Topic: ISO Shockmounts for Nuemann KM 184

[pmonk66]

SSIA

[aegert]

Try this thread.. It will cover your bases

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,92610.0.html

As well as this one:

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,98817.0.html

These are currently active threads with some new info in them They should have been combined..

I like the Joe Meek JM27SM for a reliable inexpensive shock mount it will work well with the sens they run about $19 but look like a Schoeps A20s Mount Here is a pick of the joe meek



A

[stevetoney]

I second the vote for Meeks.  They worked great for me when I owned 184s.  I give them a higher grade paired with the 184s than with 480s because the 480s are longer and jut out behind the mount farther, so there can be some sagging because the Meek bands aren't super tight, but with the 184's there's not as much exposure out the back of the mount and they just work better.  The diameter of the 184s also makes for a perfect snug fit into the Meeks.

[pmonk66]

Thank to both of you for the prompt reply!

[John Willett]

For my Neumanns I am going to get the new Rycote INV-3 shockmount.

$70 in the USA - £30 +VAT in the UK).

[DSatz]

John, thanks for posting the Rycote picture. Everyone: Please note that a length of the cable is tied off with a little slack to it; that is essential. Otherwise the cable becomes a path for vibrations to reach the microphone.

That (plus the fact that it's a blatant ripoff of Schoeps' design) is why I wouldn't recommend the "JoeMeek" shockmount. Note that the original has a mechanism for isolating a loop of cable. The copy isn't a very good copy, since it does away with one of the essential features that makes the real thing work!

--best regards

P.S.: I would make a somewhat larger loop of loose cable than is shown in either photo; these two loops were probably kept to a minimum for esthetic reasons. The microphone, as it sits in the "saddle," shouldn't be restrained at all by the cable.

Sound travels much faster through solid objects than it does through air, so when you record at any distance from a sound source, the arrival time of sound through the air and through any solid medium will be different. It isn't just a matter of emphasizing certain frequencies--solid-borne sound can seriously muddy up a recording.

[John Willett]

Everyone: Please note that a length of the cable is tied off with a little slack to it; that is essential. Otherwise the cable becomes a path for vibrations to reach the microphone.

Yes - this comment should be triple underlined.

P.S.: I would make a somewhat larger loop of loose cable than is shown in either photo; these two loops were probably kept to a minimum for esthetic reasons. The microphone, as it sits in the "saddle," shouldn't be restrained at all by the cable.

Sound travels much faster through solid objects than it does through air, so when you record at any distance from a sound source, the arrival time of sound through the air and through any solid medium will be different. It isn't just a matter of emphasizing certain frequencies--solid-borne sound can seriously muddy up a recording.

I absolutely agree.

Also - ideally the cable should be soft and flexible.

Actually, most of the structure-borne noise tends to come along the cable.

I tend to use special short flexible tails in my rig which just go from the microphone through the cable grip on the shockmount - I then use the normal cables from there.

I have actually suggested to Rycote that they add flexible cables to the price list and they are now considering selling the cable that comes with the S-series on its own for use with the InVision mounts.

I hope they do - I'll certainly get a few.

[aegert]

I would be interested to see if a foam rubber ball slipped onto the cable by the connection to the mic would dampen the vibrations best.. Sort of like the little foam pieces tennis players put in between the stings on there rackets to block vibration to the handle... It might be nice to try that!..

A

[stevetoney]

That (plus the fact that it's a blatant ripoff of Schoeps' design) is why I wouldn't recommend the "JoeMeek" shockmount. Note that the original has a mechanism for isolating a loop of cable. The copy isn't a very good copy, since it does away with one of the essential features that makes the real thing work!

I don't debate your comment other than to note that it doesn't seem that there are many mic mounts that integrate a loop tie-off design with the mount, so it's not just an issue with the Meeks.  Most people loop their cables somehow around the stand or just tape the cables to the stand to allow for the slack loop.

[Nick's Picks]

and you will certainly hear that noise travel up the cable when you're in a packed venue taping Widespread Panic.


just being a douche...dont mind me...
says Nick, who swears that you could run any rig for a jam band w/o shockmounts and never know.

[DSatz]

tonedeaf, it is exactly as you say:

> Most people loop their cables somehow around the stand or just tape the cables to the stand to allow for the slack loop.

The point which John W. and I are trying to make here is that this can be done well or it can be done poorly, and that the difference matters.

Think of airports these days--they have "sterile" areas in which everyone present has definitely gone through a security check, and public areas which anyone can get into. The transition from one type of zone to the other is handled in very particular ways. A microphone stand is physically coupled to the floor, while the cradle of the shock mount is physically coupled to the microphone body. Particularly when directional microphones are used, it's vital to prevent vibrations from being conducted from the stand to the microphone body.

Shock mounts aren't magical objects that cancel vibration just by having the microphone touch them; they're effective only if they're designed correctly and used correctly. I have high respect for China as a nation and for Chinese people, but all the cheap Chinese shock mounts I've seen suck totally, and have little relation to what a shock mount is supposed to do. It's no wonder people don't bother using them correctly; with such shoddy design and build quality, it doesn't make much difference how they are or aren't used.

Good shock mounts on the other hand can make a real difference if used correctly. They are the products of real engineering design and careful production. Thus they can't be made for the price of a pack of Kleenex--but as John's Rycote examples show well, they don't have to cost too much. Likewise with the Shure "rubber donut"--as long as some way of tying off the cables is arranged, they can work very well and they don't cost hundreds of dollars either.

--best regards

[aegert]

Rip off or not the meek's work well and fit certain budgets. They are low profile, rugged and versatile. I will use them..

When the INV-3's are available I will buy those as well... I wouldn't buy the a20s.. Bucks and they are very lite... It is good to hear from John about the senn mounts as I was just about to buy a pair! Thanks John +T

Best practices in everything matter and how you suspend the cables falls under that.

I had brought up a dampening collar idea any thoughts?

A

[johnw]

FWIW the nady a-20s knock off has the cable isolator, but it is for 22mm mics I think.

[pmonk66]

Well,

$900 mics - CHECK

$900 preamp = CHECK

$1750 digital recorder = CHECK

Neumann issued stand mounts 

[aegert]

Well,

$900 mics - CHECK

$900 preamp = CHECK

$1750 digital recorder = CHECK

Neumann issued stand mounts 

P

ROFL

You highlight the biggest point!

These mics should come with the mounts!

+T just for making me smile at 6:45am on a Saturday!

A