Quantcast
Beyer MC930 vs. JZ BT-201 vs. Schoeps MK21 on acoustic guitar - Page 3 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Beyer MC930 vs. JZ BT-201 vs. Schoeps MK21 on acoustic guitar
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #61
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Fred ... there is nothing persomnal ))....I am a guitar user ))
https://gearspace.com/board/remote-p...g-pc-card.html

I used search at this forum and found simply then this recording is good for me for a guitar
Advice on my practice/recording room for classical guitar

ISedlacek made some strange recording that does not sound like guitar for me ... first i think it is another instrument... of course i am new in sound recording and i am not able oto record the guitar best at the moment but maybe ISedlacek recordered his tests in a wooden box or something like that i do not know ... Simply ... I do not know ...maybe it is room space or preamp ... but not mics.....I anm not about mics or preanmps ... i am about sound ...and I supposed that the test a little incorrect to compare MICS with it....may be it is preamp or room space give so much influence
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #62
Gear Nut
 
🎧 10 years
That's exactly my point. You can't tell how preamp sounds, if you don't know:
- the room
- the instrument
- the player
- how that particular mic sounds on this particular instrument (mind you, NOT model, mic itself)
- the rest of the tract after the mic pre...

And I don't understand what can you hear in mp3 examples at all.
Try to listen some of the LA Guitar Quartet recordings or William Kanengiser's. How they sound to you?
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #63
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
ISedlacek made some strange recording that does not sound like guitar for me ... first i think it is another instrument... of course i am new in sound recording and i am not able oto record the guitar best at the moment but maybe ISedlacek recordered his tests in a wooden box or something like that i do not know ... Simply ... I do not know ...maybe it is room space or preamp ... but not mics.....I anm not about mics or preanmps ... i am about sound ...and I supposed that the test a little incorrect to compare MICS with it....may be it is preamp or room space give so much influence
What makes you think that every guitar and every guitar player should sound like a brittle flamenco guitar or like "into you face" acoustic guitar and if not, it is not a guitar or something is wrong with everything ? There are thousands ways how to play guitar and also thousands types of instruments ... I am not a concert guitar player, I am basically no guitar player at all ) but if I play, I mostly do it in my soft, gentle, "meditative" style (not that I cannot play some classical pieces etc., but this I do only for my private pleasure

Just recently, I had very good flamenco guitar player here, but we had to put lot of HF EQ on it, till it sounded very very sharp (not like it sounded in reality) and he was finally satisfied. I also suspect his hearing in high frequencies was a bit limited ...

And also - to give any serious importance to some casual isolated online samples and to even self-appoint them as one's responsible guide for choosing an equipment (without trying it yourself first) is not really wise, to put it mildly. They have only very limited value that can project just in approximate relative comparison between various devices and that also should be taken with some consideration of so many factors around. But without being here and hearing the real sound (or playing oneself), there is no way to judge anything about how the mics/preamp etc. work and capture the original sound. That's why a personal trying with one's own instrument , room, taste etc. is the ONLY way how to know something about the devices (and make some comments). And if the samples inspire you for a personal try, they maybe fulfill their limited role .. Seems you have some very fixed idea about how YOUR guitar should sound (which is fine) and you correlate that vision to any other guitar recording that may be played, performed and captured in a completely different way than you would do ... And it is not unlikely that if YOU sit there using the same equipment and setup, the result would sound exactly as you like it ...
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #64
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
I agree ... here is some more examples of MC930 recording
http://grafray.com/files/alex_konst/...30_macki_2.mp3
It is Mackie interface recording
http://grafray.com/files/alex_konst/Cantate.mp3
It is DACS preamp with MC930

Recordings are from users of this forum

Here is an original of first linck
http://grafray.com/files/alex_konst/RepetNoel2008.mp3
AND I don't know how you can use my samples to argue here

Plus it's not true the second one was recorded with DACS... All were recorded thru Mackie.

Please, let me use my samples when I think they can give some arguments in a thread. You could only make a link to the original thread to put these samples in the right context.

JMM
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #65
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Simply try to record the gitar 10 times better ... and that is all ..)) It is possible using your equipment
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #66
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
mmm.... Mackie again .... It raise Mackie interface to another high level
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #67
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
mmm.... Mackie again .... It raise Mackie interface to another high level
Yes ... and no. I didn't give you any recording whith another pre, so as others said, the preamp quality can't be isolated from all the others preeminents factors :
- the room
- the quality of the instruments and players
- the mics
- the recording technique

And as Ivo said, without any reference, you can only say "Oh, I like this recording and I hope to obtain similar result with similar gears"

JMM
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #68
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Ok i agree.
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #69
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
Simply try to record the gitar 10 times better ... and that is all ..)) It is possible using your equipment
What may be better for you, may not be better for me ... that's all )

Please, note also that this thread is not about various ways how to record guitar (or any other instrument) but about relative sound differences between few small diaphragm mics capturing the same source ... If you are interested to discuss details about various aspects of guitar recordings, it is better to do it in an appropriate thread ...
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #70
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
ISedlacek

Yes ... someone say SCHOEPS better .... for me Bayers better because SCHOEPS a sharp and can cause more nail touch to strings sound louder .....
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #71
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
ISedlacek

Yes ... someone say SCHOEPS better .... for me Bayers better because SCHOEPS a sharp and can cause more nail touch to strings sound louder .....
Everybody is welcome to have his preferences ... BTW - have you tried Schoeps ?
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #72
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
I heard several Schoeps tests of guitar and for me it does not so good for flamenco because of Sharpness .... Flamenco is sharp playing itself and sharp mic is not good.... ok I will try to make some records but in a month or two.....

http://grafray.com/files/alex_konst/...st_edition.mp3

Here is my flamenco sharp recording )) MXL 2003 microphone + Sound Craft Compact 4 + Creative Audigy SE...i play the guitar here all parts

Awful sound
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #73
Lives for gear
 
mljung's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
ISedlacek

Yes ... someone say SCHOEPS better .... for me Bayers better because SCHOEPS a sharp and can cause more nail touch to strings sound louder .....
GrafRay - it's not true that Schoeps are sharper than Beyers - if you mean that the specific MK-4 is sharper than mc930 [comparing cardioids] it's still questionable if that statement is true. They're different.
To me, from what you write, it seems as if you haven't that much experience yet - which is fine... But please try not to make "big claims" about quality of equipment if you don't have the knowledge to do so - it'll get a lot of users here on GS confused and doesn't lift a good debate..!



Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #74
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
mljung

Ok Schoeps are not sharp ))) Is it ok? Am I right now? All mics good enough and preamp is BEST
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #75
Lives for gear
 
mljung's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrafRay ➑️
All mics good enough and preamp is BEST

I'm afraid another have to answer this - I'll log off and have a cup of coffee...
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #76
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
I will have a cup of coffee too
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #77
Lives for gear
 
jnorman's Avatar
 
3 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
hey Ivo - a little off topic, for a second. i know you prefer SDCs for your work with acoustic instruments, due to improved off-axis performance, but i was wondering if you have spent much time auditioning any of the higher-end LDCs often used for orchestral and film-scoring work, such as neumann TLM170, U89, U47, or manley reference, or brauner VM1-KHE? btw, still listening to the vasudeva CD you sent me - nice work.
Old 17th February 2009 | Show parent
  #78
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnorman ➑️
hey Ivo - a little off topic, for a second. i know you prefer SDCs for your work with acoustic instruments, due to improved off-axis performance, but i was wondering if you have spent much time auditioning any of the higher-end LDCs often used for orchestral and film-scoring work, such as neumann TLM170, U89, U47, or manley reference, or brauner VM1-KHE? btw, still listening to the vasudeva CD you sent me - nice work.
At one time I had a pair of these beauties here:

So, of course, I tried to record all the acoustic instruments on it , it sounded very nice, but when I tried Schoeps, they sounded always better Vocals are different story though ...
Attached Thumbnails
Beyer MC930 vs. JZ BT-201 vs. Schoeps MK21 on acoustic guitar-horch.jpg  
Old 27th February 2009
  #79
Lives for gear
 
desotoslo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek ➑️
Just got an opportunity to try a demo pair of Beyer MC930, so I could not resist to play few tones on my guitar (classical nylon strings one) to compare Beyers, the new JZ BT-201 (with cardioid capsule) and Schoeps MK21 (I don't have MK4). All in AB position about 20 cm apart. Preamp Forssell SMP-2, AD Forssell MADC-2. Little bit of Bricasti Medium Hall.

<snip>

Beyerdynamic MC930

JZ BT-201 cardioid

Schoeps MK 21


.

Wow. I finally had a chance to download these and listen with my headphones and apogee.

My thoughts...
-mc930 sounds nice, but it sounds like a recording.
-Schoeps sounds better than a recording. It is a vital listening experience... the clarity, depth, vividness of them... like they are holding up a flashlight that makes walls invisible. Really a dream come true for audio.
-jz bt has a nice character, but it is grainy and the noise floor is high. I still found myself liking it... I think it has its own charm.

If I had to choose, I would of course choose Schoeps. Second, jz bt just because they're different. mc930 is silky, but I don't know, it doesn't intrigue me.

That's just my personal opinion.

Thanks so much for these clips, Ivo!!! Makes gearslutz a real pleasure.

David

ps: listening on my PMCs; Schoeps sound so alive.
Old 27th February 2009 | Show parent
  #80
Lives for gear
 
desotoslo's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
ya know, listening to those JZs on my speakers, they really sound lovely.

That viola sample immediately makes me think of Pablo Casals' landmark recording of the Bach cello suites... and it's not just the rolled arpeggio opening of the sarabande.

I wonder what microphones were used on that recording.
BACH, J.S.: Cello Suites Nos. 1-6 (Casals) (1927-1939)
"HMV in London was making the best recordings in the world."

These JZs would have a harder time as a main distance pair, but for studio work, they are very pretty microphones; grainy but smooth, mellowing out the edge of the viola. That mellowing reminds me of Casals' tone in that recording.

For the flute, I like the JZ more than the Schoeps! The Schoeps have such a refined sound that it takes a few seconds to acclimate yourself to their subtlety... I think the JZ immediacy flatters the breathy sound of the flute, and just works better. (Perhaps moving further away from the Schoeps would render a more even recording?)

d
Old 27th February 2009 | Show parent
  #81
Gear Head
 
🎧 10 years
Here is an example of my today recording with single Bayer MC930 + ART tube preamp + Cretive Audigy SE sound card. We made some tasts with one mic positions and preamp settings with my friend who play the guitar. As for me the sound is very very clear. The guitar was 150 usd guitar with savarez strings
Attached Files

miha.mp3 (2.38 MB, 1791 views)

miha2.mp3 (2.63 MB, 1319 views)

Old 3rd March 2009 | Show parent
  #82
Lives for gear
 
Mike Jasper's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek ➑️
Well, as you could hear, the other clips (flute, drum etc.) are completely "naked" for change. As for the guitar reverb, it is a "philosophical" question - I always feel to hear and compare the "real" ready-made result, since this is the shape the listeners will listen to, not dry unprocessed samples ... But both attitudes have their pros and cons ...
I've been listening and working with a lot of SD mics lately, and I can say for sure the sound comparison between the Schoeps and Beyer on classical guitar is dead on (haven't heard the JZs). I love them both. The Beyer's are darker, rounder and the Schoeps have that high end clarity that is somehow never piercing or brittle.

Thanks for posting this.

Jasper

EDIT: Now I've heard all three mics in my stuido, and I think it's a fair representation of the sound, except that in my tests the JZ were a lot brighter and the Beyer's were not quite so dark. Different environment and I was using a steel string guitar. Also, all the Schoeps used were hyper, cardioid and omni, but all had the same kind of sound regardless of pattern. (Schoeps included CMC5 with MK 5 capsule (omni & cardioid), CMT 341 (hyper) and CM 60 (cardioid).

Last edited by Mike Jasper; 18th March 2009 at 06:54 PM.. Reason: NEW INFO
Old 3rd March 2009 | Show parent
  #83
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jasper ➑️
the sound comparison between the Schoeps and Beyer on classical guitar is dead on
What is the translation of this idiom ? )
Old 3rd March 2009 | Show parent
  #84
Lives for gear
 
Mike Jasper's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek ➑️
What is the translation of this idiom ? )
Heh. Good point. And that's about as idiomatic as it gets.

Dead on = accurate.
Old 3rd March 2009 | Show parent
  #85
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek ➑️
What is the translation of this idiom ? )
dead on (target) = spot on, hits the dot
Old 18th March 2009 | Show parent
  #86
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 15 years
I found the Beyers not so much to my liking. The JZ recordings had more clarity and an immediacy that was 'impressive'; but the Schoeps were more musical and dimensional. These are my reactions to the guitar recordings. Though the ear acclimates quickly and one could enjoy a piece of music with any of them. Thank you for posting.
Old 18th March 2009 | Show parent
  #87
Lives for gear
 
Mike Jasper's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelPatrick ➑️
I don't ever remember complaining about your comparative clips Ivo, but this time I wish you were using all cardis.

We should expect MK21s to capture more natural ambience with better lows and low-mids than virtually any cardioid made. It is almost like comparing cardis with omnis. tutt
So what? I just want to hear what's best. It ain't no science project, you know. Besides, we know it's a wide cardioid, right, so we can take that into consideration while listening. You hear past that stuff.

Jasper
Old 18th March 2009 | Show parent
  #88
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Mike,

If you want to take my caution just as a heads up to those who may less experienced than you that's OK with me.

For a comparison of cardioids, regardless of experience or knowledge, this shootout was flawed without an MK4. There is a reason for cardiods and omnis. If they were that much alike we wouldn't need both kinds. The MK21 "capsule has a directional pattern between omni and cardiod" according to Shoeps, so it should be no surprise that it sounds different too.

I think sound engineers should care how their mics work because getting consistently good results requires knowledge and skill. If Ryder Cup players could ignore key attributes of their tools they might just as well take a few Lacrosse sticks out on the golf course instead of irons and woods. Or Euro Grand Prix tour drivers could make races much more entertaining by jumping on a motorcycle every now and then instead of strapping into their Formula car every time they hit the track.

Lucky gear handling isn't good enough for my customers. They expect me to know the tools and where to use them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jasper ➑️
So what? I just want to hear what's best. It ain't no science project, you know. Besides, we know it's a wide cardioid, right, so we can take that into consideration while listening. You hear past that stuff.

Jasper
Old 19th March 2009 | Show parent
  #89
Lives for gear
 
ISedlacek's Avatar
 
1 Review written
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelPatrick ➑️
For a comparison of cardioids, regardless of experience or knowledge, this shootout was flawed without an MK4.
I already mentioned few times, that I simply DO NOT HAVE MK4 here

It is not that I have it here and on purpose used MK21 ... (then your complaints would be fully justified)
Old 19th March 2009 | Show parent
  #90
Lives for gear
 
MichaelPatrick's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISedlacek ➑️
I already mentioned few times, that I simply DO NOT HAVE MK4 here

It is not that I have it here and on purpose used MK21 ... (then your complaints would be fully justified)
Ivo,

I know and was responding to another person's comment. Why? Because I don't want inexperienced readers to hear your clips and think an MK21 sounds like a cardiod. I think that's fair. You and Mike know the difference in capsule design and sound. Those newer to the recording game probably don't.

This is the only time I've ever faulted your method, yet only to remind us that an MK21 is a half-omni hybrid with a unique sound. I'm not questioning your purpose or approach. It's just the teacher in me saying the sound in these Schoeps clips is NOT that of a cardioid pattern like the other mics used.

btw -- I think your "tests" are one of the best reasons for hanging out on Gearslutz. I've bought gear because of your clips and words. They aren't scientific and don't need to be. Design specifications should serve aesthetic goals. The sonic perspective you bring to these discussions is practically more useful than a stack of specs.
πŸ“ Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 5882 views: 1881280
Avatar for Funny Cat
Funny Cat 10 hours ago
replies: 122 views: 29717
Avatar for RKeefe1032
RKeefe1032 13th February 2017
replies: 37 views: 9929
Avatar for Joram
Joram 10th July 2012
replies: 107 views: 15066
Avatar for Jeezo
Jeezo 10th April 2020
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump