OK, here is a theory about why the DPA sound the way they do: The rectangular diaphragm does not have the same tension that a classic (cylindrical) one does. That makes it more sensitive, but also open to high-frequency distortion.
I'm curious Richard, do you hear the same distortion in Chris's CA-1? I haven't had an opportunity to really use those yet, but I hope to this weekend and run a comp on some unamplified acoustic jazz.
[slight thread hijack]I've a technical question which you or Chris may be able to help me with about correctly setting up part of the comp:
I plan to compare two pairs of mics (4060 and CA-1), each into identical CA-UGLY preamps and R-09 recorders. That part is straightforward.
But I also like compare recording the 4060s to a Tascam DR2d as well as the R-09. Can I simply spit the line level output of that CA-UGLY with a 'Y' cable into the line-in of both of those decks? Or might I compromise things impedance-wise feeding the two recorders simultaneously from the single preamp? I’m trying to avoid having to run two separate comps by running the three recorders simultaneously.
[back on topic]On the high-frequency range of the 4060, where some perceive a harshness or slight resonant distortion: For me, it's the detail and clarity of the 4060 that makes it such a valuable omni for music recording. It's sort of a difuse field respose. Every recording situation is somewhat is different, but on playback of the raw files more often than not I find myself shelving up the treble slightly, primarily to boost the upper-mid / lower-treble range a bit, and perhaps shelving down the bass a few dB for amplified material. If the mics were very close to a particularly bright source like cymbals, or if the FOH mix was overly bright, I sometimes EQ a slight, tailored notch around 10kHz or 15kHz that smoothes that response yet retains the clear detail, air and shimmer.
