Schoeps Super CMIT experience?

[Reinout Weebers]

Hi Guy's,

 

I'm wondering what your experience is with the Schoeps Super CMIT in daily use, and what the feedback is from post production, or if you work in post.... your own opinion.

 

What I experience is that the DSP sometimes is audible, of course even more in the tightest setting.

It almost sounds like a gate when fast loud noises are present, for example next to a highway.

Also I got some feedback from post that this (gating) DSP, which most times I can't hear on set for it's subtlety, is audible for them. Because they also use these techniques in post... it's one effect on the other, something they don't like.

 

A couple of projects back I recorded in a rural environment with a highway 'hum' in the background. This was the only time I truly was satisfied with the mic.

 

I use the mic with my SD 788T, but because the sub-d connector on the bottom of the recorder, where the AES42 input is situated, isn't shielded I get allot of RF spray. So I use the mini DA42 pre-amp from Schoeps to do the DA conversion for me.

 

There are a couple of topic's about this mic, but none with this question as far as I could see.

 

Let me know what your opinion is or if you have some tip's 'n trick's.

 

cheers, Reinout.

 

[VASI]

Read here

[soundtrane]

I have done three features with my two SuperCMITs. in noisy outdoor locations. I can assure you - although it is not a magic wand to ward off ALL kinds of noise, it is a brilliant piece of technology yet to be surpassed - as of now. 

 

-vin

[Glen Deakin]

All digital inputs are done through the D-sub connection on the 788. The 744 and others let you do it on the xlr.

[Reinout Weebers]

Read here

Ow nice stuff, thanks. I can relate with some opinions.

 

yeah, and read through to the end to see my comment. 

a little confused here - does not the 788T offer AES42 inputs directly through the mic inputs, with them set at AES42? 

 

Why do you need to use the D-Sub connector for this?

 

-vin

Vin, the 788 has different inputs for AES3 and AES42 as you can see below. I/O – Digital in the 788T

• Balanced AES in 1-8 on DE15 connector 110 ohm, 2 V p-p, AES and S/PDIF compatible with RCA adaptor, AES42 mode 1 compatible and provides 10 V to AES42 microphones
• AES3 Balanced AES out 1-4 on TA3 connector; Balanced AES out 5-6 on DE15 connector 110 ohm, 2 Vp-p, AES and S/PDIF compatible with RCA adaptor

Are there any post people here who wish to share their experience? would apreciate

[soundtrane]

Ah... i stand corrected... I was thinking 664 family... 

 

-vin

[Simon Hayes]

I wouldn't use setting number 2 unless i was presented with a situation that was 100% sure to be ADR'd unless i could do something radical.

Setting number 2 was not designed for film and TV drama use,it is extremely harsh and severe.

 

Setting number 1 is far more subtle and unless presented with an extremely difficult off axis sound that is full range and not constant (waterfall,fast moving road very close,heavy wind in trees blowing leaves) it is extremely difficult to hear DSP artefacts in my opinion.

 

The Super CMIT is an amazing tool,but just like any tool we have at our disposal it is not the best for every job but when it is required it can be a game changer in the hands of an experienced boom operator.

[Constantin]

it can be a game changer in the hands of an experienced boom operator.

This is key, the boom op needs to be very precise. It's not an ideal mic for ad-libs.

[Prahlad Strickland]

A great way to run it is with the 742 tx. It sends both effected and unaffected channels to the qrx. Let post choose and its a cool option for them.

I rented one for a shoot on the ocean recently. It was a locked off shot though. It worked real nice. They used the dsp channel. (Setting 1)

[Reinout Weebers]

The Super CMIT is an amazing tool,but just like any tool we have at our disposal it is not the best for every job but when it is required it can be a game changer in the hands of an experienced boom operator.

 

I agree, a good tool is half the job...... but only half.

 

It's nice to get some feedback here. In the Netherlands only a few guy's have this mic, so not allot to test and compare.

[Armin Siegwarth]

I used this mic for the first time on a one week job for a female host outside and in churches. These are my findings:

 

 

Depending on the playback device in different situations I'd prefer different channels. Sometimes lav, processed (always Setup 1) or even unprocessed.

 

On my Sennheiser HD 25 heaphones on set sometimes the processed channel sounds a bit artificial. No artefacts just not that round and relaxed than unprocessed. But for example outdoors 20m behind a big fountain or with a distant road hum it was certainly best. Could be the little delay mixing with onset sound sneaking through headphones.

 

On the macbook speakers I did not like the processed SuperCMIT. Here I would prefer the lav to the CMIT most of the times, EQ it in post and put some ambiences to it.  

 

On my ADAM AUDIO A5 monitors at home I like the SuperCMIT processed much more. 

 

 

 

In general the processed channel seems to loose a bit low end when the mic is close. It works to reduce certain ambiences like a little bit reverb in churches or constant hum of water or road noise. But expect no wonders - I'd say it could make it like 10-20% better. And sometimes this makes a big difference, sometimes not at all.

 

I am still a bit confused with my findings on the playback devices.

[Reinout Weebers]

Hi Guys,

I just finished an Amsterdam police series. We shot 75% in Amsterdam city centre, so this was the perfect time to use the SuperCMIT. We shot guerrilla style, with a small bag setup.

A bit different then in the states in the Netherlands we as Head of the sound department boom our selves most of the time.

So my new findings are:

I used only setting 1, which is directive enough. Without artifacts.

On axis means good sound. Booming at 90 degrees from above kills 80% of all side noise.

I rather stay at +/- 90 degrees above the target, and pickup downward dialogue on the lav, than tilting to much and pull in background noise.

Of course every situation needs its own approach.

Because I boomed myself I recognize the delay, or headphone leakage, you hear while booming within close range. Perhaps with the X3 in AES42 mode 2, this will diminish.

I only use the Super CMIT for dialogue. Because in mod 1 we cannot adjust the input gain of the mic it has to much headroom for atmo, setnoise etc. This means, in my ears, I have to pull up the signal on fader, and doing so pulling up the noise floor. Again, I hope in mod 2 this will be history.

Last week I visited my re-recording mixer / sound designer. For the scenes we shot in the city centre he was most pleased with the Super CMIT. Of course together with the lav's. The CMIT channel was simply to wide for his taste, imaginable.

The sound:

The audible delay because of headphone leakage is sometimes annoying.

The mic itself has a bit less bottom end than the CMIT... To my ears.

Sometimes it sounds harsh on my Sony MDR 7506 headphones. I mean focussed on dialogue.

But listening at home in my studio on KRK vxt6 monitors I was very pleased. Sometimes it was almost artificial looking at the shot and it's surroundings.

You win allot, you loose a little in this case.

Because it's directivity I had to get used to the low background noise in the mix I monitor. The mic gained my trust gradually and I use it very often now.

Great tool already. Cannot wait to use it together with the X3 mod 2.

Cheers Reinout

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Constantin]

I only use the Super CMIT for dialogue. Because in mod 1 we cannot adjust the input gain of the mic it has to much headroom for atmo, setnoise etc. This means, in my ears, I have to pull up the signal on fader, and doing so pulling up the noise floor. Again, I hope in mod 2 this will be history.

The delay is mostly caused by the mic itself, because of its internal DSP processor. So, of course, the recorder attached won't make a difference. Maybe the SRC in your current recorder adds a very short delay, too, but it won't be much at all.

You cannot set the input gain of the mic, regardless of AES42 or not. You can normally add digital gain on you recorder. Or, if your mic is newer than September 2010, you can add 30dB to the digital output of the mic. You can do this now by pressing twice each of the three buttons on the mic. However, this will not improve your snr as it all happens in the digital domain

[Reinout Weebers]

You cannot set the input gain of the mic, regardless of AES42 or not. You can normally add digital gain on you recorder. Or, if your mic is newer than September 2010, you can add 30dB to the digital output of the mic. You can do this now by pressing twice each of the three buttons on the mic. However, this will not improve your snr as it all happens in the digital domain

My point exactly. This is why I can't wait to get my X3 with AES42 mod 2. Where we should be able to adjust the parameters of the mic remotely.

I understand how a digital mic works, but what is an SRC?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Constantin]

My point exactly. This is why I can't wait to get my X3 with AES42 mod 2. Where we should be able to adjust the parameters of the mic remotely.

I understand how a digital mic works, but what is an SRC?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You said that for quiet material the mic had too much headroom and you had to push up the fader thereby bringing up a lot of noise with it. I was merely trying to point out that this will happen, too, if you add the mic's 30dB gain. This is all digital gain and it makes no real difference where you apply this gain.

SRC is the sample rate converter

[pindrop]

My point exactly. This is why I can't wait to get my X3 with AES42 mod 2. Where we should be able to adjust the parameters of the mic remotely.

I understand how a digital mic works, but what is an SRC?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Will you be able to remotely adjust the parameters of a Super CMIT? Or does the mic itself also have to have mod 2 to enable remote control?

If the Super CMIT can be remote controlled one might have expected to see a kind of mini DA42 with buttons that replicate those on the mic from Schoeps themselves.

If remote control can be done then perhaps Schoeps might be prevailed upon to make a remote control box?

[Reinout Weebers]

You said that for quiet material the mic had too much headroom and you had to push up the fader thereby bringing up a lot of noise with it. I was merely trying to point out that this will happen, too, if you add the mic's 30dB gain. This is all digital gain and it makes no real difference where you apply this gain.

SRC is the sample rate converter

Hi Constantin, you're absolutely right.

Good point to bring up the +30dB digital zoom function ;-) and its downside.

Indeed we need an SRC as well, thanks.

If I'm correct this conversion is needed when you use the SuperCMIT with an un-locked AES42 source right?

As far as I know the ADC is in the mic. So the digital signal is ready to be received by a recorder or schoeps amp, but if not (word clock) sync this connection has to be re sampled? Or is an SRC always needed?

I never played in mod 2 with a digital mic myself. But I understand that many parameters are remotely adjustable.

One of them should be the Mic gain in the SuperCMIT itself.

Regards Reinout

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Reinout Weebers]

Will you be able to remotely adjust the parameters of a Super CMIT? Or does the mic itself also have to have mod 2 to enable remote control?

Schoeps might be prevailed upon to make a remote control box?

I think all AES42 digital mics have mod 1 and 2. Only certain equipment supports mod 2.

It's software driven as I understand so hardware buttons might be harder to put on a mini DA42 then we can imagine. But it would be a great feature indeed!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[VASI]

I don't think all digital mics support Mode 1 & Mode 2 simultaneously. Maybe I am wrong

[Constantin]

Hi Constantin, you're absolutely right.

Good point to bring up the +30dB digital zoom function ;-) and its downside.

Indeed we need an SRC as well, thanks.

If I'm correct this conversion is needed when you use the SuperCMIT with an un-locked AES42 source right?

As far as I know the ADC is in the mic. So the digital signal is ready to be received by a recorder or schoeps amp, but if not (word clock) sync this connection has to be re sampled? Or is an SRC always needed?

I never played in mod 2 with a digital mic myself. But I understand that many parameters are remotely adjustable.

One of them should be the Mic gain in the SuperCMIT itself.

I agree. Not sure if that's the case though.

With regards to SRC: if you have just one mic into one channel of a recorder it's not a problem. The recorder would have to lock its clock to the AES stream drom the mic. Most recorders are able to do that. Any further digital mic and the recorder needs an SRC to re-sync everything (basically). Unless the recorder supports mode 2 (and the mic, too). In mode 2 the mic can sync to an external clock, whereas in mode 1 it can only do free run. I think because the SuperCMIT outputs two channels and if you connect both of them to your recorder, you'd need src or mode 2. if you use only channel 1, your recorder shozld be able to lock to the mic.

[Constantin]

I think all AES42 digital mics have mod 1 and 2. Only certain equipment supports mod 2.

It's software driven as I understand so hardware buttons might be harder to put on a mini DA42 then we can imagine. But it would be a great feature indeed!

Actually, the remote control commands are transmitted to the mic via a variation of the phantom power. It can modulate up to 2V thereby sending various commands to the mic. So it should be *relatively* simple to build a hardware box for it

[Constantin]

I don't think all digital mics support Mode 1 & Mode 2 simultaneously. Maybe I am wrong

Most mics do supports both modes, afaik. But as I said above, mode 2 is mostly for syncing and less for remote control. So a mic could support mode 2, but it'd still not be remote-controlable

[Armin Siegwarth]

how would you compare the noise floor of the CMIT compared to the super CMIT?

 

 

I did not compare to an CMIT. But the processed vs the unprocessed channel seem about equal in noise floor. The processed one was a bit lower level on ambiences (maybe 2dB) due to reduced hum of the city. From past experience I would guess noisefloor is about the same as CMIT.

 

I did not do more digital gain as 35dB on my 664 because it got too much selfnoise then. Most of the time I was at 29dB IIRC.

 

For very quiet recordings / sounds I would recommend something else than a Schoeps. More like Sennheiser MKH 50 or 70. For speech and outside city ambience/birds its defenitely ok. 

 

  

[RadoStefanov]

thanks for the info.

[Reinout Weebers]

So in mod 2 the mic is able to (word clock) slave to the recorder/amp.

And because I'm using the DA42 (mod 1 amp) for now, the mic is in free run and has to be re sampled by the SRC on the DA42 or my 788T.

Sounds logically, thanks!

Hearing is easy, listening is a craft.