Rob Danielson wrote:
> What a treat! I d/loaded the 2nd set.
>
> I get some of same low accentuated tone with my 30/40 M-S pair.
> Almost seems like an interaction between the mics, maybe even
> mechanical. Mysterious huh?
That pair I'm least sure of. It is mounted just the same as the photos I
put up of the MKH-30/60. The zepplin is a couple inches shorter.
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/ms_mkh30+60.html
You should note that since taking those photos I've moved the front
support behind the diaphragms.
Lots to learn about.
> The 110 really compares favorably to the 20. The later is the most
> open to my ears, but just a shade over the 110. How far apart were
> the 20's?
The SASS is a imitation head, at least in one viewpoint. So the mics are
ear spaced, about 7" for both SASS. But remember that between them is a
Foam separator nearly 6" thick. And around them is a boundary mic surface.
Remember, I have photos up:
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/sass_mkh110.html
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/sass_mkh-20.html
Considering that in their day the 110's were one of two omni's in the
MKH lineup and as such were in the same sort of role as the 20's it's
not surprising they are similar. The specs of the 110 are closer to the
20 than was the other omni. During the intervening time Sennheiser
worked out how to get slightly better sensitivity and lower noise.
One should not forget that the 110's are so much more capable than the
20's at the low end. That can give their sound a heavier quality than
the 20's. I think it will be more evident when I manage the frogs in a
thunderstorm recordings I want to do.
Note that the SASS setup I have for the MKH-20 will also carry my pair
of 40's, or even the 60's. I'll have to get a sample to put up of at
least the 40's. It's possible to switch mics in the field.
> The 80's M-S stereo image spreads a bit more evenly than the 30/60's
> but I still prefer the A/B stereo image because even though it has
> less spread, i can get a better sense of depth from the timing
> differences. The barred owl in the mhk- 20 recording really shows
> this off...
Remember a MKH-60 is a short shotgun. The soundfield of the MKH-30/60 is
therefore, narrower than the 80's. Or at least than the 80's with the
center set to cardioid. Remember, the 80's have five different possible
settable patterns. In a sense you may want to compare them to the
MKH-30/40, both with mid that's cardioid in these samples. I really like
the sound of a individual 80. The setup to use them M/S is quite
different than the others as they are side mics. They are also in a
"official" M/S suspension and zepplin that's 6" diameter rather than a
little over 3" like the mono suspensions and zepplins used with the
other two.
And like all M/S, the spread is a setting.
Barred owl? I just went back and checked. There is a Southern Leopard
Frog making some quiet sounds in the second site. He's just slightly
farther out than the foreground frogs, but only by 10-20 feet. But, I
don't hear a owl in either of the MKH-20 recordings.
Since I have pairs of these mics, I'll eventually try them that way. For
field recording the configuration of M/S is definitely more convenient.
Easier to suspend and windscreen too. With the 80's, of course, simple
rotation in the clips would get a x/y.
> I know these took quite a lot of time to do, Thanks Walt!
I had to process them in anyway. The originals are on the order of 5-6
minutes each. Picking a clip to save from each and batch processing them
to mp3 did not take long. The longest part was uploading 4 megs through
my modem, but I did not have to be involved in that once it was started.
Unfortunately, it looks like it's going to be too cold and nasty this
week to make another foray.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|