R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules  (Read 29907 times)

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« on: May 20, 2010, 04:51:03 PM »

The timbre of the original Neumann K47 sound is almost there in Ben Sneesby’s new K47-type capsules: good, tight, and balanced bass, a mid range signature closely related to Neumann’s, and no pointedness or breakouts in the high frequencies. With other words, a fairly well-balanced response overall, and clearly more so than with K47/M7 efforts by other independent capsule makers whose products I have tested.

While there is still a small amount of aggressive constriction in the mids, it is clearly not so dominant that it would stick out in an ugly way, as it does with some of the recent K47/M7 capsule types made by MG and Thiersch.

What, then, could still be improved in Ben’s capsules so they could be a ready-to-use, unquestioned, true alternative to Neumann’s K47 for my work (and I would not want to use a comparison to anything but the past and current gold standard in capsules)?

1. A capacity of the transducer to respond to complex, fast, signals with higher speed and without audible mid range smear,
and (maybe related to it?):

2. Adding a slight bit of that narrow, but vitally important, range of high frequencies- that inoffensive, barely noticeable amount of ‘air’ on top of the reedy and timbre-correct mid range of his capsules. Because it is that slight amount of ‘air’ that Neumann capsules have which then seamlessly connects to the mid range, that makes their capsules so smooth overall, despite the robust and prominent low mids.

A bit more about the slight midrange smear or congestion I hear:
I am not a capsule maker, and can only speculate a possible connection between a slowly responding diaphragm that is not quite capable of dissolving incoming highs and mids quickly enough to render that famous, emotionally engaging, three-dimensionality which Neumann’s K47 capsules still possess to this day, and still exclusively. I understand that the variables of diaphragm construction, preparation and mounting are many, and ideal balance points are hard to measure and translate into manufacturing parameters. Yet, the devil hides somewhere in there...

To sum it up: I found the two capsules Ben sent me to have a lot of what makes Neumann’s K47 so appealing; but, as usual, to achieve the final 10% of anything is an unpredictable, hap-hazardous, uphill battle.

Considering how far Ben has come in such a short time, I hope he will go all out in his efforts to conquer the last bit of the performance gap between his and Neumann’s K47.

Additional notes: Ben’s capsules were within the same timbral tolerance, side-to-side- and capsule-to-capsule as Neumann’s. With other words, acceptably close in a professional application.

Minor issue that I think Ben should address: the threads in the backplates are one metric size up from Neumann’s. With other words, if the capsule is to be used in a Neumann product, you should request the correct M-size screws that will work with the oversized threads.

Minor issue I don’t understand: Ben uses super-thick washers under the central lead out screws that are also a bit rough on the surface, with a potential to mar the diaphragm upon contact. Unless there is an acoustic or electric reason for it, I would change them to gold-plated washers of conventional thickness.


Test setup:

Source: my voice, as always.

Neumann-comparison capsules used against Ben’s 2 K47-style capsules:
1961 Brass K47, 1975 ivory plastic K47, NIB 2009 K47 against Ben’s two specimens, yielding four front sides altogether

Method: quickly switching back and forth between two stock KK47 heads (one with the capsule/side under test, the other with the Neumann comparator) on the same U47 (1957 model in perfect functional condition, as if that needed mentioning)

Number of tests: 12

Ben Sneesby’s 2 capsules x 2 sides = 4 front sides
(I only tested cardioid performance)
U47 stock capsules (preselected front sides) = 3


Ben Sneesby responds:

Quote:

Hi Klaus, thanks for the review and critique.  (...)
The only observation I have is that the washers I use for the centre screw
are only rough on top as they are gold plated, and the underside that has
direct contact with the diaphragm is smooth as smooth can be, thus never
causing damage to the diaphragm.(...)

One more thing:
The reason I have chosen to use the m1.4 screw is that the tap to make the
threads is larger, hence less likely to break during manufacture. Also, the
larger screw allows me to tighten each screw to a set torque setting whereas
in the M1- due to its small size, torque setting of the capsule ring is not
possible.


Please feel free to post this on the site, I am happy to get some more
comments and ideas from the members.  I will definitely keep working on
designs and methods to make the perfect capsule.  

Thanks again

Ben Sneesby
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

R-AP.SCI

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2010, 06:54:58 PM »

It was wonderful to read your review of Ben's capsules, as I have ordered capsules from him and found his work to be sonically pleasing.
Logged

seedyunderbelly.com

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2465
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2010, 07:54:22 PM »

Hi Klaus,

Interesting review.

 If I may ask a question,  What are the differences in your specific Ivory and Brass that you tested?  It may seem immaterial but any qualitative answer would be of use even if it is beside the point.  Thanks!  j

And congratulations Ben look forward to hearing them .

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2010, 08:06:05 PM »

If you mean by 'differences' sound impressions, I would say that the spread among all post-brass K47/49 versions (with the exception of the fibreboard version, sell below) are indistinguishable to my ears, if you put aside the always noticeable timbre range between any of the capsules, and from side to side of the same capsule.

With other words, within the tolerance range of all plastic ring K47, I usually don't hear out-of-character samples. However, the brass ring series does sound slightly different: a bit mellower, with a slightly more silky upper high frequency range, a bit woolier bass response, and a slightly less pronounced midrange.

The pronounced mid range of the plastic ring K47 is even more noticeable in the fibre board versions (medium- to-dark brown color with the distinct pattern of fiber board- the first  series after the brass ring version.)  
But that prominence is by no means unpleasant to my ears. If anything, it can give an overly mellow M49 a bit of a kick in the right places, without abandoning the K47/49 family of sounds.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Eric H.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2010, 05:27:55 PM »

2 questions:

*What about Ben's mics?
As anyone have had experience with one of them? They seems to be really well made and very affordable.

*On the Thiersch M7 side, and this is more directed to Klaus, was there any big break lately?

Thanks,


EDIT: By the way , I loved the review, as it shows the level of analysis and understanding of the sound of this device.
Did you know that in the perfume world, they are not allowed to share with the outside world the words used to describe and analyse scents.
Logged
eric harizanos

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2010, 06:01:28 PM »

No noticeable deviations from previous impressions I had and shared of the Thiersch PVC capsules.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

seanBfunky

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2010, 10:38:38 PM »

Klaus,

Ben makes a K47, a K47b, and a K47c.  Which one did you test?

Thanks!

Sean Broderick
Logged

miics

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 69
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #7 on: May 22, 2010, 07:19:23 AM »

Klaus was testing my Latest revision.  i call it the K7.  thanks

Jim Williams

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1105
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #8 on: May 22, 2010, 10:59:53 AM »

To be complete, what is the rest of the signal chain used for auditioning microphones?

Which cables, connectors, mic preamp, monitoring/playback equipment were used and why they were selected? Was the microphone body or electronics used to audition these capsules stock or modified designs?

Are any other sound sources used to audition microphones besides your voice?

In the case of smaller mics not used for vocal reproduction, do you use other sources to test and audition 1/2" mics?
Logged
Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

seanBfunky

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2010, 01:58:53 PM »

Ben,

Will the K7 capsule be offered on your website anytime soon?

Sean B
Logged

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2010, 02:20:58 PM »

Jim,

My chain has remained contant, and in the case of the headphones, life long. I have found over the decades that the consistency, with a modicum of resolution/fidelity, is what counts. I have, on occasion, sampled whole components, electronic components, and/or interconnects in my effort to improve resolution, and have incorporated these components or sub components when I could hear the improvement.

So, all of the components listed below have been, more or less, modified from stock.

In the Sneesby test I used the following:

Headphones: Sennheiser 414 run and wired in mono
Headphone interconnects: back to stock-Sennheiser, after lengthy tests with audiophile substitutes
Mic pre and headphone amp: Nakamichi 610 Control Preamplifier, unbalanced input.
Interconnect beween mic pre and microphone power supply: Gotham GAC3
Mic power supply: stock Neumann NG
Microphone: Neumann U47, long body, 1957, mostly stock, with the exception of Hovland Musicap coupling and filtering capacitors
Sound source: my voice. No reproduced sound sources were used.


As to the "why were they selected"? question: Because I have found over the years a high correlation between that specific listening chain and my ability to make confident decisions in the course of microphone fine tuning. These decisions have been confirmed by many cross-checks in studios, and by the feedback I get from professional clients with ears I trust or respect.
So, while my  listening chain may or may not make sense when used by others, it has served me well in analysing and improving professional recording equipment.

What I am mainly interested in is mid range resolution and fidelity, hence the use of my voice.
I have for a long time now maintained that a microphone which is capable of reproducing the vocal range well will usually succeed in reproducing the upper and  lower end of the audio spectrum well too (see my comments on the Sneesby capsule's mid range response).

I only use my voice, and use it on small diaphragm mics as well. I believe I can translate a mic's response feedback to my voice well into other applications aside of voice, including scoring, orchestra, foley, instruments or ADR.

Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

miics

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 69
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2010, 05:36:08 PM »

seanBfunky wrote on Sun, 23 May 2010 03:58

Ben,

Will the K7 capsule be offered on your website anytime soon?

Sean B


Hi Sean, it is already available, i just haven't got to put it on the site yet.  If you need to alk with me, pm or give me a call.  thanks

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2010, 08:32:23 PM »

As clearly stated in the Ground Rules, please conduct all buying and selling business off this site.

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

MDM,

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2305
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2010, 01:19:09 AM »

Klaus,

I often record both instruments and vocals quite far from the mic, depending on the application, and have found that the 'old school' capsules seem to do this very well.

could you please do a test which evaluates the capsule's response to sources which are more than a metre or two away in comparison to the original K47's please?
Logged
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy .. in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry and music.
John Adams (1735-1826) 2nd President, United States

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Test: Ben Sneesby's K47-Type Capsules
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2010, 02:16:57 AM »

What distance would you like?
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Up