Very nice overview of the new Neumann offering in comparison to its established competition. I'm both an audio engineer and a cellist, so I've tried a lot of mics besides the DPA 4099, including many that cost what you'd pay for an excellent bow. Your engineer was spot on when he discussed the sonic differences between these two, and also what he said about leakage rejection. The Neumann is a conventional cardiod design whose directivity holds up at low frequencies. The DPA is based on a miniature omni capsule placed at the back of an interference tube. It ends up having superior directivity at high frequencies, but it can't achieve the same result at low frequencies because its dimensions are too small. The characteristic 4099 colorations are also attributable to resonances caused by that interference tube. In fact, if it were magically removed, you'd basically end up with a DPA 4060, which we all know as a far superior-sounding mic that can't be used on loud stages because it's an omni. Because it isn't saddled with that inference tube resonance, the MCM 114 has a smoother, classier high end that I liked very much. It ends up sounding almost as dark as a small ribbon like the Beyer m160 I use often on stage. I'd be inclined to use a shelving EQ to open up the top end a bit; it's smooth enough to take that kind of treatment with aplomb. Still, it sounds really classy on violin as its untreated self, whereas the 4099 had moments in this demo when it started to sound too much like a SM 57 for comfort. I was less thrilled with the Neumann on cello because I hear its cardioid-induced proximity effect as unwanted coloration. I rarely like cardioids in that position, no matter who makes them. Two mics that I do like are the DPA 4015 and the Schoeps MK21, both sub-cardioids with less bass tip-up as a result. Even those sound far better if they're backed off a bit, but you don't dare do it on a very loud stage. When it comes to more directional mics, my choices are the aforementioned Beyer m160 and the Schoeps MK41. Both are supercardioids, and both require corrective EQ on the bottom. Their top ends could not be more different from one another, but there's a place for either presentation, depending on what kind of material you're playing. Anyway, I'm happy to have stumbled across your channel. Nice work, folks!
I just sold my DPA 4099 exclusively used for flamenco guitar. I hated the guitar mount and sent numerous emails to DPA - taping the mount takes away from the sleekness of the design. I also feel that the DPA had a bit of a harsher representation of the highs on my flamenco guitars IMO. This was a great A/B video. Thanks for the work! Def worth ordering an MCM just by the better guitar mount design. The warmer and smoother sonic advantages are a plus!
Well... the Neumann sounds noticeably better to me. It's fuller in the low frequencies and *really* nicely balanced across the frequency spectrum. The DPA sounds a bit thinner and has a resonance or hyped frequency in the mids, causing it to sound more harsh on the ears. It's not a night-and-day difference, and if I hadn't heard them side-by-side I wouldn't have noticed it. But when it comes to high-ends mics, those minor differences are what you pay for.
Amazing review, as claimed Neumann is more warm and flat. In the violin the difference is very clear, and in cello DPA can work very well because it is a darker instrument, but when you need to be accurate about high frequency the Neumann MCM delivers a better sound in my opinion, surely it can do a great job in guitars, better than the harshness of the DPA
ปีที่แล้ว +2
Very interesting comparison. Thank you for this video. The microphone from Neumann sounds great. Full sound, velvety, pleasant to the ear, realistic. DPA in my opinion has unpleasant hi freq at times (but still great). Neumann sounds like a slightly processed EQ sound. My personal feeling is that this microphone is more "friendly" sounding, a bit like a ribbon microphones, sounds more like a ready "recording". I am violinist (using DPA for 5 years) and I will buy Neumann mcm 114 now. Thanks! All best.
Hey! Thanks so much for this comparison! I’ve been waiting for the Neumann for a while now and I now see I made the right choice for my needs. Thanks again!
Thanks for doing this comparison!! I was an early adpoter of the DPA4099 when they first came out but two of them failed me on two really important gigs so I have been looking for a different option for years now. The Neumann looks hopeful.
Nice video over all. The two mics sound very similar to my ears on every video that I watch. The sound and editing of the voices was a bit irritating, though. Jacobs voice is way louder (sometimes slightly distorting?) than the other two and end of sentences got chopped of too early in a few instances.
thanks for the very nice test, in my headphones, I can hear a high pitch noise when you guys talk, at first I almost stopped to watch the video as I thought it wasn't serious but I am glad I didn't. I would have like if the same moment were shown with different mics instead of switching between mics at different moment as it feel easier to compare on the same articulations. just a suggestion as I appreciate this method by other reviewers. Subscribed! thanks for your great work
Alain, ys thank you for your kind words. We are very serious indeed. So Doing these types of comparisons in video form is always tricky. one has to choose how best to engage the viewer and there are tradeoffs in every case. However, as we mention in the video this is why we created thepickuptest.com with its library that allows people to hear the same player/instrument/excerpts in the same room recorded with the same preamps at and compare in real-time as you would with recordings in a DAW. The youtube videos are helpful to many and raise awareness about our work, but The best format for deep in depth comparisons.
That’s why we do the tests and let people listen for themselves Erich! Really funny how we’ve been getting some comments from people talking about how they thought anointment blew away the DPA in terms of sound quality and vice a versa!
The Neumann definitely sounds better (flatter, smoother, deeper lows) but that comes at the cost of a little more handling noise in the low end, which you might need to filter out. Overal I prefer the sound of the Neumann.
I use a DPA 4099 on about 150 gigs a year. The microdot cable has proved annoying; I recently had to order a new cable because the first one failed, and DPA does not cover that type of failure (twisting and untwisting a cable is asking for problems yet that is their design). I like the smoother and darker tone of the Neumann. I like their cable attachment infinitely better than the 4099. I don't mind the big windscreen but I do mind how the cable comes off the violin on a diagonal. If they fix this I will most likely switch to the Neumann.
the DPA definitely has a honk to it. the Neumann is silky smooth in the highs, less strident in the high mids. The DPA has it's place, possibly in an ensemble , to cut through the band...but for solo, the Neumann is hands down the winner.
Hey, thanks for testing these to microphones. is there a reason why the right audio channel is way lower than the left one? Also the speaker audio is very distorted and sounds a little out of phase... Regards the DPA: it confirms my experiences after using this microphone for more than 8 years on my Saxophones (Soprano, Alto, Tenor) - it is overall a great sounding mic making it perfect for live performances even at higher volumes without too much feedback issues. In this video, I don't like how the low, percussive contents of the cello sound are a little suppressed by the 4099 while there is a tiny over-accentuation of the mids, as mentioned before. The Neumann, in my left ear :-) , sounds more accurate, even more studio-like offering more details of what the instrument does sound like. Therefore, it could be a good replacement even for recording situations. Other things I don't like with the 4099: - the capsule mount does not transfer body sound which is better than cheaper microphones do, but for the price that it is very flimsy, it doesn't hold the capsule very reliably. - the microdot connectors are not made to last forever, I could not unscrew the cable from the microphone as I would be supposed to destroy it. - the connection between the gooseneck and the saxophone clamp mount is not very tight, it may result in a mic drop moment (unwanted, of course) - the goose neck is flimsy as well, you will probably loose your favorite pick-up position during an evening of performing - microdot-to-Sennheiser-3,5mm-adapter was 99,- Euro back in the days (today: 89,- Euro) After countless gigs and near-daily usage for practicing purposes at home, I'm thinking about getting a replacement. Both the Neumann and the overhauled DPA 4099, as well as some saxophone-specialised solutions from LD Systems or AMT, will be considered.
Interesting review and thanks for sharing. I must say I’m personally not a fan of the mic position on the cello and find pointing the capsule towards the base of the bridge (about where the sound post sits) gives a better tone particularly in louder environments. I’m keen to try the Neumann at some stage soon. 🤓
N, that certainly hasn’t been my experience with the DPA at least. But of course, Mike positioning and instruments are infinitely variable so I can’t imagine a test, that really addresses all of the variables, at least not one that would be less than six or seven hours!
@@ElectricStringPlayer as production manager and sound engineer of a professional orchestra for nearly 15 years I never found the sound hole of either a cello or double bass being the best position for a mic to amplify those instruments, like you don’t put a mic on the hole of an acoustic guitar.
@@ianwollstein8974 Ian, appreciate that and to each their own.... There are definitely tradeoff points with isolation/sound quality as well, but please keep in mind we've been using/testing these in every possible situation since they his the market, the engineers we work with including our lead Scott is a grammy award-winning engineer and sound designer, and that goes for several of our testers as well, so plenty of experience on this side also!
Дякую за вашу працю. Лайк та коментар на підтримку каналу. Зазначу, що при використанні такого близького розташування мікрофона, його позиція та спрямованість по осі значно більше впливає на тембр, ніж назва мікрофона. Для кожної моделі можна знайти місця, де вони звучатимуть відповідно до ваших запитів та смаку.
Good test! Thank you! But I can't believe they , being in a studio, didn't monitor the sound during talking and uploaded the video without fixing the buzz😢
No one else came here to examine the audio quality of the dialogue- we came to hear some a/b of the mics in question. J.C. sound people- and I include myself- are like comic book people sometimes: hyperfocused on the irrelevant in ways that would even make an adhd sufferer blush.
Do you think these Mics are too noisy for Studio work? 23 DPA seems very noisy. I'm into music like Alvin Lucier and Elaine radigue, very quiet delicate classical drone music. And stuff like taku sugimoto which has lots of Silence in the compositions I've been working on extended techniques with my ebow and acoustic guitar that can't be amplfied by normal guitar pickups i was hoping these mics would work but 23dba of self-noise seems too much. Does anyone have any experience with super quiet delicate music and these mics?
??? I am baffled by the choice of mic locations. In my experience pressure gradient mics (cards, supers and figure 8) need to be farther from the instrument to get a more balanced sound. Second, directly over the f hole exaggerates the Helmholtz resonance. I am also hearing a metallic resonance - did you try flicking the mic stalks with your finger to see if the mics and mounts were dead enough? I am not hearing the extreme treble air of the bow scratch either. I have done comparisons between the DPA4099 and my vintage Countryman EM101's on stage, and the DPA was a distant second place - except the Countryman was a little noisier. The EM101 is a ruler flat omni lav that works really well between the bridge and and tailpiece, under the strings on a DPA MHS6005 clip where there is minimal interference with playing. Countryman does not have an equivalent in production, but the Sanken COS11 is a close match on specs - anybody try that one?
Martin, our method is to start with the manufacturer's literature and recommended placement as shown in their pictures and the manual. In the case of the cello there is more than one standard mic position. I agree that the F hole placement is initially counterintuitive if you are used to studio micing, but in practical performance situations, particularly loud ones, I and many of the sound men I work with have found it to be the ideal placement for cello in terms of noise rejection and balanced tonal response. We did flick the mounts, and they were both pretty dead, although even if they were not, we would not try to replace them as the test is designed to give people an idea of what they can expect out of the box. Yes you can hear the countyman on the pickuptest site as well. The DPA MHS6005 clip is not designed to hold a 4099 and would not fit this one or the Neumann for that matter. Further it would not be practical for the gooseneck configuration and would leave players with even less distance from the instrument. Jacob
To my ears, the 4099 had a slight sweetness lacking in the Neumann. Some might call that coloration, granted, but it was more sonically appealing at last to me, whereas the Neumann sounded more blunt or rigid, so to speak.
Very nice overview of the new Neumann offering in comparison to its established competition. I'm both an audio engineer and a cellist, so I've tried a lot of mics besides the DPA 4099, including many that cost what you'd pay for an excellent bow. Your engineer was spot on when he discussed the sonic differences between these two, and also what he said about leakage rejection. The Neumann is a conventional cardiod design whose directivity holds up at low frequencies. The DPA is based on a miniature omni capsule placed at the back of an interference tube. It ends up having superior directivity at high frequencies, but it can't achieve the same result at low frequencies because its dimensions are too small. The characteristic 4099 colorations are also attributable to resonances caused by that interference tube. In fact, if it were magically removed, you'd basically end up with a DPA 4060, which we all know as a far superior-sounding mic that can't be used on loud stages because it's an omni.
Because it isn't saddled with that inference tube resonance, the MCM 114 has a smoother, classier high end that I liked very much. It ends up sounding almost as dark as a small ribbon like the Beyer m160 I use often on stage. I'd be inclined to use a shelving EQ to open up the top end a bit; it's smooth enough to take that kind of treatment with aplomb. Still, it sounds really classy on violin as its untreated self, whereas the 4099 had moments in this demo when it started to sound too much like a SM 57 for comfort. I was less thrilled with the Neumann on cello because I hear its cardioid-induced proximity effect as unwanted coloration. I rarely like cardioids in that position, no matter who makes them. Two mics that I do like are the DPA 4015 and the Schoeps MK21, both sub-cardioids with less bass tip-up as a result. Even those sound far better if they're backed off a bit, but you don't dare do it on a very loud stage. When it comes to more directional mics, my choices are the aforementioned Beyer m160 and the Schoeps MK41. Both are supercardioids, and both require corrective EQ on the bottom. Their top ends could not be more different from one another, but there's a place for either presentation, depending on what kind of material you're playing.
Anyway, I'm happy to have stumbled across your channel. Nice work, folks!
Thank you for sharing. Your experience is appreciated.
This was helpful info. Thank you! May The Peace of Jesus Christ be with you, and your family; today, and forever.
Thanks so much for checking out the review guys. This one took a lot of time and love! Again for supporting our work and spreading the word
I regularly use 40 Neumann MCM on the strings of a symphony, it's great, you can work easily, much less EQ than the DPA 4099 ! the best option for me
I just sold my DPA 4099 exclusively used for flamenco guitar. I hated the guitar mount and sent numerous emails to DPA - taping the mount takes away from the sleekness of the design. I also feel that the DPA had a bit of a harsher representation of the highs on my flamenco guitars IMO. This was a great A/B video. Thanks for the work! Def worth ordering an MCM just by the better guitar mount design. The warmer and smoother sonic advantages are a plus!
Well... the Neumann sounds noticeably better to me. It's fuller in the low frequencies and *really* nicely balanced across the frequency spectrum. The DPA sounds a bit thinner and has a resonance or hyped frequency in the mids, causing it to sound more harsh on the ears. It's not a night-and-day difference, and if I hadn't heard them side-by-side I wouldn't have noticed it. But when it comes to high-ends mics, those minor differences are what you pay for.
Amazing review, as claimed Neumann is more warm and flat. In the violin the difference is very clear, and in cello DPA can work very well because it is a darker instrument, but when you need to be accurate about high frequency the Neumann MCM delivers a better sound in my opinion, surely it can do a great job in guitars, better than the harshness of the DPA
Very interesting comparison. Thank you for this video. The microphone from Neumann sounds great. Full sound, velvety, pleasant to the ear, realistic. DPA in my opinion has unpleasant hi freq at times (but still great). Neumann sounds like a slightly processed EQ sound. My personal feeling is that this microphone is more "friendly" sounding, a bit like a ribbon microphones, sounds more like a ready "recording". I am violinist (using DPA for 5 years) and I will buy Neumann mcm 114 now. Thanks! All best.
Hey! Thanks so much for this comparison! I’ve been waiting for the Neumann for a while now and I now see I made the right choice for my needs. Thanks again!
Glad you dug it Faremis! Thanks so much for your support!
Thanks for doing this comparison!! I was an early adpoter of the DPA4099 when they first came out but two of them failed me on two really important gigs so I have been looking for a different option for years now. The Neumann looks hopeful.
It certainly is to our ears as well Duane! More to come!
Nice video over all.
The two mics sound very similar to my ears on every video that I watch.
The sound and editing of the voices was a bit irritating, though. Jacobs voice is way louder (sometimes slightly distorting?) than the other two and end of sentences got chopped of too early in a few instances.
thanks for the very nice test, in my headphones, I can hear a high pitch noise when you guys talk, at first I almost stopped to watch the video as I thought it wasn't serious but I am glad I didn't. I would have like if the same moment were shown with different mics instead of switching between mics at different moment as it feel easier to compare on the same articulations. just a suggestion as I appreciate this method by other reviewers. Subscribed! thanks for your great work
Alain, ys thank you for your kind words. We are very serious indeed. So Doing these types of comparisons in video form is always tricky. one has to choose how best to engage the viewer and there are tradeoffs in every case. However, as we mention in the video this is why we created thepickuptest.com with its library that allows people to hear the same player/instrument/excerpts in the same room recorded with the same preamps at and compare in real-time as you would with recordings in a DAW. The youtube videos are helpful to many and raise awareness about our work, but The best format for deep in depth comparisons.
Thanks guys. I’ve been looking forward to this strings-specific review. IMO, definitely no reason yet to change from my DPA’s to the Neumann.
That’s why we do the tests and let people listen for themselves Erich! Really funny how we’ve been getting some comments from people talking about how they thought anointment blew away the DPA in terms of sound quality and vice a versa!
The Neumann definitely sounds better (flatter, smoother, deeper lows) but that comes at the cost of a little more handling noise in the low end, which you might need to filter out. Overal I prefer the sound of the Neumann.
I use a DPA 4099 on about 150 gigs a year. The microdot cable has proved annoying; I recently had to order a new cable because the first one failed, and DPA does not cover that type of failure (twisting and untwisting a cable is asking for problems yet that is their design).
I like the smoother and darker tone of the Neumann. I like their cable attachment infinitely better than the 4099. I don't mind the big windscreen but I do mind how the cable comes off the violin on a diagonal. If they fix this I will most likely switch to the Neumann.
The microdot can be a problem Phil, we certainly agree there!
The flexible gooseneck should allow to bend the end of the gooseneck down so it's not sticking out. Just as you need it.
@@schallmauer83 not completely actually. It is a strange design choice to be sure.
Thanks. I use a dpa and I haven't tested the newmann yet, but anyway, I'm happy with the results of my mic
Yes there’s no denying the DPA is a really good Mic
the DPA definitely has a honk to it. the Neumann is silky smooth in the highs, less strident in the high mids. The DPA has it's place, possibly in an ensemble , to cut through the band...but for solo, the Neumann is hands down the winner.
It's very hard to beat a 4099 on ANY instrument! I use them on my toms and they are amazing!
Hey, thanks for testing these to microphones.
is there a reason why the right audio channel is way lower than the left one? Also the speaker audio is very distorted and sounds a little out of phase...
Regards the DPA: it confirms my experiences after using this microphone for more than 8 years on my Saxophones (Soprano, Alto, Tenor) - it is overall a great sounding mic making it perfect for live performances even at higher volumes without too much feedback issues. In this video, I don't like how the low, percussive contents of the cello sound are a little suppressed by the 4099 while there is a tiny over-accentuation of the mids, as mentioned before. The Neumann, in my left ear :-) , sounds more accurate, even more studio-like offering more details of what the instrument does sound like. Therefore, it could be a good replacement even for recording situations.
Other things I don't like with the 4099:
- the capsule mount does not transfer body sound which is better than cheaper microphones do, but for the price that it is very flimsy, it doesn't hold the capsule very reliably.
- the microdot connectors are not made to last forever, I could not unscrew the cable from the microphone as I would be supposed to destroy it.
- the connection between the gooseneck and the saxophone clamp mount is not very tight, it may result in a mic drop moment (unwanted, of course)
- the goose neck is flimsy as well, you will probably loose your favorite pick-up position during an evening of performing
- microdot-to-Sennheiser-3,5mm-adapter was 99,- Euro back in the days (today: 89,- Euro)
After countless gigs and near-daily usage for practicing purposes at home, I'm thinking about getting a replacement. Both the Neumann and the overhauled DPA 4099, as well as some saxophone-specialised solutions from LD Systems or AMT, will be considered.
Both are perfect.
Interesting review and thanks for sharing. I must say I’m personally not a fan of the mic position on the cello and find pointing the capsule towards the base of the bridge (about where the sound post sits) gives a better tone particularly in louder environments. I’m keen to try the Neumann at some stage soon. 🤓
N, that certainly hasn’t been my experience with the DPA at least. But of course, Mike positioning and instruments are infinitely variable so I can’t imagine a test, that really addresses all of the variables, at least not one that would be less than six or seven hours!
@@ElectricStringPlayer as production manager and sound engineer of a professional orchestra for nearly 15 years I never found the sound hole of either a cello or double bass being the best position for a mic to amplify those instruments, like you don’t put a mic on the hole of an acoustic guitar.
@@ianwollstein8974 Ian, appreciate that and to each their own.... There are definitely tradeoff points with isolation/sound quality as well, but please keep in mind we've been using/testing these in every possible situation since they his the market, the engineers we work with including our lead Scott is a grammy award-winning engineer and sound designer, and that goes for several of our testers as well, so plenty of experience on this side also!
Besides the screeching on the right ear during talking, this is a really interesting video. I really struggled to pick out the difference honestly 😅
Glad it was helpful!
@@ElectricStringPlayer These high frequency noise came apparently from the handheld mic, not during the music parts.
Дякую за вашу працю. Лайк та коментар на підтримку каналу. Зазначу, що при використанні такого близького розташування мікрофона, його позиція та спрямованість по осі значно більше впливає на тембр, ніж назва мікрофона. Для кожної моделі можна знайти місця, де вони звучатимуть відповідно до ваших запитів та смаку.
To me the Neumann sounds flat where the DPA has a brighter sound !
Good test! Thank you! But I can't believe they , being in a studio, didn't monitor the sound during talking and uploaded the video without fixing the buzz😢
No one else came here to examine the audio quality of the dialogue- we came to hear some a/b of the mics in question.
J.C. sound people- and I include myself- are like comic book people sometimes: hyperfocused on the irrelevant in ways that would even make an adhd sufferer blush.
@@slofty but the review is still great I watched until the end. Thank you for your work!
Do you think these Mics are too noisy for Studio work? 23 DPA seems very noisy.
I'm into music like Alvin Lucier and Elaine radigue, very quiet delicate classical drone music. And stuff like taku sugimoto which has lots of Silence in the compositions
I've been working on extended techniques with my ebow and acoustic guitar that can't be amplfied by normal guitar pickups i was hoping these mics would work but 23dba of self-noise seems too much. Does anyone have any experience with super quiet delicate music and these mics?
I've done some studio work with both including replacing big string sections for artists like Brett Young. Noice is not an issue with either mic.
I really appreciate your video because I am looking for comparison video 4099 vs Mcm114 :)
??? I am baffled by the choice of mic locations. In my experience pressure gradient mics (cards, supers and figure 8) need to be farther from the instrument to get a more balanced sound. Second, directly over the f hole exaggerates the Helmholtz resonance. I am also hearing a metallic resonance - did you try flicking the mic stalks with your finger to see if the mics and mounts were dead enough? I am not hearing the extreme treble air of the bow scratch either.
I have done comparisons between the DPA4099 and my vintage Countryman EM101's on stage, and the DPA was a distant second place - except the Countryman was a little noisier. The EM101 is a ruler flat omni lav that works really well between the bridge and and tailpiece, under the strings on a DPA MHS6005 clip where there is minimal interference with playing. Countryman does not have an equivalent in production, but the Sanken COS11 is a close match on specs - anybody try that one?
Martin, our method is to start with the manufacturer's literature and recommended placement as shown in their pictures and the manual. In the case of the cello there is more than one standard mic position. I agree that the F hole placement is initially counterintuitive if you are used to studio micing, but in practical performance situations, particularly loud ones, I and many of the sound men I work with have found it to be the ideal placement for cello in terms of noise rejection and balanced tonal response. We did flick the mounts, and they were both pretty dead, although even if they were not, we would not try to replace them as the test is designed to give people an idea of what they can expect out of the box. Yes you can hear the countyman on the pickuptest site as well. The DPA MHS6005 clip is not designed to hold a 4099 and would not fit this one or the Neumann for that matter. Further it would not be practical for the gooseneck configuration and would leave players with even less distance from the instrument.
Jacob
Cual recomiendas para un acordeón, DPA 4099 o Neumann CMC ?
Nice video, but I'm really sad to hear some buzzing sound while talking and later on your voice is overloaded :(
what about guitar
Sorry Leon. our community is for bowed strings (including bass) only.... probably a ton of good reviews for guitar players on other sites.
To my ears, the 4099 had a slight sweetness lacking in the Neumann. Some might call that coloration, granted, but it was more sonically appealing at last to me, whereas the Neumann sounded more blunt or rigid, so to speak.
bagus ... tapi pasti mahal sekali.... 😢😢
Our thoughts exactly
@@ElectricStringPlayer🤠
give away dong kaka
On a live performance on the stage Dpa will be more safe.
Neumann caldo jazz , dpa power transparent.