Most "transparent" omni mic (for binaural): DPA406x? others?

[wbrisette]

I was talking with the folks at Coffey Sound today about some cables and I asked them the price on the Sennheiser pretty much floored me. The Platinum mic costs $499 dollars each. The DPA 4063 is $416... That's a pretty big difference for what I've been told was not a huge difference in sound.

Wayne

[poorlyconditioned]

I was talking with the folks at Coffey Sound today about some cables and I asked them the price on the Sennheiser pretty much floored me. The Platinum mic costs $499 dollars each. The DPA 4063 is $416... That's a pretty big difference for what I've been told was not a huge difference in sound.

Wayne

I really lucked out.  I scored a pair of MKE2-5-5 (gold) pigtail, for $52 each!!!  Would have never bought near new price.

Be careful out there.  If you buy make sure they are three wire.  They are all three wire, but the MKE2-4-x series have the third wire shorted to the ground *at the capsule*.  You need three wire (or 4.7k mod) to run these things.

  Richard

[Gutbucket]

I was talking with the folks at Coffey Sound today about some cables and I asked them the price on the Sennheiser pretty much floored me. The Platinum mic costs $499 dollars each. The DPA 4063 is $416... That's a pretty big difference for what I've been told was not a huge difference in sound.

Wayne

Any one know of any difference in sound with the 4063 vs the other 406x mics?  As I understand it the other mics in the series have varying sensitivity & noise, but I think that one is designed to run at a lower voltage (something like 3V vs. 5V)?  Always been curious.

[wbrisette]

but I think that one is designed to run at a lower voltage (something like 3V vs. 5V)?  Always been curious.

I bought the 4063 because I'm using it with a wireless unit and needed a mic that could run at 3 volts.

Wayne

[Gutbucket]

but I think that one is designed to run at a lower voltage (something like 3V vs. 5V)?  Always been curious.

I bought the 4063 because I'm using it with a wireless unit and needed a mic that could run at 3 volts.

Wayne

OK, that makes sense. 

[poorlyconditioned]

This is my best binaural recording and someone (thank gawd) is still seeding it:

Racheal Yamagata 6-28-2004 http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=5704

It is pretty frickin' amazing.  Very, very representative of the ideal 406X sound.  I was quite close and apparently is the sweetest spot in the room.  Probably one of the best early Yamagata recordings out there.

i listen to this recording all the time.  it's a sick performance and sounds great on headphones as well as on my big system. it's definitely one of the best 4061 recordings i've heard.  thanks for circulating it andy.

If that is the best, it is not transparent.  I've got WM61a recordings where I can get distracted by talking so much because I can hear all the words people are saying at the other side of the room.  That is transparent.  Now the 4061 sound way better, and sometimes even more enjoyable than the detailed recording.  They are just not as transparent (to my ears anyway).

Hmm.  Maybe the "vertical" diaphragm has some directional character.  I dunno.

  Richard

[shaggy]

They are just not as transparent (to my ears anyway).

All a matter of opinion, I suppose.  Transparent to me is forgetting you have headphones on, I agree about those distracting ambient noises being a good earmark for transparency BUT I do not think you should be able to hear conversations going on across the room.  Honestly, I am not trying to grandstand here.  I have had alot of people tell me that they are stunned by the realism of that Yamagata recording.  I gave you the other torrent with a Cale show recorded with CSBs and I agree totally with you on your assertion that they are very transparent but that they have some odd characteristics in the high frequencies.  If you are really looking to go tru-binaural, size is gonna be a factor....unless you want to run a sphere or dummy head.  I have used the AT853Rxs (O,C, HC), CSBs, DPA4061s and mk4Vs extensively on my head.  For transparency/sonic faithfulness, hands-down...I go with the DPA4061s.  For practical concert recording in an audience full of distracting noises, hands down...the mk4vs.  Those 853s always sounded metallic and not very transparent to me and I tried to use them with the omni cap with was horrible with kick drums up close.

As far as the nature of the vertical diaphragm, yes...they are directional in the higher frequencies, just as those forward facing capsules are.  Those diaphragms are facing out like a pair of CSB would face.  I am a freak about this type of positioning even to the point of making sure the vents of the 4061 capsules are facing out (in the same orientation).  I kept a set of CSBs around for a while, I like them but to be completely honest, the only reason was to run them in a horribly sweaty and smoky environment...b/c I was not going to do that to my prized set of matched 4061s.

[musicsherlock]

I like mine... http://akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/71/C577WR_CK74055c24812c1f.pdf

I'll try and get a sample up Monday as I'm having cd drive problems here at home...

[poorlyconditioned]

They are just not as transparent (to my ears anyway).

All a matter of opinion, I suppose.  Transparent to me is forgetting you have headphones on, I agree about those distracting ambient noises being a good earmark for transparency BUT I do not think you should be able to hear conversations going on across the room.  Honestly, I am not trying to grandstand here.  I have had alot of people tell me that they are stunned by the realism of that Yamagata recording.  I gave you the other torrent with a Cale show recorded with CSBs and I agree totally with you on your assertion that they are very transparent but that they have some odd characteristics in the high frequencies.  If you are really looking to go tru-binaural, size is gonna be a factor....unless you want to run a sphere or dummy head.  I have used the AT853Rxs (O,C, HC), CSBs, DPA4061s and mk4Vs extensively on my head.  For transparency/sonic faithfulness, hands-down...I go with the DPA4061s.  For practical concert recording in an audience full of distracting noises, hands down...the mk4vs.  Those 853s always sounded metallic and not very transparent to me and I tried to use them with the omni cap with was horrible with kick drums up close.

As far as the nature of the vertical diaphragm, yes...they are directional in the higher frequencies, just as those forward facing capsules are.  Those diaphragms are facing out like a pair of CSB would face.  I am a freak about this type of positioning even to the point of making sure the vents of the 4061 capsules are facing out (in the same orientation).  I kept a set of CSBs around for a while, I like them but to be completely honest, the only reason was to run them in a horribly sweaty and smoky environment...b/c I was not going to do that to my prized set of matched 4061s.

I'm not dissing the sound of the DPA at all.  If I want to listen *for pleasure* than the DPA are probably the best I've heard.  The "warm" and "clear" sound combined with an HRTF soundstage is wonderful.  Sennheiser MKE2 sound pretty good as well, but maybe not quite as good as the DPA.

But this is just like headphones.  If I want to listen for pleasure I might use Grado or something.  But for
"transparency" and a real "clinical sound" I will use Sony MDR-7506 or the like.  I also agree that while the WM61a (CSBs and similar) are transparent *in places* there is something wrong at high frequencies and there are some wierd resonances (?) in the upper mids.  What these mics do is show that transparency is *possible* but they don't completely achieve it.

Also, I *finally* noticed the coloration of MD encoding with the experiment.  Listen with WM61a MD (HiSP) compared to Edirol R09 WAV for example and I can hear *much* more subtle detail (voices at the other side of the bar ) in the WAV than in the ATRAC recording.  The ATRAC sounds great (just like a "warmer" mic) but not transparent.

Oh yeah, I've been playing with some AT822 recordings recently.  What I did was try to EQ the spectrum to get it more "flat" and *wow* does this sound a lot better.  These mics (and maybe AT mics in general) have a lot of detail, it seems more than AKG blueline, but the spectrum is messed up a bit.  I have heard of people apply EQ in post to correct for cheaper mics, and some of the AT mics seem like good candidates.

I'm not sure what I *want* yet, but I'm trying to answer some questions along the way.

  Richard

[poorlyconditioned]

I like mine... http://akg.com/mediendatenbank2/psfile/datei/71/C577WR_CK74055c24812c1f.pdf

I'll try and get a sample up Monday as I'm having cd drive problems here at home...

Thanks!  That would be great.

I just bought a set of AKG HM1000 (damn, Ebay).  These have slightly bigger capsules (CK3x series) and are for hanging mics or goosenecks.

So now I have a whole bunch of "lav"/"goosenec"/"hanging" mics: AT853, AT943 (smaller ones), Shure MX183/5, Sennheiser MKE40, and now CK3x.  The only ones tested extensively so far are the AT853.  I have to do a "bake off" I guess to compare all these.  Or maybe I should do a "sell off" and regain my sanity!!!

  Richard

[musicsherlock]

I've found that the AKG CK3x to be a bit too sensitive for my tastes...ymmv

[Gutbucket]

I have no experience with the AT mics.   I've used WM61 based mics, but mostly use the DPA's now.  FWIW, I find the 4060's noticeably directional at high freq's.  I'm not certain if they are directional from one side to the other with the standard short grid (interference tube) on, but there is a definite HF roll-off as you move from the front of the grid around to the back where the cable exits.  I have not used the mics extensively without any grid, but I suspect any side to side directionality would be much more apt to manifest in that case with the capsule exposed to the side (normally obscured by the grid tube).  I do orient the mics so the capsule vent sides are symmetrical in my mic setups.  Sometimes that setup is HRTF or taped to a flat surface (ball, arm, pole, etc) where I do not want the important side of the capsule obscured by the surface it's mounted on.  I find that small changes in mounting (distance of the caps from my head, the size of the glasses arms, caps flush in the surface of the ball vs, taped tangentially to it) make a significant difference in the HF response and resulting 'transparency' of the resulting recording using the same mics.

[RebelRebel]

Josephson c617 bodies with Gefell mk221 or mk202 capsules.

those are actually measurement capsules, and as such are very , very flat/natural.

mercenary audio has them.

[2amuse]

>Racheal Yamagata 6-28-2004 http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=5704

>It is pretty frickin' amazing.  Very, very representative of the ideal 406X sound.  I was quite close and apparently >is the sweetest spot in the room.  Probably one of the best early Yamagata recordings out there.

I picked that up, yes it is very good.  Just so I am understanding your mic setup, the mics were headworn and facing out in binaural style?  For most concerts, do you prefer "to the side" or facing forward.  I have the CSBs, I like them, and thinking about going up to the 4061's so I am quite interested in results I like and how tapers achieved them.

Ray
rays@sonic.net if you prefer

[Gutbucket]

From the TXT file notes on the recording:
Field: DPA 4061 > MPS 6010 > Oade SONY 2mod SBM-1 > SONY PCM-M1
Location: 12 feet back from stage 3 feet left of center, HRTF caps towards stage, vents facing outside.

I read that as the mics facing towards the stage on either side of the head in front of the ears.  If you remove the grid/boost tube from the mic, you'll see the tiny 406x capsule (a rectangular gold thing with holes on one side, normally hidden inside the housing & grill) actually points to the side, not directly forward... so the mic body is facing forward with the grills pointing towards the stage, but the body of the mic is rotated so that the hidden vents in the actual capsule are oriented to the outside, away from the head.

I assume that the short grids were used for this recording. That's the standard configuration and what most people use.  In that case I'm not convinced that there is much left/right HF directional difference since the capsule is completely inside the tube (like most omni's I can hear a on/off axis, front/back bias). Rotating the mic bodies may not make a big difference with the grids mounted, but I also orient the vents this way just to be safe and cross my T's.  I think there might be more of a side bias to the HF response with the grid completely removed, since half of the capsule vents would be exposed above the mic housing, but the more noticeable effect in that case would be an overall reduced HF response.

Just finished downloading this recording, I'll give a listen tonight.