Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: stevetoney on August 05, 2008, 05:48:24 AM
-
I've got two questions for the DPA knowledgeable folks on the list...
1) My 4021's are equipped with I think 3m long cables. That's not long enough to get my mics up as high as I like them, so I end up putting a 5 foot long interconnect on them. Can you get longer active cables? If so, how much?
2) Sorta the same question, but with a different motivation...wouldn't a new set of active cables enable me turn a set of side mount 4021's into rear mount 4022's or 4023's?
Thanks!
EDIT: To add that the DPA website doesn't address replacement cables as an accessory.
-
as for question number 2, the caps and cables for the 21s and 22s are permanently affixed to the caps and cannot be removed/separated like the lemo connected 23s, so no the addition of new cables would do nothing to the original cable configuration and they would attach to the ends of the original cables only
-
as for question number 2, the caps and cables for the 21s and 22s are permanently affixed to the caps and cannot be removed/separated like the lemo connected 23s, so no the addition of new cables would do nothing to the original cable configuration and they would attach to the ends of the original cables only
Hmmm...what am I missing? On my 4021s, the end part unscrews from the rest of the mic, basically just the same as my Neumann actives unscrewed from the capsule. In my mind, that's not permantently affixed, although we may not be communicating with each other well. I'm not talking 'lemo' connector here...I'm talking that in the middle of the microphone body, just above the dual grommets that have the writing inside them, there is a threaded connection.
So I guess the part the unscrews from the rest of the microphone on the 402X is not interchangeable...is that what you're saying?
I mean, I guess that on the DPAs, maybe it's not an interchangeable capsule like for the other mics in the context that you buy a new set of capsules and interchange the capsules onto the same set of cables, but on my 4021s, there IS a section of the mic that unscrews from the rest of the asssembly, and the end pieces look exactly like a Neumann active setup...one piece is the capsule and the other is the cable with an integrated module attached.
Sooo, the basis for my question is that I was thinking that maybe swapping that module part that's attached to the cables would give me an option for having rear-mount cables. OTOH, if getting that part requires the purchase of a complete second set of mics, it's hardly an option.
-
I did not know that the cable unscrews, so if it does I guess the question for you is whether DPA will offer a longer cable that will also screw into the cap, which now I suppose was your original question, and certainly one for DPA
-
Wow! I had no idea that part detached. :P :)
-
Wow! I had no idea that part detached. :P :)
Me either, I've had these mics for almost 10 years and had no idea.
-
What's interesting to me about the pictures that I posted (and something that I noted the first time I detached the two parts) is that I really don't believe that this detachment enables DPA owners to have interchangeable mic patterns. For example, the cardioid symbol is embossed on the part that attaches to the cable, not the part that we typically call 'the capsule'. So, if I can make an assumption from that small technical observation, I can assume that there is still no way to put a hyper or omni onto this cable set...but I do go back to my original question that I think what it does mean is that it's probably possible to interchange the three cable styles.
-
:crazy: aaaaccCKKK!
Bruce Myers has sternly warned against removing the capsules from the built in preamp.
This could have very well zapped the fet of the miniaturized system.
If there is a difference in output by about 12dB, or spiking,.... well,.....
There's not. I've had this one off before without any problem.
What sucks though is that it shouldn't be so easy to separate them!!! In my case, the only reason I knew that they came apart from each other is that the capsule unscrewed from the other piece with little or no force when I was pulling the mics out of my mount after a show. Oh well!
Thanks for the heads-up tho, Moke...I'll make sure and screw the two pieces together nice and tight so that they don't come apart so easily in the future!
Anyway, I suspect that the issue would be that little copper part shown in the picture needs to retain it's spring-like properties so that there is good electrical contact between the two pieces...basically the same as say the retractable contact in middle of the 61, 62, and 63 AKG capsules. Seems that if you take the capsule off alot, that piece might squish down enough so that it doesn't spring back and make nice solid contact...which is probably what you're talking about, huh Moke?
-
Electro-static discharge between the two components, upon taking them apart; if memory serve me well?!?
It was a bit over my head when I was told about this. But they take some precautionary steps to prevent the dscharge of the pre-polarized backplate (back-electret design), prior to removing them.
Its still over my head, but, I got enough out of it to know that was something my dremel would never get anywhere near ;)
Yeah, I've hear that you carry a mean Dremel! After all, you're Mr. DIY! :-\
-
The side mounted cable is why I think you've seen alot of folks move to the 4023 because 1. it's rear mounted and 2. I believe you may be able to make replacement lemo cables.
It does somewhat drive me crazy that I cannot run a Kwon style bar but a new mounting system is in the works by a couple of folks for the DPA's (4021's included)
-
It does somewhat drive me crazy that I cannot run a Kwon style bar but a new mounting system is in the works by a couple of folks for the DPA's (4021's included)
Yeah, I've always been bummed that there was not an easier mount for alternate configurations on the 4021's. I usually end up using the DPA shocks configuring them the best I can. And unfortunately I don't quite have the diy skills that Moke has to build my own. I would be very interested if a mounting system is developed.
-
Electro-static discharge between the two components, upon taking them apart; if memory serve me well?!?
It was a bit over my head when I was told about this. But they take some precautionary steps to prevent the dscharge of the pre-polarized backplate (back-electret design), prior to removing them.
Its still over my head, but, I got enough out of it to know that was something my dremel would never get anywhere near ;)
That brass or gold tab connects directly to the fet. So if there is a static dischage you can damage the fet. But it would be pretty hard to do, but it can happen.
-
It does somewhat drive me crazy that I cannot run a Kwon style bar but a new mounting system is in the works by a couple of folks for the DPA's (4021's included)
Yeah, I've always been bummed that there was not an easier mount for alternate configurations on the 4021's. I usually end up using the DPA shocks configuring them the best I can. And unfortunately I don't quite have the diy skills that Moke has to build my own. I would be very interested if a mounting system is developed.
Nice. Looking forward to that whenever it's made available for what...about $300 or so. Pfft. Oh well, 'ats the price you gotta pay for customization, I guess.
-
listen folks i have both dpa 4021,s and org b and k 4021,s. both capsules are not repeat not supposed to be taken apart.the cables are fixed.and can not be replaced or extended unless you send them back to org manufacter for replacement. carefully put capsule back on and send it immediatley back to have it looked at.you could fry the entire capsule and pre amp and then you are screwed. as for a good shock mount. check out the new rycote inv series. they are awesome. it makes set up and tear down seconds.inv-3 were the ones i bought.you buy a pair of shock mounts for 128 dollars plus 12 dollars times two for the lyres(rubber mounts). i bought them from b and h and had them dropped shipped in two days to my door. they are built like a tank and at half the cost of dpa mounts.i also use this set up for ccm 41,s . hope this helps.
-
Hey tbone65, would you mind posting a photo of your 4021s in the rycote shock mount. Will they work with wind screens? I may just have to pick up a set.
By the way, my 4021s are labeled both DPA & Bruel and Kjaer and they certainly don't seem like they would come apart like tonedeaf's did.
-
Hey tbone65, would you mind posting a photo of your 4021s in the rycote shock mount. Will they work with wind screens? I may just have to pick up a set.
By the way, my 4021s are labeled both DPA & Bruel and Kjaer and they certainly don't seem like they would come apart like tonedeaf's did.
Yes, I'm curious about the use with windscreens also.
Pat
-
Hey tbone65, would you mind posting a photo of your 4021s in the rycote shock mount. Will they work with wind screens? I may just have to pick up a set.
By the way, my 4021s are labeled both DPA & Bruel and Kjaer and they certainly don't seem like they would come apart like tonedeaf's did.
Yes, I'm curious about the use with windscreens also.
Pat
Thats the problem. They look like they're great mounts in the studio, but when you take them outside, they're useless unless you can jury rig something that's sorta patchworked. If the mounts supported the bodies more like the picture of the schoeps, it would be a different story. I'm sure that's why none of the marketing pics of the small body mics are taken of mics with windscreens attached.
-
A link to Bruce's post explaining the reason for non interchangable capsules on DPA mics in the
Re:Big Praise For DPA / Bruce Myers thread (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,14527.msg183735.html#msg183735)
-
What I don't understand about Bruce's statement is that he implies that they are designed so the body cannot be removed from the capsule. I mean, if damage to the microphone is possible, then why would it be designed so the capsule can unscrew? In my case, the darn thing came loose with no force at all when I was taking the mics off the mount the very first time I ran them.
What is kinda bothering me then is, if there's a possibility that DPA mics could have been damaged, why would they be designed like that? At a minimum, there should be a warning label or something on the mic body, especially when so many other mics are designed with interchangeable capsules.
Oh well. Thank God my mics are working fine!
EDIT: Moke, looks like our messages crossed in cyberspace. Interesting in that maybe the post that you made above this one may explain the very dilemma that I posed in this post!!!
-
What I don't understand about Bruce's statement is that he implies that they are designed so the body cannot be removed from the capsule. I mean, if damage to the microphone is possible, then why would it be designed so the capsule can unscrew? In my case, the darn thing came loose with no force at all when I was taking the mics off the mount the very first time I ran them.
What is kinda bothering me then is, if there's a possibility that DPA mics could have been damaged, why would they be designed like that? At a minimum, there should be a warning label or something on the mic body, especially when so many other mics are designed with interchangeable capsules.
Oh well. Thank God my mics are working fine!
EDIT: Moke, looks like our messages crossed in cyberspace. Interesting in that maybe the post that you made above this one may explain the very dilemma that I posed in this post!!!
well if the innards have to be repaired, they have to be accessible somehow
-
What I don't understand about Bruce's statement is that he implies that they are designed so the body cannot be removed from the capsule. I mean, if damage to the microphone is possible, then why would it be designed so the capsule can unscrew? In my case, the darn thing came loose with no force at all when I was taking the mics off the mount the very first time I ran them.
What is kinda bothering me then is, if there's a possibility that DPA mics could have been damaged, why would they be designed like that? At a minimum, there should be a warning label or something on the mic body, especially when so many other mics are designed with interchangeable capsules.
Oh well. Thank God my mics are working fine!
EDIT: Moke, looks like our messages crossed in cyberspace. Interesting in that maybe the post that you made above this one may explain the very dilemma that I posed in this post!!!
well if the innards have to be repaired, they have to be accessible somehow
...but not with an easy little twist from the capsult end when you're taking them off of a mount if, for example, there's a chance that it might damage a $3000 pair of mics!!!
I'd understand if I had put pliers and a vice to them!
However, I think Moke's point is valid in that, this particular junction may not be the one in question. I don't know. All I know is a) my mics unscrewed with less than finger force after I got them, b) they still work 100% perfectly, and c) they're never coming apart again!
-
Had the chance to use your Moke Din Bar for my 4022's at Jones Beach last week.
Thanks again Moke, love the Bars/Shockmount.No issues so far.!
Used the thick windscreens too , Perfect.!
Carry On.
Sorry to hear your 4021's are loose Tondeaf , I would send them in for repair to DPA
-
Sorry to hear your 4021's are loose Tondeaf , I would send them in for repair to DPA
My mics are not loose, they don't need repair, and they never needed repair. I made some of the hottest recordings you could possibly hear for 4 days straight at All Good this year with this pair of 4021s.