At 1:17 PM +0200 4/14/04, Klas Strandberg wrote:
>Preliminary, after only a few days test, and with a questionmark for
>reliability - I claim that the CAD 179 is the "best buy" under 200 dollars=
.
>
>A bit heavy and ugly, with a linearity which is "average" - it's still a
>lot of microphone for the price. Stepless directivity from omni to eight
>and very low self noise. Good handling noise.
>
>Two of them will make an good stereo pair, making both XY, Blumline and M/=
S
>possible.
>
>You need phantom power, though.
>
>Klas.
Hi Klas-
Have you managed to mount your 179 in such a way that you can
hand-hold easily it in the field? Perhaps because of it's weight and
response down to 10Hz, all my usual rubber band tension tricks aren't
eliminating subtle, lo-Hz vibrations from cable.
I've had a pair for about two months now and I was able to compare
the noise between 5 units. It did vary enough for me to pick out the
best two by ear pretty easily (monitored with an SD mp-2 w/
headphones) The noise I heard in the CAD 179's is lower in tone,
more "sputtery," than the tight hiss I get with my mkh's and Rodes.
I agree about the linearity. A boost in sensitivity around 3K on the
5 manuf provided charts suggested the 179's have extra bite in the
power range and I could hear this. The lower mid response critical to
spatial rendering seemed a bit more linear than the NT1-A maybe
because of harmonics created by a smoother very low Hz response. All
five mics had a considerable presence rise starting at 10K Hz which
is pretty typical of the large condensers I've studied.
I tried Blumline with a pair-- first time I've experimented with
this. This arrangement seems very well suited when the soundfield
has at three or four sources at 90 degrees. The net result is each
of the 3-4 sources is spread fairly evenly across the stereo image,
stereo. Pretty cool. If I can get the shock mount issue solved, I'd
like to give it serious testing with in the field, initially with
M-S. To build a field-worthy shock-mount for stacking two, one on
top of the other with unobstructed fields will take some engineering.
Any one have pictures of a home made blumline shock mount for two
large condensers?
The phantom power for the 179 does suck about three times the juice
of an MKH or NT1A.
For Omni and Figure 8 polar patterns, I don't know of a better deal
in terms of noise and flexibility. But if a wide cardioid pattern is
preferable, the Rode NT-1A is lighter in weight, has more output
(about 2-3dB) and considerably less self noise [about -6 to -8db(A)]
at $199. Rob D.
Here's an in depth review of the CAD-179:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/oct01/articles/cadmics.htm
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|