Topic: Sennheiser MHK8040 vs. sE Electronics RN17

[skimmel]

I'm considering a stereo pair of these, mostly for classical music recording and possibly some choral stuff.  The cost is actually not that far apart.  My rep at Sweetwater says he really likes the RN17s.

Anyone ever compare these? Opinions on pluses and minuses?

Thanks.

[acidjack]

The Senns have massive bass response.  I haven't tried the RN17s but the Senns have a very specific sound. Whether you like that or not will depend on how much you like bass.  For classical, in that price range, I'd probably want something more neutral than the Senns myself.

[skimmel]

 Good point on the bass response (the RN17s look like they have a bump in bass so maybe that won't work either).  I do like some bass though to pick up cellos.  Any suggestions?  Thanks.

[acidjack]

Again, only having heard the Senns and not the SE's, and not being a classical taper, I wouldn't want to venture too far afield of what I'm talking about.  But in your price range, a mic with a much more neutral tone, to my ear, would be the Milab VM-44 Links.  For a bit more money, I think the DPA 40xx series of mics have an extremely neutral and natural response that is ideal for recording in good-sounding rooms. If you keep an eye out, you might be able to find some DPA 4011s or Schoeps MK4s used for about what you were looking to pay for the Senns new.

Do you require a "low profile" or is a full-size mic acceptable?  Obviously one advantage of the Senns is they are nice and compact.  The same is true of Milabs. 

DPA's 402x line, which is discontinued, is even lower profile and has the same sonic signature as their larger mics.  You can probably find a used set in excellent condition for $2400 (price of new 8040s) or less.

[page]

Of the two, I'd pick the 8040s over the RN17s. John Willett on this board and over at GS uses Sennheiser mics and does classically-styled recordings IIRC. He might be able to fill in some of the good/bad about using them. The reason I would pick them over the RN17 is two fold; the RN17 have a bass bump which is either cause they are dark mics (mildly expected having the Neve name) or they measured in close for taking the specs (note; they don't say the measurement distance). So I can't say whether that's proximity effect or how they are designed. In that same vein, note the drop above 10k. Again, I'd expect that in an attempt to design a "neve-like" sound, so keep that in mind. Second, note the low output. Classical music requires the most gain of anything I've recorded, to the order of 30db more than rock or onstage jazz taping. So starting out at a hit with only 6mv/pa compared to the 8040s 20mv/pa is sort of an annoyance. The RN17 may be able to boast 130ish db of dynamic range, but that does a fat load of good if it's all at the top end of the spectrum (note the max spl before clip of close to 150). Most classical will stay under 130spl unless it's something like Mahler which even then won't push it much past that. The noise figures favor the Senns for classical music as well with 22/13 compared to the RN17s 23/18. The 8040s can also be shortened if you use a special cable between the capsule and the preamp instead of the XLR adaptor that you typically see in the pictures, and maintaining a lower profile in the air is something I've seen valued in that area. At the end of the day you could probably make either sound good and overcome any faults that they had, however if I had to start out with one of the two, I'd likely pick the 8040s. I suspect they have a coloration/response that would be more favorable than the RN17s (especially outside of the 4khz-9khz range).

//disclaimer; I havn't heard the RN17s at all, and while I have heard the 8040s a number of times, I haven't heard them with classical.

//disclaimer 2; I use dpa 4015s while taping classical stuff; partially by choice and partially by necessity. 

[skimmel]

Thanks everyone for the great advice so far.  Very good points about the gain and noise.

I'm relatively new to all of this, so don't know what the neve-sound is. Can someone explain that to me?

Thanks.

[cashandkerouac]

skimmel:  are you going to be micing the instruments from the stage or recording performances from the audience?

i use both the 8040s and 8050s and love 'em (so much that i recently added the MKH8020s to my tool box).  the 8040s do pull massive bass, but they do not overexaggerate the bass.  in other words, whatever bass is present in the music that your recording will be accurately captured by the mics.  the 8040s and 8050s do not add any bass that's not there, nor will they minimize the bass if it's heavy in the mix. 

you will find lots of comments on the board about the "Sennheiser" sound... some like it and some prefer other flavors.  i personally love it and highly recommend any of MKH8000 mics.   

good luck with your purchase whatever you decide.   

if you're interestred in samples PM me and i can send you some stuff via Dropbox.  i haven't recorded any classical music with the Sennheisers, but i've got plenty of rock and jazz shows that run the gammet of heavy to light bass. 

[page]

I'm relatively new to all of this, so don't know what the neve-sound is. Can someone explain that to me?

Rupert Neve designed a number of recording consoles back in the 70s which used darker sounding british "iron" (e.g. like transformers from Carnhill) and that had an effect on transient response and other things. The 1073 console being a prime example, read up on that for a better understanding. Now, for bright mics, that can be a great pairing, especially for pop/rock/etc. For darker mics, maybe, maybe not. It's also genre dependent. I'm not sure that sort of sound works for classical, but it might, dunno.

It's a house sound though. From what I've seen, most Neve gear is designed to sort of sound that way.

[bombdiggity]

skimmel:  are you going to be micing the instruments from the stage or recording performances from the audience?

^ Your expected position and profile is an important factor.  The relative distance is often critical to the choice. 

All mics have their characters/colorations (and all listeners have their preferences).  I'm in the bassy camp relative to Sennheisers, but classical music doesn't have the kind of bass a rock show does, so that may not be a factor for your usage.  I tend to feel DPA's are not that clear sounding on the low-end at greater ambient distances (though less so with the 406x series), but suspect I'm in the minority there.   Personally I'd only want to use them up very close to the source. 

I've come to love cello (though am still only warming to classical music).  It's a different price point but to my ear cello sounds better through Schoeps MK4V's than anything else I've heard (I might even add unamplified strings in general to that statement - and they also do very well on brass).  I don't record classical orchestras or classical chamber but have recorded some "cross-over"-ish things (sort of from the "chamber jazz" realm to mixed acoustic/electric and even processed traditional strings like looped cello) and would always go with the MK4V's for those.  For a string quartet or something like that they're absolutely sublime.  They're nice close or at a distance (though I like to be relatively close). 

I do suggest listening to samples of as much as you can (and trying to determine how the setting for each compares to where you expect to use your rig).  I don't think I've edited any of the recent ones I can think of where I recorded string sections or chamber setups. 

Good luck. 

[skimmel]

Thanks everyone!

I have been listening to as many samples as I can -- not a lot out there on the RN17. 

I have been able to hear a bunch of MKH8000 recordings and I believe some were from bass_ur_face  were, in fact, part of my inspiration to look at the Sennheisers!

Tapings will be sometimes from stage, sometimes from audience.  Of note, I will hopefully get a chance to do some more rock-like concerts too.

I really like the Schoeps -- just hard to justify the cost.

[danlynch]

I should add that pretty much everything I've recorded in the last year has been with Sennheiser 8040's.  Most have been mixed with varying percentages of board feeds, but if you're interested take a look/listen:
http://www.nyctaper.com/?s=sennheiser+8040

[John Willett]

The Senns have massive bass response.  I haven't tried the RN17s but the Senns have a very specific sound. Whether you like that or not will depend on how much you like bass.  For classical, in that price range, I'd probably want something more neutral than the Senns myself.

 

I would say that the MKH 8040 are very neutral - the designer said that they were the most uncoloured mics that Sennheiser had ever made.

They *do* have a far greater bass extension than other directional mics., but it's a natural bass extension.

I certainly don't find that the 8040 have a specific "sound", just uncoloured with a distortion figure way below most other mics.

I don't think there are many "more neutral" than the MKH series - and I am one who buys mics for neutrality and accuracy.

[skimmel]

I should add that pretty much everything I've recorded in the last year has been with Sennheiser 8040's.  Most have been mixed with varying percentages of board feeds, but if you're interested take a look/listen:
http://www.nyctaper.com/?s=sennheiser+8040

Wow, some really great stuff there! 

[skimmel]

I would say that the MKH 8040 are very neutral - the designer said that they were the most uncoloured mics that Sennheiser had ever made.

Exactly what I'm looking for.  I'm sold!  Will be ordering MHK8040 pairs (as soon as I can sell some other photo stuff to raise fund!).

[F.O.Bean]

fuck it, go with schoeps mk21 subcards