The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > RECORD

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 09-26-2018, 11:29 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 6,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karel View Post
Could you tell me your line-up of the Schoeps and Gefells, Doug? Preamp-interface.
The Schoeps and Gefells are both going into an Apogee Ensemble Thunderbolt, which has preamps and also acts as the A/D converter and computer interface. So it's an all-in-1 thing. The Brauners are going into a Great River MP2-H preamp into the Ensemble's A/D, so bypassing the Ensemble preamps. Same with the NS22 ribbons, except the preamp is an AEA RPQ preamp.

Here's the Ensemble:

https://www.apogeedigital.com/products/ensemble
__________________
Doug Young
----------------
Music on Pandora
You Tube Channel
website: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com
Fingerstyle Christmas Tunes: A DADGAD Christmas
CDs: Closing Time, Laurel Mill
Pickup tests: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com/pickuptests/
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-27-2018, 05:24 PM
anton anton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 562
Default

Very nice demo Doug, I was wondering if you might check out a pair of the M300's one day. As with most of these things the difference between them and the Schoepes is pretty subtle, at least to my ear.

I love my pair of M300's, they are at the perfect spot of price to performance for my budget.
__________________
Celtic Fingerstyle Guitar
Youtube
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-27-2018, 05:34 PM
Trevor B. Trevor B. is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Posts: 1,009
Default

The only difference I hear is that the Gefells sound a little brighter than the Schoeps which is surprising given that the Gefell M300s usually sound darker than most other SDCs. Mine were certainly darker than the AKG 451s I used to own.
That said, the Gefells and the Schoeps both sound really fine. This thread has convinced me to give my Gefells another go round.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-27-2018, 07:11 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 6,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor B. View Post
The only difference I hear is that the Gefells sound a little brighter than the Schoeps which is surprising given that the Gefell M300s usually sound darker than most other SDCs. Mine were certainly darker than the AKG 451s I used to own.
That said, the Gefells and the Schoeps both sound really fine. This thread has convinced me to give my Gefells another go round.
That seems right to me, Schoeps are flat as can be, the Gefell's have both a high end boost (starting around 2KHz) and a low end roll-off below 100. AKG models vary, depending on the exact version, from what I understand, but generally have a much larger high end boost, and at least I think of them as a bright mic. So if you're comparing to a 451, the Gefell's might seem dark, but the Schoeps would be even darker. The other mics I have around are KM184s, which would probably be a bit brighter than the Gefells, tho looking at the frequency graphs, I'm not sure they're that different, the KM184s just have a more pronounced high bump, but starting at 5K.
__________________
Doug Young
----------------
Music on Pandora
You Tube Channel
website: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com
Fingerstyle Christmas Tunes: A DADGAD Christmas
CDs: Closing Time, Laurel Mill
Pickup tests: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com/pickuptests/
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-27-2018, 07:43 PM
rick-slo's Avatar
rick-slo rick-slo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 12,460
Default

The M300 is a more directionally affected mike regarding frequency response than the Mk41, getting brighter sounding when fairly off axis. A plus or minus factor depending on the circumstances.
__________________
Derek Coombs
Website -> Music -> Tabs -> CDs and Youtube
Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-27-2018, 07:46 PM
DupleMeter DupleMeter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,084
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor B. View Post
The only difference I hear is that the Gefells sound a little brighter than the Schoeps which is surprising given that the Gefell M300s usually sound darker than most other SDCs. Mine were certainly darker than the AKG 451s I used to own.
That said, the Gefells and the Schoeps both sound really fine. This thread has convinced me to give my Gefells another go round.
Though, in all fairness, it's pretty hard not to sound darker than 451s
__________________
-Steve
My Website

Too many acoustic & electric guitars, basses, mandolins, violins, dulcimers, trumpets & percussion instruments to list.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-28-2018, 08:23 AM
KevWind's Avatar
KevWind KevWind is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edge of Wilderness Wyoming
Posts: 11,008
Default

Doug quick question if I may . I just set up and recorded (for a test and to go through it) my N 22's in the MS position as per your photo, one down one up . With the upper mic being the direct ( mid) mic. And the bottom being the side mic with the null of the figure 8 facing the guitar . As I stated I have never done an MS recording , so am a virtual newbie to it .

So first, do you adjust the mic pres to bring the S signal back up to equal to the M signal prior to recording ? or leave the pre amps aprox the same input level and just bring up the fader on the side track/s while mixing ? I found a significant difference in signal strength between the two such that with my pre. with 60 db gain and 48 v phantom power , the S channel had to be pegged to get the signal equal to the M at about 2/3 rd's .

Second did you "decode" the MS track ? and if so do you use an MS decoder plugin, or just do the three track method ?
__________________
" Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." Albert Einstein
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev...


KevWind at Soundcloud

Last edited by KevWind; 09-28-2018 at 10:30 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-28-2018, 12:37 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 6,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KevWind View Post
Doug quick question if I may . I just set up and recorded (for a test and to go through it) my N 22's in the MS position as per your photo, one down one up . With the upper mic being the direct ( mid) mic. And the bottom being the side mic with the null of the figure 8 facing the guitar . As I stated I have never done an MS recording , so am a virtual newbie to it .

So first, do you adjust the mic pres to bring the S signal back up to equal to the M signal prior to recording ? or leave the pre amps aprox the same input level and just bring up the fader on the side track/s while mixing ? I found a significant difference in signal strength between the two such that with my pre. with 60 db gain and 48 v phantom power , the S channel had to be pegged to get the signal equal to the M at about 2/3 rd's .

Second did you "decode" the MS track ? and if so do you use an MS decoder plugin, or just do the three track method ?
Yes, when recording MS, the sides will be lower. Partly the side information is inherently lower, and also it gets added back in twice, so it gains in that process. With identical mics and matched preamps, you should simply be able to set the gain the same - set the knobs to the same level, that is, even tho one mic will be quieter as a result, and it will work. Another approach is to turn the side mic so that both are facing forward, match the volume, then rotate the side mic back into position. If you try to match the side volume to be the same as the mid, you'll get a ultra-wide image, not the expected XY-ish sound. One thing I try to do with these large mics is to place the mid mic at or above the waist of the guitar, with the side mic below. This leaves the null of the side mic at the soundhole, with the sides capturing both sides. Seems to work well, tho there are other approaches, especially with smaller mics.

I just use the Voxengo free MS-Decoder plugin. Logic has one built-in as well, probably most DAWs do. That lets me keep things on a single stereo track which works well for my workflow - effects sends, other plugins, etc.

Here's what my stereo track looks like with the relative levels (Mid is on the left/top, which is what the Voxengo decoder expects):

MS_Levels.jpg

With an encoder/decoder (like the Voxengo), you can go back and forth between MS and normal, so one way to get comfortable with the relative levels would be to take an existing non-MS track, and encode it into MS and look at the result, which should be similar to my screen snap.
__________________
Doug Young
----------------
Music on Pandora
You Tube Channel
website: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com
Fingerstyle Christmas Tunes: A DADGAD Christmas
CDs: Closing Time, Laurel Mill
Pickup tests: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com/pickuptests/

Last edited by Doug Young; 09-28-2018 at 07:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-29-2018, 06:57 AM
KevWind's Avatar
KevWind KevWind is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edge of Wilderness Wyoming
Posts: 11,008
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
Yes, when recording MS, the sides will be lower. Partly the side information is inherently lower, and also it gets added back in twice, so it gains in that process. With identical mics and matched preamps, you should simply be able to set the gain the same - set the knobs to the same level, that is, even tho one mic will be quieter as a result, and it will work. Another approach is to turn the side mic so that both are facing forward, match the volume, then rotate the side mic back into position. If you try to match the side volume to be the same as the mid, you'll get a ultra-wide image, not the expected XY-ish sound. One thing I try to do with these large mics is to place the mid mic at or above the waist of the guitar, with the side mic below. This leaves the null of the side mic at the soundhole, with the sides capturing both sides. Seems to work well, tho there are other approaches, especially with smaller mics.

I just use the Voxengo free MS-Decoder plugin. Logic has one built-in as well, probably most DAWs do. That lets me keep things on a single stereo track which works well for my workflow - effects sends, other plugins, etc.

Here's what my stereo track looks like with the relative levels (Mid is on the left/top, which is what the Voxengo decoder expects):

Attachment 13379

With an encoder/decoder (like the Voxengo), you can go back and forth between MS and normal, so one way to get comfortable with the relative levels would be to take an existing non-MS track, and encode it into MS and look at the result, which should be similar to my screen snap.
OK thanks so much I like the idea of both mic's facing to get levels and then rotate the side mic . And will try the position you mention ( I assume you mean the upper waist ). Thanks again.
__________________
" Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." Albert Einstein
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev...


KevWind at Soundcloud

Last edited by KevWind; 09-29-2018 at 08:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-06-2018, 12:49 PM
Knives&Guitars Knives&Guitars is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 749
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
That's a tough call, partly because I'm not hearing the guitar from out front, but I'd say the Schoeps sound most like the guitar. I've always felt the Schoeps were neutral to a fault, not adding anything extra, just giving back what's there. I've used the Brauner's for most recordings over the past handful of years - they seem to produce a slightly bigger sound, tho I've used the Schoeps for many of my You Tube videos.
Sincerely, Thank you so much for doing this comparison test. I have searched and searched and could not find a true comparison between the Schoeps and M300. So this is really helpful.
And you have answered a very important question...the M300 "sound most like the guitar" That is something that is appealing to myself...to hear a recorded version of what I hear from my position playing the guitar.
From your recorded examples I do like both. I personally hear quite a difference between the two...an Openness the Schoeps has. An appealing trait. However, for standing out in a mix, the Gefells reality might be more important.
Have you ever Tried the Sanken Cu-55? Those are another microphone that I would love to hear. They have the ability to be closer miced without proximity. Unfortunately, finding recorded samples of these mics are far and few in between.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-06-2018, 01:53 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 6,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars View Post
S
And you have answered a very important question...the M300 "sound most like the guitar" That is something that is appealing to myself...to hear a recorded version of what I hear from my position playing the guitar.
I think I actually said the Schoeps sounded most like the guitar, tho the difference is very subtle, and since I can't contort myself to hear the guitar where the mics are while I'm playing, my confidence level in that judgement is low :-)

Quote:
Have you ever Tried the Sanken Cu-55? Those are another microphone that I would love to hear. They have the ability to be closer miced without proximity. Unfortunately, finding recorded samples of these mics are far and few in between.
I tried some Sankens years ago, I don't recall the model. They sounded good, but I was comparing them to the Schoeps and there wasn't enough difference to justify spending whatever it was ($5K, I think) for them.
__________________
Doug Young
----------------
Music on Pandora
You Tube Channel
website: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com
Fingerstyle Christmas Tunes: A DADGAD Christmas
CDs: Closing Time, Laurel Mill
Pickup tests: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com/pickuptests/
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-06-2018, 02:23 PM
sdelsolray sdelsolray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,123
Default

By putting the Schoeps MK41 and Gefell M300 pairs in basically the same position, the differences between their frequency responses are noticeable. If the Gefells were moved back a bit (relative to the Schoeps), and levels matched, those differences would be less noticeable. At least that's what I heard when I did that with these same mics.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-06-2018, 02:34 PM
rick-slo's Avatar
rick-slo rick-slo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 12,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdelsolray View Post
By putting the Schoeps MK41 and Gefell M300 pairs in basically the same position, the differences between their frequency responses are noticeable. If the Gefells were moved back a bit (relative to the Schoeps), and levels matched, those differences would be less noticeable. At least that's what I heard when I did that with these same mics.
That is true. The M300 has a greater proximity effect tendency. Also the M300 has a greater frequency balance change off axis. And also of course any mike would be
affected by having another mike right up next to its capsule. Nevertheless I think the generalized characteristics of the mikes came through.
__________________
Derek Coombs
Website -> Music -> Tabs -> CDs and Youtube
Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-06-2018, 02:40 PM
Doug Young's Avatar
Doug Young Doug Young is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mountain View, CA
Posts: 6,631
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdelsolray View Post
By putting the Schoeps MK41 and Gefell M300 pairs in basically the same position, the differences between their frequency responses are noticeable. If the Gefells were moved back a bit (relative to the Schoeps), and levels matched, those differences would be less noticeable. At least that's what I heard when I did that with these same mics.

Yeah, that's always the challenge when comparing mics. Is it most useful to compare how they sound in the same location, or to optimize the placement of each mic to make them sound the same (or their best). Infinite possibilities, so I think all you can do is be clear about the experiment. This isn't "how schoeps and gefells sound", because move either of them an inch and the sound changes. It's just "here's how the two sound when placed as close together as possible", nothing more, nothing less. I did the other approach with the other two mics - that's "where I would place them" with no attempt to have them be in the same location, and we can hear that that sounds very different.

But it sounds like you and Rick both think the Gefells have more proximity effect than Schoeps? The Schoeps are hyper's, and so should actually have more proximity effect than equivalent cardiods, if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure I'm hearing a big difference wrt proximity, but I'll experiment some more. To my ear, the Schoeps and Gefells are very similar in sound, but it all depends on what "similar" means. At some point, it's splitting hairs. I could shift in my chair by an inch and the sound would change :-)
__________________
Doug Young
----------------
Music on Pandora
You Tube Channel
website: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com
Fingerstyle Christmas Tunes: A DADGAD Christmas
CDs: Closing Time, Laurel Mill
Pickup tests: http://www.dougyoungguitar.com/pickuptests/
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-06-2018, 05:45 PM
sdelsolray sdelsolray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 6,123
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Young View Post
Yeah, that's always the challenge when comparing mics. Is it most useful to compare how they sound in the same location, or to optimize the placement of each mic to make them sound the same (or their best). Infinite possibilities, so I think all you can do is be clear about the experiment. This isn't "how schoeps and gefells sound", because move either of them an inch and the sound changes. It's just "here's how the two sound when placed as close together as possible", nothing more, nothing less. I did the other approach with the other two mics - that's "where I would place them" with no attempt to have them be in the same location, and we can hear that that sounds very different.

But it sounds like you and Rick both think the Gefells have more proximity effect than Schoeps? The Schoeps are hyper's, and so should actually have more proximity effect than equivalent cardiods, if I'm not mistaken. I'm not sure I'm hearing a big difference wrt proximity, but I'll experiment some more. To my ear, the Schoeps and Gefells are very similar in sound, but it all depends on what "similar" means. At some point, it's splitting hairs. I could shift in my chair by an inch and the sound would change :-)
Good points.

The Schoeps MK41 capsule has a bass rolloff which is wider (starting at 200 Hz down -4dB at 50 Hz) than the Gefell M300 (starting at 100 Hz down -3dB at 50 Hz), but less than a Gefell M295 which is very wide (starting at 600 Hz down -8dB at 50 Hz). All of these mitigate the proximity effect by differing amounts.

What has always impressed me is the linear off-axis response of Schoeps capsules. That's where the much of the "smoothness" comes from, particularly when using them in the the ORTF-like positioning you used in your above recordings.

Schoeps MK41:

https://schoeps.de/en/products/colet...ids/mk-41.html

Gefell M300:

http://www.microtechgefell.de/dmdocu...%20300_ENG.pdf

Gefell M295:

http://www.microtechgefell.de/dmdocu...94_295_ENG.pdf
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > RECORD

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=