Topic: DPA 4061 Question, which side I should mount?

[MJ]

Hi, all
It could be a stupid question but I tried to search an answer by reading threads here and there but could not find one.
 
I removed the grid of DPA 4061 and saw the tiny holes on one side of the element.  That got me start wondering which side I should place it up, down, right or left to capture the sound better.

[lordbelial]

Hi, all
It could be a stupid question but I tried to search an answer by reading threads here and there but could not find one.
 
I removed the grid of DPA 4061 and saw the tiny holes on one side of the element.  That got me start wondering which side I should place it up, down, right or left to capture the sound better.

As far as the mic is omni, the polar response is 360º... so it does not matter where it's placed, the sound will come from everywhere.

[Church-Audio]

Hi, all
It could be a stupid question but I tried to search an answer by reading threads here and there but could not find one.
 
I removed the grid of DPA 4061 and saw the tiny holes on one side of the element.  That got me start wondering which side I should place it up, down, right or left to capture the sound better.

Because of the case and the way the capsule is mounted * I must say its strange and really should not sound good * but it does It really does not matter the mic body it self insures the capsule stays omnidirectional because of the lip over the capsule between the screen and the capsule it self. Now if you were to run these with out the correction/protection grids * some people do this * then you should point the holes towards the source. I have to warn you really to never do that because its just very dangerous if a bit of hair pokes into one of the holes you have a real problem.. And not only that but the grid helps block debris from getting in. I would find a screen that sounds good and leave it on.

Chris

[Church-Audio]

I noticed after a show that the metal protective grid from one of my 4061's got pulled off somehow, and is MIA. Mic still works fine, I taped a windscreen over it for more protection for the element, but would definitely like to get it repaired, or do so myself. Any suggestions greatly appreciated. I tried the dpa site, they don't appear to offer this part there in the parts list.

thanks!

ildu

Actually, you can use the mic without the screen and not worry of damage problems. 

The tiny rectangular capsule is inside the little brass tube, with the sound hole FACING THE WALL OF THE TUBE, so it is IMPOSSIBLE to damage the mic with the screens removed. 

Also, the sound hole is got a VERY STURDY fabric covering inside further protecting the diaphragm from water, makeup, and sweat as these capsules were designed as body mounted actor's vocal mics to be immune to the makeup/sweat, and cleaning process to remove such.   

How do I know this?   I have disassembled about a dozen of these 9 years ago in an attempt to make them very good sounding mics by removing them from being buried inside that awful brass tube!   Without the tube, these capsules sound glorious, but inside the tube they suck in my opinion.  This is why I cannot use them as-sold for natural sounding recording mics.   However, most agree these sound fine for live Pop/Rock PA'd live recording.

I have one recording posted using NAKED DPA 4062 capsules: http://www.sonicstudios.com/dixielnd.htm

Moke that's not entirely true ( respectfully ) I have taken apart more then a few right down to the insides of the capsules there is no mesh in front of the diaphragm what so ever on any of the ones I have worked on. Its totaly naked.. debris can get inside it and if it does it will rattel around in front of the diaphragm. Now the chances of this causing damage is minute but it still exists. And I would never run them in an " uncontrolled " situation such as placing them on a person. Often for symphonie micing engineers prefer the sound with out the correction grid being on so they remove it.. But that's a situation where it will not be a problem. Now maybe just the few capsules I have opened up did not have this protective screen but I have never seen a DPA 4060 capsule with a protective screen in front of the diaphragm. Only the brass  plate with holes in it.
Maybe they have a protective screen on newer ones?? I dont know..

I think its a good sounding mic.. I had the 4090 for a while and compared it to my 4007 and it came out pretty good my 4007 was much flatter up past 18k but its a dam good mic capsule imo.. And actually if you want to remove the sound effect of the brass tube its easy to do on the new capsule the holes are flush with the top of the tube. You can fill in the part in front of the capsule with epoxy and it will reduce if not almost eliminate the harsh reflections from the tube it self. This only works on the newer capsules that dont have the back pressure port on them.. Do not try this on the older ones with the little tube sticking out or you will ruin the mic. Taking the capsule out is pretty easy if you use a heat sink on the capsule and heat the tube up with a hot soldering iron you can get the epoxy to release and get the capsule out of the tube with out damaging it. I have done a few for a customer that wanted his DPA mics even smaller for a surveillance application.

[RebelRebel]

Freq. response is better with the screen/grids off. Of course in a dive with a 50.00 behringer mixer getting feeds from a few SM57s from 1982 and a sound guy with a deviated septum, I dont reckon flat freq. response is much of a concern.

[Church-Audio]

I'll take your word as good on this as well chris. I just thought I'd bring that quote over, not intending for it to be argument fodder.
I'd never in a million years consider diving into these myself. So all I have to go on is comments from yourself and guysonic, as to what is behind the brass curtain.

as far as personal experience with running them without the grid:
they don't seem worse for wear after exposure to my hair (straight and thick stranded (.07") when its short, I'm like a burr-head).
I ran them without grids, hrtf, for quite a while, and had no apparent issues. :shrugs:

Hey there is a brass curtain? nobody told me about any stinking brass curtain 

[Gutbucket]

Two separate aspects of orientation.

As for the entire mic in free space- When using the grids, the small size of these things makes them more omnidirectional than larger omnis, but there is a very slight off-axis roll off of the highest frequencies as you move from away from the front of the mic back around towards the cable entry point.  Orientation of the internal rectangular diaphragm and holes in that case does not matter.

As for the orientation of the internal rectangular diaphragm with holes on one side- The only time I concern myself with the orientation of the capsule holes (meaning I take the grid off to look and see which way the holes are pointing, turn the mic if necessary and replace the grid) is when I'm either using the mic in the hard rubber boundary mounts or taping it to a soft surface.  With the boundary mounts you need to make sure that the mic is inserted so that the holes do not face down, away from the tiny slot in the top surface of the rubber mount.  DPA recommends inserting the mics in the rubber mounts so that the rectangular diaphragm is perpendicular to the slot opening.  I insert the mic so the holes face up directly towards the opening because the boundary mounts increase the response peak slightly and it sounds slightly less peaky to me that way.  It's been awhile since I used those mounts, but if I recall correctly, I think I preferred using them without either grid, just the nekkid capsule in the mount. I usually use the short grid for almost everything else.

A more common scenario is when I tape the mic to a soft surface like skin, fabric, foam, or whatever.  I usually orient the capsule so that the holes would point away from the surface. Not because the mic is more sensitive on that side with the grid on, but because I don't want the surface to deform and obscure the side of the grid where the capsule holes are, changing the response (by acting like the slot in the boundary mounts).  It's probably not an issue at all if taping the mics to a hard, non-deformable surface like a wall.

[Gutbucket]

I had the 4090 for a while and compared it to my 4007 and it came out pretty good my 4007 was much flatter up past 18k but its a dam good mic capsule imo.. And actually if you want to remove the sound effect of the brass tube its easy to do on the new capsule the holes are flush with the top of the tube. You can fill in the part in front of the capsule with epoxy and it will reduce if not almost eliminate the harsh reflections from the tube it self. This only works on the newer capsules that dont have the back pressure port on them.. Do not try this on the older ones with the little tube sticking out or you will ruin the mic. Taking the capsule out is pretty easy if you use a heat sink on the capsule and heat the tube up with a hot soldering iron you can get the epoxy to release and get the capsule out of the tube with out damaging it. I have done a few for a customer that wanted his DPA mics even smaller for a surveillance application.

Interesting to hear about that Chris, thanks.

Anyone ever come across a response chart for these without any grid?

[Church-Audio]

I had the 4090 for a while and compared it to my 4007 and it came out pretty good my 4007 was much flatter up past 18k but its a dam good mic capsule imo.. And actually if you want to remove the sound effect of the brass tube its easy to do on the new capsule the holes are flush with the top of the tube. You can fill in the part in front of the capsule with epoxy and it will reduce if not almost eliminate the harsh reflections from the tube it self. This only works on the newer capsules that dont have the back pressure port on them.. Do not try this on the older ones with the little tube sticking out or you will ruin the mic. Taking the capsule out is pretty easy if you use a heat sink on the capsule and heat the tube up with a hot soldering iron you can get the epoxy to release and get the capsule out of the tube with out damaging it. I have done a few for a customer that wanted his DPA mics even smaller for a surveillance application.

Interesting to hear about that Chris, thanks.

Anyone ever come across a response chart for these without any grid?

For anyone that does not know the 4090 is a 4060 or 4061 capsule with a flat FR screen grid on it. It kinda shocked me when I opened it up and it was a Lav mic inside the 4090 complete with the wire and everything it was beige too! it was held in place by a rubber tube to the phantom circuit board.

I should have take pictures.

[RebelRebel]

I had the 4090 for a while and compared it to my 4007 and it came out pretty good my 4007 was much flatter up past 18k but its a dam good mic capsule imo.. And actually if you want to remove the sound effect of the brass tube its easy to do on the new capsule the holes are flush with the top of the tube. You can fill in the part in front of the capsule with epoxy and it will reduce if not almost eliminate the harsh reflections from the tube it self. This only works on the newer capsules that dont have the back pressure port on them.. Do not try this on the older ones with the little tube sticking out or you will ruin the mic. Taking the capsule out is pretty easy if you use a heat sink on the capsule and heat the tube up with a hot soldering iron you can get the epoxy to release and get the capsule out of the tube with out damaging it. I have done a few for a customer that wanted his DPA mics even smaller for a surveillance application.

Interesting to hear about that Chris, thanks.

Anyone ever come across a response chart for these without any grid?

No, but I bet I could come up with one, let me ask around.

[MJ]

Hi all
Thank you very much for all of valuable info and opinion.  It might be better to run without girds but I will probably do with grids on.  These mics are pretty expensive and I don't want to take even a slightest chance to damage them....Of course it does not do any harm to see a response chart for these without grids.

[guysonic]

Moke that's not entirely true ( respectfully ) I have taken apart more then a few right down to the insides of the capsules there is no mesh in front of the diaphragm what so ever on any of the ones I have worked on. Its totaly naked.. debris can get inside it and if it does it will rattel around in front of the diaphragm. Now the chances of this causing damage is minute but it still exists. And I would never run them in an " uncontrolled " situation such as placing them on a person. Often for symphonie micing engineers prefer the sound with out the correction grid being on so they remove it.. But that's a situation where it will not be a problem. Now maybe just the few capsules I have opened up did not have this protective screen but I have never seen a DPA 4060 capsule with a protective screen in front of the diaphragm. Only the brass  plate with holes in it.
Maybe they have a protective screen on newer ones?? I dont know..

10 capsules deconstructed here were ~1997-8 4062 versions and all these had a white hard fabric inside the actual tiny capsule fully protecting the diaphragm.  So later models may use a different construction, but seems old verses newer frequency data sheet plots from DPA seem not to change.

[Church-Audio]

Moke that's not entirely true ( respectfully ) I have taken apart more then a few right down to the insides of the capsules there is no mesh in front of the diaphragm what so ever on any of the ones I have worked on. Its totaly naked.. debris can get inside it and if it does it will rattel around in front of the diaphragm. Now the chances of this causing damage is minute but it still exists. And I would never run them in an " uncontrolled " situation such as placing them on a person. Often for symphonie micing engineers prefer the sound with out the correction grid being on so they remove it.. But that's a situation where it will not be a problem. Now maybe just the few capsules I have opened up did not have this protective screen but I have never seen a DPA 4060 capsule with a protective screen in front of the diaphragm. Only the brass  plate with holes in it.
Maybe they have a protective screen on newer ones?? I dont know..

10 capsules deconstructed here were ~1997-8 4062 versions and all these had a white hard fabric inside the actual tiny capsule fully protecting the diaphragm.  So later models may use a different construction, but seems old verses newer frequency data sheet plots from DPA seem not to change.

I "think" they may have changed it only because it was getting clogged and once it does you cant clean it. Where as if there was nothing in front of the diaphragm you could soak it and remove some of the debris from the capsule with demineralized water. But that's just a theory. All I know is the 9 I have opened up in the last year or so all did not have any filter in front of the capsule the proof of this is if you look at the new capsule you can clearly see the Gold vaporized diaphragm through the sound holes.

Chris

[Gutbucket]

...if you look at the new capsule you can clearly see the Gold vaporized diaphragm through the sound holes.

That's how mine appear, vintage '05 / '06.