I'm liking the idea of a Schoeps M222 with mk21 cap. Not cheap. I would like a 221 but there seem to be a lot of issues with them - like hungarian copies, bad switches, many parts not replacable etc. So: How is the M222? I would use it for acoustic guitar and in a drum rig (over brass) - but I was thinking it might be useful on some vocals (male?), and perhaps strings. Comments please. My other options are schoeps and dpa non tube mics. I just like the tube mics over drums because they seem to do nice things with the huge transients. The new powers supplies also have this interesting options for the harmonic focus - which seems interesting, but.. .who knows? ted.

I also pondered about these few times. But the bodies are insanely expensive ... Maybe in the end it comes to the same result like when using normal CMC6 through a good decent tube preamp ?

I tried a Schoeps 222 along with several DPA mics and a modified set of KM 84s recording a late 30s Martin D 18 and a Collings D1AV and D2H through a Pendulum MDP-1 and an OCL-2. For me, the 222 was the sound I was chasing, however, unfortunately I ended up buying the CMC6--that was a mistake... Just my take.

I love mine...I have a matched pair with MK6 capsules. I have the original design with ac701 tubes. Really love these mics. Swear by them on all acoustic intruments.

I have both m221's and m222's and they definitely sound different. The 221's are brighter in the mids and slightly less detailed.

From what I have read, many people think it is the capsules that give the m221's their sound - which original versions are nickel diaphrams and not as reliable as the newer gold sputtered mylar capsules used now adays.

They both sound great just different.

I will have a pair of M222 here soon for loan. I am very curious about their sound and will definitely report the impressions and also the direct comparison with CMC6

Looking forward to this test Ivo, it will be good to hear some high quality, carefully prepared samples.

I will also look forward to hearing Ivo's tests. I did use a M222 pair here for some years. Then I sold them as I moved to M221B with 934c capsules. The olde version M222 is a wonderful mic with a subtle tube flavor.

As I understand it the current versions offer a heavier and more audible tube mic sound--a version with an extreme tube modus is what I suggested to Bernhard Volmer at Elvo. These do not use the AC701k.

I was interested in the 222s for quite awhile, but never had a chance to experience them first-hand. I did, however, visit with people who had used Schoeps for years and perspectives (as you might expect) were mixed. Some said the 222 created one of the most beautiful recordings they'd experienced, and others said that the difference between the non-tube version was so nominal, and in many cases inaudible, that they were comfortable staying with the CMC6/MK4.

That being said, I'd still like to try the 222, just to know for myself.

Thanks for all the replies. I ended up with a pair of CMC6 and mk21 capsules - mostly based on the feedback that the tubes were almost perfectly transparent ie no advantage in color relative to the solid state. I have been using them for Drum overheads + misc duties for acoustic instruments. It would have been nice to try the tube version to see if the tube would soft clip a little on big snare hits etc.

I did have a drunk Violin player in a Cajun band slam one of the cmc6/mk21 against a wall (as he fell) - and the mic survived with no damage whatsoever. So.... there's another reason to get a schoeps. t. .

A pair of M222 arrived just few hours before I had to leave to Greece for one week. I cannot say any definitive conclusions so far and will definitely post some samples

Hello Ivo,

First of all, have a GREAT trip in Greece and wherever else you are bound.

I will look forward to your always expert and sensitive evaluation of the newer M222 mics. This is a new version that I am not familiar with and it is
Elvo's latest thinking on the modern tube mic.

with anticipation,

Phlsidhio

Hi Ivo, have you had a chance to do any further testing?

I am very interested too!

Hi, almost four months later (as always) from the last comment, but I own a pair of very old M221 with their original AC401K and a pair of CMC6 w/ cardioid capsule.
They are night and day. The CMC6's are the most detailed microphones in my locker -and I do own a lot of mikes- but the 221's are the softest ones, so to speak. It has probably a lot to do with the fact they are very old, in fact their power supply is dying very fast, but I have never been able to record a viola with any other microphone the way the M221s capture its sound. They are smooth, full, but not very detailed, which sometimes is great in my experience. I prefer their omni position, to round even more the harshness of some instruments.
If the M222 -which I don't know- are capable of retaining this velvet and add clarity they are the best microphones which I can think about for anything.
Some of the best sounding classical recordings -very argueable- are made with M221's, like Ravel's Bolero by the Minnesota Orchestra/Stanislaw Skrowaczewski. It's a famous recording among purists.
BTW, If someone knows how I can repair my power supply (the same for both microphones) I will thank him/her a lot, as I am not very wealthy now to buy two new power supplies from Elvo/Schoeps.
Thanks and excuse my English.

Cleaning some sessions, I indeed noticed some sample comparison Schoeps CMC6 vs M222 and also three degrees of harmonic saturation of M222.
Should you be interested, here they are (demonstrated on few tones on monochord - of course, I tried them on many other instruments as well)

preamp Forssell SMP-2, AD- Forssell MADC-2 , MK2 omni capsules

CMC6

M222

And the degrees of saturation:

M222 basic

M222 harmonic2

M222 harmonic3

M222 harmonic4

I have returned M222, since I actually did not hear any substantial sound benefit that would advocate that price ...

I would argue that there is other material where the m222 would show its true colours.
Sustained lows like bassoon through an mk21 or mk2h, orchestral mains and the likes is where I find it to be superior to the cmcs.

I have the older model that has the 701 tube unlike the ones featured in Ivos samples.

This can be the case ... After the first "psychoacoustic" wow effect, I had to admit there is not much difference in my case, if at all ... And that harmonic distortion did not improve much for me ...

There is definately no wow compared to the cmc as you say.
For most use I prefer the cmc5 and 6 for ease of use, tubes (i.e. PSUs) are a pain in the orchestra after all. That being said, I am not selling mine anytime soon.

Which of the two power supplies are people using for the M222 preamp: the NT 222 DC or NT 222 AC?

The webpage here: Tube Microphone Amplifier M 222 - Application - SCHOEPS.de, has some information, as does ELVO Mikrofonbau.

I'd like to plug it into the mains (AC), so the AC model would be the best. But then there's the 'tube' direct on the DC model....

Anyone care to explain, a little confused - would be most appreciated....

M