People - all condensor mic's are unreliable in the wilderness, except the
MKH. It is not a matter of brand, but of construction.
With it's RF modulation and membrane connected to ground, the MKH has
outstanding reliability.
Question: I hear a lot on the list about the perfection of R=F6de mic's..? =
I
don't find them outstanding. I think they perform about the same as a lot
of other mic's. Good, but no sensation...?
And even if very carefully made, they must be unreliable in humidity.
How high is the polarizing voltage? Anybody know?
Klas.
At 05:56 2005-06-21, you wrote:
> > <<<<Now we as a group have to talk Rhode into an Omni version of
> > the NT-1a
> > as it clearly is outperforming the mkh line at a lot less
> > money.>>>>>>>>
>
>Whoa! That's a dangerous statement. Noise floor is only one spec for
>a microphone. It's not fair to compare the MKH line to this mic, I
>think for a couple of reasons:
>
>1) The MKH are designed to be rugged, very resistant to humidity,
>etc. The NT1A is clearly a studio mic, has anyone actually taken it
>out into the field.
>
>2) How do they 'sound'. I buy Schoeps because in spite of their
>higher noise (to the MKH) I think they're the best sounding mics in
>the world. I love the imaging I get, and I personally think they
>sound better than the MKH (which are great, don't get me wrong). But
>the MKH are way better for humid recording, the Schoeps may very well
>crap out (although I've never had it happen yet).
>
>But noise floor alone is no way to decide between mics.
>
>That being said, I think I'll buy one of these, might make a good
>studio mic for recording very quiet sound effects
>
>Tim
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|