The milabs aren't really structured well for use with a kwon-bar or the like. The ends don't really have that much length to them, and what is there is a something like two separated metal disks that sandwich in two rubber grommets/o-rings which are used to hold onto the "spear" of the milab mounts (and at the same time given the design of the system provide a good measure of shock absorption since the mics are only mounted on a small surface area of shock-absorbing rubber -- really an ingenious design if you ask me).
As you can tell, I actually like the milab mounting option and don't really understand the fuss. I use an appropriate length of 3/4" delrin rod to make the chosen pattern (DIN, NOS mainly) and use the milab mounts, all mounted in a shure donut. Ends up being just the same in terms of size, profile, function as some type of kwonbar setup, with the added benefit that if I want to run NOS spacing but narrow the angle to 75-80 degrees, it is quite simple.
More info in this thread:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=117392.msg1579550As to the original thread here, anyone who's paid attention to my fluffing over the years knows I am a huge milab fan. I'm not sure though what is meant by being everything we hoped mbho's would be. I never really liked the sound of mbho's, though I bought a pair (and then sold them) when I was wanting a reasonably priced active-cable mic system with numerous capsule options.
At any rate -- milabs being what we wanted out of mbho's in the sense that both are more reasonably priced active systems (compared to schoeps, dpa, neumann, etc) or meaning that milabs aim toward the sound of mbho's in some way but achieve better results?
Topic: Milabs are what we hoped MBHO would be... (Read 9098 times)