Topic: Schoeps Caspsules Are Consistent

[stevetoney]

I'm not talking about consistent between capsules...as in capsule matching, but across the line from MK2 to the MK21/MK22 to the MK4/MK4V and on up through MK41. 

I've been impressed with how consistent Schoeps capsules sound from model to model in their product line.  When I initially bought into Schoeps, I really wanted a pair of MK21 because I heard so many recordings with great sounding low end, but I think I've come to realize that all schoeps capsules sound very similar to each other if you do some tweeking in post.

(Full disclosure, I'm a post processing 'wanker'.  I tweek 100% of my recordings in post, so if you don't tweek like I do, you might think my comments in this post are a little bit crazy.)

The biggest realization of this for me was when I was using an MK41 pair I discovered how well it rejects off axis sounds while maintaining the same basic sound characteristic as the other capsules.  At first, I thought the MK41 was kinda thin sounding compared to the others, but then I had a pair and used them for a year or so and found that's not really true because the low end is there, it's just not emphasized as much at the point of capture.   

Don't get me wrong, I do think the capsules sound different at the point of capture, but for example, even when I use an MK41, I can still dial in a sound in post that makes a mk41 sound very similar to the sound I'd have gotten if I'd have used another capsule.  I can't necessarily say that for other company's products I've used.

Not really trying to start a brand debate here, but wondering if other Schoeps users have similar feelings.

[page]

The biggest realization of this for me was when I was using an MK41 pair I discovered how well it rejects off axis sounds while maintaining the same basic sound characteristic as the other capsules.

This. I came to a similar epiphany not too long ago; for top flight mic makers, they have a sonic signature/flavor, and what your buying is generally a rejection option, not a tonal balance option. You can fix the later in post, but you can't do much for the former. Others may disagree, ymmv.

[acidjack]

I agree- it's pretty remarkable how similar they sound - though the caps with more HF emphasis (MK5, 4V) do sound a bit different ... haven't really analyzed the vertical address vs. side-address caps.  But I definitely agree that the 41 is a a lot more similar to the rest of the line than it seems some other manufacturers' hypers are. 

[stevetoney]

I agree- it's pretty remarkable how similar they sound - though the caps with more HF emphasis (MK5, 4V) do sound a bit different ... haven't really analyzed the vertical address vs. side-address caps.  But I definitely agree that the 41 is a a lot more similar to the rest of the line than it seems some other manufacturers' hypers are.

Jack.  The reason I made this post was another post where someone was bumping it asking for a comp between the MK5 and MK4.  You comment that the 5 and 4v sound different.  I thought so too, but if you read DSatz's old response to that other thread, he seems to indicate that the frequency bump would be the only main difference.  I'm not challenging you or asking you to justify your comment...but I'm curious if you think that an mk5 or mk4v would sound similar to an mk4 if you just tweeked the files in post or if there's a basic flavor difference.  The reason I ask is that, of all of the capsules in the Schoeps line, if I were to have thought there's a basic flavor difference in any of them, I'd have said MK4V -> MK5 - > MK6...in order of most different flavor to least different flavor....as opposed to Page's great characterization that the different capsules just offer different rejection options (great way to say it Page!)

EDIT:  LOL, I just visited that other post after hitting send on this response and discovered that you were the OP asking about the MK5 vs. MK4. 

[page]

An addendum I guess; rejection does affect tonality as you will have a different collection of reverberant bass (for example) courtesy of the off-axis rejection, in addition to on-axis frequency response differences. However, for a top-flight mic maker, I still think the character/flavor of a capsule seems to largely stay in line with it's family's characteristics.

[acidjack]

I agree- it's pretty remarkable how similar they sound - though the caps with more HF emphasis (MK5, 4V) do sound a bit different ... haven't really analyzed the vertical address vs. side-address caps.  But I definitely agree that the 41 is a a lot more similar to the rest of the line than it seems some other manufacturers' hypers are.

Jack.  The reason I made this post was another post where someone was bumping it asking for a comp between the MK5 and MK4.  You comment that the 5 and 4v sound different.  I thought so too, but if you read DSatz's old response to that other thread, he seems to indicate that the frequency bump would be the only main difference.  I'm not challenging you or asking you to justify your comment...but I'm curious if you think that an mk5 or mk4v would sound similar to an mk4 if you just tweeked the files in post or if there's a basic flavor difference.  The reason I ask is that, of all of the capsules in the Schoeps line, if I were to have thought there's a basic flavor difference in any of them, I'd have said MK4V -> MK5 - > MK6...in order of most different flavor to least different flavor....as opposed to Page's great characterization that the different capsules just offer different rejection options (great way to say it Page!)

EDIT:  LOL, I just visited that other post after hitting send on this response and discovered that you were the OP asking about the MK5 vs. MK4. 

I can't say definitively whether removing the HF bump would make them all sound the same or not... DSatz has no doubt heard many more of the caps side by side than I have or ever will, so I guess I'd tend to trust his knowledge/opinion more than my own

My only (completely unsubstantiated) thought would be that the V series caps would have a "flavor" difference because of being a completely different design.  But those Schoeps engineers are pretty good at what they do, so...

[Gutbucket]

The biggest realization of this for me was when I was using an MK41 pair I discovered how well it rejects off axis sounds while maintaining the same basic sound characteristic as the other capsules.

This. I came to a similar epiphany not too long ago; for top flight mic makers, they have a sonic signature/flavor, and what your buying is generally a rejection option, not a tonal balance option. You can fix the later in post, but you can't do much for the former. Others may disagree, ymmv.

+3

I think one of the most interesting things to look at in a cardioid's frequency response plot is the 180 degree off-axis line.  Amazing how the shape is completely different with various manufacturers.

This hints at what I've come to think is by far the most misunderstood dichotemy in recording and reproduction- not Left/Right, not Loud/Quiet dynamics, not Card/Omni, not Spaced/Coincident, but Direct/Diffuse.

[raymonda]

Since you do a lot post-production work to your recordings, I think that one of the qualities you are discribing is the EQ friendliness of the Schoeps line. Many mics are not as EQ friendly, thus increasing a frequency band, at times, can have a negative impact. I would agree that Schoeps are fairly EQ friendly.

[F.O.Bean]

I *heart* my mk41s