Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: Nick's Picks on April 14, 2006, 02:27:03 PM
-
hey all...
are there any condensors out there that are the size of 140/184s and are on the same playing field?
specificaly, length is my concern (coughs...looks away sheepishly).
I miss my 140's, but dont need actives. I have a nice little lowprofile rig that is just needing some mics. I might just have to hunt up some 184s.
-
The DPA 4022's seem like they would fit the bill. nice, small, and compact :)
of course, considerably more costly than the km184's, but you didn't mention anything about price. :P
-
KM184s = 107mm length (dunno if w/ or w/o XLR)
MBHO 440s = 85mm length (w/o XLR)
MG M300s = 130mm (dunno if w/ or w/o XLR)
-
I'd probably go with a pair of Audix Micro's before a pair of MBHO's. those are some nice, small mics as well.
-
Josephson c42
-
audix need not apply. been there, done that. not in the same class as the neumanns.
mg300s?
hmmm.....
-
The C4s are small and sound real nice. I'm impressed with what I've heard from them.
-
studio projects eh?
I'll have to see how long they are.
mmm...140s. I feel the urge calling me back.
off topic, but what are the feelings between 140's and 184s?
same, not the same? I've never used both to compare.
-
Done a lot of "research"...reading TS.com and gearslutz.com and it seems like the consensus is that the 184 and 140 are the same. Someone on gearslutz was arguing that the 140 had a better response rate during peak volumes. I'll see if I can find that thread.
If I can get someone to lone me a 184 I will run an 140 and a 184 next week during galactic and papa mali. (just bought a 140 and cannot afford another one right now). anyone willing to loan a 184 or 140 for 5 days next week? Ethan can vouch for me.
-
Josephson c42
yeah these are snall. I used to run these, probably about three inches long
-
studio projects eh?
I'll have to see how long they are.
mmm...140s. I feel the urge calling me back.
off topic, but what are the feelings between 140's and 184s?
same, not the same? I've never used both to compare.
Same. The Neumann folks say they are the same, and they sound the same. Same.
Nick,M300s are excellent mics. If you decide to go MG, please PM me. I can help you out.
-
Done a lot of "research"...reading TS.com and gearslutz.com and it seems like the consensus is that the 184 and 140 are the same. Someone on gearslutz was arguing that the 140 had a better response rate during peak volumes. I'll see if I can find that thread.
I'm reasonably sure that this is wrong.
Never discount body resonace.
Other factors are involved as well.
My ears have told me that the KM140 is the way to go for concert taping.
Gearslutz has allot of opinions, some excellent, some just opinions, just like anywhere else
I won't comment on TS.com, as the ticket troll has been "up my behind" all week already
If you have the means, get the KM-140s. I sure wish that I did.
-
I am familiar w/the sound of both neumanns, and find them pretty much the same (though, never done a head to head comparrison).
if anything, the 184's sound a little more sparkely to me and the 140s, a little darker, but both sound very, very similar. Probably to the point that I doubt I could pick one over the other in a blind test.
w/the 184's being about 2", or less, longer than the capsule and active cable end together, I see it pointless to spend 2x as much on them.
-
the mg300s are only slightly longer than the 184s and sound better imo. The MG300s have the neumann sound that you get with the KM84i and other vintage neumann gear imo. Fantastic mics and tough to make a bad tape with them
-
but never come up used, and are probably much more than the 7bills that is standard for a pair of 184's.
I know they are nice, and would excell w/my T+ UA5 sound.
theyd be my first choice, if it were not for that stupid money thing.
-
studio projects eh?
I'll have to see how long they are.
124.5 mm 20mm diameter
although definately nice sounding - IMHO they are not in the same league as the others being mentioned. for a couple hundred bills however, they could be worth it, especially of you aren't going to be using them as your primary mics
-
mg300's out of those choices for sure
-
OK, then what do you guys think of the MHBO 440s ?
And the Josephsen C42s ?
I always think of these two when comparing mics to the KM184s.
FWIW, I just did a line by line comp of the specs. on the KM140 vs. 184 series and they are very close, but not identical.
Since I've never owned either, my opinion is based on a bunch of stuff D/L'd from archive, dime, furthernet, etc.
I'd love to hear a side-by-side.
Until then, I'll defer too the experiences of those who've put more afternoons and nights in the sections.
In the mean time, if you have a favorite KM184 recording that has been posted to archive, can you point me to it ?
Thanks !
-
look for any of Rob Clarkes recordings. they are usualy very ON
-
I used to run c42s, theyre great for on stage
http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=16566
-
In the mean time, if you have a favorite KM184 recording that has been posted to archive, can you point me to it ?
on the archive, if you check out Club d'Elf from 2004 or 2005, you can easily find many of my on-stage recordings with km184 > V3. they all sound excellent, IMO, and really show what the mics can do. check out 12/9/04 or 2/17/05 to start with...
-
I've owned both and I don't think they sound the same, really. There was more silk in the KM140s, less brightness, and the bass was less prone to bloat and boom. I am using different gear down the line now, but my experience listening to other tapes only reaffirms my opinion. The 184s are fine in many respects, but they ain't 140s. I miss those 140s.
But these things change over time too. My 140s were manufactured in '92, and the 184s in 2000. They weren't even making 184s in '92. And it is very possible that today's 140s are different in subtle ways from the ones I had. Now, no German would ever admit that -- ;) -- but it does happen. And, of course, YMMV.
Then of course there's the old KM84s. Those things are ballsy, with a great tonal balance ("erudite" is the word that comes to mind for me) and very short, although IIRC they have a not-very-tight pattern and as such can show some elbows (muddy, flat) when not in the sweet spot or at a not-good-sounding show (or both). But when they're on, they're really ON. Check out this Kimock show if you're a doubter -- very much what KM84s are all about, in my opinion:
http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=2774 (http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=2774)
BTW who's hoarding the KM84 tapes out there? LMA is light on them. Those mics were reasonably popular back then.
-
I have a buddy w/a pair of 84i's. I'd love to snag them but he uses them a couple times a year and wont let them go.
damn you Clay !
-
checked the Kimock show. Nice...very nice. I'm a been doing this taping thing a little over a year Newb. What configurations do people run ontage cards in? XY, ORTF would by my guesses?
So questions need help with. Stage configurations for cards
and
Would a J-disk help with onstage cards?
Thanks yall
KLowe
-
I ran the c42s on stage ortf style, y0!
-
the mg300s are only slightly longer than the 184s and sound better imo. The MG300s have the neumann sound that you get with the KM84i and other vintage neumann gear imo. Fantastic mics and tough to make a bad tape with them
Thats because Mg is the company that was origanlly nuemman. The split came when the country was split into two after WW2. Neumann today as we know them are controlled by sennheiser......
-
IMHO This is a really nice MG300 tape, been listening to this one a lot in the past week.
http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=34634
The night before from the same rig is also up:
http://www.archive.org/audio/etree-details-db.php?id=34478