R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Gefell M296 Question  (Read 23964 times)

Schallfeldnebel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 816
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #30 on: April 01, 2007, 03:46:56 am »

Kostas,

where did you get the information about 4 micron and 8 micron thick membranes in the Gefell 296?

The B&K 4145 is about 2 micron thick, and an 8 micropn thick nickel diaphragm to me seems to be rather heavy. Is this information correct?

Schallfeldwebel
Logged
Bill Mueller:"Only very recently, has the availability of cheap consumer based gear popularized the concept of a rank amateur as an audio engineer. Unfortunately, this has also degraded the reputation of the audio engineer to the lowest level in its history. A sad thing indeed for those of us professionals."

ioaudio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #31 on: April 01, 2007, 05:08:09 am »

Logged
-max

mr.gefell

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #32 on: April 01, 2007, 09:40:31 am »


the capsules used in the sms200 series by gefell ( m70,m94 etc) are all 0.8 micron nickel.Which equals to 3 micron mylar diagphram. the nickel type has more more desity.

all measurement capsules ny gefell are 0.4 micron nickel, even the modidied one used in m296.

for more info contact gefell

* A sharing of actual, real world experiences with specific microphone brands and models"


yes the mk102 and m296 sound different. I prefer the mk102.
Logged
Mujtaba Hussain,Oslo Norway

davebl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #33 on: April 01, 2007, 02:02:30 pm »

Thanks, as the 296 is a much newer mic in design, Im informed it is strongly prefered over the older Omni M93/M58 capsues with the MV692 series preamp, I beleive the old omni caps don't have have nickel capsuels.

This next question should really be in another thread I started ealier, So appologies for asking the question here.

I am told, but do not have first hand expirience, that the MV692/70 sounds reasnobly similar to the 295 and like wise the MV692/M94 cardioid mics. Would any one have first hand expirence to coment on the models ?

Again sorry for the question but these are a family of mics which are of interest.

Dave
UK
Logged

Schallfeldnebel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 816
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #34 on: April 01, 2007, 02:27:50 pm »

Mr. Gefell,

where did you get this information? On the site there is only mentioned for the cardioid 294 and 295: Die Wandlerelemente besitzen eine Nickelmembran mit einer Dicke von weniger als 1 Micrometer.

The info over the 296 omni does not say anything about membrane thickness.

I am not so surprised the 294 and 295 have such thin nickel membrane, in a cardioid microphone the membrane tension is much lower than in a omni. What I find hard to believe is that according to you the omni 296 even has half the thickness of the 294/5, and to my opinion the membrane would be near to collapse when the higher tension is applied an omni needs to have to function.

The DPA 4041 has a membrane thickness just under 2 micron, and so about the 4145 from B&K. I simply cannot believe your info is correct, unless Gefell uses much lower tension than B&K does.

Maybe someone from the Gefell factory should jump in here.

Der Schallfeldwebel
Logged
Bill Mueller:"Only very recently, has the availability of cheap consumer based gear popularized the concept of a rank amateur as an audio engineer. Unfortunately, this has also degraded the reputation of the audio engineer to the lowest level in its history. A sad thing indeed for those of us professionals."

mr.gefell

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #35 on: April 01, 2007, 02:34:12 pm »


Greetings Erik,

I got the info from the supreme being.Acronym 786.

Shocked

now let's not get spooky. Razz


contact Frank M
Logged
Mujtaba Hussain,Oslo Norway

Gunnar Hellquist

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 206
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #36 on: April 01, 2007, 04:17:19 pm »

As promised, a recording where the m296 is used as L and R in a Decca tree. C is a MKH20, various mics used other places. Preamps are Millenium HV3D, AD is Lavry Blue. This is no way mixed yet, no time alignment done on tracks, no reverb added, no EQ.

http://trombonisten.se/m/mix.wav
here is only the 296 mics (volume as in mics)
http://trombonisten.se/m/m296.wav

Both files are 15megabytes, uncompressed 16 bit/44.1kHz

A rather bad picture of the setup is here:
http://trombonisten.se/b/IMG_4051.JPG
Also rather large at 4 MegaBytes.

Gunnar
Logged
Gunnar Hellquist
unafiliated

kostavox

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #37 on: April 06, 2007, 08:36:14 am »

I'm not sure yet as I receive them next week...I'll let you know how it goes.

As for the TLM50s, they are normally 48V phantom powered. But since they are quite a complicated circuit, the quality of phantom powering is critical for them to reveal their true potential. They also tend to draw more current.

I have constructed a very simply diecast box with XLR ins/outs and inside I parallel 5 X Duracell 9V batteries which actually give me 48.5V, and llast for at least 5-8 concerts before needing replacement or the addition of another battery.

The sound improvement is HUGE. Same works wonders for other mics.

I explained to a Recording friend that many consoles which use transformer ins, actual defeat the purpose of outstanding CMRR because the earths on both sides of the transformer are shorted to be able to offer a 48V phantom powering.
Logged

bushwick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 624
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #38 on: April 06, 2007, 01:00:18 pm »

It seems to me that Gefell is in a very good place to offer a gift the recording community and make some money at the same time were they to make an Omni head utilizing a perspex sphere ala the M50. They already have the technology down pat for making the diaphragms.

josh
Logged
Joshua Kessler
bushwick  studio
brooklyn, ny
www.bushwickstudio.com

Schallfeldnebel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 816
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #39 on: April 06, 2007, 06:41:48 pm »

Hej Gunnar,

With the example where only the 296's were used, it is obvious the L-R separtion is very strong in the discant. This is off course because you had the microphones directed very much outside, but it is also a characteristic of all large membrane omni directional microphones. It is also the reason I am preferring small diameter capsules as main pair with this kind of orchestra set-ups. The over directionality of LD omni's force you to compensate with a M(iddle) microphone and a lot of spots to correct the stereo image.

And that is what you have done in your final mix, which sounds actually very nice. I must say I like the sound from the 296 as in your example, but I would not use them as main pair for large and complex set-ups, rather more for small and solo set-ups. I do not think either you can see this microphone as a competitor of the M50 or TLM50 from Neumann. The perspex sphere of the M50 creates a much more stable stereo image, without pulling the high midrange to the Left and Right outer sides of the stereo image.



Logged
Bill Mueller:"Only very recently, has the availability of cheap consumer based gear popularized the concept of a rank amateur as an audio engineer. Unfortunately, this has also degraded the reputation of the audio engineer to the lowest level in its history. A sad thing indeed for those of us professionals."

davebl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2007, 04:01:05 am »

I can see Eriks view but still think the M296 is a usefull mic. I had heard these samples of the smaller MK221 capsuel on a Josephson body.

http://www.mil-media.com/media/Amen.wav
http://www.mil-media.com/media/Glory.wav
http://www.mil-media.com/media/Goodwill.wav

Credits are on the milennia site for the performance and recordist. One reviewer suggests the mics are too close and should have more room on the recording, I still think its a great recording and I like the closer perspective.

It seem the 296 can be 'steered' over the top or to the sides of the orchestra/choir or whatever due to its HF directionality where as the MK221 could not. How usefull is this charicteristic rather than adopting Josh's great idea of Gefell producing a sphere ? I would like to see a product of this type.

Do I detect from more expirienced users a preference for the smaller MK221 capsuel types over the larger 102 or 296 mics ? Also Is there any other option of preamplifier other than the Josephson C617 for these measurment capsuels ?

Dave Blackham
UK
Logged

liuto

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #41 on: April 07, 2007, 07:39:58 am »

kostavox wrote on Fri, 06 April 2007 14:36


I have constructed a very simply diecast box with XLR ins/outs and inside I parallel 5 X Duracell 9V batteries which actually give me 48.5V, and llast for at least 5-8 concerts before needing replacement or the addition of another battery.



kostavox, how did you decouple 48VDC from the signal?
Thanks
Hermann Platzer
Logged

liuto

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #42 on: April 07, 2007, 07:41:11 am »

sorry, double post, please delete.
Logged

Markus Sauschlager

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
Battery powering the TLM50
« Reply #43 on: April 07, 2007, 10:23:00 am »

Hello Kostas,

kostavox wrote on Fri, 06 April 2007 14:36


The sound improvement is HUGE. Same works wonders for other mics.




Could you please describe that a bit?
What is the difference in sound and in which way is it improved by battery powering?

Best regards,

Markus

Logged
Markus Sauschlager

- Schauma amal, dann werma schon sehen... -

"...and do not forget that marketing is b.s. with a sugar coating." - O. Archut, 06 March 2009

davebl

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 122
Re: Gefell M296 Question
« Reply #44 on: April 07, 2007, 01:35:10 pm »

Would any one know the diference between a Microtech Gefell MK102 and MK102.1 capsule and if it is significant for our type of music work.

Thanks,

Dave
UK
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up