Topic: [comp] r09 something vs. something else

[it-goes-to-eleven]

Okay.. One of these sources is the r09 with no preamp.  The other source is.. some more expensive gear.  This isn't much of a 'comp' in that the mics were in slightly different locations, each with different tradeoffs, etc.

The recordings were made outdoors.  The source is bluegrass...

In the background you may notice an a/c unit and I hear some clicking that I think is someone warming up with spoons.

I'll reveal more particulars once folks get a listen and post some feedback. The idea isn't to identify the r09 so much as to discuss the respective sound.

[RebelRebel]

eh...I think A is the DPA setup because of more seperation.....id have to say I like A better because the seperation is better..

b sounds a bit muted/subdued, "veiled"/

[ambo]

"A" sounds brighter, and has a wide soundstage, but with headphones, has a hole in the middle. "B" has a deeper, narrower soundstage, a bit floppy bass and as teddy mentioned sounds a bit veiled. I like "A" better, but with "B" soundstage.

[Gutbucket]

"A" sounds brighter, and has a wide soundstage, but with headphones, has a hole in the middle. "B" has a deeper, narrower soundstage, a bit floppy bass and as teddy mentioned sounds a bit veiled. I like "A" better, but with "B" soundstage.

Listening on crappy computer speakers, I agree with the above.  'A' wins for tone and presence, vocals and instruments sound clear and clean, better dynamics and isolation from talking and the 'spooner'. 'B' has actual depth and a much more balanced sound stage L-R, but lacks bass, puch and is more distant sounding.  I can hear crowd conversations and spoon.

My guess? 'B' is omni, which would make A=mk21, B=4061. 

It's the reach.

[Gutbucket]

At first listen I prefer the tone and clarity of 'A', even with the 'hole' and lack of depth..
but from across the room, far from the sweet spot, 'B' is more natural sounding.  Hard to say which I would prefer with a longer test sample at home on the stereo.

Let us know the mic configs when you 'spoil' this one.

[JasonSobel]

my guess is that A = mk21 and B = 4061
I think A has better clarity and detail

b sounds a bit muted/subdued, "veiled"/

I agree with Teddy there, but I think it's the DPA's, not the schoeps.  hmmm.....

[RebelRebel]

it is the imaging that causes me to think a is the jdisc. more drastic l/r split..recently i have been noticing a "muffled" sound with my schoeps omnis...ever since I bought the DPAs(and mk250s) it seems as though the schoeps are more closed off..sort of like they are inside a tissue tube....

my guess is that A = mk21 and B = 4061
I think A has better clarity and detail

b sounds a bit muted/subdued, "veiled"/

I agree with Teddy there, but I think it's the DPA's, not the schoeps.  hmmm.....

[JasonSobel]

it is the imaging that causes me to think a is the jdisc. more drastic l/r split..recently i have been noticing a "muffled" sound with my schoeps omnis...ever since I bought the DPAs(and mk250s) it seems as though the schoeps are more closed off..sort of like they are inside a tissue tube....

my guess is that A = mk21 and B = 4061
I think A has better clarity and detail

b sounds a bit muted/subdued, "veiled"/

I agree with Teddy there, but I think it's the DPA's, not the schoeps.  hmmm.....

huh, well, I certainly didn't do a super-critical listening of the two, but I've heard a ton of on-stage mk21 tapes, and, generally speaking, the mk21's are anything but "muffled" sounding.  so I'm much more familiar with the mk21's mics relative to the 4061s.  also, Teddy, keep in mind that your DPA omnis, the 4006's are an entirely different ball game, IMO.  I think the miniature 4061's are not on the same level as those, and also, I think not as clear, smooth, and detailed sounding as the mk21's...  we shall see, we shall see

[RebelRebel]

Dont get me wrong, I love schoeps, and still have two pairs of CMC62S(and mk21s, mk4s).. it just seems that in the near/free field that there is some funky midrange/upper coloration going on...it completely dissapears at far distances, but is very noticeable close up.
they are all great mics! the mini DPAs are wonderful for instrument spots. self noise is a big killer with those though.

it is the imaging that causes me to think a is the jdisc. more drastic l/r split..recently i have been noticing a "muffled" sound with my schoeps omnis...ever since I bought the DPAs(and mk250s) it seems as though the schoeps are more closed off..sort of like they are inside a tissue tube....

my guess is that A = mk21 and B = 4061
I think A has better clarity and detail

b sounds a bit muted/subdued, "veiled"/

I agree with Teddy there, but I think it's the DPA's, not the schoeps.  hmmm.....

huh, well, I certainly didn't do a super-critical listening of the two, but I've heard a ton of on-stage mk21 tapes, and, generally speaking, the mk21's are anything but "muffled" sounding.  so I'm much more familiar with the mk21's mics relative to the 4061s.  also, Teddy, keep in mind that your DPA omnis, the 4006's are an entirely different ball game, IMO.  I think the miniature 4061's are not on the same level as those, and also, I think not as clear, smooth, and detailed sounding as the mk21's...  we shall see, we shall see

[live2496]

A has a much more unform eq curve, and sounds better to me also.
B has a bit more coloration on the low end which is masking other frequencies.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

SOILERS AHEAD....






















A= mk21 nos > bg1 > 722
B= 4061 baffle > sp bbox > r09 24/48

I would have liked to position the 4061 baffle higher up (and closer) but I taped it to the stand while setting up indoors and was too lazy to mess with it.  I think the r09 result could have been quite a bit better if closer (especially vocals).

I would have liked to move the mk21's a little further away but I knew talkers would be a problem. There was also an A/C unit very near.  I did not want to run cards.

As far as a 'hole in the middle'..  Given the positioning of the players, I'm not sure it could be avoided without dramatically narrowing the soundstage.  I much prefer having the separation between the players.

[Gutbucket]

Interesting, thanks for the comp and for posting the setup info.

[Kevin Straker]

SOILERS AHEAD....
As far as a 'hole in the middle'..  Given the positioning of the players, I'm not sure it could be avoided without dramatically narrowing the soundstage.  I much prefer having the separation between the players.

You might try those 21's x,y at about 110. In my experience this works well from close range.