Hello,
I am in the process of putting together a compact, mid-side rig for gathering nature sfx in fairly remote locations. Since a great deal of what I'm recording is fairly subtle, high-sensitivity and low noise is a big consideration. I love my MKH20/30/40, but I don't believe I can make them fit in one of the extended ball gag rycotes. When hiking all over the place toting gear, every bit of added weight/bulk starts to make a difference at my age

Schoeps as an alternative to MKH?

I've never used Schoeps mics in the past, but their compact mid-side setup seems like the perfect form factor. My concern of course is the noise-level of the Schoeps. Are they comparable to the Sennheiser MKH40/30?

BTW, I'll be recording with an Aerco MP-2 and Korg MR-1 or Sound Devices 702.

Schoeps rig I'm considering

Schoeps CCM4 Lg Cardioid
Schoeps CCM8 Lg Figure 8
Schoeps WSR MS LU (mount, windscreen)

I would love to hear opinions from folks using this setup in particular.

Thanks!

What's your timeframe? If you can wait until this fall, the MKH-8030 comes out and I would think an 8030/8040 pair would be your winner...?

As you may have already read, the 8000 series are widely reported to if anything equal or improve on the sound (character, clarity, etc.) of their predecessors, and I can tell you, they are so small you have to see one to believe it. Think, a AA maglite cut to be half as long.

I am about to begin testing an MS rig based on a 8040 center channel and an MKH-800 as the figure-8; the 8040 is so small it makes the 800 look like whale. I'm using the 800 while I wait for the 8030, which someone on the Taperssection forums was expected this fall... along with a shotgun capsule version... 8060 I would hazard...

In this setup the 8040 is so small I had to add a barrel extender just to mount the thing in a Windpac. When I get the rycote stereo clips I ordered I'm going to try piggybacking the 8040 on the 800 in a mono zeppelin. As I know someone who crammed a 30/40 pair in one, I am quite confident this will work...

When the active cables come out you will be able to get the windscreen down even smaller... even without I'm thinking double-MS surround inside a mono zeppelin should be doable with room to spare. :D

Now, if SD will just come out with a 744 with four pres...!

best, aaron

I agree with Aaron.

My current rig is the MKH 30/40 and I'm just about to get the matched stereo sets of the MKH 8020 and 8040 - I wll add the MKH 8030 as soon as it's available.

The Sennheiser is (will be) a truly symmetrical fig-8, with identical patterns front and rear.

The Schoeps is not truly symmetrical and the rear lobe is slightly different from the front lobe.

The Neumann AK20 mini head is also symmetrical - so if you can't wait I would go for the Neumann KM 100 series over the Schoeps.

But, personally, I will wait for the MKH 8030 - the MKH series are all RF condenser mics and will work happily in damp conditions that other mics ar unhappy with (ie: noise and crackling).

If you go for the 8040 stereo set, it should fit in the Rycote stereo ball gag as an XY pair - then when the 8030 comes out, you reconfigure the Rycote for the MS rig. - For info. the 8000 series extension cables are stereo enabled, so you can run both capsules down the one cable.

MS for on location (outdoor rigs) are not usually the best as they suffer a lot more from wind noise. The Schoeps are fantastic mic's, however, be aware that there is a significant bass roll off on the fig 8 mic from about 200 hz.

Regards


Roland

This is because the fig.8 is open on both sides of the diaphragm.

But in a decent Rycote with Windjammer, not a real problem.

I have certainly not suffered using my MKH 30/40 rig.




This is to minimise wind noise. Also, the rear lobe is different from the front at high frequencies as is shown on the polar pattern on the Schoeps website.

The cardioid head also rolls the bass off a bit early as well - a friend started using the Schoeps omni and fig-8 together to get a cardioid pattern with the bass end he wanted.

Awesome info, everyone. I really appreciate it.
I am really happy to hear that an MKH8030 is on the way. I'm getting ready to purchase 8040/8020 pairs as well, so I may just record XY until the 8030 is released. I've had such great luck with my mkh20/30/40/416's that this seems like a logical move.

On the subject of the Sound Devices 744 not having 4 pre-amps...I hear you, that's been an issue for me as well. That very issue has me considering purchasing two of the 702's instead and using the link cable to sync them up. Monitoring wouldn't be as sophisticated, but I suppose I could rig a headphone switch to toggle between both decks.

This is exactly what I am doing.




This is why I am waiting for the new Nagra VI - this has 6 tracks and 4 mic. pres. - first units due next month.

Here we go again John

Oddly enough the Schoeps don't usually suffer in Rycotes either. OK, if the weather is really, really wet to the point of soaking through the Rycote, or it's exceptionally hot and humid then the Sennheiser's RF biasing will be an advantage but most of the time there won't be a difference. And if the Schoeps are so unworkable, why are they so heavily used in the very application you describe when the Sennheiser alternative has been available for so long? Could it be that they work and their users like the sound more than the Sennheiser. I doubt it's on price.

This is the first time I've heard of the rolled off LF response of the Schoeps fig-8 being there to counteract wind noise. Where did that come from?

Yes, the Schoeps fig-8 response is different front and back but in hundreds of recordings using it I've never found it to be a problem.

And I've no idea why you still tell the story about someone using the Schoeps omni and fig-8 combination to get a cardioid with extended LF. The way I read that, the implication is that he so much prefers his Schoeps over others like...er... Sennheiser that he'd prefer go to the hassle and compromise of combining two Schoeps rather than using one Sennheiser


And on the subject of compactness, there's only a few mm in it between MKH8000, KM100 and Schoeps capsule plus remote cable equivalents. With Schoeps you're buying into the largest modular mic system (by far) in the world; Neumann's KM100 system is also fairly comprehensive; the MKH8000 looks good on paper but has some catching up to do. Three capsules and no preamp options on the MKH8000 vs. seven KM100 series capsules with two body options vs. twenty Schoeps capsules with six basic body options (plus variants). Schoeps also do dual (stereo) cables and there are Schoeps, and third party, preamps available which permit direct termination of remote cabled capsules without needing the mic body. Or one could opt for the CCM Compact range (which is closer in ethos to the MKH8000, being non modular complete mics with a range of output connector options and add ons. An important difference being that the majority of Schoeps accessories work with both the CCM and remote cabled modular mics rather than being limited to one or the other.


At the moment, the only way I see to sell the MKH8000 is on its sound, which is supposed to be rather good, and the promise that the system will grow along the lines advertised. It can't (yet) compete on it's 'system' completeness and it'll be a while before it can approach that of either Neumann or Schoeps. Or even DPA (though their 'compact' range is a bit short of capsule options with only omni, subcardioid and cardioid, albeit with variants on each). So in the short to medium term, I'd say that the MKH8000s are to be bought for sound rather than versatility. Fingers crossed for the future. I'll be happy to see something that can really compete with Schoeps as a modular system mic but it's not looking like it'll happen imminently.

The Nagra VI looks nice.

ALL single diaphragm condenser Fig. 8 capsules will exhibit frequency differences between the front and rear lobes. The Neumann KK-20 manual does not publish anything but the 1kHz response, but the laws of physics can't be broken. If you want a Fig. 8 condenser microphone, you need to have a backplate and with it a change in rear lobe HF sensitivity. The only way to get around this is to use a 2 diaphragm system, which introduces time/phase differences and their attendant resonances. No free lunch here unless you want to go back to a Ribbon.


Just to clarify Roland's point, All Fig. 8 microphones exhibit the LF rolloff present in the Schoeps drawing. Once again, the laws of physics can't be broken. The flat response achieved by the Sennheiser Fig. 8 microphones is via electronic equalization in the preamp.

All the best,
Mark

Ive never heard of that
examples please

Neumann KM-120, Schoeps MK8.
And to be clear about the Sennheiser MKH-30, it uses an RF capsule with 2 plates and the diaphragm in between them. This means that to gain it's symmetry, it has the same problem as the back of the Neumann and Schoeps Fig. 8 capsule, but on both lobes.
Now, don't get me wrong, the Sennheiser is a fine microphone, just not my first choice.
All the best,
mark

Not true - this is true *only* if the acoustic conditions are different front and back.

Both the Sennheiser MKH 30 and the Neumann AK20 have a front plate as well as a back plate making the acoustic conditions identical front and rear making a totally symmetrical polar pattern.

In the case of the Sennheiser the front plate is active, in the case of the Neumann it's passive and for acoustic properties only.



They have all frequencies on the website HERE.

Click on the magnifying glass and it should display the KM120 response (if not, click on KM120). Then click on the frequencies in turn from 125Hz to 16kHz and you can see the polar pattern at each frequency - this can be done on the Neumann website for all Neumann microphones.



You have assumed that all single diaphragm fig-8 mics have an open diaphragm and a backplate - the Sennheiser and Neumann both have a front plate making the acoustic conditions front and back identical to make a truly symmetrical polar pattern. No, you can't change the laws of physics, but you *can* use the laws of physics. The MKH 30 (and new MKH 8030 when it comes) and the Neumann KM120 are the only fig-8 mics that I know of on the market that are single diaphragm and truly symmetrical.




This is true.

The Schoeps do work OK, but have to be clean, so they have to go back to Schoeps every now and again for cleaning to keep them good.

I won't comment on the sound - Schoeps are excellent mics and I have never said otherwise, just pointed out certain things now and again

But I think one of the reasons Schoeps have been popular is the small size and modularity and there has *never* been a Sennheiser alternative at all until the launch of MKH 8000. The problem with RF mics is that the capsule has to be matched to the electronics, so you cannot have remote capsules and separate electronics - with the MKH 8000 everything is in the mic. head - the XLR is just an XLR with no electronics at all. But the 5-pin should be coming along some time and the AES42 module quite soon.

The only ones I know of are the Schoeps, Sennheiser and Neumann ones already mentioned.

The Neumann also has a front plate.

The advantage of the front plate means a symmetrical polar pattern which is important when you consider MS operation - not so important if used in other ways.

But - we are talking about excellent mics here (the differences between Audi, BMW and Mercs) - all three mics have been designed by excellent engineers who know and respect each other and all come from slightly different directions in their design of mics.

Some prefer one some prefer the other - it's a matter of personal choice to choose the mic you want for the job you do - here, we are discussing the technical differences.

The final choice will be the one that does the job you want it to do for you.

So... with all this said, for location sounds and fx recording with an m/s array, which would do a better job... the sennheiser 8030/8040 series or schoeps ...,Which sound better .... gotta say, the schoeps are much more $$$ but have the ability to switch the capsules....

Also... Shoeps specs show schoeps as a tiny bit nosier.....

Thanks

also...i just called sennheiser to see when the 8030 fig 8 mic will be released, and they said there is no plans for one..

they said that one isn't even in development.....

Where did you guys hear of an mkh 8030 coming in fall?????

I will refrain from giving an opinion to sound as people will say I'm biased - but I *do* like the MKH and have 10 so far with another 4 coming soon.

Both are excellent - it's a bit like the difference between BMW and Mercedes.

The MKH 8000 series also have the ability to switch heads, though.

But if you want MS now you would need an MKH 30 as the fig-8.


This is not quite true.

The MKH 8030 fig-8 *is* definitely planned, but there is no release date yet.

At the AES next week I will be pressing for the 8030 to be put top priority and as soon as possible.

I think that in this specific thread it should be pointed out that John Wilett is, or at least was, employed by Sennheiser. I do respect John-s opinion as his owns and built on his personal experience, but the thread so far has taken a turn more or less sounding like a sales broschure. Personally I think it very premature to talk about the sound of the not-even-press-released 8030. Sorry.

Personally I run a MKH30/40 pair in a stereo Rycote for outdoor recordings into a Sound Devices 722. This combination has never let me down, but I agree that it can be a bit on the bulky side but that has not been a problem for me. There is an advantage of having a bit larger "blimp" in that, and this i my guess only, it will give a bit more wind protection.

One alternative "blimp" to look at might be the one made by DPA. I have never used one but if I understand correctly it folds together when not in use.

For really tiny MS stereo setups with top quality mic, currently I know only of the Schoeps compacts as a solution. The Neumann combination is not very much smaller in real world application compared to the MKH30/40.

Thinking out of the box, you might want to look into stereo mics, although the good ones are rather far between. The typical ones, are not quite up to it but there are things like the Roede NT4, quite useful despite the low price. You might like the Sennheiser 418S (really made for other things, but you never really know until tested).

And why not the Neumann usm69 - a bit on the heavy and expensive side perhaps.
Georg Neumann GmbH - Products/Current Microphones//

There used to be a few from AKG (discontinued I believe).

There is also yet another alternative in the Soundfield mic that gives a full surround recording if you run it into a SD 744..
SoundField: ST350 Microphone System

Regardless, happy hunting for the sound you look for.

Gunnar Hellquist

thanks for the advice.

With that said, have you had an opportunity to A/B your MKH30/40 MS array next to the schoeps CMC6 - MS array?

Ive heard that for general field MS recording especially nature and ambient (high gain) the schoeps can't be beat sound quality wise....

The only thing I noticed when comparing these to the sennheisers is the fact that the schoeps have a bit more self noise...is it enough more to be a concern...Are the schoeps really that much better....

Agreed - If I had any news I would say - I don't know who started the Autumn (Fall) thing. I'm pushing for it, but no news.


Agreed, same as me, but I use a FR-2 at the moment (Nagra coming soon I hope).


Yes, it's quite good, but the Rycote is slightly better I think.


Actually the Neumann is about the same size as the Schoeps when the heads are used with the remote cables and fits in the same Rycote Ball Gag that is used for the Schoeps. And the Neumann fig-8 is the same polar pattern both sides.

heh For *field* recording hehhehheh

The Schoeps are definitely *not* better - about the same in terms of quality, maybe,but different.

The Sennheiser are quieter and are bullet proof in damp and wet conditions, have lower distortion and the fig-8 is truly symmetrical. ANd RM mics don't attract dust to the diaphragm like AF condensers do.

I will not comment on the sound quality between the two, that is personal, and I'm not setting myself to be knocked down as to bias - I try to be objective and honest. But I have invested my own cash in about 10 MKH mics so far with another 4 shortly.

The Schoeps are not bad for AF condensers outdoors, but do have to go back to Schoeps now and again for cleaning if they are to stay like this.

Well, it seems like a no brainer , but what im really looking for is a comparison of the sound.... Can anyone comment schoeps cmc6 m/s vs sennheiser MKH m/s

It all boils down to the sound for me, considering both mike are excellent performers in the field

Price size and personnel preference. I have also used both, I own MKH40's and 30's & have good access to Schoeps. For the kind of recording I do (location classical) I prefer the 40/30, however if I was forced the to use the Schoeps I wouldn't be too unhappy.

The Sennheiser's have the advantage of the MKH30 which (depending on your point of view) is probably the best fig of 8 condensor out there. Equalized or not, it's flat 40 - 20khz with a near ideal polar response.

For in the field recording of sound effects both are more than up to the job, personally I would consider using omni's and not MS at all, but that's for you to decide.

Regards


Roland

There seems to be quite a bit of misinformation being bandied about almost every line of mic by Mr. John. Why?

According to Schoeps, the frequency response of the 8 capsule is as it is so that the pattern remains consistent within those ranges. If someone wants more lower end from the Schoeps 8, they could equalize it too if needed and/or wanted.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with minimizing noise, etc.

I'm not sure where that came from either.

So that there is some perspective, this is the "natural" form of a SD figure 8 capsule. The MKH30's response is more extended because it employs electronic equalization as an integral part of the design.

John, we like your expertise with the Sennheiser line, but a great deal of what you say about other makes of mic's is just plain inaccurate.

Sorry.

According to you only, and you are clearly unanimous in that.

I like the MKH line, John, but I like my pair of Schoeps, too, and there are many who prefer other mic's over the Sennheisers-for reasons which I easily understand.

Another "difference" you've neglected to mention is the (lack of) pattern integrity of the 8040 compared with the Schoeps. There is no comparison here.

John, why keep spreading these untruths about other mic's? There are plenty of AF mic's where the diaphragm is at neutral polarity.

You will have to revise your noise comparisons as well. The MKH 20 is a very quiet mic, in general, omnis generally have better noise figures. The MKH40, 30, and others are not as quiet. The new Sennheiser range (8000) is slightly noisier, and has a slightly lower output level. That, combined with a seemingly not very thorough knowledge of other product lines leaves you on thin ice, I'm afraid. This leaves aside the whole methodology of measuring noise. Even looking at mic's from Shure-not to mention Neumann-one finds AF mic's with much lower figures than the Sennheisers.

I believe you completely, but I think you should make clear your long association with Sennheiser.

Ridiculous, John. This depends on a multitude of variables. Other mics go back to their makers as well. But then it makes no difference if the user prefers a different mic anyway. OTH, there are plenty of AF mic's that are bullet proof, in terms of humidity. I've a pair of 414 B/ULS that have been used in very, very high humidity environments without a trace of noise. And these are now very old. And they've never gone back to anyone.

John, you are an invaluable source for the history and the MKH range. And I've learned a great deal from you-and I continue to do so. But I take exception to you putting down other ranges of mic's, especially, on occasion, when you are just plain wrong about the mic's you are criticizing.

Why not stay with talking up the Sennheisers without putting the others down? I like the MKH series a great deal, especially after having gotten more of them (!), but I just don't think they should be held as the be all and end all of microphone technology.

The original poster did specifically ask about Schoeps compact. In total answer to his question, yes they would be great for his application, as long as he is aware of the bass roll off issue (shouldn't be a problem for his application) and he has considered that MS rigs are more subsceptable to wind noise than say an omni set-up, however this shouldn't be a problem in a full rycote.

In fairness to John:

The MKH range is quieter than virtually any other mic available due to RF capsule/preamp design.

The response, however achieved, for the MKH 30 is pretty much text book, making it a near ideal side mic in a MS set-up. (however the original poster states that he owns one and wants something more compact for this application).

Soundwise they are comperable and I think John did say this, however, he then went on to say he'd personally bought the MKH, (perhaps he should have at this point explained his connection with Sennheiser. Own money or not, his Sennheisers, I am sure, are obtained at a very favourable rate).

Outside of the above, there are issues with almost all microphones when it comes to hostile (damp, humid) environments. I have heard of very rare issues concerning Schoeps, but never come across these with the MKH range from Sennheiser (YMMV). Perhaps it's a little too early to know if the 8000 range will be totally trouble free, hopefully yes.

Regards


Roland

I take exception to this - I have never spread any untruth about any mic.

Anything I say about mics comes from my own knowledge, by reading the published specs on microphones and by conversations I have had with microphone designers - yes, I know and talk to microphone designers of several comnpanies and have had several conversations with Joerg Wuttke of Schoeps. And the bit about mics going back to Schoeps for cleaning now and again if they were used outdoors came directly from a conversation I had with Joerg in england at a broadcasting weekend conference a few years ago.

I only say what I do to bring clarity, that's all. Unfortunately some people seem to misunderstand what I say sometimes.

Just to add a grain of salt here... The noise specs of e.g. AKG (CK 6x) and Neumann (KM 100/KM18x) capsules don't quite support this generalized statement. As for Schoeps, the difference is about 3 dB comparing MK2 (flat) and MK4. MK2S or MK3 have higher noise figures, just a dB below the MK4.
By two (MKH 40/50) or three (30) dB. They are still quieter than many other capsules.
The self noise figure for the omnis is identical, and the 8020 is in fact more sensitive than the MKH 20 (31 vs. 25 mV/Pa). As for e.g. the cardioids, the differences are very small (12 vs. 13 dB and 25 vs. 20 mV in favour of the old MKH 40). Nothing really significant, I'd say.

Daniel

The 800 makes for fantastic side mic. It is unusually sensitive to wind though, and can become temporarily disfunctional due to high humidity.