Mic compare: Gefell M300 vs Schoeps MK41 + others

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Thanks Chuck. Here are a few examples via demo mp3s using the Gefell M295s. All recordings are of the same Blanchard guitar I have.
I usually mike a ways out for the sound I like.

http://dcoombsguitar.com/CDFive/WhereToDemo.mp3

http://dcoombsguitar.com/CDFive/BossameDemo.mp3

http://dcoombsguitar.com/Guitar%20Mu...eemoreDemo.mp3

http://dcoombsguitar.com/CDFive/BlackFeatherDemo.mp3

Beautiful playing and great recordings.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

That’s too funny, and as Foghorn Leghorn would say, “I resemble that remark.” And that’s why my recording chain was selected; for capturing my sound with as much realism as I could.

And what are you using ChuckS?

[AcousticDreams]

No one here has talked about DPA's? I have heard some nice recordings with them.

Anybody have any thoughts about DPA, as compared to Schoeps and Gefells?

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

...[snip].... I am not great player in any way, but I get a sound. And representing that sound is everything to myself.

Originally Posted by ChuckS

That’s too funny, and as Foghorn Leghorn would say, “I resemble that remark.” And that’s why my recording chain was selected; for capturing my sound with as much realism as I could.

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

And what are you using ChuckS?

I'm using a pair of Gefell M296S omnis, in a spaced pair 18-26" out, panned hard right and hard left. They have a very flat frequency response. I don't have to worry about proximity effect but have to deal room issues (use a number of portable gobos). For preamps I recently picked up a used Gordon Model 5.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

No one here has talked about DPA's? I have heard some nice recordings with them.

Anybody have any thoughts about DPA, as compared to Schoeps and Gefells?

I've never had a chance to try DPAs. I'd expect them to be very similar to Schoeps, clean, flat, uncolored, etc, but no personal experience.

[Karel]

Let's not blurr this great thead with all our preferences, but stick to the helpfull comparison (shoot-out?) Doug did for us. I myself keep going back and forth between the Schoeps and the Gefells. My first preference were the Schoeps but the Gefells attract me because of their beautiful pure/natural reproduction. For further listening I also checked out Michael Watts' website to get a better idea of the characteristics of the Gefell M 300.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by Karel

Let's not blurr this great thead with all our preferences, but stick to the helpfull comparison (shoot-out?) Doug did for us. I myself keep going back and forth between the Schoeps and the Gefells. My first preference were the Schoeps but the Gefells attract me because of their beautiful pure/natural reproduction. For further listening I also checked out Michael Watts' website to get a better idea of the characteristics of the Gefell M 300.

I would love to hear more on your thoughts about the Pure/Natural Reproduction of Gefells. I do love Michael Watts recordings. I believe Doug thought that the Schoeps sounded most like his guitar.

[Karel]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I would love to hear more on your thoughts about the Pure/Natural Reproduction of Gefells. I do love Michael Watts recordings. I believe Doug thought that the Schoeps sounded most like his guitar.

Well, like I said before in this thread I have the impression that the Schoeps add this slight colouring which is, I do admit, very attractive to the ear. But when I keep comparing I have the feeling that the Gefells reproduce the sound of the guitar maybe more honestly. Where you feel the the Schoeps have more openess over the Gefells I almost hear the opposite. I for obvious reasons express my self very carefully. It's all in the ear of the beholder and I don't know the real sound of either Doug's or Michael's guitar. As always I find it terribly difficult to substantiate my choice where differences are nearly too subtle. I am almost 69 and my hearing will certainly have suffered over the years. On the verge of deciding on a new pair of mics for my home studio this discussion comes most timely. And I am grateful for all your thoughts, wisdom and experience.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I would love to hear more on your thoughts about the Pure/Natural Reproduction of Gefells. I do love Michael Watts recordings. I believe Doug thought that the Schoeps sounded most like his guitar.

Yes, but a very close call, and as I said, I don't know what my own guitar sounds like from the position of the mics :-) At some point, it's splitting hairs.

I have a love/hate relationship with A/B comparisons. On one hand, it's useful to go thru things, guitars, mics, placements, and try to figure out what works best. Educational. On the other hand, if someone just posts a good a recording with a mic, like the M300s, as Michael Watts did, or the M295s as Rick-Slo did, you just say "that sounds great". Or it could be the Schoeps, and they are capable of sounding great. As soon as you start comparing, you're zeroing in on little details you'd never notice if you just had to decide if you liked a single recording or not. In this case, they're so close, to my ear, that any variable could change the equation - a different guitar, different placement - sdelsolrey suggested that I should move the gefell's back an inch to better match the schoeps, would that change the impression entirely? maybe. So comparing 2 items that are very similar is kind of artificial, we focus in on details that you'd never even notice if you heard just one of them.

Also, I don't know about you, but I have a hard time separating the performance from the recording, as long as it's reasonably well-recorded. In Michael's demo, he's playing such cool stuff, I'm not listening to the mics, just the music. Would the mics come thru as sounding as good with someone playing a lesser guitar, or not playing as well? Probably not.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by Karel

Well, like I said before in this thread I have the impression that the Schoeps add this slight colouring which is, I do admit, very attractive to the ear. But when I keep comparing I have the feeling that the Gefells reproduce the sound of the guitar maybe more honestly. I for obvious reasons expess my self very carefully. It's all in the ear of the beholder and I don't know the real sound of either Doug's or Michael's guitar. As always I find it terribly difficult to substantiate my choice. I am almost 69 and my hearing will certainly have suffered over the years. On the verge of deciding on a new pair of mics for my home studio this discussion comes most timely. And I am grateful for all your thoughts, wisdom and experience.

I am nearly in the same boat as yourself with but four years your junior.

I have also heard from others, that they do believe the Schoeps to be colored. So you are not alone in your beliefs.

That is why I was so eager to hear both of them with a touch of reverb side by side. For myself, it revealed that I still liked the openness of Schoeps. Yet, that may change if I were to audition them side by side. There is a Meat-fundamental to the sound of the M300's that can not be denied.

As I mentioned before, those recordings of the late 60's and 70's came from many Nuemann microphones...the KM84 being one of them. And side by side tests of M300 and KM84 reveal a strong similarity.

The key might be our own individual style of playing and our own preference of guitar wood tone.

There is an internal fight that goes on within myself between the rosewood overtones, and the Maple clarity. That is why I finally found a guitar that fills the bill in those two areas. It displays the clarity and preciseness of maple with some of the overtones of Rosewood. Or, at least that is how I hear it.

Still the question remains...which mics would represent that tone and my style the best. In my brief testing between Gefell M295 and Schoeps with cardior caps....I heard things from both of them that I found to be the most realistic.

Still confused...ha ha...as is the nature of it all...and the fun of it all.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Yes, but a very close call, and as I said, I don't know what my own guitar sounds like from the position of the mics :-) At some point, it's splitting hairs.

I have a love/hate relationship with A/B comparisons. On one hand, it's useful to go thru things, guitars, mics, placements, and try to figure out what works best. Educational. On the other hand, if someone just posts a good a recording with a mic, like the M300s, as Michael Watts did, or the M295s as Rick-Slo did, you just say "that sounds great". Or it could be the Schoeps, and they are capable of sounding great. As soon as you start comparing, you're zeroing in on little details you'd never notice if you just had to decide if you liked a single recording or not. In this case, they're so close, to my ear, that any variable could change the equation - a different guitar, different placement - sdelsolrey suggested that I should move the gefell's back an inch to better match the schoeps, would that change the impression entirely? maybe. So comparing 2 items that are very similar is kind of artificial, we focus in on details that you'd never even notice if you heard just one of them.

Also, I don't know about you, but I have a hard time separating the performance from the recording, as long as it's reasonably well-recorded. In Michael's demo, he's playing such cool stuff, I'm not listening to the mics, just the music. Would the mics come thru as sounding as good with someone playing a lesser guitar, or not playing as well? Probably not.

There is no denying ultimately it is the sum of all the parts and our own perception, and also our particular intended usage. But much like musing over the minutiae of guitars is interesting for the guitarist, so too can the minutiae of microphones be interesting to the recordist.

For example as for specific use , in my case where both the acoustic and electric guitar will part of multi instrument sessions, with vocals and other midi instruments, I actually sold my one Schoeps MK4 to fund the purchase of a pair of AEA N22's, and am also trying to sell my Brauner Phantom V ....which BTW is IMO also an outstanding mic for acoustic guitar... (shameless plug) to fund the purchase of an ADK Z-Mod 251 specifically for my voice .

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Also, I don't know about you, but I have a hard time separating the performance from the recording, as long as it's reasonably well-recorded. In Michael's demo, he's playing such cool stuff, I'm not listening to the mics, just the music. Would the mics come thru as sounding as good with someone playing a lesser guitar, or not playing as well? Probably not.

This may be the most important point of it all. Performance. Many top recording engineers stress, Performance first and foremost, as the most important factor, above recording technique. Some then say, changing out a guitar as second, and further saying that changing out the musician if that does not work. Then they go to Microphone to preamp. While other engineers say the ROOM is the most important over Microphone. How the room sounds.

I have a good friend that is a notable engineer, that claims with all of the new software available, microphones and preamps are not that important. He can alter the sound afterwards. He also believes in One mic for guitar and not stereo...claiming that one mic will sit better in the mix than stereo.

I have not yet learned how to manipulate sound in that way as of yet. I have been programed from the old days...and digital is a bit of a mystery to myself. In the old days we recorded on tape and close to 0 ...now everything is at minus values. I used compressors before entering the tape machine. Now engineers often believe that compressors should be added later.

For myself, not being a skilled recording engineer, not being an overly skilled guitarist, I can not help but hope for the magic a particular microphone or a particular guitar can add to my performance.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Knives&Guitars

I have also heard from others, that they do believe the Schoeps to be colored. So you are not alone in your beliefs.

Interesting. I'm never sure what people mean by "colored", and it seems to mean good or bad, depending on how it's used. But to me, the Schoeps are very neutral, and quite flat, with just a bit of low end rolloff:



While the Gefell M300s are not nearly as flat, with a presence bump (which I'd call "colored"):



of course every guitar has a "color", too...

[AcousticDreams]

Regardless of what conclusions or confusions to come out of this comparison test that Doug has done....it is so wonderful to get everybody's input conducted with such thought.

Such a great discussion & so informative.

I have gone on Gearsluzt a little bit...and not learned nearly as much as I have from just this one Post. Why a difference when Gearsluzt is oriented toward recording specifically? The answer is quite simple... many engineers are not specifically guitar oriented ...they are recording engineers recording a vast number of instruments and vocals. And many engineers are not as humble in their discussions as I have seen here on this post. They are not as articulate in their answers...and they don't offer as nice of a test as what Doug has done. And even further...they are often dealing with non high end guitars. Soyuz has a great video using all their microphones..but uses a standard acoustic that does not appear to have much in the way of overtones.

My deepest appreciation to all of you for what you have contributed to this discussion. And of course the most appreciation for Doug in conducting this comparison. I hope there is still more input to come.

[rick-slo]

As far as accuracy of a recording capturing the sound of a guitar I thought I was getting somewhere when I could clearly
identify one of my guitars from another one when listening back to a recording.

That said I often like the final output to be somewhat "bigger" and "better" than the guitar itself sounds. Also some of my
favorite guitar recordings have a pick up of some sort mixed in with the mikes - not something I have done myself, but
certainly a viable way of making a recording.