Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[pickngrin]

Hello all,

Do mostly to budget and inexperience I have been using a TLM-103 for my vox in my home studio.

I recently rented U-87 just to try something different, I really like what it did to my voice in omni mode.

It actually put the vocal in a different place in the mix, more focused, more forward, for the first time I could hear a real difference while changing the reverb diffusion.(somewhat more difficult with the tlm-103)

I have not been able to replicate this with the 103. My question is this to those with experience with the U-87 or other omnis,

Is the difference I heard between these to mics because of omni, or more because of the u-87 itself.

Would I be likely to get the same result with say a shure ksm-44 in omni? (again mostly budget) what other mics could you recommend to me that have the same forward, focused result I heard with the u-87 in omni.

The tlm-103 while fine for somethings seems to be more blurred for my voice.

thanks for any suggestions

todd

[Harland]

Have you been taking proximity effect into account in your evaluations?
Harland

[Fibes]

pickngrin wrote on Thu, 22 June 2006 20:44

Is the difference I heard between these to mics because of omni, or more because of the u-87 itself.

Both.

That said, sometimes Omni can be just the ticket for vocals but other times it just sucks.

Taking some time to shoot out some mics and patterns is always a good thing unless it's done right before the vocal session (which can kill the vibe.) Usually i try a few mics during the scratch takes if money is a concern.

Signed,

A self proclaimed pattern whore.

[Malcolm Boyce]

I thought multi-pattern omnis still exhibited proximity effect.  Isn't that just limited to true single diaphragm omnis?

[Harland]

There's no appreciable proximity effect on a
multi pattern mic in omni. What do you mean
"true single diaphragm omnis"?
Harland

[Gunnar Hellquist]

Maybe I could fill in here.

Switchable large condensor mics are generally made according to the old Neumann formula. They are made up of two diaphragms, one pointing forward and one backward. Between is an acoustical maze (a number of holes in the backplates).

The effect is that each diaphragm works as a cardioid mic. So if you take the signal from only the front you get a cardioid. Same for the back but now it points backward. If subtract the two signals you get a figure 8, if you add them you get an omni.

A true pressure omni has a single diaphragm in front of a closed cavity. There is no sound coming in trough the back. (There needs to be a very small vent). There are very few large diameter "true" omnis. One reason for this is that the smaller the mic is, the less it is going to "shadow" the sound and the more omni the pattern is. Even the best of omnis has a directionality in high frequencys.

In theory a switchable LDC in omni setting should be the same as a "true" SDC omni. In reality there is a difference. The SDC is more truely omni as the frequency plot shows. It generally also goes deeper in the bass frequencys.

Some examples of "true" omnis:
- several Earthworks mic, eg QTC30
- several DPA mics, eg 4006
- Neumann KM183, KM120, KM150 and the famous M50
- Sennheiser MKH20
- Schoeps MK2 capsules
- Microtech Gefell M296
- the omni capsule of Octava MK012
- the omni capsule in Studio Projects C4
- and so on, there are quite a few

Hope this helped in answering the question.

Gunnar

[Harland]

Helpful and illuminating, thanks!!
Harland

[davebl]

Is there a perceived 'large' sonic deference between an MKH20 and Schoeps mk2/2h.

The use would be for accoustiv music work ie spaces pairs or tree.

I have cardiod versions of both mics but no omnis for comparision.

thanks,

Dave
UK