Comps.

[newplanet7]

So, I always see people discrediting or picking apart peoples comps of different gear around these parts.
Not that it's a bad thing or anything to give helpful tips as to why his or her comp lacks in this or that.
I'd like to hear some different views on how to pull off a "fair" comparison in an un-sterile situation like live recording.
We must be able to agree on something but, most of the comps posted here there is someone finding a loophole
with the hosts comparison.

Say if I wanted to compare an AKG 460 and a 480 both with ck61 caps in a live setting.
-Wouldn't it be easiest to set up ONE of each mic side by side or stacked vertically going into the same pre/recorder.
Then just comparing the mono tracks? Then there would be no configuration/angle/cap space ETC
errors like you would get with a stereo pair of each.
Same thing if I wanted to compare the CK1 cap with the 61.

Same thing with comparing preamps.
1 mic goes to pre A, one mic goes to pre B then to the same recorder.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

-Wouldn't it be easiest to set up ONE of each mic side by side or stacked vertically going into the same pre/recorder.
Then just comparing the mono tracks?

That is good for some things.   

But I don't think it can cover the most critical case - how the mics sound in a stereo recording.  For example, the off-axis response characteristics can only be really appreciated when they are placed in a stereo soundstage.

[DSatz]

I often make comparative recordings with different microphones and microphone arrangements at rehearsals. And if I'm checking out a microphone that might be defective, I might compare it to another microphone of the same make and model. But I never listen to anyone else's microphone "comps"--they just don't tell me anything. If I didn't hear the original sound in the room, I can't possibly evaluate the microphones, the mike setup or the recorder. Assigning praise or blame to any specific component just isn't possible under those circumstances.

Whenever someone carries out a comparison, they have to make some very important choices about the setup. If the mikes in a comparison are placed where pair "A" would sound best rather than where pair "B" would sound best, then pair "A" will sound better than pair "B"--duh.

--best regards

[acidjack]

I have an Oade R-44.  I feel like putting the mics in stereo pairs one immediately above the other, with the same degree of separation between them, and running into a 4-channel machine, is pretty fair and is certainly accurate enough to test the differences in mics for recording PA systems (that are often playing loud rock).

There are a bunch of other things like cables, the whole inch of vertical distance between caps, etc. etc. etc. that I'm sure people can nitpick, but IMHO that's pretty damn close, esp if you use the same mounts.

[newplanet7]

^^^
Nice. That's what I was looking for.
I just like to hear what people consider a good comp.
I still think my Idea above is a good one. If there is an audible
difference between the caps and bodies. Even if it is mono.

[datbrad]

^^^
Nice. That's what I was looking for.
I just like to hear what people consider a good comp.
I still think my Idea above is a good one. If there is an audible
difference between the caps and bodies. Even if it is mono.

IMO, with the mic brands/models those of us who mostly record off PA's use, the differences between them seem to be more about coloration than anything else. Basically all of the European SD condensers in regular use have similar specs, 20-20K range, headroom to 138db at 0.5% THD, and self noise around 14 dB-A. None of the mics I am referring to are vastly different than the other in terms of sound quality, just in terms of "color", as each brand of mic clearly has it's own sound.

I see some disadvantages to the notion of making definative judgements with comps, since the mics are faced with other variables in each recording situation, even if you could have the caps almost touching and every other aspect of the chain identical. The mic brand/model coloration factors may cause, for example, a KM184 to sound better in some way to a AKG481 recording in one instance, and in another situation the reverse might be true. I think you can get some additional insights from deliberate comps, but I am not sure they are vastly better than just listening to a lot of recordings with different mics, and eventually arriving at consistent opinions about each mic brand/model. Not that I don't enjoy playing around with a good comp every once in a while, so those of you doing them, thanks !!!

[newplanet7]

I am thinking more along the lines of you brad. Subtle differences like coloration as you stated.
Those differences are what gets picked up on when someone does a comp around here.
You're absolutely right on not making definitive judgments on these tests that people run.

However I do love the comp threads here. Like the modded vs. unmodded fr2le
and others. Its fun to see what others hear and sometimes what they don't.

[stevetoney]

I find good comps to be useful and fun but mostly only for A vs. B comparing within the confines of the comp.  I try not to make too many broad ranging conclusions from any single comp for the reasons that DSatz points out...too many variables at work.  That said, I don't think I've seen a comp that someone hasn't been able to put some spin on why they feel that it's an invalid comp.  Some of the comments can be valid but I think lots of them are spin.

[ero3030]

comps can be fun. we all did at least one comp.  if u did'nt, how did u pick the mics u r using now?  u comped different shows with diff mics and hopfully picked them for how they sound

, not by the logo.  i've been running 4v's for over 10 years now based on shows givin to me, and shows i taped and found out my recording did'nt sound better than the ones being giving to me.  why record if u think your not walking out of the show with the best recording possible.  and thats i feel, and everyone else should too.  all based on comps.  if u dont feel that, why record at all.  ed

[page]

I find good comps to be useful and fun but mostly only for A vs. B comparing within the confines of the comp.  I try not to make too many broad ranging conclusions from any single comp for the reasons that DSatz points out...too many variables at work.  That said, I don't think I've seen a comp that someone hasn't been able to put some spin on why they feel that it's an invalid comp.  Some of the comments can be valid but I think lots of them are spin.

I agree. Some of the examples I think were interesting were the fr2le mod comp, the A/D comp of the 722/M10, and teddy's AKG 461/481 set.

The last one is really what made me think about it; if prior to that you had asked me to articulate what the differences in sound were, I doubt I could. I may not be an expert on them now, but I have a much better grasp on it. Once I got a handle on what the differences were, I could start to pick them out from room/performance differences, but prior to that it was much more difficult to articulate and attribute the sonic traits to various categories.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

For comparing recorders, I really like using the v3's internal a/d as a reference.  The internal a/d on the v3 is quite good, and it was surprising that most people preferred the r09 on the analog outs (in multiple comps).  I'd still like to hear some m10 comps done that way.

[SmokinJoe]

Teddy did a comp once... I think it was 460/CK61's vs 480/CK61's running into 4 channels of Busman Tmod R4.  It was about as close as we could reasonably expect to get.  Like you said, people ripped his "scientific method" to shreds.   I think the best thing to do is state up front that it's not perfect, but it's as close as you could get it.  Then get thick skinned and ignore the nay sayers.  If people want to listen they can listen.  If people want to bitch, they can bitch.

And I'll reiterate what Brad said... Rig A will sound better than Rig B in one circumstance, but just the opposite in other cases.  Been there, done that.   I've had AT853's > ST9100 > H120 outshine AKG481's > V3 > R4.... once.  But people are quick to draw great conclusions on one data point when it's not universally true.