Quantcast
B&K 4164 measuring mic. ( DPA 4041 ) - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
B&K 4164 measuring mic. ( DPA 4041 )
Old 3 weeks ago
  #1
B&K 4164 measuring mic. ( DPA 4041 )

The B&K 4164 stood model for the DPA 4040 Aniversary and the DPA4041. It was also prototype for the B&K 4179. It has never gone in production. I was involved in the project of the DPA 4040 Aniversary microphone, with both transistor and tube preamplifier.

Sound example recorded with the 4164 and thus compatibel with DPA4041. Microphone preamplifier was a Tubetech MP1a.
AD Converter dCS900B.
Attached Files

01 Spår 01.mp3 (2.48 MB, 43 views)

Old 3 weeks ago
  #2
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orgeltonmeister ➡️
The B&K 4164 stood model for the DPA 4040 Aniversary and the DPA4041.
What's the difference between the B&K 4164 and B&K 4165? It was stated here on Gearslutz that the DPA 4041 used the B&K 4145, but the published on axis capsule response curves do not match.

Thanks
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #3
Quote:
Originally Posted by tailspn ➡️
What's the difference between the B&K 4164 and B&K 4165? It was stated here on Gearslutz that the DPA 4041 used the B&K 4145, but the published on axis capsule response curves do not match.

Thanks
The B&K 4164 is a one inch measuring microphone that was designed for extreme low noise. It has an ultra thin membrane of nickel. It never came on the market. Self noise typical 6dB A (100mV output ! ) Twenty years later it stood model for the aniversary DPA 4040 and later for the 4041.

The 4165 is a half inch capsules also designed for low noise. Self noise typical 12-14 dB A. Actually, the 4165 was designed to replace the more expensive 4145 one inch. The 4145 was expensive to make and the big volume of the capsule obstructed the sound, so for modern handheld SPL meters, it was more conveniant to use a half inch format.

To get comparable noise figures, B&K designers had to compromise on a few criteria. Limited bandwidth and limited maximum SPL. Not so good. And slightly worse phase response compared with the half inch 4133 which was already used in the mid 70s by several engineers in the classical recording world, e.g. Onno Scholtze and Peter Willemöes. ( 4165 has 90 degrees phase shift at 14K).

The DPA 4041 and B&K 4145 are two very different microphones so that statement is not correct. The DPA 4041 has a 100mV output, the 4145 has 50mV/Pa. Curve of the 4041 has a 5 dB peak at 8K. The 4145 is flat with -0 and + 1 dB.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #4
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orgeltonmeister ➡️
The B&K 4164 is a one inch measuring microphone that was designed for extreme low noise. It has an ultra thin membrane of nickel. It never came on the market. Self noise typical 6dB A (100mV output ! ) Twenty years later it stood model for the aniversary DPA 4040 and later for the 4041.

The 4165 is a half inch capsules also designed for low noise. Self noise typical 12-14 dB A. Actually, the 4165 was designed to replace the more expensive 4145 one inch. The 4145 was expensive to make and the big volume of the capsule obstructed the sound, so for modern handheld SPL meters, it was more conveniant to use a half inch format.

To get comparable noise figures, B&K designers had to compromise on a few criteria. Limited bandwidth and limited maximum SPL. Not so good. And slightly worse phase response compared with the half inch 4133 which was already used in the mid 70s by several engineers in the classical recording world, e.g. Onno Scholtze and Peter Willemöes. ( 4165 has 90 degrees phase shift at 14K).

The DPA 4041 and B&K 4145 are two very different microphones so that statement is not correct. The DPA 4041 has a 100mV output, the 4145 has 50mV/Pa. Curve of the 4041 has a 5 dB peak at 8K. The 4145 is flat with -0 and + 1 dB.
Thank you for your reply! My interest is in the understanding of the B&K capsule used in the DPA4041, of which I have three, and believe are the best microphone for my ITU surround recording technique.

Any information you could offer on the capsule used on the DPA4041 would be most appreciated.

Thanks again!
Tom
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #5
Quote:
Originally Posted by tailspn ➡️
Thank you for your reply! My interest is in the understanding of the B&K capsule used in the DPA4041, of which I have three, and believe are the best microphone for my ITU surround recording technique.

Any information you could offer on the capsule used on the DPA4041 would be most appreciated.

Thanks again!
Tom
The 4041 is a typical diffusefield microphone, although the peak (+5/+6dB) is not that much as e.g. a Neumann KM183.

I never bought the 4040 or 4041. The 4041 for me was never an alround microphone. I only found it useful for softer instruments, and not even for the sound, only because of the extreme low noise. I could not justify the investment for its limited employability.

Since you already have them, you don't have that problem, so I would advice you to experiment, and load up some sound examples in the future on Gearspace.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Here's a snippet of a recent recording. A string quartet, originally recorded DSD256 in 5.0 surround, with the three front DPA4041S's mixed to stereo 352.8KHz PCM, then converted to 320kbps CBR MP3. The quartet was seated, with the 4041's 8.5 feet high, A and B spaced 54 inches, and 5 feet from the downstage musicians. The center 4041 was 23 inches forward of the A and B, and 6 inches inches lower. All three 4041's were up tilted off axis by ~30 degrees.

Tom
Attached Files

DPA4041S snippit.mp3 (5.46 MB, 26 views)

Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #7
Quote:
Originally Posted by tailspn ➡️
Here's a snippet of a recent recording. A string quartet, originally recorded DSD256 in 5.0 surround, with the three front DPA4041S's mixed to stereo 352.8KHz PCM, then converted to 320kbps CBR MP3. The quartet was seated, with the 4041's 8.5 feet high, A and B spaced 54 inches, and 5 feet from the downstage musicians. The center 4041 was 23 inches forward of the A and B, and 6 inches inches lower. All three 4041's were up tilted off axis by ~30 degrees.

Tom
Very clean and noise free, sounds better on speakers than on headphone. Maybe a little sharp for my taste, but a Neumann KM183 is sharper. 4041S is that the version for the HMA 5000 ? Stereo-image kind is problematic haere and there, jumps a bit but not important sound wise.

I never tested the 4041, I was only involved in the preliminary stage by testing 4164 with B&K preamps, so maybe what I hear might also be issues with 2669 preamps.

I will look for some other samples I recorded also. Thank you, your sample is very interesting to analyse.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #8
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orgeltonmeister ➡️
Very clean and noise free, sounds better on speakers than on headphone. Maybe a little sharp for my taste, but a Neumann KM183 is sharper. 4041S is that the version for the HMA 5000 ? Stereo-image kind is problematic haere and there, jumps a bit but not important sound wise.

I never tested the 4041, I was only involved in the preliminary stage by testing 4164 with B&K preamps, so maybe what I hear might also be issues with 2669 preamps.

I will look for some other samples I recorded also. Thank you, your sample is very interesting to analyse.
Thanks, I appreciate you taking the time to listen, and evaluate. Your right, the snippet is sharp sounding with an occasionally imprecise image. That's all the product of mixing the front three 4041's to stereo. Played in 5.0 surround, with the surround mics included, the image is very solid, and much less bright, but still retaining the you-are-there feeling. It's so much easier to achieve that, recording and playing out in 5.0 surround, compared to stereo. Also, I believe no one would use the mic spacing I used if recording for stereo.

I selected this particular snippet because it exemplifies the +5dB peak issue of the 4041, when used close in with small ensembles playing dissonant screechy music. To lessen the effects of the peak, I angle the 4041's up ~30 degrees, taking advantage of it flat polar response at -60 degrees off axis.

I'll upload a sample of a large orchestra using these same three 4041's, to give you a feel of their properties in a much larger space.

Thanks again,
Tom
Old 3 weeks ago
  #9
Gear Maniac
 
🎧 5 years
So often I see these 4041 used with a lot of angling to knock down the HF, y'all aren't making it easier to stave off the temptation to go down the rabbit hole with ye old flat 4145! (Thanks for the additional information you sent @ kludgeaudio !)
Old 3 weeks ago
  #10
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
These samples demonstrate what can be achieved with a simple Decca tree like placement using the DPA4041's. They are the pictured three 4041's, A and B spaced 9 feet apart, 11.5 feet high, and angled flat to the stage. This takes advantage of the capsule's reach due to the +5dB peak, while having the strings mostly -~60 degrees off axis sounding smooth and natural.

Again, recorded in DSD256 5.0, mixed three front channels to 352.8KHz PCM stereo, then converted to 320kbps MP3.

Note that the alto; Gerhild Romberger is at least 8 feet from the left and center 4041's. In surround, she sounds like she's immediately in front of you. Disbelieving, I snapped that picture from the broadcast booth where I was recording when I heard her over headphones.

Tom
Attached Thumbnails
B&K 4164 measuring mic. ( DPA 4041 )-1024_20160312_134937.jpg   B&K 4164 measuring mic. ( DPA 4041 )-20160312_124941_1024.jpg   B&K 4164 measuring mic. ( DPA 4041 )-20170129_094753_1024.jpg  
Attached Files

M3-4 start.mp3 (7.44 MB, 35 views)

M3-5 finale.mp3 (10.00 MB, 20 views)


Last edited by tailspn; 2 weeks ago at 05:17 PM..
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #11
Thank you for the interesting samples. I need some time to analyse what is going on here, so if you can give me some time I will return to GS within a few days, just very busy editing and mastering.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #12
Before I give any reaction on the last samples Tailspn loaded up in this thread, I like to invite others here to give a reaction first. I am just very curious to find out what you think without biasing your opinion.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #13
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Great sounding clips, Tom! Gorgeous acoustics beautifully rendered. I've moved towards 1inch onmis in the last two years, so I'm pretty biased, but the clips show what I like about them: extremely detailed, but never harsh. Specially with strings, 1 inch omnis deliver what I consider the most desireable tone. I find that the DPA4041 never sounds harsh, even when used on axis, you get a a bright sound, but they deliver a highly refined sound, top microphones!
My last two years, using a pair of Rens Heijnis modified Gefell M296, Reso/Gefell M102 and Sonodore LDM54 have made me develop a clearly preference for 1inch omnis: They have such a refined sound that I find them very seductive, the directionality at high frequencies is, in my opinion, useful, and (I know this is highly subjective) I think they have a curious quality: they sound really good when listening with average/poor speakers.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #14
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzalo1004es ➡️
Great sounding clips, Tom! Gorgeous acoustics beautifully rendered. I've moved towards 1inch onmis in the last two years, so I'm pretty biased, but the clips show what I like about them: extremely detailed, but never harsh. Specially with strings, 1 inch omnis deliver what I consider the most desireable tone. I find that the DPA4041 never sounds harsh, even when used on axis, you get a a bright sound, but they deliver a highly refined sound, top microphones!
My last two years, using a pair of Rens Heijnis modified Gefell M296, Reso/Gefell M102 and Sonodore LDM54 have made me develop a clearly preference for 1inch omnis: They have such a refined sound that I find them very seductive, the directionality at high frequencies is, in my opinion, useful, and (I know this is highly subjective) I think they have a curious quality: they sound really good when listening with average/poor speakers.
Thank you for your reaction Gonzalo1004es. I hope also others here on the forum will give a reaction.

Gonzalo1004es, the one inch omni's you mention above that you use for your own recordings are all of the "flat" reponse type, have you used yourself also the DPA 4041?
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klimermonk ➡️
So often I see these 4041 used with a lot of angling to knock down the HF, y'all aren't making it easier to stave off the temptation to go down the rabbit hole with ye old flat 4145! (Thanks for the additional information you sent @ kludgeaudio !)
That is what I did. I only used the 4041 for soft sources like vihuela's, lutes, baroque-guitars and clavichords. I once tested the 4041 in front of a harpsichord and I could not believe what I heard. Harsh and unpleasant sound, much better with the 4145, but the directionality of the 4145 did not make it an easy job. They picked up a lot more unwanted noises from the keels, which the 4006es didn't but one had to accept the higher self noise of the 4006.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #16
Gear Nut
 
🎧 5 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orgeltonmeister ➡️
Thank you for your reaction Gonzalo1004es. I hope also others here on the forum will give a reaction.

Gonzalo1004es, the one inch omni's you mention above that you use for your own recordings are all of the "flat" reponse type, have you used yourself also the DPA 4041?
The omnis I mentioned are all flat. I haven't used the 4041, but I've always been very interested on them and have heard many recordings of made with them (like Nicolas Bartholomée or Morten Lindberg's). If you're interested, send me a message with your email address and I can send you some samples recorded with Sonodore's LDM54s, they're outstanding microphones!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #17
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #18
Quote:
Originally Posted by didier.brest ➡️
Thank You for linking to those samples. If you like you may as well place those samples also here in this thread. Anything that compares to the 4041 makes this thread more informative for others that do not know the DPA 4041.

I have tested the 4041 also close to the piano, (we used a Fazioli) and as long as the sound was from ppp to mf it was fine and delicate, but high notes fortisimo became soon very aggressive with the 4041, and my client decided not to go for the 4041 but for a pair of 4006. At the end of your sample the 4041 became also a moment pretty aggressive. It is remarkable that the KM133 has as much a peak as the 4041, although the maximum is a bit higher up on the tonal scale (10-12kHz) anyway it is way less aggressive as the 4041, that also peaks about the same but at 8kHz, but that is because of its diameter it is much more directional. Thank you for this sample, I found it very educative to be able to compare those two.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #19
Lives for gear
 
didier.brest's Avatar
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orgeltonmeister ➡️
If you like you may as well place those samples also here in this thread.
Thank you for your interest. The link to these samples in another Gearspace thread should be sufficient. Let us save memory space, it's good for our planet.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #20
Quote:
Originally Posted by tailspn ➡️
These samples demonstrate what can be achieved with a simple Decca tree like placement using the DPA4041's. They are the pictured three 4041's, A and B spaced 9 feet apart, 11.5 feet high, and angled flat to the stage. This takes advantage of the capsule's reach due to the +5dB peak, while having the strings mostly -~60 degrees off axis sounding smooth and natural.

Again, recorded in DSD256 5.0, mixed three front channels to 352.8KHz PCM stereo, then converted to 320kbps MP3.

Note that the alto; Gerhild Romberger is at least 8 feet from the left and center 4041's. In surround, she sounds like she's immediately in front of you. Disbelieving, I snapped that picture from the broadcast booth where I was recording when I heard her over headphones.

Tom
In this configuration as you describe above, the sound reminds me of Decca, using the Neumann M50 microphones. But this is better in many ways. It is cleaner, less noisy and has beautiful tight low end. The M50 is quite boomy in the low end. The timpani sound great. The voice of Gerhild Romberger is caught in an unsurpassed way. One only has to be very reserved with the volume button in the beginning, soft should not be played louder than real, otherwise your ears get problems later on.

I understand why you like this for your penta-mike set-up. If this is recorded only with those three microphones, your balance is already near perfect without any spots. If you like the Decca sound, this is a way to go. Maybe one disadvantage, the stereo image seems to be less clear, but I do not mind that so much. Balance and sound are the most important issues. Very nice recording.

Another thing, I am quite curious, where is it recorded?

During the test period of the 4040 I never had the possibility to test them on orchestra, so this was for me the first time to hear them this way. So thank you for this sample, very interesting to hear.
Old 2 weeks ago | Show parent
  #21
Gear Addict
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orgeltonmeister ➡️
In this configuration as you describe above, the sound reminds me of Decca, using the Neumann M50 microphones. But this is better in many ways. It is cleaner, less noisy and has beautiful tight low end. The M50 is quite boomy in the low end. The timpani sound great. The voice of Gerhild Romberger is caught in an unsurpassed way. One only has to be very reserved with the volume button in the beginning, soft should not be played louder than real, otherwise your ears get problems later on.

I understand why you like this for your penta-mike set-up. If this is recorded only with those three microphones, your balance is already near perfect without any spots. If you like the Decca sound, this is a way to go. Maybe one disadvantage, the stereo image seems to be less clear, but I do not mind that so much. Balance and sound are the most important issues. Very nice recording.

Another thing, I am quite curious, where is it recorded?

During the test period of the 4040 I never had the possibility to test them on orchestra, so this was for me the first time to hear them this way. So thank you for this sample, very interesting to hear.
Thank you for your thoughtful review. These excerpts were just the three 4041S's. Reducing the five channels to stereo, including the surrounds, made the stereo mix muddy by comparison. The recording was made in 2016 in Budapest at MUPA:

https://bachtrack.com/venue/mupa

The recording was done for Channel Classics by Jared Sacks, who kindly allowed me to hang my five mics and record in parallel.

Thanks again!
Tom
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 61 views: 6778
Avatar for MarkF48
MarkF48 5th January 2013
replies: 5641 views: 585985
Avatar for OrphicTrench
OrphicTrench 1 week ago
replies: 73 views: 8638
Avatar for lagoausente
lagoausente 14th June 2016
replies: 296 views: 13469
Avatar for Noisewagon
Noisewagon 17th January 2021
Topic:
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