[dactylus]

Thanks for the details Jamie.

[Gutbucket]

A second thanks for putting this up and for the detailed explaination.

I'm suprised, since B sounds much closer to my 4060 recordings and the upper midrangy peak in A seems uncharacteristic of that mic. Never had much luck with the collar mount technique, myself.  I'm not at all as familiar with the MCE400 sound and would like to try them sometime, even more so now.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

This was a fun comp.

Though I would suggest the differences in how the mics were worn was a very significant factor in the results.  There was something not quite right about A, especially when compared to B.  Whether there was something going on with the whole lapel position, and interaction, or something else..

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

Thanks! So cool that the Nevaton's seem to have "won"

I agree the mic placement sort of makes it a not so scientific experiment. Get them mics up high. I always hat mount unless security is uber tight.

[dactylus]

First off thank you for the comp Jamie!  I think that this comp was more of a mic positioning comp than anything else.  I own 4061's & the Nevaton's so I don't care who "wins".  I like them both.  But as I stated earlier my 4061's have never sounded anything like what I heard from the sample A, 4060's in this comp. 

What kind of gear would I have to use with my 4061's & mce400's to make it a somewhat equal and valuable comp?  I do NOT have the phantom power adapters for the dpa's.  I think that I still have access to two V3's that have not been modded and using the digi out on both should take care of that part, I can run both pairs of mics over-and-under, side-by-side or whatever closely matched config so that they will be very close to the same position relative to the sound source.  Any suggestions?

[acidjack]

First off thank you for the comp Jamie!  I think that this comp was more of a mic positioning comp than anything else.  I own 4061's & the Nevaton's so I don't care who "wins".  I like them both.  But as I stated earlier my 4061's have never sounded anything like what I heard from the sample A, 4060's in this comp. 

What kind of gear would I have to use with my 4061's & mce400's to make it a somewhat equal and valuable comp?  I do NOT have the phantom power adapters for the dpa's.  I think that I still have access to two V3's that have not been modded and using the digi out on both should take care of that part, I can run both pairs of mics over-and-under, side-by-side or whatever closely matched config so that they will be very close to the same position relative to the sound source.  Any suggestions?

I guess it still would not be a perfect comp but you could run the DPAs line-in to an M10.  For that matter, you could also use a pure phantom power source and run the Nevatons line-in somewhere too (i.e., to an M10). I think even the many purists on here would accept that 2 R-09s or 2 M10s are close enough alike.   How are your DPAs wired up?   Mine can power off a 9v BB, so for me that would be doable. 

Quite frankly, even if you went DPAs>DPA MMA0 (whatever that model # is of the DPA pre) > line in to some deck and Nevatons > deck (using the deck's pre) as long as the mics were positioned the same, I still think it'd be an interesting comp.

[JD]

First off thank you for the comp Jamie!  I think that this comp was more of a mic positioning comp than anything else.  I own 4061's & the Nevaton's so I don't care who "wins".  I like them both.  But as I stated earlier my 4061's have never sounded anything like what I heard from the sample A, 4060's in this comp. 

What kind of gear would I have to use with my 4061's & mce400's to make it a somewhat equal and valuable comp?  I do NOT have the phantom power adapters for the dpa's.  I think that I still have access to two V3's that have not been modded and using the digi out on both should take care of that part, I can run both pairs of mics over-and-under, side-by-side or whatever closely matched config so that they will be very close to the same position relative to the sound source.  Any suggestions?

Honestly, going back and listening to various recordings I have made in that room with both sets of mics, I notice similar results in almost all recordings.
The samples I posted were from the only time I ran both at the same time though.
I like both mics and will run them either or without any hesitation!

Like I stated before, I am not a real big fan of the 406x mics directly into the 7xx recorders.
Thus, the phantom adapters I have are seldom used, I would be happy to send them your way for a while if you want to do some comps of your own.

LMK

jamie

[dactylus]

My dpa's are microdots.

Well after checking I do NOT have access to that 2nd stock V3 now.

[dactylus]

First off thank you for the comp Jamie!  I think that this comp was more of a mic positioning comp than anything else.  I own 4061's & the Nevaton's so I don't care who "wins".  I like them both.  But as I stated earlier my 4061's have never sounded anything like what I heard from the sample A, 4060's in this comp. 

What kind of gear would I have to use with my 4061's & mce400's to make it a somewhat equal and valuable comp?  I do NOT have the phantom power adapters for the dpa's.  I think that I still have access to two V3's that have not been modded and using the digi out on both should take care of that part, I can run both pairs of mics over-and-under, side-by-side or whatever closely matched config so that they will be very close to the same position relative to the sound source.  Any suggestions?

Like I stated before, I am not a real big fan of the 406x mics directly into the 7xx recorders.
Thus, the phantom adapters I have are seldom used, I would be happy to send them your way for a while if you want to do some comps of your own.
LMK

jamie

Hello Jamie - I'd like to try the dpa phantom adapters running out of a V3 and then take it from there.  Thanks for the offer.  I should be able to do a stage lip jazz comp in the near future.  PM sent.

David

[dactylus]

I may have just lined up the following recording chains, made available by borrowing a mytek 192 adc locally:

dpa 4061 > v3 > mytek adc192 digi out > to a bit bucket

nevaton mce400 > v3 > mytek adc192 digi out > to a bit bucket

Just waiting on the word on the mytek, that shouldn't be a problem.

[Gutbucket]

No chance of bias for the electrons at least in those chains, David.  Just keep the mics as close as possible and oriented the same direction- differences in directionality probably play a decent roll here.

Dunno about direct into a SD recorder, but I've had no problems and very good sound IMO running 4060s through Niaint PFAs directly into either an OCM R-44 or DR680.  I also have a single DPA microdot>XLR adapter, but since I usually use the Niant PFAs, I've only used that once when I did a 5 omni surround recording a couple weeks ago driect to the DR-680.  The DPA>microdot powering adapter was used for one of the surround channels.  That recording has no problems and sounds very good, but I haven't listened to each channel in isolation or just the surround pair.  I'll give that a close listen tonight when I get home tonight to see if I can detect any obvious differences between the DPA adapter and the Niaiant PFAs.

[illconditioned]

I have to say "I told you so" for this comparison!!!

I went out and bought a (new) pair of DPA4060 and thought, OK, I'm done.  But when I used them they just didn't sound good.  Everything was there, the detail, the clarity, and intense realism for ambient recordings.  They just did not sound good for music.  I found myself listening to "the room" rather than "the music".  I found myself preferring other recordings, even with "lowly" mics like the Panasonic WM60/61.  This was a big disappointment...

I cannot provide a scientific explanation, but IMO there is something wrong with these mics.  If I had to guess, I would say there is something distorting at higher frequencies (perhaps because they use a rectangular non-tensioned diaphragm).  The only microphones that I feel have *both* detail and natural sound for music are metal diaphragm units, such as Nevaton and Countryman B3 (both use a stainless steel diaphragm).  You'll also notice that DPA made their name by introducing metal diaphragm "measurement microphones" (1/2" and 1") mics to the classical recording folks.  Those are the only DPA microphones I've ever liked.  Note that the DPA directional mics are not metal diaphragms either (and I don't like the sound).

  Richard

[Gutbucket]

I have to say "I told you so" for this comparison!!!

I went out and bought a (new) pair of DPA4060 and thought, OK, I'm done.  But when I used them they just didn't sound good.  Everything was there, the detail, the clarity, and intense realism for ambient recordings.  They just did not sound good for music.  I found myself listening to "the room" rather than "the music".  I found myself preferring other recordings, even with "lowly" mics like the Panasonic WM60/61.  This was a big disappointment...

I cannot provide a scientific explanation, but IMO there is something wrong with these mics.  If I had to guess, I would say there is something distorting at higher frequencies (perhaps because they use a rectangular non-tensioned diaphragm).  The only microphones that I feel have *both* detail and natural sound for music are metal diaphragm units, such as Nevaton and Countryman B3 (both use a stainless steel diaphragm).  You'll also notice that DPA made their name by introducing metal diaphragm "measurement microphones" (1/2" and 1") mics to the classical recording folks.  Those are the only DPA microphones I've ever liked.  Note that the DPA directional mics are not metal diaphragms either (and I don't like the sound).

  Richard

That's a bit strong, Richard.

I'll be the first to admit I guessed wrong on this one.  But we all know that one sample isn't enough to make a complete judgement.  I'm with David on this one in that I've rarely had 4060 recordings turn out sounding anything like the sample here- one reason I was pretty confident about my guess, and suprised at the result.

Tempted to post any number of 4060 snippets that are some of the most absolutely musical recordings I've made, including many made with more expensive and 'lauded' microphones.  I made a killer one a couple weeks ago that was in mind when listening to this comp.  I'm sure others have similar experiences.

Maybe we get over-influenced by inflated expectations. I was pretty charged up about trying the B3s, but now that I have a few pair I'm a bit underwhelmed. I like them generally and feel they are a good value, but to my ear they are not only noisy enough to bother me but are also sonically- musically- a far cry from whatever it is that works for me with the 4060s on the recodings that really shine.

Though I obviously like the 4060, I like to think I keep an open mind and would like to try the Nevs myself.  They certainly have more of the right stuff in this comp. Your mileage may vary. 

[F.O.Bean]

I cant DL the files from where they are

[dactylus]

I cant DL the files from where they are

Try here Bean:

Sample A: http://iput.it/82b108
Sample B: http://iput.it/bcff94

[it-goes-to-eleven]

Well, I've posted comps here where the 4061's *excelled* against mk21's, which are fantastic mics.  Two now dead examples:

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=51789.msg676886
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=51789.15

In the first one, the 4061 > microtrack  came up in a dead heat against mk21 > 722

I think this nevaton/dpa comp had significant issues with mic placement - or something.   Line of sight is critical to mic performance.  If someone's fat head interferes with line of sight to one of the mics, that's a big problem in the comp.   If one of the people doing the comp has someone tall sitting in front of them, etc.  I'm not suggesting that the Nevaton's can't produce a better recording.  I do have concerns about how the dpa's were worn on the collar, etc.

We need more comps

[illconditioned]

I have to say "I told you so" for this comparison!!!

I went out and bought a (new) pair of DPA4060 and thought, OK, I'm done.  But when I used them they just didn't sound good.  Everything was there, the detail, the clarity, and intense realism for ambient recordings.  They just did not sound good for music.  I found myself listening to "the room" rather than "the music".  I found myself preferring other recordings, even with "lowly" mics like the Panasonic WM60/61.  This was a big disappointment...

I cannot provide a scientific explanation, but IMO there is something wrong with these mics.  If I had to guess, I would say there is something distorting at higher frequencies (perhaps because they use a rectangular non-tensioned diaphragm).  The only microphones that I feel have *both* detail and natural sound for music are metal diaphragm units, such as Nevaton and Countryman B3 (both use a stainless steel diaphragm).  You'll also notice that DPA made their name by introducing metal diaphragm "measurement microphones" (1/2" and 1") mics to the classical recording folks.  Those are the only DPA microphones I've ever liked.  Note that the DPA directional mics are not metal diaphragms either (and I don't like the sound).

  Richard

That's a bit strong, Richard.

I'll be the first to admit I guessed wrong on this one.  But we all know that one sample isn't enough to make a complete judgement.  I'm with David on this one in that I've rarely had 4060 recordings turn out sounding anything like the sample here- one reason I was pretty confident about my guess, and suprised at the result.

Tempted to post any number of 4060 snippets that are some of the most absolutely musical recordings I've made, including many made with more expensive and 'lauded' microphones.  I made a killer one a couple weeks ago that was in mind when listening to this comp.  I'm sure others have similar experiences.

Maybe we get over-influenced by inflated expectations. I was pretty charged up about trying the B3s, but now that I have a few pair I'm a bit underwhelmed. I like them generally and feel they are a good value, but to my ear they are not only noisy enough to bother me but are also sonically- musically- a far cry from whatever it is that works for me with the 4060s on the recodings that really shine.

Though I obviously like the 4060, I like to think I keep an open mind and would like to try the Nevs myself.  They certainly have more of the right stuff in this comp. Your mileage may vary.

When I say "I told you so".  I was commenting on my own (strong) preferences against the DPA.  This test seems to confirm that many, if not most people, also sense a difference.  At least it raises doubt as to whether DPA is the best microphone as everyone assumes.

The question I ask is why should one microphone sound so much better than another?  We can point to lack of detail, or self noise, or limited/colored frequency response.  But DPA are fine in all this regard.  So why is it that we prefer the Nevs over the DPAs here?  There are some differences between the recordings, but nothing makes up for the qualitative difference we hear.

This is subjective.  Maybe some people prefer the DPA "sound", but not for me.  Maybe I'll do a DPA vs Countryman B3 and present a similar "blind taste test".

  Richard
 

[F.O.Bean]

I cant DL the files from where they are

Try here Bean:

Sample A: http://iput.it/82b108
Sample B: http://iput.it/bcff94

+T bro. Got em. Listening now

[F.O.Bean]

I prefer SOURCE B. It has better bass response, and is easier on the vocals I'm dying to know which is which I think that SOURCE B is the DPA's

[Gutbucket]

I did too. 

[F.O.Bean]

After reading this whole thread I am really tempted to buy some Nevaton omni's I was thinking of getting CA-14 Omnis for around $90.00, but after hearing the nevatons, I am really tempted to save up for them

[it-goes-to-eleven]

I'm trying to remember when my DPAs ever sounded this bad

When are you guys gonna do another comp?

How about recording some birds with your mics, as a test of their health, etc?

[dactylus]

I'm trying to remember when my DPAs ever sounded this bad

When are you guys gonna do another comp?

How about recording some birds with your mics, as a test of their health, etc?

What sorta bird recordings are you speaking of?


I received the dpa phantom adapters from JD a few days ago.  Once the 2nd mytek makes its way back into town I'm going to do a comp here.  Hopefully within the next two weeks.

dpa 4061 > v3 > mytek adc192 digi out > to a bit bucket

nevaton mce400 > v3 > mytek adc192 digi out > to a bit bucket

[aaronji]

I am definitely curious to hear some more comps!  My take on this one is that it's pretty hard to judge the difference between the two mics due to the differences in set-up.  If I read JD's comment correctly, the Nevatons were essentially boundary-mounted, in addition to the big difference in spacing...

But I was definitely impressed by the Nevaton recording.  I have thought about getting a pair for a while, but the shows I downloaded weren't that great (mostly loud shows from unknown locations).  These samples have piqued my interest again, though.  The only problem is price: Nevaton Europe sells the MCE400 for 249 euros each, plus a 32.50 matching fee and 25 for shipping.  That works out to about $800.  I guess I'll have to coordinate something with our friendly local Nevaton dealer next time I am headed to the US!

[TNJazz]

The only problem is price: Nevaton Europe sells the MCE400 for 249 euros each, plus a 32.50 matching fee and 25 for shipping.  That works out to about $800.

Just FYI to anyone who might be interested:  Nevaton has recently raised their prices considerably and the cost of a pair of MCE400 has gone up about 50%.  Still cheaper than EU prices, but I guess they realized they were selling these too cheaply.  So if you got a pair at the original price (which was the same for the last 3 years by the way), consider yourself lucky!

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

Damn! I guess I got a deal then. I think I paid $300 for the the pair (Brand new). 

[aaronji]

Just FYI to anyone who might be interested:  Nevaton has recently raised their prices considerably and the cost of a pair of MCE400 has gone up about 50%.  Still cheaper than EU prices, but I guess they realized they were selling these too cheaply.  So if you got a pair at the original price (which was the same for the last 3 years by the way), consider yourself lucky!

Sigh...Typical...Finally decide to take the plunge and they jack up the prices!  Still considerably cheaper in the US, though, especially since Nevaton Europe appears to have increased their prices too (now 349 euros each).  I guess next time I'm in the States long enough to arrange the shipping, I'll be in touch!