Schoeps M/S: Mid Capsule MK41 or MK4?

Question

I am looking to set up a MS field recording rig based around Schoeps. I am wondering what your experiences are regarding using a Supercardioid (MK41) vs. a Cardioid (MK4) as the Mid channel? Is one preferrable to the other? Obviously there will be some rear pickup with the MK41 but I'm thinking that the flexibility in post-prod when converting the MS recording would be just as good, if not better with a super cardioid as opposed to cardioid. Also, I will have the ability to use the Mid as a mono fx mic as a short-shotgun.

Anybody have experience with this and can offer some insight?

Thanks.

Answer 1

I ended up going with the MK41 and MK8 capsules on xt bodies. Have to say that I love the sound of these mics and recording in MS has introduced me to a whole new world of possibilities for sound effects gathering. The mono mid capsule is indispensable and the ability to choose how wide or how much stereo image you use in post is fantastic. Compared to "fixed" stereo setups like XY, MS does give you a lot more latitude to customize your final sound. Went with the Rycote MS setup as well.

Answer 2

Although both will work just fine the output will be different. Using a cardioid, when the MS is decoded, will give you an exact cardioid XY configuration. Using a supercardioid distorts this but it may be what you're after. A friend and colleague of mine had a great excel spreadsheet which graphs the output based on different M mics. I'll have to get it from him...

Answer 3

Joseph is right, the output is different, because of the 'rear' pickup your stereo field is not correct. This might result in phasing issues and perhaps more noticeable a stereo image leak from R>L and L>R. A car passing behind you would first be heard softly from the opposite direction in your stereo image. But if you're only interested in spot miking with 'some stereo information' than it shouldn't really be an issue.

Good luck

Answer 4

My setup is based around a Schoeps CCM 41 and CCM 8. I think I'm using it the same way you want to do and I'm overall very happy with the results. The leak in the stereo image is there, but is very rarely a problem and the distance factor of the CCM 41 is quite better than the CCM 4, when you decide in post to make it mono, it's a lot better spotted with the CCM 41. When I'm exactly aware of what the scene will look like, I'll use the CMIT as a mid microphone, but most documentaries I've worked on are not that predictable and the CCM 41 is for instance much nicer to pick up a spontaneous dialogue (since the off axis also sound good). For the suspension you might want to check out the Cinela company based in France. The make absolutely great suspensions and wind protection stuff specially for Schoeps microphones, they're expensive, but much better than Rycote in my opinion.

Answer 5

instead of MK41, look at supercmit: http://digital.schoeps.de/de/products/supercmit for even more focus on the center.

Answer 6

I have an M/S rig that is simply built from two CMC6 bodies cable-tied together with a small piece of foam separating the two bodies. One one body I have an MK8 and the other body I can place an MK21,MK4 or MK41 capsule depending on the application. I love my M/S rig. MK4 and MK41 both get a good workout. MK21 or MK4 usually for music and MK41 for effects or ATMOS. The beauty of the CMC body is that you don't have to build just one M/S rig - you can change the capsule depending on the application.

Not really much point IMHO in gaffering an MK8 to a SuperCMIT. Most of the time with a CMIT you are going to be recording dialog or point effects which will be used in mono mode by the dialog editor. The MK8 will most likely be discarded.