Super-Cmit 2U vs KMR82i Shotgun Shootout / ATL Mixer Breakfast @ Whit Norris' House


42 posts in this topic

#: 1   Posted

post-659-0-97787000-1360531442_thumb.jpgHi all,

 

Last Saturday morning a bunch of local Atlanta mixers, boom-ops & utilities met over breakfast at Whit's house to field test the Super CMIT.

 

We had all heard how successful the Super CMIT had been used by Simon Hayes on “Les Misérables” in studio conditions. We wanted to test the practical applications of using the Super CMIT in the field.


(Note: I am writing this from memory a week later, so I encourage any involved to correct me or add more details to our findings!)

 

The Gear


-788t / CL-8 Bag rig


-Neumann KMR82i on a 22' Ambient Boompole


-Schoeps Super CMIT 2U on a 22' K-Tek Boompole


Note 1:
To use the 788t in AES mode, you have to enable “AES Power” in the menu and also on the individual tracks (in same place you select phantom power). Hook up your AES Cable to the back. The cable we had was set to put the DSP (super-CMIT) channel on channel one, the CMIT (non-dsp output) on 2 through a single XLR output. The cable also had a second XLR to hook up a second Super CMIT if desired.

 

Note 2:
There are two preset DSP modes. One is “standard” DSP and the
other what we termed “extreme”.

 

From the Schoeps website:    


             -Preset 1
                1: moderate directivity increase (green LED); ca. 11 dB reduction
                in diffuse sound (5 dB greater than a Schoeps CMIT 5 U or channel
                2 of the SuperCMIT 2 U)

                Preset 2: strong directivity increase (red LED); ca. 15 dB
                diffuse sound reduction. This setting is reserved for special
                applications since sonic artifacts can occasionally be heard.

 

In our tests, we did not tinker much with Preset 2 as it isn't very applicable to our purposes with the introduction of artifacts into our tracks. We also did not engage the filters on the CMIT and left them open.


This kind of became a test of three, as we compared all results between the Super CMIT in DSP mode and in standard CMIT versus the Neumann KMR82i.

 

The "Shooting Range"

 

Whit's house has some good conditions for a proper field test. There is a good-sized waterfall and a busy road nearby. Also, there is a small airport nearby. At the back of Whit's house is fairly quiet (except for the occasional aircraft).


Test 1: Waterfall


While booming a single person near the waterfall we noticed that the Super CMIT had amazing background rejection and pulled the dialogue right out of the waterfall. The background could still be heard, but was diminished greatly.


The standard CMIT and the 82 performed as expected and did a good job of bringing the dialogue forefront, leaving the sound of waterfall in the background.

 

While booming between two people have a conversation, the CMIT and 82 sounded “natural” while cueing.


The Super CMIT had some issues here. Some noticed artifacts while cueing as the processing tried to match the movement and change of position of the mic relative to the background. To fight this effect, a BoomOp would have to be careful to keep the mic on a the same plane of axis when cueing.


Which is better? Well, I suppose the answer is “It depends”. If that waterfall was instead a generator, perhaps the directivity would be exactly what you want. The waterfall as part of the scene, perhaps not.


Test 2: Running Diesel Truck in Background


We experienced similar results with the rumble of the truck as with waterfall. Again, if the rumble was a generator you couldn't get turned off, perhaps the Super would be the way to go... If a picture car, the CMIT or 82i sounded more natural to most of us.


Test 3: The Wide

 

We conducted this test with stationary subjects with an imaginary frame above our “actors” of 10-12 feet. On pavement, we noticed a reverb effect on all mics that was added. When moved to the grass, this was removed. The 82 lost a lot of low end frequency at this height, but was still very legible. The Super and CMIT both kept more of the low end and sounded better to most of us, with Super CMIT having a slight edge in a controlled situation of two actors having a one to one conversation.


Whit brought up a very valid point here though: The Ad-lib. What if there were other actors in the scene were known to adlib often. Would you want the more directional and less forgiving Super CMIT? Likely not.


Test 4: The “Really” Tight


We ALL agreed the Super CMIT sounded too present and “splattered” when used to close to the source. It needs some air in between to sound natural.


Test 5: Walk & Talk


We did walk & talks two ways: from above, and from below.


From above, all mics sounded nice. Noted that the Super CMIT might be nice in mitigating the sound of gravel or crunchy footsteps if boomed from the proper angle, if so desired.


From below, they also sounded good. Of course, all were in some form more susceptible to aircraft noise with the Super CMIT giving a few more moments of “acceptable” sound than the others by mitigating some of the off axis background noise.

 

The Conclusion

 

Someone in the group called this mic a “very expensive one trick pony”. While it may be useful in more than just one scenario, it certainly is a very specialized microphone and at $4,449US it is certainly very expensive.


Is it something to have in the kit? As a wise man once said... “It depends”... While it certainly would be nice in certain situations to have, it is one of those items that might be difficult to recoup costs outside of your standard kit rental.


It is an amazing piece of technology and if you can afford it, and it would be a nice microphone to have in the arsenal. That being said, I don't think any of us rushed out to get one after our testing. But time will tell!


The Players


Mixers:

Whit Norris, Chris Durfy, Aron Siegal, Todd Weaver, David Terry


Boom/Utility:

Chris Harris, Matt Derber, Maaike Snoep, Dana Simmons


ENG/Post:

Michael Wynne

 

Special thanks to:


-Whit & Kathy Norris for hosting us at their house.


-Trew Audio for arranging the Super-CMIT appointment.


-Redding Audio for supplying the demonstration Microphone.


-Michael Wynne for taking the pictures of the event.


THANKS!!!


post-659-0-31785200-1360531696_thumb.jpg

post-659-0-23919700-1360531724_thumb.jpg

post-659-0-35052900-1360531736_thumb.jpg

post-659-0-70041000-1360531756_thumb.jpg

post-659-0-17496400-1360531776_thumb.jpg

post-659-0-36666800-1360531811_thumb.jpg

post-659-0-54879400-1360531832_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 2   Posted

Cheers to that and thank you all for that review !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 3   Posted

Thanks for sharing this informations!

I love when I see and read these reports.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 4   Posted

Nice review. Simon HAYES, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 5   Posted

Right so! Changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 6   Posted

This is the most informative review I have read about this mic. Thanks so much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 7   Posted

Very nice job Chris! I have been dragging my feet on CPA Antennas that we tested. Hopefully I will have that up tomorrow.

 

Whit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 8   Posted

Terrific report! Very informative, and good pix, too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 9   Posted

A week ago I used my KMR-82i to capture the dialogue of two people sitting at a table in a kitchen. the microphone was approximately two meters above the table top, at the center of the two persons. The kitchen had a slight reverb. The result was very good, perhaps better than I had using my CMC641. It has for some time that I'm thinking of buying a SuperCMIT, but then I do not know if I will be able to use it since I already have a 82i, a CS-3e, a MKH416 and MKH816. Perhaps in some cases the result is better, but certainly the cost of Schoeps would not be adequately rewarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 10   Posted

thanks for the report. Nice read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 11   Posted

Sergio. The cost of Schoeps SuperCMIT 2U it's nothing when you have this "weapon".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 12   Posted

Thanks for posting Durf!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 13   Posted

Really interesting read, thanks everyone involved for taking the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 14   Posted

Very good report Chris. I used to have more Neumann mics in the past. The 82i was excellent but for some reason it didn't stand the field burden and it broke quite often. Then I switched to MKH70, which is similar to the 82i. I did have the 81i, another excellent mic, but then I switched to the CMIT and I am also please. My question to you: would be better to compare the 82i with a 70 or 816? Of course your choice of mic - Super CMIT - is the reason you did the tests, but for me, when I need a longer reach I go for the sennheiser, not for the schoeps. And yes the cost of the mic makes a very important decision when you consider buying it: is it worth? A lot of people would say yes, but it I think that one has to consider if the feeling is like driving a Ferrari in a dirt, not paved road... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 15   Posted

post-659-0-97787000-1360531442_thumb.jpg

The Super CMIT had some issues here. Some noticed artifacts while cueing as the processing tried to match the movement and change of position of the mic relative to the background. To fight this effect, a BoomOp would have to be careful to keep the mic on a the same plane of axis when cueing.

Yes, thank you for a very much for a great review! And what a fun day it must've been.

Quick question: the artifacts you mentioned, are they very audible? If in your example, you'd record a wildtrack of the waterfall and put that under the dialogue, maybe pretty much at the same level as the original recording's waterfall sound, would that sufficiently disguise these artifacts?

Sorry for my awkward wording, I hope you know what I'm getting at

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 16   Posted

Thanks much Atlanta!

 

Look forward to reading this in detail while on the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 17   Posted

Great info, thanks folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 18   Posted

Any chance you'll post some audio samples? Maybe on sound cloud or something?

Mark O.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 19   Posted

Very good report Chris. I used to have more Neumann mics in the past. The 82i was excellent but for some reason it didn't stand the field burden and it broke quite often. Then I switched to MKH70, which is similar to the 82i. I did have the 81i, another excellent mic, but then I switched to the CMIT and I am also please. My question to you: would be better to compare the 82i with a 70 or 816? Of course your choice of mic - Super CMIT - is the reason you did the tests, but for me, when I need a longer reach I go for the sennheiser, not for the schoeps. And yes the cost of the mic makes a very important decision when you consider buying it: is it worth? A lot of people would say yes, but it I think that one has to consider if the feeling is like driving a Ferrari in a dirt, not paved road... 

 

Yes about the the 70/8070/816 mikes? I am curious how useful these are compared to a SuperCMIT. 

 

Good stuff though guys. It does match what I expected. The DSP works best in controlled situations. Nice tool to have though (but expensive). 

 

 

 

Sawrab

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 20   Posted

I'll own up to the "very expensive one trick pony" comment.  But, perhaps I should have said "very expensive two trick pony" as the microphone can perform in "standard CMIT mode" and in DSP mode. The rub is the extra $2,250 plus tax for that extra little trick called digital signal processing. IMHO, the CMIT-5U is still king and is my ‘go to’ mic for the majority of conditions, outdoors especially. The Super CMIT-2 seemed to produce frightening artifacts in extreme conditions with the DSP modes activated, the very same DSP modes that tack an extra $2,250 to the sticker price. As far as return on investment goes, I will stick with the plain ole CMIT-5U with its perfect combination of reach, rejection, and a very pleasing and natural reproduction of its intended source. Heck, take your $4,449 and buy two! If the two mics were closer in price, I would get the Super CMIT 2u.

 

-Weaver
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 21   Posted

Nice test!Makes me think 3 times about buying a digital mike.Not. Problem with digital microphones (CMIT and digital KMR 81) Vs boards (mixers): they are not up to them yet.Will have to use the 'mike input'of the recorder(788) in order to stay 'digital'.Not ideal.Yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 22   Posted

Guys,

Wow,what a great test !  

 

Please allow me a couple of days to respond fully,but thanks for such an informative post.

 

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 23   Posted

Guys, Wow,what a great test ! Please allow me a couple of days to respond fully,but thanks for such an informative post. Simon
You mean after the hang over clears right? I had the pleasure of meeting Andrew Rowe at the weekend he spoke very warmly about you. This has been an interesting thread to read I am going to get the chance of listen to the super cmit in a week or so. I am looking to it as I have heard great things about this mic. Regards Chris W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 24   Posted

had a great time everyone, thanks for posting Chris !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#: 25   Posted

had a great time everyone, thanks for posting Chris !

Michael thanks for all the photos and helping out and your participation in the test. It always great to get the Atlanta Sound Mafia together! 

 

Whit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now