Topic: Comparison: two good lav mics, approx hrtf, please tell me which you like best..

[illconditioned]

OK, here are two clips of same material, from same position in the room (on my hat), both into identical MD recorders (PCM).

  http://Soundmann.com/2008-05-02-clip_mics1.mp3
  http://Soundmann.com/2008-05-02-clip_mics2.mp3

They are both good (imo) clips, but let me know which you like best, and why.
If you would have either recording, which would you pick.
Please listen to clips in their entirety, espeically towards the end where it gets louder.
Mics will be disclosed shortly.
Note: levels might not be completely balanced, listen for sound quality.
OK, I admit this isn't my usual country stuff, but this is what was at the club that night...

Thanks,
  Richard

[nickee]

Tight call. Clip 1 gets my vote. Clip 2 sounds overall duller. This is better heard during some parts of the performance, listen to the piano and voice around 05:00 for example. By dull I think I mean that the mid range and up sounds "buried" on clip 2. (this was heard on a pair of HD650 fed with a X-can amp). Do I make sense? 

[newplanet7]

Clip one because it has more air/clarity to it. The highs and mids seem
a little more crisp and in your face. Louder in general too.

Clip two seems a little more balanced instrument wise but a little thinner sounding.

Clip one is my choice.

[illconditioned]

OK, keep the comments coming.  I'll reveal "my sources" in a bit .

  Richard

[Brian Skalinder]

FWIW, in general I find different volume levels make it difficult for me to compare effectively, so I imported both into my DAW and <a> raised levels on source 2 to closely match RMS levels on source 1, and also <b> raised levels insignificantly on source 1 so both sources would as closely as possible undergo the same processing.

I hear overall greater detail and sense of space in source 2.  Source 1 seems a little more hyped in the mid and high frequencies, and I find the HF grates a bit on my ears, while source 2 sounds overall more balanced across the frequency range.

And while I normally prefer your country stuff, I enjoyed this clip.  What's the band?

I listened via PC / Adobe Audition > soundcard digi-out > Mytek Stereo96 DAC > AKG K-501s.

[illconditioned]

FWIW, in general I find different volume levels make it difficult for me to compare effectively, so I imported both into my DAW and <a> raised levels on source 2 to closely match RMS levels on source 1, and also <b> raised levels insignificantly on source 1 so both sources would as closely as possible undergo the same processing.

I hear overall greater detail and sense of space in source 2.  Source 1 seems a little more hyped in the mid and high frequencies, and I find the HF grates a bit on my ears, while source 2 sounds overall more balanced across the frequency range.

And while I normally prefer your country stuff, I enjoyed this clip.  What's the band?

I listened via PC / Adobe Audition > soundcard digi-out > Mytek Stereo96 DAC > AKG K-501s.

Thanks for the comments.

The band is called "Sing Leaf", I think a Toronto acoustic/electronic band.  They are on Myspace I believe.

  Richard

[newplanet7]

Clip one because it has more air/clarity to it. The highs and mids seem
a little more crisp and in your face. Louder in general too.
Clip two seems a little more balanced instrument wise but a little thinner sounding.
Clip one is my choice.

FWIW, in general I find different volume levels make it difficult for me to compare effectively, so I imported both into my DAW and <a> raised levels on source 2 to closely match RMS levels on source 1, and also <b> raised levels insignificantly on source 1 so both sources would as closely as possible undergo the same processing.

I hear overall greater detail and sense of space in source 2.  Source 1 seems a little more hyped in the mid and high frequencies, and I find the HF grates a bit on my ears, while source 2 sounds overall more balanced across the frequency range.

If I had thought to raise the levels, I probably  would've chosen #2.
Note that our above comments are pretty much the same.

However I chose to take it as is, which is why clip one appealed to me a bit more

[illconditioned]

Clip one because it has more air/clarity to it. The highs and mids seem
a little more crisp and in your face. Louder in general too.
Clip two seems a little more balanced instrument wise but a little thinner sounding.
Clip one is my choice.

FWIW, in general I find different volume levels make it difficult for me to compare effectively, so I imported both into my DAW and <a> raised levels on source 2 to closely match RMS levels on source 1, and also <b> raised levels insignificantly on source 1 so both sources would as closely as possible undergo the same processing.

I hear overall greater detail and sense of space in source 2.  Source 1 seems a little more hyped in the mid and high frequencies, and I find the HF grates a bit on my ears, while source 2 sounds overall more balanced across the frequency range.

If I had thought to raise the levels, I probably  would've chosen #2.
Note that our above comments are pretty much the same.

However I chose to take it as is, which is why clip one appealed to me a bit more

Please tweak the levels (on the files, or your listening gear).  I didn't control very carefully for this.

Thanks...
  Richard

[illconditioned]

^^^^^^^^^^^ bump

I'm looking for a few more comments before disclosing my sources.
I put a lot of work into these comparisons (Ie., staying sober for at least the beginning of the night  ), so please help me out.

Thanks,
  Richard

[illconditioned]

OK, here are the "sources":

- clip1 was DPA4060 > batt box > MD (line in, pcm)
- clip2 was Nevaton MKE400 > batt box > MD (line in, pcm)

To *my ears* the Nevaton clip is smoother and "more natural".  The DPA clip has detail, yes, but I just don't find it "comfortable" to listen to.
Some people might call it "clinical" or "dry".  Whatever.  I just find I get drawn in, and "focus on the music more than the mics" when I listen to the Nevatons.

This is not the best clip to hear the mic differences, actually.  A lot of sound is coming from the PA.  I'll try to record a clip with more coming from other sources (acoustic drumkit, guitar amps).

Thanks for listening.  Stay tuned for more comparisons...
  Richard

[muj]

FWIW, in general I find different volume levels make it difficult for me to compare effectively, so I imported both into my DAW and <a> raised levels on source 2 to closely match RMS levels on source 1, and also <b> raised levels insignificantly on source 1 so both sources would as closely as possible undergo the same processing.

I hear overall greater detail and sense of space in source 2.  Source 1 seems a little more hyped in the mid and high frequencies, and I find the HF grates a bit on my ears, while source 2 sounds overall more balanced across the frequency range.

And while I normally prefer your country stuff, I enjoyed this clip.  What's the band?

I listened via PC / Adobe Audition > soundcard digi-out > Mytek Stereo96 DAC > AKG K-501s.

have you considered sound engineering?..you got the right ears!

[TNJazz]

I just saw this topic.  Wish I'd had the chance to blind test the samples!

d'oh!

[illconditioned]

I just saw this topic.  Wish I'd had the chance to blind test the samples!

d'oh!

OK, I've got another comparison up.  Not so "high end", but comparing three different mic capsules.  Please take a listen.

Thanks,
  Richard