Jump to content

Evaluating Neumann KM185 vs Schoeps CMC6/MK41


pvanstry

Recommended Posts

For me, since my budget is limited ( i am purchasing a lot of gear lately and still have some more to buy ), the test told me that i was not missing out on a huge difference that would make or break a dialog recording.

What makes or breaks a dialog recording, and who decides? Is it that the track will have to be replaced, or is it that you, someone else, or the audience will be unhappy with the track that isn't replaced? In every situation it is different, so there is no way to tell, given the information that is here. I don't know what kind of project you are working on, so it is hard for me to comment. It doesn't seem like a microphone switch will "make or break" anything, given two mics with a similar build quality and pickup pattern, no. But I have been fooled before in that line of thinking. At the end of the day, after someone calls "cut", you probably go, "that was great", or "that was acceptable but it could have been better", or "I don't know if that will work", or "that was a bunch of crap". Sometimes I find one's own assessment's of the material, especially in the heated and sometimes emotional moments of trying to record and get it, aren't always accurate either, especially not knowing how the material will cut (or whether or not the material being shot will even be part of the end product). But I digress. Generally speaking, you'll know when you hear it in your headphones whether you've got it, or you don't got it. The mics chosen are only a means to that end, and so goes choosing them. Sometimes changing a mic can make all of the difference. Sometimes not.

This entire thing is born out of a producer asking for a Schoeps mic for his feature.

As Senator Mike notes, that's dangerous. If he specified something he wanted out of the Schoeps for his project, that's understandable, but it's pretty unlikely. It's fair for the producer to expect you to have quality microphones, but you probably don't see that producer insisting to a DP that he shoot the entire project on one lens, either.

So, in your case, why is the producer asking for a Schoeps? Is it a catchphrase, or is he looking for something specific from a Schoeps?

But i was really not sure it was going to make a difference. I recorded the dialog of my daughter with both mics and sent the dialog to the producer with no mention of the mic it was using. The producer was cool enough to play the game and was really surprised to hear no difference.

Again, that's fine if what your project entails is recording your daughter in your house from x distance (and no cameras to get in the way). It probably isn't, but it probably also means your producer isn't looking for something specific from the Schoeps but instead has been told by someone else that it's the mic one's mixer should be using. If you're asking of ways to please your producer, it seems like you've got that sorted out. If you're asking "which is the better mic for all situations", I don't think it's safe to say "the Neumann is as good as the Schoeps, because I recorded my daughter close-miked on both in my house and I couldn't hear a difference between the two".

For example, 15 years ago I recorded a dialogue scene for a feature with an Electro-Voice 637/A. It was a close shot of two actors speaking in a racquetball court with fencing going on in the background. The results were really good. When I tried a more powerful condenser (in that case, Schoeps) the fencing noise overwhelmed the track, but with the dynamic mic I was able to achieve a happy balance between dialogue and background noise. Should I then recommend the 637/A as the best mic for dialogue recording? No, but in that space, at that time, with those voices, and with that background noise, and at the micing distance I was able to achieve, it was the best solution -- better than lavs, better than high-market condensors (which I had but didn't use in that case).

We always forget that in the end, it really is going to be twisted, mangled, compressed and mixed with 200 other sources.

To me, unless you're working on an audio kaleidoscope of some sort, that's a cop-out, and an inaccurate one at that. Most dialogue or voice-driven projects tend to feature the voice as the primary factor of the finished track. There are plenty of projects we've all worked on where there is very little besides our track playing on the speakers at the end of the day, and if there's another element it takes a backseat to the dialogue recording.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

I found that the KM150/185 had a smoother polar pattern (shows on published literature) than the MK41 Schoeps. This meant a bit better "reach" and smoother off axis response. Also the KM (KMR) series was immune to humidity (I once put a KMR 82 shotgun into a steam room and took it out only after drops were forming on the tube-no noise! Also in 20 degrees below zero weather I took the KMs inside and listen as they warmed up with no hiss or noise.

All early KMs and KMRs are very sensitive to RF like that generated by the old TV band camera xmitters. Later Neuman made a modification on the KM183/4/5's board to make it immune to RF (no pops when I held a 5 watt Walkie Talkie within a few inches and hit transmit) These newer mics are all above SN# 50,000.

Otherwise the older mics can be bad for nearby RF. One way to minimize this is to use "Reussen" (German word for banded) wire in the fish pole or mic cables leading from the RF area. Realize that Canare StarQuad is NOT Reussen. Reussen wire is usually European and is double helixed for more than 100% RF shielding. After some handling this wire can open up.

A reasonable expedient would be the recent Oktave MC 012 mics with Hyper Cardiod capsule which have no sensitive to either RF or moisture. Be sure to have the mics modded by Bill Sitler Recording Services. The mic will sound much better and you will have no need of the -10 dB in line attenuator. Oktava makes a modestly priced swivel too. However their in-line low frequency roll off accessory adds some noise so be careful.

As for mics out of doors: The Neumann KMR81short shotgun sounds the best of any mic I ever heard. The KMR82 (long shotgun) would phase, even outside, with any other mic pointed at the same source. But the 82 when pointed straight up or down outside would null out at the sides like a BiDirectional capsule. This is very valuable to reject noise (but not airplanes). Neither the 81 or, especially, the 82 would work as well as the '50 capsule inside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/02/2016 at 7:04 PM, NJT said:

Is anyone aware of any major differences between the new KK capsules and output stages compared to the old ones? Apart from the option of AES out. https://www.neumann.com/?lang=en&id=current_microphones&cid=km_a_description 

I bought a pair of KM184 D mics about a year ago. They had been bought by a big AV company in error, and had not been used at all. They were sold to me at an amazingly cheap price, I thin kthe company simply wanted to move them on. They sound stunning, just stunning. I wish I could find excuses to use them more often than I do.

Kindest, sb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Good snag with those 184's, Bash! So those need to go directly into a digital interface, is that right? How are people using these in the field? And why is Neumann harping on the limitations of the analog signal, in general, if they're still promoting the "A" counterpart to these series?

We're just talking "on paper", but for those hearing the base roll-off on the 185's, have you noticed how closely the 184's correlates to the CMC6 MK41 combination? Then you look at the polar pattern, and the off-axis attenuation clearly is a trade-off with the two patterns. Which do you think is a better comparison then to the schoeps, the 185 or the 184? If the diagram doesn't lie on the 185, I'd definitely be able to hear -4db by 200hz. And, yes, I think that would bite into the body of a rounded, well-trained voice. Whereas the schoeps is more impartial, even in the range of hard consonants.

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...