Jump to content

New DPA modular mic system


peter775

Recommended Posts

the DPA 4017 is an excellent shotgun type mic, but has not caught on well in our field, possibly because of the high price. . .

we'll have to wait and see how the forthcoming modular version does, won't we?

I suspect the MMP-B preamp, with the cut filter might be somewhat equivalent to the current 4017, and with the MMP-C compact preamp, it would be smaller and lighter, but still pricey,

DPA's mic's, including their excellent Lav's, have always been premium products, and a lot of folks believe they are worth their  premium prices!  That's a subjective, and individual decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DPA's mic's, including their excellent Lav's, have always been premium products, and a lot of folks believe they are worth their  premium prices!  That's a subjective, and individual decision.

Hm. A DPA studio-mic is actually not much more expensive than a Schoeps mic. The 4017 is about the same price as a CMIT or a MKH60 (the 60 is a bit cheaper, true) (at least in europe that is).

Yes, they are premium products but far from being pricey, IMO. Unless of course you call Schoeps pricey as well.

Isn´t a B6 more expensive than a DPA lav as well? Not sure.

IMO, this new line of products seems to be aimed at location recordists. In a studio it doesn´t matter if you are using a large or small mic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I consider Schoeps pricey, here in Hollywood, the Schoeps CMIT and the DPA 4017 are virtually the same price, but the Schoeps sells waaaaay more, and many of the few DPA's have had problems with their rings-switches, which requires return to Denmark, and is apparently not being covered by warranty...I'm told newer production has improved this issue, though it may have left a bad taste......

While DPA does target broadcasters,  I don't think they are particularly partial to the little niche of Production Sound Mixers like most of us here.  I don't think they would have made a big deal of introducing this product line at the Musican/PA/music show that is NAMM if they were targeting broadcasters and Production Sound Mixers.  I expect they will show the new MMP-4017 at NAB, and I'm pretty certain that the modular series will work out at least as costly as the current 4017, upon which it is based.  If you love the 4017, as some do, you will really love this.  Schoeps seems to remain more popular, but as I keep saying, mic choices are quite subjective, and personal, especially when comparing similar performing premium products.

BTW, this series now paves the way for additional collette type accessories, but unlike Schoeps, they would also work with their "short shotgun", and also BTW, the DPA 4017 performs longer than its actual physical length, and I'm a fan, though not an owner..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DPA 4017 has the best off-axis rejection I have ever heard in a shotgun mic. The Senator is correct in pointing out the early ring-switch problems and that indeed was an issue. The larger issue however was cell phone interference. Which the factory had a hard time replicating, as I am told their cell phones operate in a different range.  That, in my opinion was the main reason that this mic did not catch on here. However, that problem has been resolved with the current model. It prices out to a little less than the CMIT and just a bit more than the MKH60. LSC has one in stock for evaluation should anyone be interested.

SJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I evaluated the 4017 on a feature when the mic came out in 2008. I was pretty excited about a new offering from a high-end manufacturer, but the sound quality was so different from the other mics in my arsenal (Schoeps and Sennheiser) that I decided I could not use it. Even if not using it with other mics, I could not get used to it's sonic character. The best words I could come up with to describe it were "glassy" and "brittle". The rep assumed that maybe I was not used to a mic with such low distortion, which I considered. But I finally gave up after trying it in several different locations, different sets, and even different male and female actors, but always with the same impression on my ears. That was three years ago, so it's worth another another try by now. Could be that the "B" designation (4017B) addressed what I was hearing.

gt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I evaluated the 4017 on a feature when the mic came out in 2008. I was pretty excited about a new offering from a high-end manufacturer, but the sound quality was so different from the other mics in my arsenal (Schoeps and Sennheiser) that I decided I could not use it. Even if not using it with other mics, I could not get used to it's sonic character. The best words I could come up with to describe it were "glassy" and "brittle". The rep assumed that maybe I was not used to a mic with such low distortion, which I considered. But I finally gave up after trying it in several different locations, different sets, and even different male and female actors, but always with the same impression on my ears. That was three years ago, so it's worth another another try by now. Could be that the "B" designation (4017B) addressed what I was hearing.

gt

Yah I agree with you Glen.  I rarely use mine.

I have all sennheiser mics.  They sound way warmer then the 4017.  I do find on most women it works well.  And any musical instruments, it actually sounds pretty sic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I consider Schoeps pricey, here in Hollywood, the Schoeps CMIT and the DPA 4017 are virtually the same price, but the Schoeps sells waaaaay more, and many of the few DPA's have had problems with their rings-switches, which requires return to Denmark, and is apparently not being covered by warranty...I'm told newer production has improved this issue, though it may have left a bad taste......

While DPA does target broadcasters,  I don't think they are particularly partial to the little niche of Production Sound Mixers like most of us here.  I don't think they would have made a big deal of introducing this product line at the Musican/PA/music show that is NAMM if they were targeting broadcasters and Production Sound Mixers.  I expect they will show the new MMP-4017 at NAB, and I'm pretty certain that the modular series will work out at least as costly as the current 4017, upon which it is based.  If you love the 4017, as some do, you will really love this.  Schoeps seems to remain more popular, but as I keep saying, mic choices are quite subjective, and personal, especially when comparing similar performing premium products.

BTW, this series now paves the way for additional collette type accessories, but unlike Schoeps, they would also work with their "short shotgun", and also BTW, the DPA 4017 performs longer than its actual physical length, and I'm a fan, though not an owner..

Hey Mike,

Actually my experience with there warranty was awesome.  I've had the mic for almost three years.  I sent it in a few months ago.  They replaced a bunch of parts, made sure it is performing as it should and sent it back at no charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Old post, I know.. But is was the only one i could find regarding the DPA 2011c.
Its just a cardioid and not a hyper but has anyone used this on a pole?

Interested in this because may want to buy this and the MMC4017 shotgun capsule, but i might guess the MMC2011is to wide unless your in a really controlled environment and close to the talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Yes, I consider Schoeps pricey, here in Hollywood, the Schoeps CMIT and the DPA 4017 are virtually the same price.........

Always a problem with importing niche products, not helped by a relatively strong €. With small numbers the importer needs bigger margins and the end user ends up paying. We have a similar situation with an import like Countryman for instance. I can get a price on a DPA 4061 very similar to a B6 which I consider expensive. Early 4017s suffered from cellphone interference, which was soon sorted but it did not help its launch. If you get a chance to see the new film 'Rush', much of it was done with DPAs. I have yet to see it (released next Friday) but I am told that it is a sound feast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...