Author Topic: Schoeps mk22 vs mk21 vs mk4 vs mk41 (Read 18301 times)

JasonSobel · « **on:** February 08, 2009, 06:48:26 PM »

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...

Quote

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

andyjah · « **Reply #1 on:** February 08, 2009, 06:56:21 PM »

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

dennisrtyler · « **Reply #2 on:** February 08, 2009, 06:59:31 PM »

thanks!

J.T.L · « **Reply #3 on:** February 08, 2009, 07:03:18 PM »

fun wins in my ears

grtphl · « **Reply #4 on:** February 08, 2009, 07:22:17 PM »

gonna dig into this later tonight...

newplanet7 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 08, 2009, 07:35:41 PM »

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 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 08, 2009, 08:33:27 PM »

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

dactylus · « **Reply #7 on:** February 08, 2009, 10:26:25 PM »

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 · « **Reply #8 on:** February 09, 2009, 08:52:22 AM »

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...

Quote from: dactylus on February 08, 2009, 10:26:25 PM

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 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 09, 2009, 10:14:47 AM »

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

newplanet7 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 09, 2009, 12:18:03 PM »

I thought more people would be all over this comp.

Əkoostikal · « **Reply #11 on:** February 09, 2009, 12:27:04 PM »

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 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 09, 2009, 12:56:48 PM »

Quote from: newplanet7 on February 09, 2009, 12:18:03 PM

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 · « **Reply #13 on:** February 09, 2009, 11:01:01 PM »

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 · « **Reply #14 on:** February 10, 2009, 06:06:41 AM »

Quote from: bobbygeeWOW on February 09, 2009, 11:01:01 PM

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

bobbygeeWOW · « **Reply #15 on:** February 10, 2009, 09:09:06 AM »

Cool, thanks I'll check that out.

kennedy · « **Reply #16 on:** February 10, 2009, 10:51:52 AM »

thanks for the comp...cant wait to dive in later

ive owned all these caps including the 4v's and 2S's except the 22s and i found i liked them in this order
21, 41, 4v, 2S, 4

without listening id probably go with the 21/22

Gutbucket · « **Reply #17 on:** February 10, 2009, 11:30:22 AM »

marking thread to listen tonight..

Jamos · « **Reply #18 on:** February 10, 2009, 06:43:19 PM »

I have to say that the Gefell recording sounds remarkably more vibrant and full of life across the frequency board...
but since it's the only one using a V3, it's hard to say how they compare.

Out of the schoeps recordings, I preferred the 21's, but next to the Gefells, there's no comparison.

newplanet7 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 10, 2009, 07:01:16 PM »

All this good stuff about the gefells and v3 pairing.
Make him an offer.

Next time it may be wise to leave the gefells out of the comp

andyjah · « **Reply #20 on:** February 10, 2009, 08:08:25 PM »

Just posted this over on gearslutz as well. Stir up a little more conversation.

JasonSobel · « **Reply #21 on:** February 11, 2009, 08:07:42 PM »

the complete 16 bit files of each source is now on the archive:

http://www.archive.org/details/clubdelf2009-02-06.m200.flac16
http://www.archive.org/details/clubdelf2009-02-06.mk22.flac16
http://www.archive.org/details/clubdelf2009-02-06.mk21.flac16
http://www.archive.org/details/clubdelf2009-02-06.mk4.flac16
http://www.archive.org/details/clubdelf2009-02-06.mk41.flac16

nedstruzz · « **Reply #22 on:** February 12, 2009, 05:49:57 PM »

For this comp I liked the 21's due to the larger low end pick up.

Would definitely like to hear a comp of the 21's and 22's at an outdoor festival type set up in the Impact Zone.

SClassical · « **Reply #23 on:** February 13, 2009, 02:34:22 AM »

Jason,
If you need a V3 in the future you can ask me.

Simon

dandecoop · « **Reply #24 on:** May 17, 2010, 09:07:23 AM »

How's the Schoeps mics do on singing vocals? I've got a couple Sony professional EX1R video cameras and a Sound Device 24 bit 8 track 788T recorder and might purchase 4 of the MK 41's for recording acustic guitars and vocals seperatly and then mixing in post. Is there a better mic you all could recommend for singing vocals as I could just buy two Schoeps MK 41's for the guitars and two of some other kind for the vocals. I am looking more so towards the 41's as I would like to like to concentrate the mic on a single instrument rather than the whole show at about 14 to 18 inches from the guitar. The performers will still be using their own dynamic mics for the PA system so will not be able to get any closer to the instruments or vocals.

it-goes-to-eleven · « **Reply #25 on:** May 17, 2010, 10:28:52 AM »

I missed this comp when it was original posted. Excellent job! Ah, the lure of on stage and stage lip recording; how they make even excellent PA recordings sound like crap.

I have owned all of those mics at the same time, except the mk22's.

It reminds me why I have my mg200's, V3, and mk21's, and the conflict that arises whenever I think of selling any one of those. The clarity, detail and soundstage of the v3 really shines on stage or stage lip. We could quibble about patterns; for the mk21's especially, I would have leaned toward NOS or splitting them (2 or 3 feet, depending on stage config, etc). It's also a great reminder of why people "bother" with full bodied mg200's.

While the mk21's do have more low end, that isn't their primary attraction for me. The big draw is their more natural and realistic presentation (especially split outdoors). I can't get that with any card or hyper. Of course there are a lot of indoor situations where the subcard pattern produces a result that isn't sufficiently crisp.

On a somewhat different topic, I'm curious how much gain was added on the v3, and on the r44 recordings. On-stage is typically loud, so I assume not much. There have been some recent posts suggesting pre-amps are not sonically necessary with modern recorders, that they don't add anything; that adding gain at the recorder is just as good. While that is not the focus of this comp, the result does hint at why many of us "bother" with pre-amps despite having recorders with specs that look entirely adequate.

JasonSobel · « **Reply #26 on:** May 17, 2010, 12:44:00 PM »

Quote from: Freelunch on May 17, 2010, 10:28:52 AM

On a somewhat different topic, I'm curious how much gain was added on the v3, and on the r44 recordings. On-stage is typically loud, so I assume not much. There have been some recent posts suggesting pre-amps are not sonically necessary with modern recorders, that they don't add anything; that adding gain at the recorder is just as good. While that is not the focus of this comp, the result does hint at why many of us "bother" with pre-amps despite having recorders with specs that look entirely adequate.

This was a while ago, and Rob and Andy were running the R-44's, so I don't know how much gain was applied on the decks. However, I know from years of taping d'Elf at this venue, that with the Gefells > V3, I always ran somewhere in the 26-28dB of gain (big knob at +25, and then another few dB of gain with the trim knobs).

Gutbucket · « **Reply #27 on:** May 17, 2010, 08:15:51 PM »

Interesting to revisit this and listen for the imaging differences determined by the mic spacing as well as the different cap flavors.

I seriously dig this band.
Big thanks for this 4way comp, but huge thanks for all the great LMA'd recordings, Jason.

Poll

Pick your favorite

Author Topic: Schoeps mk22 vs mk21 vs mk4 vs mk41 (Read 18301 times)

J.T.L