hi folks,
Well even tho I'm not shopping for a 416 mic I still found the link to
Ken Tanaka's site and the comparisons between the k6/me66 which I do
have and the 416 interesting enough and worth hearing. while I agree
the subjective terminology can add to confusion when trying to
describe these differences it is even better hearing the two side by
side and then you can understand what someone is refering to when they
use terms like 'warm'. I always thought the me66 sounded quite
nice(what's nice?)but now having heard the 416 side by side, the me66
does sound a bit on the thin side and not as full a sound as the 416.
this could be due to the extended low end response of the 416 or an
enhanced mid range. Whatever this diference,I like the sound of both
the me66 and now I have heard the 416 I may buy one another time. I
would be interested in hearing sound clips of the MKH60/70 as well.
A while back I posted a question to anyone useing the MKH418 stereo
mic as that is what I was mainly interested in so maybe someone can
post me some sound clips of that mic. Maybe we need a link to
different mic sounds if anyone knows how, it's certainly more usefull
than descibing mic characteristics in words.
regards clint williams
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|