I would take polite exception to a few points you made.
I don't know who first ran into the 183 as a stand alone md mic but
if I was to guess it was not a taper but likely Dan Dugan of here.=20
Robs who has been working with this mic has availability to an
extensive collection of mics and he records quieter stuff than I do.
For MD use the 183 as described comes in at $100.00 a mic. That is
not close to being in the price bracket of mkh20's or the ME-62. No
thanks on used me-62's or mkh-20's from ebay I am still working to
calibrate and repair e-bay mkh-110's.
I have spent a little time with the 183 now and the sensitivity
compared to the me-62 is very close. The noise level is close as
well with the me-62 having a very slight edge. But the 183 is much
more of an omni than the me-62 is, and does not suffer from the boomy
bottom end or artificial (narrow) sounding bass that is heard in the
me-62. It is brighter and more transparent than the me-62. I have 5
years experience with me-62's and at first listen I suspect I am
converting my dishes over to the 183's.
Nature Recordists have a good following in the Micbuilders group and
there no longer is just a core group of concert tapers there. In
fact if there was any one largest group right now it would be close
between the engineers and the hobby builders. We continue to see
growth in the international group of new members joining as well. I
say that as I am the one who approves the new members on that group.
Maybe someone with a me102 can comment on that mic as I do not own
one and do not even know if the fet is in the k6 or in the capsule.=20
Rich
--- In Walter Knapp <>
wrote:
> I think it's worthwhile pointing out that how good a mic is for
someone
> is relative to their experience. I doubt that you or I with our
> experience with the MKH series would find this mic all that
wonderful in
> day to day use. But, for someone, like most of those in the MicDIY
> group, used to things like mics made from the noisy panasonic
capsules,
> it's a significant improvement. It's well to consider the
experience of
> a person with other mics when they give a opinion about a mic. And
what
> sort of recording they do. Many of the MicDIY group are concert
tapers,
> or street sound recordists. Where self noise is not a big criteria.
> Others are into recording for mixing with other sounds, or the
newer
> one, video. Each will color their opinion (and even what they hear)
> based on their need.
>
> It does appear to be good specs for a lav mic, but not unique. So,
if
> tiny size is the important criteria it's one to look at. If the
ultimate
> in sound quality for nature recording is the criteria it's well
down the
> list. A Sennheiser ME mic can be had for not much different price,
for
> instance, and would be a much better mic for nature recording. Even
the
> MKH-20 can be found for about 2-3 times the price, the price
difference
> is not infinite. The Sennheiser ME102 would be a equivalent lav mic
> (also part of a series) though it's sensitivity is less, it's self
noise
> is the same and it's frequency response curve is similar though
slightly
> flatter.
>
> Walt
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|