This particular thread has opened up whole new concepts for myself. I thank you so much Doug for doing this review...and all the wonderful people who have joined in.
I would like to offer up some of my newest theories, since this thread changed the way I was thinking about my future microphone purchases. For myself, it was obvious for my needs the Schoeps is most likely what I will eventually get. it seems I always come back to determining that Schoeps is what I need.
The Big Difference now, is I have totally reconsidered what capsules will be right for myself.
From my point of view, I was convinced that micing from a closer distance is important. And I am still convinced of this. For many reasons. However the primary reason is the way I angle my guitar up towards my head when I play. I want to hear the guitar recorded as I hear it, not the audience. Measuring I find that the distance is somewhere in the 11 to 12 inches from my ears. As you know at that distance Proximity effect can be a huge factor.
I have worked hard over the past four years, two find a guitar with the exact sound I was looking for. The Top wood, back and sides, strings,Bridge pins, Saddle material and even tuners( I use Gotoh Locking tuners). I want to hear the guitar pretty much the way I hear it. Although, I know one can never achieve exactness. A close proximity is the best I can hope for. Or...a close proximity to what I dream it should sound like...ha ha..
Previously I was convinced that A wide cardiod would suit my purposes. I was convinced of this because a Wide Cardiod should be able to mic closer and not have as much proximity effect. After all, Omni's do not have to worry too much about proximity effect and a wide cardiod has some of the characteristics of omni. However, It is not possible on my budget to test out a wide variety of microphones at one time. And to boot, I am still dealing with a poor interface and needed room acoustic modifications. Still, regardless of the weak links in my chain...High quality microphones will be necessary at some point in time. And on my list..while I know others place other factors as more important, microphones are paramount in my world of thought.
Now thanks to Doug and others...I realize that Wide Cardiod might not be the correct answer for myself. A microphone polar pattern that I would have never have thought would be right...I am now really considering...Hypercardiods.
Many, Many engineers solutions are to just listen to each microphone. And yes, that is one of the best solutions. But since that is not completely possible for myself...I like to study graphs. But until recently, I did not really understand how to look at a graph-polar pattern properly. Now, I think I do...all brought on by this nice comparison test of Doug's.
Several times on this thread different people mentioned about the 641 great off axis response. Funny, I had always associated omni's with the best off axis response. It did not make sense that a hyper card would have such great off axis response. Until...I studied the charts. very revealing!
For stereo, the graphs and patterns, And what I have heard from Doug's recordings, indicate to myself that the Hyper is a strong contender for its ability to mic close and reproduce off axis. After all, when you are micing closer, Off Axis response might be one of the most important considerations? The closer you mic, the more important Off Axis should become.
Below is what I perceive from these charts and of course I have included the charts.
Schoeps 641= 2 db difference between 4/8/16 at 60 degrees
&2.5 db at 80 degrees
Schoeps 64 = slightly less…retaining only 2 db up to 90 degrees
Schoeps 621= almost 5 db difference at 80 & 90 degrees
Which, might explain why there is a high frequency bump
__________________________________________________ ____
Gefell Polar graph was too small to post-and a little bit confusing on the DB line ratio=Not sure of the increments…but their 1hz/8hz/16hz graph shows a 5 to 10 DB difference between the 8 &16 hz at 60 degrees alone. and very dramatic at 90 degrees.
Again a possibility as to why the High refreq bump works with this mic. And also combined with ceramic housing and low frequency roll off allows for closer mixing without as much proximity effect?
Mitek C-5 does not have an in depth polar graph…but its frequency graph looks similar to the the Gefell.
__________________________________________________ ___
Cu-55
Down 4.5 db’s between the 8hz & 16 hz at 60 degrees
Down 6 db’s at 70 degrees.
But oddly comes back to only 3.5 difference at 90 degrees
_______________________________
Polar patterns Start With Schoeps 4, then 41, then 21, then to Sanken Cu-55
