Topic: DPA 4061 or 4062?

[symoka01]

Hello,

 Currently Run AT853 and have read that often times the next logical step is the DPA 4061 or 4062.  That being said, I mainly tape loud rock and hip hop/rap. LOts of clubs and an occasional arena. Given that there's a good chance I'll be fairly close to the stage, would 4061 handle the spl or is the 4062 suggested? Feedback and other suggestions on this would be appreciated

Also, currentlyrun at853 > deneke ps2 1/8" out > mt2496 1/8" to 1/4" conversion. Advised rig modifications for Spa? Read somewhere ps-2 is not balanced or something so not good for spa? Don't necessarily know what this means. I'd like to have a rig that shares traits of my current rig, 1) lower noise floor, 2) 24 bit/48 at least and 3) more compact/stealthy than current rig.

Thanks!

[aaronji]

Definitely the 4061.  The 4062 is really low sensitivity, 1 mV/Pa, similar to a lot of dynamic mics.  The 4061 is also quieter than the 4062 (that shouldn't be too much of an issue with loud shows, though) and can handle much higher SPLs than your ATs.

You could still use the PS2, but you would need the DPA phantom adapters, which like all things DPA aren't cheap.  Personally, I would switch that for a smaller power source (DPA, Church, etc.) and an M10 or R05 or the like...

[adrianf74]

I'll second the 4061 but I don't know if they're worth the money based on the plentitude of other options that currently exist.  I've run everything under the sun in the way of small mics and found that I didn't like the "DPA sound" (or frequency bump) that they exhibited.  I tried the Countryman B3's (about 1/3 the price) and found they were decent in quiter situations but didn't necessarily like the how they performed at louder shows.

I ended up with the 853's recently and have stopped there.   If mic size isn't a big issue, you might also want to consider the CA-14 omni or CA-11 series II omnis from Church Audio; for about 1/8th the price, you'll get a mic that captures shows very nicely.  I'm happier with many of the CA-14 omni pulls I made over the 4061's, even.    I personally found the CA-14 one of the best sounding omnis in its (size) class (as have many other people around here).   I do have a new pair up for sale in the Yard, however, I'm not 100% sure if I'm gonna keep it or the CA-11 Series II omnis.

But, if you still want to go the DPA route, I'd think about the 4061's.  Personally, I don't think they're worth it in the end.

Adrian

[Gutbucket]

Personally, the DPAs are well worth the cost difference to my ears, especially in comparison to the Countryman B3, but to each his own.  Thank goodness we don't all prefer the same things.. for one thing it would be very difficult to get good tickets. 

As mentioned the  4062 has very low sensitivity for this type of microphone.   The typical choice around here is between 4060 and 4061.  The 4060 has the lowest self-noise and is the most sensitive of the line by far.  It can handle quite loud sources (clips at 135dB) but will produce a pretty hot output at those SPL levels which might overload your downstream gear.  You will find claims around here that the 4060 may distort at very loud shows from AUD distances, that may be true in some extreme circumstances, but I think it's more commonly the downstream circuitry overloading from the high level input.  That's why the 4061 is more commonly available on used market- it's lower output doesn't overload wireless transmitters so it is more popular for theatrical use.  For the same reason, even though the 4060 has slightly better specs except max SPL, the 4061 may be a better choice if you only record very loud material.  The 4061 is commonly placed inside the bell of horns and under the bridge of violins, so it can obviously handle quite high SPLs.

Sensitivity differences:
4060 =  20 mV/Pa
4061 =  6 mV/Pa
4062 = 1 mV/Pa
4063 = 6 mV/Pa (lower DC power requirement option, 3V instead of 5V nominal)

[Gutbucket]

I repect Adrian's preference and choices.  Perhaps pricing is a bit different in Canada than the US.  Here in the states, the Countryman B3 are about $150 a piece new, the DPAs can be found for a bit under $400 each. 

Both can be found at firesale prices used on Ebay, but a fair number of those may be heavily used, damaged or not to spec.  I bought a batch of 5 each on Ebay ($70 each for B3s, $100 each for 4061s) and was able to get a very closely matched pair out of each batch, a couple decent singles and one or two totally off-spec duds.  That payed off but required the time commitment to test, sort, match and re-terminate them.

You are likely to be most pleased with them in general if you take some time to EQ the resulting recordings.  In my experience,
that is one area in particular where the DPAs seem to clearly differentiate themselves in comparison with other miniature mics.
 
I have not used the CA-14 omnis, but would like to give them a try.  Church Audio mics are typically not particularly high sensitivity and generally work well at high SPLs.

[hi and lo]

4061s are not immune to overload. I have a good friend who does nothing but stack tape arena shows and has overdriven 4061s. It was not an overload of downstream circuitry and switching to 4062s was the best decision he ever made.

[Gutbucket]

Wow, really?  At this point does he have any hearing left at all?

Here are the relavent 4061 specs copied from the DPA site-
Max. SPL, peak before clipping:  144 dB
Total harmonic distortion (THD):  < 1 % THD up to 123 dB SPL peak; < 1 % THD up to 120 dB SPL RMS sine

Besides inside the bells of trumpets they're specified for placement inside pianos inches from the hammers.

I'm curious, how was he certain it wasn't the downstream circuitry overloading?  Do you know what his signal chain consisted of?  I don't doubt switching to the 4062s reduced distortion, only that the mics were the source of it, assuming they were powered correctly.  If it was the mics distoring, I certainly would not want to be there.

[hi and lo]

Construction Earplugs... It's gut-rattling loud. I didn't have an spl meter when I tapes with him, but trust the results more than specs.

[Gutbucket]

Yep, results are really all that maters in the end. 

There is no question that less sensitive mics can help to reduce overload distortion wherever it is happening in the recording chain. Determining exactly where that distortion is occuring can be difficult.

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

I've run the 4060's, B3's and also will toss in a 3rd option, the Nevaton MCE400's.

Under ideal situations, I liked the DPA's the best, but if the sound was a little off or I couldn't get exactly in the sweet spot I didn't like them. There is no question that if you could run all 3 mics in the ideal spot of a nice sounding room you'd probably like the DPA's the best.

The B3's are fantastic for quieter shows. I've made some really nice recordings for acoustic stuff (Ryan Adams solo with a PA, and Will Johnson solo with no amplification were both fantastic with these mics). For normal loud rock shows I didn't like them at all (ran the for Spiritualized and was very disappointed). I have been running them with just a battery box. Maybe a preamp would help these mics for the louder shows. Another plus on these mics are they are SMALL. Very nice for super stealthy operations. Thought about selling them, but they are just too nice for the acoustic stuff.

My favorite are the Nevaton's. They cheaper than the DPA's, and better for loud shows than the B3's. Another thing I like is they seem to be more directional than the B3's and DPA's. This is nice to cut out talkers behind you (you'll still get them next to and directly in front of you). They aren't full on cards, but sound more like sub-cards to me. These are the most versatile of the 3 and priced in the middle. I seriously doubt I will ever part with these mics.

[Ziggz]

I'm undecided on my B3s. Really nice for acoustic shows, and I did a smoking outdoor pull, but indoor rock shows I think my OKM II's sound a lot better. I'll do a side by side comp in a couple of weeks at a theatre rock show.

[Gutbucket]

I've said this before but I think it's important, so I'll repeat it here, setting aside other issues such as cost which are obviously important-  When assessing microphones, I'm interested although usually much less concerned with how a particular pair sounds in comparison to a another across various recording situations, and far more interested in how good I can make the resulting recording sound by manipulating things both before and after I've made the recording, and the range of usable adjustment the microphones seem to allow me in getting there.

Of course I'm happiest when I don't need to do much at all, but goal for me is the best sounding recording I can produce with the tools I have.  If a pair of microphones gives me more control over getting closer to that goal than another, it wins.

The quality of the end result is what matters most.

If you are in the camp of tapers who simply trim, track, fade and perhaps normalize, then that metric shouldn't apply to your microphone decision process.  Instead, you should choose the mics which produce the best results in the typical situations in which you record, straight off the recorder.  That's a completely acceptable and legitimate approach, and is the way most tapers operate.   It's still the quality of the end result which matters most, it's just that the appropriate tools to get there may be different. 

In fact, we might all agree about what qualities make a finished recording ‘good’ or ‘less-good’ even though the difference in our process of getting there leads us to quite different choices in microphones.

That’s entirely separate from differences of personal preferences in the sound of the resulting finished recordings, where ‘good’ for someone may not be ‘good’ for someone else.

[adrianf74]

^^^ Truth.   I (almost) always do (some) post processing to any recording regardless of the mics used unless I got really lucky and was in the sweet spot.   Not that I didn't mind the 4061's, I just found them too bright for my ears.  I found the B3's somewhat muddy (for loud shows) or good for quieter/acoustic shows (with a better noise floor than the 4061's) but liked the CA-14 omnis the best despite the bigger size.

I think the biggest point to make here is that the 4061's are quite pricey for what they are.   I was thinking about going that route (again) not too long ago before acidjack slapped some sense into me.  I ended about the same on the AKG CK61 setup (with a preamp) that I wold have on 4061's new (or about the same for a used pair not factoring the preamp).   Just doesn't make sense to me.   Suffice to say,  AKG actives is a little more involved than 4061's but it's not impossible.
 

[taper666]

If you want to receive your mics this year you shouldn't go the CA way as long as you don't find some good working mics on the yard sale. Considering that you want to record loud rock shows and hip hop I would take a mic that pics up bass better than the DPA - such as Sennheiser MKE2 . DPA are great mics if you're recording acoustic/pop/classic as they are bright and detailed but I don't like how they sound when recording hard rock/metal/hip hop. MKE2 are considerably cheaper than the DPA and have a better bass response than DPA. But that's just a question of personal taste...

[yates7592]

I would second the Nevaton MCE400's, best mini omni's out there IMHO.  BTW the price has rocketed recently, I paid about $650 for a matched pair last year, still cheaper than DPA though.