Some People Buy Expensive Cars...

[VibrationOfLife]

I'm typically wrapping 8 xlr's everytime I tape and I tape on average 2x per week.  Wrapping cables is like a 2ndary mindless action at this point.  I am often the last person at a venue, usually always.  In fact I get a beer for breakdown as a ritual.  But I could never fit all my shit in what I bring if I didn't wrap every night.  Leads to some cool conversations most times with the load out crew or the artists.

[DSatz]

>> How come no MK2? I've been on the hunt for a pair myself to replace the Beyer/Line Audio omnis I run.
> MK3's are an older omni in the Schoeps line of capsules.

It's not quite a matter of older vs. newer. Schoeps makes four different, interchangeable omni capsules for the Colette series. They all have identical polar response and are each designed for flat overall response given different mixtures of direct and reflected sound energy at the recording position. The MK 2 and the capsule formerly known as the MK 3 correspond to the "outer extremes" of a spectrum of recording applications, while most music recording in the modern stereo era occurs closer to the middle.

If you're in a recording situation with most of the sound reaching the mike directly on axis -- as in close-up/spot miking, or recording in a "dead" (non-reverberant) space -- then the MK 2 is ideal for that purpose, being ruler-flat on axis. But if you use it from farther away, where a significant amount of reflected sound is in the mix (and is reaching the microphone mostly from off-axis angles), the MK 2 can sound dark or even dull. In the extreme opposite situation, when you're immersed in a reverberant sound field, so far from the sound source(s) that you're getting basically equal amounts of sound energy from any and all angles, then the MK 2XS is designed for that situation. It's flat with respect to sound arriving at random angles, i.e. to the integrated sum of all possible angles, rather than just on-axis. Until 2015 it was known as the MK 3; the MK 2 XS is the exact same capsule, with only its name changed. Again, if you use this type of microphone for close miking, it will pick up more sound from on axis, and this will make it sound bright or even harsh.

In between those extremes there are two other capsules, the MK 2H and the MK 2S. They're designed for the great majority of practical recording situations which are neither purely "free field" (free of reflections, sound arriving mostly on axis) nor "diffuse field" (sound arriving at random angles, with little coming in directly on axis). And they are the omni capsules most generally recommended, and that Schoeps sells the most of by significant margins.

The MK 2S was introduced ca. 1983 and is perhaps the most general-purpose Schoeps omni capsule. (There's a 1985 AES paper about it, written by Jörg Wuttke, then the chief engineer at Schoeps, which I translated for the preprint; the only "fee" I accepted was a pair of the new capsules.) The MK 2H arrived about twelve years later. It is often preferred by classical engineers who work in reverberant concert halls where they want to mike a little more closely to get more detail, or to cover just one section of an orchestra. It's kind of a cross between the MK 2 and the MK 2S.

Any of these omni capsules can be fitted with sphere attachments (Schoeps KA 40) which enhance the sense of proximity to sound sources; they have a mild but smooth presence-boosting effect in the front hemisphere, and a corresponding shadow effect in the back. For users of the MK 2H and 2S these are highly recommended options. They're also an intrinsic part of any "Decca Tree" arrangement. If someone has MK 2 capsules and is trying to use them as general-pickup capsules at medium distance in reverberant spaces, the spheres may help increase clarity and presence. They can also be used with the MK 5 two-pattern capsule in its omni setting.

But since all four capsules have identical polar response and other characteristics, recordings made with any of them can be equalized fairly simply to come out sounding the same as they would if another of the four had been used in the same position instead. In fact the Schoeps CMD 42 digital microphone amplifier has software built in which can effectively "convert" any of the four capsules to each other in real time.

[Gutbucket]

A couple nice things about the over-under cable wrapping technique are that it trains the cable to lay straight and flat when deployed and minimizes the stress on the conductors.  The not so nice thing is that if one end gets passed through the loop you end up with a series of overhand knots when laying it out.  To prevent that from happening secure the ends with a cable tie, or if the loop is large enough you can plug both ends together.

I'm typically wrapping 8 xlr's everytime I tape and I tape on average 2x per week.  Wrapping cables is like a 2ndary mindless action at this point.  I am often the last person at a venue, usually always.  In fact I get a beer for breakdown as a ritual.  But I could never fit all my shit in what I bring if I didn't wrap every night.  Leads to some cool conversations most times with the load out crew or the artists.

You may have already considered this, but a very fast and easy way to store/deploy multiple loose cables is on a cable reel. Those intended for electrical extension cords work well. Once the first cable has been reeled in, plug the next one into it and keep on reelin'. You end up with all the cables forming a single line on the reel. Doesn't train an over-under lay, but is super quick and easy and becomes increasingly attractive as the number of cables grows larger.

Yeah, this was a bad one.  Ran OMT-6 for the first time at a new-to-me venue.  Was putting away mics, clamps and stuff at the end of the show and was taking a little bit.  Looked up and there were zero people left in the place (holds 1,100), just me, my son and the roadies loading up.  Ushers started to give me the "what the hell is that guy up to over there" look so I had to make a command decision to cram all the cables into the bag and get out ASAP before they call security.  Artist is taper friendly but had no idea on the venue.

For situations where I know ahead of time what the multiple cable layout is going to be, such as a multichannel mic array, I'll use a large, somewhat loose length of Techflex (diameter large enough to easily enough pass individual XLRs through) and run all the cables through that when checking out the setup beforehand.  The loose cut ends of the Techflex are just tucked back inside itself, and I usually temporarily cable wrap one or both ends of it, snug the techflex tight and coil the entire bundle, storing and deploying it like I would a single fat cable.  Works great for my 8 cable run from mics to recording bag, about 15' long.  Coiling and packing up the bundle takes less than 30 seconds.

The key is using a length of Techflex with a sufficiently large diameter that all cables plus at least one XLR at a time are able to be easily passed through freely without struggle, which also allows for readjusting the offset in cable lengths at the microphone end when necessary.  Significantly looser than most techflexed stereo pair runs.  Yet not so large in diameter that it cannot be snugged down sufficiently to form a tight compact bundle. 

[fanofjam]

>> How come no MK2? I've been on the hunt for a pair myself to replace the Beyer/Line Audio omnis I run.
> MK3's are an older omni in the Schoeps line of capsules.

It's not quite a matter of older vs. newer. Schoeps makes four different, interchangeable omni capsules for the Colette series. [sniperoo]

^ Nice and very informative summary of the Schoeps omni capsule line.  Thank you.

[DSatz]

Thanks. -- I have a sudden, strange idea. I think the accessory spheres deserve to be better known around here. I have a pair of them in storage somewhere. If anyone here who tapes with Schoeps omnis (or the MK 5 in its omni setting) would like to borrow them, I could lend them out to try, as long as you take basic care and return them fairly promptly so that someone else can have a turn.

They're not at all fragile, so this doesn't feel like much of a risk. Anyone who's been a member of this board for a while and wants to try them, please send me a private message.

Also, please give me at least a few days to find them--I have three rented storage rooms, one of which is reminiscent of the final scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark, and I suspect that's the one that they're hidden away in.

-- The attached photos show a KA 40 sphere on an omni capsule on a Colette active cable. This is the proper position; they have to be pushed onto the capsule until the front surface becomes continuous. The interior cylinder of the sphere is padded and won't scratch the finish on your capsules or amplifiers. They can used with complete microphones, CMC 1 amplifiers, RC extension tubes--basically any possible configuration with an omni capsule.

(oh, and to the inevitable question of what happens if you put one of these onto an MK 4 or 41, the result sounds awful because they block the rear sound inlets but the diaphragms are tensioned so that the system resonance is lower in frequency, and the result is a continuously falling response. Boomy and dull, and incapable of being used for coincident or closely-spaced stereo techniques because the directional pattern gets all screwed up.)

[Gutbucket]

^ Nice offer!  I've found sphere attachments on omnis useful in taper situations, and encourage other TS members to give them a try.

A note on sphere attachments- It's interesting to me how these types of attachments are used to intentionally alter pickup pattern in a way that, on the face of things, seems to run counter to one of the advantages of small diaphragm condenser microphones.  How's that?  In comparison to most large diaphragm microphones, a smaller diameter diaphragm and capsule housing allows for more consistent pattern behavior across the audible frequency range.  This is particularly true of Schoeps microphones, which are highly valued in part for their particularly consistent pattern behavior.  The sphere attachment sort of makes an SDC omni behave less like a typical SDC and more like an idealized version of an LDC omni in terms of pattern. That is, it causes the fully omnidirectional pattern to become slightly more directional up top where wavelength measures similar to capsule diameter, in a way somewhat similar to the behavior of a large diaphragm microphone, while the acoustically smooth surface of the sphere, free of discontinuities, provides for a smooth transition from fully omnidirectional at lower frequencies to slightly directional above say 5-7kHz or so.  The primary listening impression when comparing the recording to one made in the same situation without the sphere attachments is likely to be a sense of increased clarity and presence for sources on-axis, along with a slightly attenuated high frequency response off-axis.  The slight change in frequency response is tied hand-in-hand with the slight change in pattern. Both pattern and response smoothly transition between the lower and higher frequency regimes.

It works, is often audibly attractive for recordings made from audience locations using omnis, and emulates a classic microphone that was traditionally used in quite different recording situations, but for the same reasons.  

The thing that's interesting to me is this represents an intentional distortion of pattern. Perfecting the omnidirectional pattern requires going the other way, making the diaphragm and housing smaller. A very small omni about a 1/4" in diameter or less is nearly perfectly omnidirectional throughout the frequency range. Use of the spheres makes the housing larger so as to create an intentional distortion of the pattern at wavelengths smaller than the diameter of the sphere. If this represents a special case where maintaining a smooth but not fully uniform pattern shape across the audible spectrum is a useful feature, are there other special cases?  Perhaps so but not as easily achievable?  I'd love to play around with a pair of microphones where I could modify their directionality by frequency range.  How does a smoothly narrowing pattern as frequency decreases behave in an otherwise boomy mud hall?  Would like to try a somewhat wider pattern in the mids, narrowing a bit above and below.  And the opposite of that.

[DSatz]

>  I'd love to play around with a pair of microphones where I could modify their directionality by frequency range.

um, that exists; see https://schoeps.de/en/products/special-microphones/polarflex.html . This system was invented and patented by Jörg Wuttke, though the patent has expired by now and the present system is implemented largely via plug-in software. (It used to require a $4,000 outboard DSP box--I know a dealer who still has one or two in stock, in case you'd like to go "old school" rather than using the $free plug-in ...)

In principle an Ambisonic microphone should be able to do this, too, but it would depend entirely on the supporting software, and if you wanted to record with spaced or near-coincident techniques you would need two Ambisonic microphones.

[Gutbucket]

Yes and thanks, I'm aware of the Schoeps PolarFlex system combining omni and bi-directional channels to produce any first-order pattern of choice. Very cool. Fanofjam might employ a newfound mk8 that way.

I mostly thought a lot about this when I was actively running an ambisonic microphone.  I only had one so was limited to coincident configurations and never tracked down the software to easily do this at the time, and never made the effort to do something similar manually in the DAW.

Are you aware of folks using the PolarFlex capability of changing pattern with frequency in the kind of ways I mention above?  Useful for anything?  Aware of any relevant AES papers about that kind of thing?  Or are most PolarFlex users either simply dialing in patterns that don't vary with frequency or emulating a narrowing pattern at high frequencies?