naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Sennheiser MKH-8000 Series

Subject: Re: Sennheiser MKH-8000 Series
From: "Walter Knapp" waltknapp
Date: Sun May 20, 2007 8:16 am ((PDT))
Posted by: "Mike Feldman"

>> They are single pattern mics derived from the design of the MKH-80 & 
>> MKH-800. I know my MKH-80's are better than my MKH-40 when set to 
>> cardioid, ...

Sennheiser gave their derivation in their original press release. Please 
note the sad facts below.

> I'm hoping that all of the MKH-80x0's are single-diaphragm unlike
> the dual-diaphragm MKH-80's and MKH-800's.  I've always been leery
> of dual diaphragms, and some 'perts with net.presence have complained
> of mid-range not-rightness in the MKH series.

There are 'perts with net.presence that will complain about anything, 
often with no justification. And they are generally not nature 
recordists. We will have to wait and see. The proof is when you get out 
in nature and record with them.

The key to the newer design is the backplates, not the diaphragms. They 
use a system with plates on both sides of the diaphragm, something 
that's fairly uncommon. Couple that with the RF circuit and they are 
unique in design. They are not the first MKH with this design, what they 
replace is that design. Sennheiser's discussion of the reasons for the 
design make sense to me. And I've considerable experience using MKH in 
nature recording now which agrees with what they say. And that includes 
my pair of MKH-80's which are excellent and qualify as one of the best 
of the MKH. Go ahead and suspect the design if you wish, I'll happily 
take the results.

I did finally wake up and realize that Sennheiser had the specs and 
polar charts up, when I first found out about them they did not. (and 
I've been a bit distracted by other unrelated events) I took a hard look 
at those comparing them with the equivalent earlier MKH mics and came to 
certain conclusions.

First off, the polar pattern diagrams are virtually equivalent to the 
equivalent previous MKH. Except they added a line for 32kHz response. 
Like the MKH-800 they do have extended frequency response though it's 
not very regular. Probably more interesting is a little extension of 
response at the low end.

The MKH 8040 & 8050 are a disappointment in the spec sheets. The self 
noise is up by 1dBA vs the MKH 40 & 50. And the sensitivity is 
significantly down. For nature recording that's the wrong way to go. 
Unless some special talent in sound surfaces from them I'm no longer 
interested.

The MKH 8020 is a little better story. It preserves the 10dBA self noise 
of the MKH 20 while raising the sensitivity from 25mV/Pa to 31mV/Pa. 
That makes it interesting to try in nature recording. I'd still like to 
stick a pair in a mod SASS to compare. If they still have the good sound 
and durability of the MKH-20's we will have a winner. Or at least a 
improvement.

Note on the question of capsule derivation, the mics are smaller 
diameter. I doubt that the capsules from previous MKH would fit, so they 
are new capsules.

> I'm hoping the MKH-8000s achieve a lower price point by simplification;
> we'll see when they hit the streets.

I expect they will still be the hand built, hand tuned sort of mic. 
Parts count is not what makes the price so high. I've always believed 
the reason they are so high is the customers with too much money, 
however. I, too, would love for them to be a lot cheaper.

Walt




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU