At 8:33 PM -0400 7/16/05, Walter Knapp wrote:
>From: Rob Danielson <>
>>
>> Hi Robin--
>> Are you keeping it from direct contact with water? I haven't seen
>> major moisture susceptibility with our 40 plus NT-4 units.
>>
>> I set up my mics under umbrellas when I leave them out all night--
>> for dew, if not for rain. My 30/40 mkh pair is probably my most
>> reliable, but I've only been able justify one set because I need
>> multiple rigs and I like the character of the NT1-A's for what they
>> are. Out of the 8 Rodes I've used, 2 have not been up to par. One is
>> the right mic/channel in the river recording I posted (low mid
>> distortion and, by dawn, its sputtering away in the humidity). The
>> other unit I sent back after a night's use and the dealer replaced
>> it. The other six deal pretty well with moisture. The NT2-A mic I've
>> been testing churned out clean audio through 2.5 hours outside in the
>> rain this week.
>
>Others have noted the lack of standardization in Rode mics, one price
>you pay for that cheap price.
I had the pleasure of working with recordings from about 8 different
kinds of mics in "matched" x-y or spread omni pairs. None of them
have been that well matched really. I'm interested in folks with
DPA's and other expensive mics taking a shot at describing the
improvements they feel they hear because the frequency responses (or
other qualities) of their mics are very closely matched. Comments
about MKH 80's or 800's (in X-Y or spread omni) would be interesting
to hear about. M-S is inherently less demanding on tonal martching
but I guess uniformity could also affect M-S polar patterns. Come to
think about it Walter, it would be great to hear your mkh 30/40's
stereo field compared to your 80/80's or is it an 80/800?
>
>Have you seen any polar patterns for Rode mics that go above 4 khz? The
>stuff I've downloaded off their site is very disappointing, the bottom
>end frequencies are easy to get good polar patterns compared to the
>higher frequencies. Is Rode just showing the good stuff? Sennheiser,
>Schoeps and such like all give polar patterns up to 16 khz, much more
>useful to evaluate a mic for nature recording. Even if those curves at
>the upper frequencies are not as pretty. Giving polar patterns only up
>to 4 khz is just evaluating the use of the mics with voice frequencies.
The pdf I have for the Nt1A goes to 8K. It seems like all mics I've
used, even omnis have considerable off axis drop from 8K up.
Based on field results, the area uniformly covered at 8K with an NT1A
pair is around 120 degrees of coverage. You should check my
computations, but using Sennheiser's chart for a pair of mkh40's, I
get a whopping 180 degrees of coverage within 5db at 8K. The cardioid
pattern in the NT2A looks very similar to the 40, even little wider.
The omni pattern in the NT2A only shows up to 4K, but its tad wider
at 4K than an mkh 20 (if we believe the chart). Such performance
doesn't make a lot of sense for a large capsule mic, but note the
20's off-axis response isn't that good either. It seems to have
about same coverage of a mkh 40 within 5dB at 8K.Now, the mkh 80
could be in a different league-- a pair, in X-Y cardioid, seem to be
able to cover about 210 degrees within 5dB at 8K. The pdf I have has
no omni pattern for the 80, is the omni pattern wider at 8K too?
>
>You seem to be saying that if the Rode and 30/40 MKH were the same price
>you'd be using the MKH? That the Rode is only under consideration due to
>it's price. What would be your mix of mics if the prices were reversed?
>Or equal?
>
>Most of us are not trying to equip a university class, we need only one
>set. If you were choosing one set, what would it be?
I did decide to buy the Rode 2A they sent me to create another M-S
pair with an Nt1A. I'd love to be in Aaron's and your position and
play with 80's or 800's, but the gain in the spatial imaging with the
higher noise for another 30/40 pair is not where I'd spend my money
at this point. I bring 8 mics along when recording surround.
> > Any time you use mics in X-Y or paired in omni, its harder to get two
>> mics that will respond very similarly to the full range of
>> frequencies. My $200 NT1A's differ from unit to unit, but not any
>> more than my "matched" $1400 mbho's-- which I sent back for a better
>> match too. Out of my 8, I have what I consider to be one very
>> well-matched pair-- meaning that I don't not have to address the
>> channels with separate EQ from the start. This pair is probably as
>> well matched as my reference speakers! I use all of the NT1A's all
>> the time.
>>
>> Its easier to equalize M-S micing because both channels get flavored
>> by both mics. That's another reason the NT2-A/NT1-A MS pair is
>> appealing to me.
>>
>> There's no way to get around the disappointments that come with the
>> good fortunes in the field. Do I worry about moisture? Sure! But, a
>> steady, light breeze has obscured many more hours of usable material
>> than condenser mic failure due to moisture. Rob D
>
>This may depend on where you live and time of day you record. Certainly
>the SE has a great deal of humidity to deal with, and mics that cannot
>be trusted out in it are a bad deal. When it's calm, humidity is often
>high, so the very times when you could record because the wind is down a
>mic likely to fail with humidity is even worse. Especially if you have
>burned some expensive gas to get to the recording site.
The only way we can test this theory is if you get some Rodes! Rob D
>
>Walt
>
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|