At 3:19 PM -0400 7/25/06, Walter Knapp wrote:
>Posted by: "Rob Danielson"
>
>
>> As Walt pointed out, the MKH30 circuit uses a fairly elaborate
>> push-pull capsule design and many, if not all fig 8 mic circuits seem
>> to require some low Hz boosting to more closely match the low-end
>> response of gradient cardioids.
walt replied:
>There appears to be no difference in the low end response of the MKH-30
>vs the MKH-40.
In addition to listening and real time spectral displays like Firium,
this discussion on the ProSoundWeb was the most in depth I'd read:
http://tinyurl.com/p5ky2
I copied this discussion just a while back when researching the
mkh80. I couldn't get the ProSoundWeb search engine to locate it
again.
The whole discussion is pretty interesting. There are a couple of
more references to low Hz response in the entire string.
>
> For a less complicated solution, the
>> multi-pattern Rode NT2000 could be workable for some applications
>> (though very heavy and not yet humidity-tested as best as I know). It
>> has better bottom end response over the lower cost NT2-A and
>> NT1-A's. Rob D.
>
>The NT2000 is a dual diaphragm single backplate design I think.
Yes, the large capsules and model to model-- all very different. I
would have retired my NT1A's for 2A's or NT2000's by now except the
NT1A's are so reliable. I do want to try the NT2000's in worst case
moisture scenarios because the upper end also seems much smoother.
Looks like the seal between the electronics and the capsule could be
less water-tight than the NT1-A tho. You never know until you try.
Rob D.
--
Rob Danielson
Peck School of the Arts
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/
|