|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 20, 2015 21:52:47 GMT -6
Anyone used it? Supposedly the 84 with a -12db roll off at 50hz.
|
|
|
|
Post by fishnmusician on Feb 20, 2015 22:53:51 GMT -6
Would like to know too. They're usually hella cheaper to buy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 20, 2015 23:14:57 GMT -6
We had some at Motown. it's an 84 with a roll off. You can possibly buy an 84 capsule for it from Neumann-Sennheiser or just boost the low-end to taste with an equalizer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 20, 2015 23:20:26 GMT -6
Better than a KM84 for acoustics but not nearly as good as a well-maintained (or rebuilt by Sinsay) M582 or KM54.
|
|
|
|
Post by tasteliketape on Feb 21, 2015 7:03:22 GMT -6
Ward on sinsay m582 rebuild do you know if this is like his CV4 mod? Or is just a stock rebuild of m582 replacing bad parts
Also anyone heard his miktek c5 mod?
|
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on Feb 21, 2015 8:52:50 GMT -6
I asked my VK rep about this last fall when they came into a bunch of 85's and 84's.
The idea of a roll off at 50 sounded ideal to me, but he pointed out the roll off starts much, much further up, resulting in a fairly bottom free recording. I looked up an old response chart but I can't recall off hand exactly where.
I just ended up adding another 84.
MJH
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 21, 2015 8:57:52 GMT -6
I have the C5 mod. Really meaty and nice. Probably gonna have him dial in a little more top.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 21, 2015 9:16:04 GMT -6
I'd never say an 85 is better than an 84 for acoustics unless you are using it for a PA system!
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 21, 2015 9:48:25 GMT -6
Well. That answers that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 21, 2015 10:50:53 GMT -6
Ward on sinsay m582 rebuild do you know if this is like his CV4 mod? Or is just a stock rebuild of m582 replacing bad parts Also anyone heard his miktek c5 mod? Well, he rebuilt my old Neumann M582 and I've never heard it sound better. It's awful damned hard to tell the difference between an M582 and a KM54! Especially after Shannon's overhaul! |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 21, 2015 10:52:21 GMT -6
I'd never say an 85 is better than an 84 for acoustics unless you are using it for a PA system! À Chacun, sa même! It depends on the application. If it is a solo acoustic performance or a mix that is heavily dependent on the acoustic guitar, maybe not. But in most applications in modern country and pop music, you want the acoustic to be somewhat thin and fit into a mix without a heavy low-end footprint, and for that, the KM85 is pretty decent. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 21, 2015 11:17:47 GMT -6
I still like the acoustic to have some bottom in it, though...even in a dense mix. I should just get a KM84 and shut the hell up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 21, 2015 11:33:58 GMT -6
Make sure the KM 84 hasn't been "modified" except for removing the output pad and changing the impedance from 50 to 200 Ohms. The beauty of it is its extremely uniform pattern that makes placement far less critical so you never lose spontaneity to "getting sounds." You can usually just throw one up and hit record. There are very few mikes I've ever been able to say that about.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Feb 21, 2015 12:47:29 GMT -6
My understanding is that the 85 was designed as a SDC speech mic, while the correct EQ could restore the correct Frq response, the Phase response is going to be FUBAR!
listen to Bob just buy a 84 and be happy !
|
|
|
|
Post by fishnmusician on Feb 21, 2015 14:03:38 GMT -6
Make sure the KM 84 hasn't been "modified" except for removing the output pad and changing the impedance from 50 to 200 Ohms. The beauty of it is its extremely uniform pattern that makes placement far less critical so you never lose spontaneity to "getting sounds." You can usually just throw one up and hit record. There are very few mikes I've ever been able to say that about. This is good to know about the pad, Somewhere on Klaus's forum he mentions very early KM84 (or is it km86, cant remember which) without pad sounds the best, and has a little lower output. |
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 21, 2015 17:11:51 GMT -6
I love my 84.
I stopped "Chasing" acoustic guitar micing after getting it.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Feb 23, 2015 11:14:34 GMT -6
My km84's rule. I love them and my killer DIY 67's for acoustic and pretty much anything. I could easily make a record with just those 2 mics.
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 23, 2015 16:53:55 GMT -6
I know I have said this before...
but my Km84 and U87 cured my mic searching addiction....
don't worry though..I have plenty of other gear related monkeys on my back
8)
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 23, 2015 17:28:43 GMT -6
I just need to pull the trigger.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 23, 2015 17:30:15 GMT -6
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107
|
Post by ericn on Feb 23, 2015 17:40:57 GMT -6
VK. Simply because 84 were such a utility mic, you have no manufacturers warranty to fall back on, I have seen way to many bad examples! Of course if you would rather take the rest and possibly give Sinsay your money! |
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Feb 23, 2015 17:54:07 GMT -6
I bought mine, off a guy in Oz, who bought it from VK. It had apparently came out of Capitol.
I have never dealt with VK, but I have read a bit on their website.. and it seems cool they do a restoration on stuff they sell, (They did a killer video on restoring a 670). I would probably go that route.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on Feb 23, 2015 20:52:56 GMT -6
Yeah, my VK 84 is older, but its cleaner, has stronger output and is even slightly cleaner.
My other one was serviced my Sennheiser, and Vk still did a nicer job.
Of course, I don't know the starting point of each, but it was still fairly startling.
MJH
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Feb 23, 2015 22:07:17 GMT -6
The weaker output could be the output pad and/or 50 Ohm impedance strap still in place. Sennheiser still sells cases as replacement parts so you can't judge a Neumann by appearance.
|
|
|
|
Post by mjheck on Feb 24, 2015 8:10:27 GMT -6
Great point bob - thanks.
MJH
|
|
