Looking for electret capsule manufacturer recommendations

[kingkorg]

Could you elaborate on that? My impression has been that condensers often have less LF rolloff than handheld vocal-oriented dynamics (and better HF extension too).

I don't think i was clear enough in that reply. When i say not much character i meant condensers are mostly flat in the low end. Yes, there might be roll-off or even a cut, but there are hardly any curves, nulls, bumps. So even if there's a roll off or boost it is linear, and it can be easily compensated with an EQ. Dynamics are different they can have all kinds of shapes in the low end so compensation with an EQ can be tricky.

Either way it seems like there's not much information in the bass (the bandwidth is narrower) and you ought to be able to EQ it better than the HF, because boosting HF exacerbates any circuit hiss.

Am I wrong? Is there LF circuit noise (rumble?) that's a problem that limits your ability to boost the bass with EQ? I would think that LF rumble is usually ambient noise, e.g. from trucks driving nearby or room mode boom, not a mic issue per ser (unless you have a bad shock mount), so it's going to have the same ratio to LF signal whether it's boosted or not. (Boosting a weak LF signal will also boost any LF noise, but won't change the ratio.)

You are absolutely right.

 

[MicMaven]

Good day!
For the record, I have been used both the open and grill version of these condenser capsule, and a similar capsule which has a blue plastic back plate, with success in several microphones over the past couple of years - even before this thread, so I am feeling pretty stud after reading good reports from others here. [Perhaps someone will tell my wife I was right for a change! She won't believe ME . . .]

I put one of these capsules in a Samson G-Track and one with the blue back plate in a CAD GXL1800 with pleasing results over stock JLI 16mm type capsules. They work well with computer speech recognition applications and online Zoom meetings.

I prefer the versions with white or metal back plates over the version with a blue plastic backplate, although it is totally subjective, and I cannot really say why. I second KingKorg's assessment they are realy good with speech up close and personal.

I, too, am amazed they arrive safely in a glassine baggie inside a grey plastic shipping bag, with no protective packaging. Crazy lucky, I guess.

Just my take - merely reinforcing the trend with my experience. James

 

[k brown]

An update on the venerable "KK12 v2" capsules.

Revisiting a couple of mics I built with these, I found that their ~hypercardiod pattern can brought much closer to cardioid by blocking four of the rear plate holes. It also produces a flatter response from behind and a bit richer overall sound (a slight mid/upper mid dip perhaps); also seems to reduce the low end roll off these are (in)famous for.

Overall tonal balance nearly indistinguishable from my AKG C 3000 B with the @kingkorg mod.

https://groupdiy.com/threads/akg-c3000b-5-min-mod-awesome-mic.67911/

 

[k brown]

I'm now liking these capsules so much I put them in these 'M 49-ish' mods I did to BM700 bodies (in place of the AT825 capsules I had in there):

 

[pmfalcman]

I'm now liking these capsules so much I put them in these 'M 49-ish' mods I did to BM700 bodies (in place of the AT825 capsules I had in there):

I share your kink love for short(ened) microphones so I'm planning to improve i.e. shorten my BM-700 clad OPICs. Please advise how did you solved the frame removal issue? I have a few ideas but additional insight would be valuable.

Tasam/Marantz/ISK body is a no brainer. Can do it with my eyes (half)closed but BM700 is a bit trickier.

 

[k brown]

I share your kink love for short(ened) microphones so I'm planning to improve i.e. shorten my BM-700 clad OPICs. Please advise how did you solved the frame removal issue? I have a few ideas but additional insight would be valuable.

Tasam/Marantz/ISK body is a no brainer. Can do it with my eyes (half)closed but BM700 is a bit trickier.

I tend to be a pretty crude 'cobbler', so I just cut the side rails to the desired length, then epoxied the frame back together; trickiest part is holding the parts in alignment while the epoxy sets - the fast stuff is your friend here. I used a small amount at first just to hold the parts together, then bolstered the joint with a second, heavier application around it.

When you shorten the body tube, cut off the top, so you retain the stepped lip at the bottom that the heavy threaded ring seats into. Then you need to file a notch at the top of the tube that you see at the top of the stock tube.

 

[ricardo]

Revisiting a couple of mics I built with these, I found that their ~hypercardiod pattern can brought much closer to cardioid by blocking four of the rear plate holes. It also produces a flatter response from behind

How are you measuring your cardioid mikes behind?

At what distance?

Perfect Cardioids should NOT measure flat from behind at 1m.

 

[k brown]

How are you measuring your cardioid mikes behind?

At what distance?

Perfect Cardioids should NOT measure flat from behind at 1m.

No measuring, just listening and comparing to other, unmodded cardioids. It's not hard to discern a deeply scooped response from behind, from one that is far less so.

It is the natural property of single-diaphragm capsules for their rear response to become flatter as the pattern widens. It's the main reason Tony Faulkner prefers the MK 21 on his four-mic array. Below are the (rarely seen) actual responses of Schoeps capsules. You can see as the pattern goes from supercardioid to sub cardioid, the rear response gets flatter and flatter.

So take my assessments with grain of salt, and try for yourself, and measure if have that capability. I offer these remarks to prod others to their own experiments. As with most things, YMMV.