DPA 4099b Dislike?
So I'm looking to get a mic. I think I've settled on the DPA 4099 for my current instrument, although I think I will also get a Troll mic when I get another bass and set it up with all guts.
My question is, have any of you ever used the DPA 4099 and just really didn't like it at all? If so, what do you think it does worst/best?
That Wouldn't Be The Case With Me
You're could be opening a can of worms here, but here's what I think, might be the essential strengths of the DPA 4099B. All microphones, no matter how great they are, will eventually feed back. The DPA 4099B is the most feedback resistant microphone I've ever used. I've compared it to the ATM 35, the AMT SP25B, and the Crown GLM 20. Among that group of microphones, with my Mirecourt Bass, and Evah Parazzi Weichs, it's definitely the best sounding. That said, IMNO, it's not a microphone that works, as a single sound source into a bass amplifier.
There are a host of different pickups, that will do that better.
I agree with Ric. I love my DPA but I wouldn't try to use it for backline, only FOH. If I were really dedicated to having a mic to amp situation, I would try the Troll. It's even more feedback resistant than the DPA.
I loved the DPA and used it exclusively into an amp for a couple of years. The main group I have used it in is a drummer less gypsy jazz group so I wasn't needing a ton of volume. For that application it worked great. When I sent it FOH it was even better. When I heard about the Troll, I got very curious about this ribbon mic used in a live setting, so I ordered one, compared them side by side and decided to put the DPA on the shelf. After using it sparingly over the course of a year, I decided to finally sell it off.
They are both great microphones that posses a ton of clarity and did the job just fine for me. I was able to get a little more volume out of the Troll before feedback, but this wasn't the reason that I ultimately kept the Troll. What I heard coming through the amp, and in a recording where they were set side by side, was a naturalness of sound that the Troll had and the DPA very surprisingly didn't. There was a warmth in the Troll that I was surprised to not hear in the DPA. Perhaps I should have expected it. I was comparing a ribbon mic with a a condenser.
FWIW, the instrument being amplified is a very resonant 30 year old Czech bass with gut strings and tuned in fifths.
Ironically, on my last gig I had to use an Audix D4 because the Troll is picking up some strange new rattles that I haven't been able to locate. The Audix, being a dynamic kick drum mic, seems to be mostly impervious to rattles. :)
DPA's and Recording
I don't think that DPA ever intended the 4099B to be used for recording. I did that on one session, where we need it's isolation, and it sounds to focused. The same thing applies to using it with an amplifier, even with it's unique design, it will still pickup instruments in close proximity, if you have to raise the volume levels. I've had such great results with the Ehrlund, that I use it for most everything. The recordings of the Troll sound wonderful, but like all good mic's, it requires accessories that raise it's
Nothing but problems with the DPA 4099B
I had nothing but problems with the DPA 4099B on stage.
Don't get me wrong, if you're on a stage on your own, the sound quality is fantastic and truly replicates the sound of your bass, however, I found that once my band mates joined me on stage, all I ever had was feedback. It was completely impractical.
I used it on small, cramped stages at local cafe's and clubs, to large theatre stages in London, and always had problems. I soon gave up on it and couldn't get rid of it quick enough.
I went a got myself a Wilson K4, and it's the best purchase I think I have ever made in my life. For my bass, the Wilson K4 is just stellar.
|All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:54 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.