Oktava MK-012 vs Schoeps MK41

H

Heezzi

Active member
How does the Okatava MK-012 Joly mod compare to the Schoeps CMC4-6 MK41. Does anyone here own both? If so, would you be kind enough to post samples?

Thanks.
 
Heezzi said:
How does the Okatava MK-012 Joly mod compare to the Schoeps CMC4-6 MK41. Does anyone here own both? If so, would you be kind enough to post samples?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I own both, but don't have time to make a comparison video. I do have videos I made with the Okatava as well as the Schoeps. Let me know if you are interested in that and I'll post some videos.
 
Heezzi said:
How does the Okatava MK-012 Joly mod compare to the Schoeps CMC4-6 MK41.
Click to expand...

Samples I've heard in the past, the Schoeps sorta mops the floor with the Oktava, even with the Joly mod. As one should hope for the relative price difference. The Schoeps are top line products, and sound/act/cost like it. Not a big surprise.

That said, plenty of people get good results from the Oktavas. They tend to be a little touchy with handling noise which can make booming more difficult. Sample-to-sample variance is higher with the Oktavas, IOW some are better than others.

I don't own either mic now and therefore can't post any samples for you. Sorry. What I ended up with in the middle ground between the too -- the AT4053b. Half the price of the Schoeps, sufficient sound quality to make my clients happy, relatively easy to boom with. Clearly, YMMV.
 
Michael Thames said:
I own both, but don't have time to make a comparison video. I do have videos I made with the Okatava as well as the Schoeps. Let me know if you are interested in that and I'll post some videos.
Click to expand...

I would appreciate that. Thanks. you.

Bruce Watson said:
Samples I've heard in the past, the Schoeps sorta mops the floor with the Oktava, even with the Joly mod. As one should hope for the relative price difference. The Schoeps are top line products, and sound/act/cost like it. Not a big surprise.

That said, plenty of people get good results from the Oktavas. They tend to be a little touchy with handling noise which can make booming more difficult. Sample-to-sample variance is higher with the Oktavas, IOW some are better than others.

I don't own either mic now and therefore can't post any samples for you. Sorry. What I ended up with in the middle ground between the too -- the AT4053b. Half the price of the Schoeps, sufficient sound quality to make my clients happy, relatively easy to boom with. Clearly, YMMV.
Click to expand...

I recently bought an Oktava & modded and now I am experiencing gear fever. I was assuming the MK41 mopped the floor did based on stuff I heard vs the regular one but was still curious vs the Joly version. I just wish I just sat still and bought the Schoeps in the first place but as one says Hindsight is 20/20.
 
Last edited:
I'm out now but when I get home I'll post some videos. Needless to say the Schoeps are superior . However before I got the Sheops I really loved the Oktavias.
 
'Most' Oktavas sounds closer to a Neumann KM83/84 than the Schoeps IMO, it also has about the same sensitivity as the Neumanns (low.. 10mV). As I've stated time and time again, Oktava mics are not created equal, with or w/o the mod, some sound really good, others pretty awful, and a lot has to do with the preamp. (not to mention operators skills) I own a matched set of the Sound Room/Oktava 012s, an A 4053 and a Sennheiser MKH50. If I sold all four, I'd barely have enough for one Schoeps, then I'd have no back-up and be short a mic for two boom interior takes.
 
If you are into getting some Scheops you might consider Neumann 184's, here is a comparison between my Scheops MK4 and Neumann 184. Although I prefer the Scheops the Neumann held up surprisingly well against the Scheops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qngmz88wogI

I like to think of the difference between the Neumann 184's and the Scheops MK4's as the difference in shooting Wide Dynamic range, and C-log. The Scheops don't color the sound, they have a very flat frequency response.
 
Last edited:
Michael Thames said:
If you are into getting some Scheops you might consider Neumann 184's, here is a comparison between my Scheops MK4 and Neumann 184. Although I prefer the Scheops the Neumann held up surprisingly well against the Scheops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qngmz88wogI

I like to think of the difference between the Neumann 184's and the Scheops MK4's as the difference in shooting Wide Dynamic range, and C-log. The Scheops don't color the sound, they have a very flat frequency response.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the 185 be a generally better choice for location dialogue than the 184?
 
Last edited:
IronFilm said:
Wouldn't the 185 be a generally better choice for location dialogue than the 184?
Click to expand...

I have no idea....... Heezzi never stated what he was using them for, and have never heard of the 185. I was just showing an example of what I have. Probably the Scheops mk41's are better for dialogue than the mk4's for that matter. From the standpoint that someone asks a question about two mics that I happen to have was rather interesting.
 
Michael Thames said:
I have no idea....... Heezzi never stated what he was using them for, and have never heard of the 185. I was just showing an example of what I have. Probably the Scheops mk41's are better for dialogue than the mk4's for that matter. From the standpoint that someone asks a question about two mics that I happen to have was rather interesting.
Click to expand...

Well yes of course, the mk41 is a way way way more common choice by location sound recordists than the mk4
 
IronFilm said:
Well yes of course, the mk41 is a way way way more common choice by location sound recordists than the mk4
Click to expand...

I have read many swear by the mk41 for recording guitar, I did a lot of research before buying the MK4 specifically for recording guitar. I didn't want a shotgun mic mk41, when I generally place the mics 11 inches from the guitar. Recording dialogue isn't my forte..... for that I just use a Lav suits my needs just fine.

I doubt in the real world people will notice a difference between a cardiod and a hyper cardiod. I bought the MK4 because I felt they were more versatile.
 
Last edited:
Michael Thames said:
I have read many swear by the mk41 for recording guitar, I did a lot of research before buying the MK4 specifically for recording guitar. I didn't want a shotgun mic mk41...
Click to expand...

For the record, the Schoeps mk41 capsule is a hyper, not a shotgun. If you want a 'gun, Schoeps sells good ones. But not as interchangeable capsules for the CMC amplifiers.

The reason so many people like the mk41 for close micing guitar is they like that capsule's particular sound. Many of those same people really don't like the sound of the mk4. IDK why. Popular opinion on the music recording sites like GearSlutz is that the mk4 is the least favorite of the Schoeps capsules. That said, in comparisons of cardioid mics for music, I often pick the mk4 as my winner. Clearly you and I must be crazy. :cheesy:
 
Bruce Watson said:
For the record, the Schoeps mk41 capsule is a hyper, not a shotgun. If you want a 'gun, Schoeps sells good ones. But not as interchangeable capsules for the CMC amplifiers.

The reason so many people like the mk41 for close micing guitar is they like that capsule's particular sound. Many of those same people really don't like the sound of the mk4. IDK why. Popular opinion on the music recording sites like GearSlutz is that the mk4 is the least favorite of the Schoeps capsules. That said, in comparisons of cardioid mics for music, I often pick the mk4 as my winner. Clearly you and I must be crazy. :cheesy:
Click to expand...

Yea, I dreamed about getting Schoeps for years, and read every post on Gearsluts I could. I came to the conclusion most run of the mill recording engineers can't record a classical guitar to save their ass. I'm hyper sensitive to good classical guitar recordings and very critical of even well accepted recordings of world class players. As a guitar maker I find I can't enjoy a concert cause I'm too busy analyzing and criticing the guitarists guitar, probably much the same way film makers watch a film. For every one that preferred the Mk41's for guitar recording on Gearslutz there were again that many who preferred the MK 4's. I agonized over choosing the MK4's vs MK41's. What I finally came down to was most people who preferred the 41's were recording steel string guitar...... very easy to record in my humble opinion. The Classical guitar is much harder to record well, as the all the sound is produced in the detail of the nail striking the string......also if I might be so arrogant, most people who play and appreciate classical guitar are more sensitive to a good tone than the run of the mill steel string players who's motto is...... there's no money above the 3rd fret.

I wanted a slightly warmer sound than what I heard in the mk41's, so I went with the mk4's. Maybe one of these days I'll have $1600 bucks laying around and I'll get a pair of mk41's and could discover something marvelous. I'm happy to hear you prefer the MK4's also, conformation that we aren't nuts....... ha!
 
Bruce Watson said:
For the record, the Schoeps mk41 capsule is a hyper, not a shotgun. If you want a 'gun, Schoeps sells good ones. But not as interchangeable capsules for the CMC amplifiers.:
Click to expand...

Yea, I know, I mentioned before they were cardiod and hyper cardiod, but was just exaggerating a bit and emphasizing the laser like qualities of the mk41's.
 
Michael Thames said:
Yea, I know, I mentioned before they were cardiod and hyper cardiod, but was just exaggerating a bit and emphasizing the laser like qualities of the mk41's.
Click to expand...

Huh. I don't think of the MK41 as laser like. I mean, I'm able to split unexpected two shots with mine. Yep, it's not like the MK4, but perhaps because of its sexy smooth shoulders, instead of laser like, I'd describe the MK41 as like a friendly aphrodisiacal puff that warms the intentions of all under or near it... Sorry; I'm getting carried away... I like both MK4 and MK41 capsules, but the MK41 is my day-in-day-out mic for film/video interiors and sit-down interviews...

;-)
 
Jim Feeley said:
Huh. I don't think of the MK41 as laser like. I mean, I'm able to split unexpected two shots with mine. Yep, it's not like the MK4, but perhaps because of its sexy smooth shoulders, instead of laser like, I'd describe the MK41 as like a friendly aphrodisiacal puff that warms the intentions of all under or near it... Sorry; I'm getting carried away... I like both MK4 and MK41 capsules, but the MK41 is my day-in-day-out mic for film/video interiors and sit-down interviews...

;-)
Click to expand...

Jim, I'd be curious to know what you feel the difference is between them. Miking a classical guitar, I at 8 to 10 inches I felt the MK4's were slightly more forgiving with the high transients, it smoothed them out a little more. For voice and dialogue I haven't a clue.

Would it be fair to say the MK41's being a super cardioid are a bit more focused than than the MK4's cardioid? That's kind a what I meant. Filtering out the noise around the MK41's, I can see how in a film setting they would work better than the MK4's. But for recording guitar I wanted a wider cardioid pattern than the MK41's.
 
Heezzi said:
Any chance you can post vocal samples?
Click to expand...

Sorry I don't have time and I just record guitar not voice. So perhaps someone else can chime in. However I can assure you the Schoeps will be noticeably better than the Oktavia mk-12's, for any purpose. Even Michael Jolly said use the Oktavia until you can get some Scheops!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top