Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: waltmon on February 18, 2014, 04:01:42 PM
-
I used to run 140/150 4 channel with nice results. I ran the 150's to v2 as I will be doing now plus a cardioid pair. Just curious how different the sound would be. Ive heard 2 schools of thought...184's and 140s are totally different...also heard its the same mic minus the active option.
My experience was they sounded pretty different. Any thoughts?
-
If there are "schools of thought" about this, there shouldn't be. KM 184s and KM 140s are identical in acoustical design and sonic character. The capsules for these two models are built in batches and inserted into capsule heads for the one model or the other with no difference as to how they are manufactured or graded or selected or anything else.
Apart from their slightly (ca. 3 dB) different dynamic range specifications, the electronics are sonically identical as well, i.e. neutral in both cases. The main difference is functional: The capsule head of the KM 184 contains no active electronics, and so can't be used with Neumann's extension cables (etc.) for the KM 100 series. (In the KM 100 series the capsules are attached to a small, cylindrical barrel containing a small printed circuit board with some active circuitry mounted on it. This is why, for example, the replacement capsule head for the KM 140 has the Neumann model designation of "AK 40": The "A" stands for "active". The accessories that can go between the KM 100 microphone bodies and their "active capsules" are in fact completely passive.)
If the two models seem to sound different to anyone, it would only mean what it would mean if one individual KM 184 sounded different from another one, or if one KM 140 sounded different from another one: individual sample variations (or perhaps one or the other microphone is out of spec), and/or the gains of the two preamp channels might need to be matched better to the respective sensitivities of the microphones. It is amazing how many subtle and not-so-subtle differences between otherwise identical components vanish when levels are properly matched.
--best regards
-
Appreciate the info...I had heard that but I always thought the 184'swere hotter. My first rig I used the DMIC20. They sounded way better paired up with the v2. Another thought here is that I seem to like the sound better running the whole mic with a fat silver mic cable than the actives. Obviously size wise the actives are amazing. Fortunately the 184's and 150's are pretty tiny so not much size concern there.
-
Conjecture like this really deserves a comp.
-
Conjecture like this really deserves a comp.
taperjoe and I did a comparison with my 184's and 140's a while back, the sources are here:
http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=532775
http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=532788
Pics of the rigs:
http://205.234.187.219/tab2010-02-19pic1.JPG
http://205.234.187.219/tab2010-02-19pic2.JPG
When I get home from work I'll see if I can get these sources seeding again so you can draw your own conclusions.
-
Awesome, you rock.
I was actually talking more about "fat silver" cables, but this is great. Not to say that anyone's opinion is right or wrong... I just get nervous when these types of anecdotes get tossed around without verifiable evidence. It's how the whole "184s sound different than 140s" debate begain in the first place. I will listen to this comp soon and try to form my own opinion.