Topic: Beyerdynamic ck930 opinions?

[datbrad]

Although graphs tell a story they don't tell the whole story.  Remember the graph generally published are those measured at 0 degrees from the sound source.  pointing dead on..  While the frequency response may be way different at 45 degrees and 90 degrees from the sound source and at a further distance from the source....  Also most measurements are with 6 inches of the source while we record several feet to several yards away from the source.

OOK

You are correct in your observation, but your conclusion is off. The reason that these measurements are made on-axis is because that is the only point with a cardioid, or any other capsule for that matter, where sensitivity is constant and all the frequencies are lined up on the polar pattern as a single line. At 45 and 90 degrees to the sound source, no capsule is linear, except an omni. So really, these measurements are quite accurate to the overall response curve from one mic to another.

Actually I am not.  You make my point better than I did.  They are not linear.  They have different peaks and valleys off axis which give the impression a mic is bright or muddy...

I agree with you. The polar chart for the CK61s show the peaks and valleys by frequency from 60 degrees to 90 degrees off axis clearly. Since the mics' polar patterns vary in sensitivity by frequency off axis, and don't vary directly on axis, using this for an industry standard way to measure is really the only fair way to do it. It's similar to the way audio amplifier manufacturers use dummy loads to test and establish the amp's power output specs to simulate the resistance of a loudspeaker's voice coil, rather than using actual loudspeakers so consumers have some kind of apples to apples measurement to compare with.

I will say that I always liked the M160 ribbons and the M88s I used on occasion back in the '80s taping the Dead, and think the 930s are a great value for the price, no question.

[page]

The polar chart for the CK61s show the peaks and valleys by frequency from 60 degrees to 90 degrees off axis clearly. Since the mics' polar patterns vary in sensitivity by frequency off axis, and don't vary directly on axis, using this for an industry standard way to measure is really the only fair way to do it. It's similar to the way audio amplifier manufacturers use dummy loads to test and establish the amp's power output specs to simulate the resistance of a loudspeaker's voice coil, rather than using actual loudspeakers so consumers have some kind of apples to apples measurement to compare with.

It doesn't help that the distance using in measurement sometimes differs. I swear between neumann and schoeps (or someone else) they use a different distance. Might be beyer, I can't remember, but I distinctly trying to reconcile the difference in distance in comparing plots which aggravated me.

I will say that I always liked the M160 ribbons and the M88s I used on occasion back in the '80s taping the Dead, and think the 930s are a great value for the price, no question.

Thats how I look at it. I could get closer to the sound I want, but I'd have to spend a shit ton more money to do it and it's not that big of a difference for me to care at this point in my life.