dpa 2006st vs dpa 4006st etc

DPAs are very beautiful but don't underestimate the Earthworks for piano either! The Neumann 184s don't really blow me away in general as microphones. They are excellent microphones, but for the piano there is better. For classical piano, Shoeps are certainly the best choice.

Thanks Simone! ....I was hoping you'd tell me: well yes, you can have the same quality as the Schoeps but spending half as much. Like having your cake and eating it too!

Do you know the Sennheisers?...in some English reviews I read that they are a bit "dark"! The difference is about 500 euros....now I'm looking at these other ones you mentioned!

Unfortunately, it is harder to find info on Earthworks. From what I've seen, the mp40 system (if I'm not mistaken) uses two dedicated omnidirectional mics, but for a very close recording inside the soundboard, and here I have some doubts about the timbre, perhaps with "too much attack" resulting from it... I read that being omnidirectional they pick up the diffuse sound field.... but how much ambience do they capture when placed so close to the strings?

I like the TC30s more instead... the only problem is I haven't found any information on prices and availability! I'll try to dig a bit deeper because based on the technical specifications, they seem very interesting..

The Earthworks for the piano, the QTC30s are fine, even better the 50s. You can find them on the American market used for 2000 euros per matched pair (the QTC50), they are perfect for classical because they are omnidirectional and must be positioned very far away, typical capture style for the classical piano. In any case, the official distributor for Earthworks in Italy is MidiWare, which is located in Rome. You can give them a call and ask how much new ones cost. The top would be the Schoeps, but they cost twice as much used (around 3500/4000 depending on their condition); keep in mind, however, that these are not microphones for children, they are bought by professionals who normally know well how to handle microphones like these, so with this level of quality, it's hard to get ripped off. The Schoeps were designed specifically for the capture of orchestral acoustic instruments and adapt perfectly to the piano; they seem tailor-made. A friend of mine who has a large studio in Rome has them; he was going to lend them to me to make a sample library, but I didn't feel comfortable taking them (you know how things go). In the end, I opted for a more "modest" Neumann set with the 184 matched pair in AB and the U87 as a tail, but the Schoeps would have made the difference!!

I didn't answer you regarding the preamplifiers, it slipped my mind. If you use microphones of that kind, audio interface preamps, even if they are Apogee or RME, are not good enough! With microphones of this quality, you must opt for dedicated preamplifiers, like the Avalon 737, and pair them with good converters which can be either Apogee or RME—those are fine, but excluding the preamplification stage and thus entering as a line input rather than a microphone input. There is a former university professor of mine who has a company called Arrel Audio; they build analog outboard gear for industry professionals. They made a monstrous preamp designed specifically for recording acoustic instruments. It has no color; it delivers square waves up to 300 kHz!! This means it has an extremely faithful transient response; it is very crystalline. In my opinion, it isn't very suited for recording electric guitars and things like that, but for classical music, it is terrifyingly good—it is exactly what is needed to avoid distorting the characteristic "color" that the manufacturer intended to give to the instrument. The website is www.arrelaudio.com, and the preamplifier is this one: http://www.arrel-audio.com/it/product.php?page=el-111.

I don't know how much it costs; they lend it to me when needed, but the distributor is always MidiWare, so you can kill two birds with one stone.

thank youuuuuuu! I was able to look closely at the features and prices!!

forgive me if I disturb you again....but I would like to understand a few things and you explain wonderfully in a way that is understandable even for me!

i had looked at the TC SERIES because they talk about high sound volume with a max SPL of 150 dB and the ability to be used even in close proximity (heaven forbid I get the urge to try an AB pattern up close) but above all because I can only distance myself by 5 m, no more, and I have a repertoire that is mostly late Romantic. Therefore (please correct me if I am wrong), with the lid open and without being able to distance myself further, I fear that the QTC SERIES won't hold up. The QTC series has an SPL of 142 dB and the TC series 150 dB. Is this difference significant? (the Schoeps MK2 have an SPL of 130 dB)

the comparison with the Schoeps also brings up another doubt...

the capture range (is that what it's called?) seems exceptional in the lows. depending on the model, it starts from approx. 3 Hz up to even 50 kHz (QTC 50). in this way, all the harmonics should be present and the sound should be nice and full....the manufacturer speaks of a "warm and natural" sound.

said like that, they would seem even better than the Schoeps....but here too, correct me if I am wrong...the disadvantage, having such a wide range, is recording "reflection harmonics" that have nothing to do with it, thereby "coloring" the sound a little bit?

the price difference between the Schoeps Colette MK2 and the QTC 50 favors the former...while it starts to be felt with the TC30, which are at least 800-900 euros cheaper than the other two.

forgive me if I express myself poorly....I am doing my best to learn but it is a very technical and complex field...

thanks for the tip regarding the preamps, I will keep it in mind...for now I have already ordered the RME FF802...it seemed like a good practical choice (4 XLR with integrated preamps) and with a good quality-price ratio (still... I don't even know how to turn it on yet)....but if I understood correctly, in the future I can expand it according to my needs, even with higher-level external preamps...if my husband doesn't kick me out of the house

In theory, an 8 dB difference is a lot, but in practice it is useless considering that a Jet at takeoff heard from 50 meters away develops 130 dB, just as a Rock Band at 5 meters develops 125 dB. 140 dB is already well beyond the pain threshold and the piano, despite being an instrument with a large soundboard, would never be able to develop these levels. The maximum 130 dB of the Shoeps are already more than sufficient!! I don't understand what you mean when you say you are afraid that the QTC series won't hold up... What shouldn't hold up?

Going on...

There are no reflection harmonics. There are harmonics that are generated by a vibrating body and develop at fractions of its length; the room and the acoustic context have to do with everything that happens after the direct sound, namely the reflections. If the room is not suitable for capturing, it is preferable to record a drier sound, perhaps treating it with some panels, and then adding reverb in post-production.

The characteristic of the frequency range of the QTC series is not so much the fact that it can capture up to 50 kHz—bats might hear 50 kHz, perhaps, but we stop, with great optimism, at 18 kHz—but by increasing the sampling frequency and having a microphone so sensitive to the increase in frequency, it will also be very sensitive in terms of impulse response. Therefore, this data interests us more than the ability to "hear" such high frequencies.

TheSimon wrote:

In theory, an 8 dB difference is huge, but in practice it is useless considering that a Jet at takeoff heard from 50 meters away develops 130 dB, just as a Rock Band at 5 meters develops 125 dB. 140 dB is already well beyond the threshold of pain and the piano, despite being an instrument with a large soundboard, would never be able to develop these levels. The maximum 130 dB of the Shoeps are already more than sufficient!! I don't understand what you mean when you say you are afraid that the QTC series won't hold up... What shouldn't hold up? .

it seemed to me to be much more powerful than a jet! The small room, the beautiful powerful piano, and the type of repertoire had convinced me that it was muuuuuuch more "loud" and would exceed the 142 dB of the QTC. Certainly, the cat runs out of the room at full speed.... I was afraid of distortion and having to then reduce the recording volume too much....

I am certainly getting very confused and I apologize for using inappropriate terms. In my head, I had linked the frequency range with the phenomenon of harmonic distortion. I thought that the harmonics introduced during signal transduction and transmission came from the environment, being foreign to the original sound. And therefore, a mic with a better frequency range would also be more capable of capturing these foreign harmonics. After your clarification, I reread what THD is... and I realized that I was inappropriately linking the frequency range to this parameter.

So, the 50 kHz of the QTC30 or even the 40 kHz of the QTC30 only denote much more sensitivity in sound pickup and no disadvantage for timbre.

as an ignorant person, the Earthworks QTC would seem better for classical piano compared to the Schoeps... what do the latter have to be preferred by more people over the former? Given that there isn't even a timbral disadvantage and both are linear and natural?"

Every microphone has its own characteristic based on its construction. The capturable frequency range is only one parameter; in between, there is a whole series of variations in the ability to capture frequencies, and these determine a characteristic "sound" of the microphone. QTCs are certainly very crystalline, but the frequency characteristics of Shoeps make them more suitable for recording classical piano. They are certainly less suitable for Jazz recordings.

Thank you Simone, you have been a huge help to me. Now I have much clearer ideas so that I can choose... I'll think about it for a little bit and I'll see if I can do some quick math....

You're welcome, don't mention it, feel free to ask for anything else.