R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Schoeps MK26 Capsule  (Read 7564 times)

seanmccoy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« on: February 23, 2010, 12:39:44 AM »

Hey all, first post here! I'm looking at picking up an M221B with a MK26 capsule, but I've been able to get very little information on where this capsule sits in the Schoeps hierarchy. I have seen a couple mentions of potential maintenance issues with it, though. Would this capsule be suitable for acoustic instrument close-miking, and if it develops a problem, am I hosed? Thanks for any insight.
Logged

bodtbody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2010, 03:27:44 AM »

I sometimes use mk26 capsules on M221 , nice capsules for acoustic instruments, no problem.

I was told that Schoeps not was able to fix the ring for shift between figure of eigth, omni and cardioid, but Schoeps can repair this and did this on two of my microphones in 2008.
But I would ask Schoeps about maintenance, and what they can do.
I have 4 of these capsules i use for 15 years width no problems but !

Similar schoeps capsules in a  CMTS 501 microphone cannot be fixed.
I have 3 of them , so its sad.

quote:
CMTS 501.
Unfortunately, both (!) capsules must be given up. They work in an indefinite "ike-eight" figure only, at quite low output. The failure roots in the highly delicate valve systems and cannot be fixed.

But wery nice microphone, the 221 , i use them a lot.
Microphones width smaller membranes I use is , 221, B&K 4006 and Neumann KM56
Logged
venlig hilsen JP

seanmccoy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2010, 01:50:28 PM »

Thanks for the info! I've sent a message off to Schoeps to see what their official position is on MK26 repairs.
Logged

David Satz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 661
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #3 on: February 24, 2010, 01:10:48 AM »

There were two types of MK 26 capsules for the M 221 B series. The earlier type used a "push-pull" transducer with two electrically active backplates. That capsule type can flatly no longer be maintained any more at all by the factory.

Whether an individual MK 26 capsule of the second (and more common) type can be repaired or not depends on exactly what is wrong with it. Unfortunately, that isn't knowable until the capsule is disassembled and inspected at the factory. Since some essential parts aren't available at all any more, it can even happen that a capsule will reveal a certain defect which cannot be repaired, which also prevents the capsule from being reassembled as a usable capsule any more at all (e.g. if certain internal parts are cracked, and they crumble when the capsule is opened). Therefore Schoeps has a form that they send out, in which they clearly state that while most microphones can be serviced or at least restored to some level of functioning, a total loss is also possible.

I personally would avoid the MK 26 capsule because sooner or later, it will almost certainly become unrepairable if it is not already. Along the way it may lose the ability to be set to any other pattern than figure-8 (the knob will turn and the mechanism will go clickety-click, but the cardioid or omni patterns aren't produced, or aren't produced correctly). Also, the frequency response of the MK 26 in the cardioid or omni setting was never as broad or smooth as the single-pattern or two-pattern capsules. However, its figure-8 setting did match the (rare, single-pattern figure-8) MK 28 capsule.

Let me just say that I am quite surprised to hear that a CMTS 501 stereo microphone (which is from a considerably more recent series) should be unable to be repaired. I have one of those myself, which was overhauled about two years ago, and as far as I'm aware, the capsules on which it is based (a specially adapted version of the CMT-series MK 6--which I also have a pair of, and which were also rebuilt at the factory just a few years ago) are all basically capable of being restored to a very high standard. That doesn't mean that every repair is necessarily practical economically (e.g. if the microphone is run over by a truck or is immersed in salt water for a long time). But for the more or less normal range of repairs and maintenance, I understand the CMTS 301/501 and the CMT 30/40/50 series overall to be on the list of models that they can normally restore to original specifications or better.

--best regards
Logged

Barry Hufker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8228
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #4 on: February 24, 2010, 02:14:34 AM »

My 501 capsules/shutters were fully restored by Schoeps a few years ago and at a very reasonable cost.


Barry

Logged

seanmccoy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #5 on: February 24, 2010, 04:29:21 PM »

Thanks for the detailed information, David.

Mr. Vollmer at Schoeps confirmed your assessment in that they couldn't guarantee being able to repair an MK26. This particular MK26 was recently serviced and given a clean bill of health by John Peluso.

Although I am concerned that this combination might not yield the most "magical" M221B sound. (...)  Would you recommend holding out for a 221/934 combo, or maybe even opting for a Collette series mic?
Logged

David Satz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 661
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #6 on: February 24, 2010, 05:54:25 PM »

For anyone other than Schoeps to repair a Schoeps capsule strikes me as a very poor idea. It's not a question of Mr. Peluso's general competence but of what he does or doesn't know about how the capsule is designed to work, and the specialized jigs and tools and measurement procedures that apply to each particular type of capsule. Sometimes the special tools cost thousands of dollars to develop for just one capsule type, and Schoeps sells 20+ capsule types currently, while cumulatively, the number would be closer to 50. No one but the manufacturer would reasonably choose to invest that much, nor would anyone but the manufacturer know how to make the tools. So I think we can safely conclude that no one else is using the proper equipment for those capsule repairs, no matter who they are.

Just as a side note, I still have a frantic email message that I got once from a microphone repair technician with an international reputation, who had accepted a switchable-pattern Schoeps capsule for repair and only realized when he took the cover off that Schoeps capsules switch their patterns mechanically rather than electrically. That was a rather extreme situation; the person really should have known that reasonably well-known fact before accepting the item for repair. But there also are secrets of assembly (e.g. how to align certain parts and optimize certain settings) which are not shared outside the company, and cannot very likely be guessed at accurately. That's part of how some manufacturers prevent their products from being reverse engineered and copied by others.

--I don't usually give advice about microphones that I think other people should buy, since I make recordings my way and you make them your way, and I listen my way and you listen your way. Plus I've been at this long enough to have gone through several changes of opinion on rather basic issues. What I can tell you is that the M 934 capsule was manufactured in a few different versions, and that to my way of thinking, the "C" version is the most satisfactory version technically, with the most extended and smoothest frequency response. But I sold my M 221 B microphones some time ago, and in general I'm ambivalent at best about "vintage" microphones as practical, working tools.

I do know that most (though certainly not all) people who directly compare the M 221 B with the M 222 tend to prefer the M 222, but I haven't made that comparison myself so I can't comment on it directly.

--best regards
Logged

bodtbody

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #7 on: February 26, 2010, 08:08:06 AM »

The message I got  from Schoeps, was that it was not possible to repair the mechanical acoustic system used in connection with Figure 8 in a 501
I also asked why Schoeps could not repair it, and I was told that it was because the microphones were over 20 years old.
I have no complaints about Schoeps their service is fine and their prices are reasonable.
All my Schoeps microphones have been serviced at Schoeps to my satisfaction.
And I respect that a company can not always repair very old microphones.
(This was in 1995. And i my case it was not possible.)


My coment was to draw attention to the mecanical aspekt of the mk26 capsule.
And advice to ask Schoeps
Logged
venlig hilsen JP

Rich Mays

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 134
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #8 on: July 06, 2010, 03:08:17 AM »

David Satz wrote on Wed, 24 February 2010 17:54

I do know that most (though certainly not all) people who directly compare the M 221 B with the M 222 tend to prefer the M 222, but I haven't made that comparison myself so I can't comment on it directly.


As a former owner of a pair of M 222 I find this interesting. My experience was that the 222 differed so little from the CMC6 that I decided to sell them and buy several mics in their place. I had the 222 with the AC701. I could only discern the slightest difference and only in a direct A-B comparison.

Fast forward a few years and I was using a a pair of a friend's M221B/934c.  WOW-- so THAT'S what all the fuss is about! Effervescent, alive, 3-dimensional-- it was a semi-religious experience. OK, maybe not QUITE that over the top-- but they sure made an impression. Which makes me wonder what percentage of the sound the 934 and transformer accounts for?

Rich
Logged
Sonare Recordings
www.sonarerecordings.com

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #9 on: July 06, 2010, 02:16:48 PM »

So what is the current word on Schoeps's willingness and ability (not to mention price) to repair defective MK26 (mechanically defective, that is, not with a defective membrane)?

I have a few of those beasts in my basement, and am not quite ready to toss them.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

David Satz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 661
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #10 on: July 06, 2010, 08:57:34 PM »

Klaus, it all depends on which type of MK 26 a capsule is (the earliest type generally cannot be repaired at all) and on exactly what is wrong with it, which they can't diagnose remotely; practically speaking, you would have to send them the capsule(s).

Truth is, there's a substantial chance that even an MK 26 of the later type might not be able to be restored to full, three-pattern functioning, though it might be possible to turn it into a single-pattern figure-8 capsule (which anyway is the only pattern offered by that capsule that isn't outperformed by some other capsule for the same microphone series, such as the M 934 B or M 934 C).

--best regards
Logged

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #11 on: July 06, 2010, 09:00:36 PM »

Thanks, David.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

David Satz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 661
Re: Schoeps MK26 Capsule
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2010, 09:20:40 PM »

Rich, agreed: The M 222 amplifier is very clean and sounds just like the solid-state CMC series amplifiers except at the upper limit of its dynamic range. That's why the power supplies for the M 222 have the control that adds "tube sound" in careful increments--because otherwise there isn't enough of a sonic difference for the tube amplifier to have any real reason for existing.

The main sonic difference between the M 221 B microphones and modern Schoeps microphones is due to their different capsules. This can be confirmed by using the AMC 3 adapter which allows modern Colette-series capsules to run on M 221 B amplifiers. If there could be an inverse adapter to allow the old capsules to work with CMC-series amplifiers, that might be the ideal combination for your tastes, from what I gather.

Sonically I think that Schoeps' output transformers for this series (and the later, solid-state CMT 50 series) are very close to being neutral until the point of saturation is approached; I don't think that they influence the sound of the microphone very much except by not influencing it, so to speak. J
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 21 queries.