• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Double Bass Neumann MCM 114

CryingBass

CryingBass

Gold Supporting Member
Apr 8, 2016
5,967
10,253
#1
Any of you guys tried one of these yet? Pretty new. Looking for a Guinee Pig.

Pickups are like 50% of the posts on the DB side here, but I have not seen any chatter about this yet. Surely interesting, at least.


upload_2022-4-7_16-54-7.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: peteswanson91 and bassically_eli
#3
We’re just waiting on you to try it out “Kaspar” after you’re very close to the source. :)

It appears they are going after the rather lucrative market that one of their competitors (DPA)
has developed within the popular orchestra concerts for commercial artists and film soundtracks played live.

Although at this point I have my eyes on a Schoeps CMC1 MK 41 which seems to be the Gold standard for recording live and FOH. My Remic DB5400LB is pretty remarkable at the same price point as the Neumann and way easier to mount. Just my take.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CryingBass
#4
And this line has a lot of different mounting options and instrument targets. I don't play my UB much these days, but I am going to keep my eye on reviews after it starts rolling-out more-widely. My current solution is a 100-year old ( ok, 40 ) Barcus Barry bridge-mount. I like the theoretical advantage of the positioning options with something like this, not to mention ( sans feedback ) an open mic solution not on a stand.

Thanks for the feedback guys.
 
#6
No experience with the MCM 114, but I compiled some data you may find useful:

Looks like the street price for the MCM 115 bass kit is $699. Not sure if these have actually dropped yet as the websites I reviewed list them as pre-order or special order.

From the MCM 114 Quick Guide:
upload_2022-4-8_13-35-13.png

upload_2022-4-8_13-37-5.png



DPA 4099 plots:
upload_2022-4-8_13-43-19.png




ATM350A plots:
upload_2022-4-8_13-45-39.png


From the comparisons I have seen (IMHO) the DP 4099B seems to have slightly better tone and isolation than the ATM350A. I would find it hard to justify the spending twice as much for the DPA.

The Neumann is about the same price as the DPA.

The Xlson Chuck Israeals is about 40% more than the DPA

The two Schoeps options are almost 3X as much as the DPA.

I own ATM350A but haven't used them. I have used Schoeps CMC6 with Mk4 and Mk6 capsules, but not on upright bass. These are very expensive/high-end mics. I used them in a concert band setting for grand piano, horns, and mallet instruments. My impression is they were very accurate/transparent/clear with a tendency to make the tone slightly warmer...but it's been a long time since I used them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jason Hollar, LaFaro01, sludgetail and 4 others
#7
Kaspar Vadsholt said:
My impression, comparing it to my Schoeps mk41, is that the Schoeps has more output, sounds a little beefier, but is more feedback-prone.
The Neumann holds it’s own, and is a bit more natural/bright. The DPA-like mount is a big plus IMO, since I can leave it on my bass, instead of always dismounting the H-clamp, that I use for the Schoeps.
Click to expand...

One question John, approximate how long is the Gooseneck? What I found was, with the original Gooseneck on the DPA 4099B was to short to mount in the after lengths and reach through the feet of the bridge to get in close enough to reach the top.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LaFaro01
#10
Kaspar Vadsholt said:
My impression, comparing it to my Schoeps mk41, is that the Schoeps has more output, sounds a little beefier, but is more feedback-prone.
The Neumann holds it’s own, and is a bit more natural/bright. The DPA-like mount is a big plus IMO, since I can leave it on my bass, instead of always dismounting the H-clamp, that I use for the Schoeps.
Click to expand...
The Schoeps is more feedback prone? That’s very interesting. I was about to put an order on a Schoeps but if the Neumann is better in this regards and also cheaper and easier to mount, then it’s a no-brainer….
 
#11
Kristian, perhaps it’s because the Schoeps has more output. Only had a somewhat brief AB session with the two.
The Neumann has a cardioid pattern which, on paper picks more up from the sides, whereas the Schoeps mk41 is hypercardioid, thus narrower, but also pick up sounds from the rear. I’d love to check out a Schoeps MK 4 cardioid capsule. Anyway, the Neumann’s price point is very appealing, as well as it’s unobtrusive, DPA-like mounting system
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ric Vice, CryingBass, Wasnex and 1 other person
#12
Kaspar Vadsholt said:
Kristian, perhaps it’s because the Schoeps has more output. Only had a somewhat brief AB session with the two.
The Neumann has a cardioid pattern which, on paper picks more up from the sides, whereas the Schoeps mk41 is hypercardioid, thus narrower, but also pick up sounds from the rear. I’d love to check out a Schoeps MK 4 cardioid capsule. Anyway, the Neumann’s price point is very appealing, as well as it’s unobtrusive, DPA-like mounting system
Click to expand...
Since the Schoeps is a hypercardiod, and the Neumann is a „normal“ cardioid, it didn’t make any sense that the Schoeps would be more prone to feedback but who knows! I’ll see if I could try them both out before making my mind…
 
  • Like
Reactions: CryingBass and flatback
#14
I had a conversation with my rep at Sweetwater today, because one of my issues with the DPA 4099B (pre Devote) was that the standard gooseneck was two short to clear the inside arch of my bridge, since you

have to bend it into a S curve to clear the back of the inside of the bridge and position the capsule right above the top at the "sweet spot". The DPA Gooseneck would always start to been back and touch the bridge arch

which would vibrate the mic. The gooseneck on the Neumann 5.9" long vs 5'5 on the DPA so it's possible that it will work better on my bass, but that's not a significant difference. Now DPA solved this problem

on when they revised the 4099 Dvote and added a gooseneck extension, but the DPA isn't to my personal liking as it's timbre leans into the midrange a little to much for my taste.
 
#17
Kristian said:
Since the Schoeps is a hypercardiod, and the Neumann is a „normal“ cardioid, it didn’t make any sense that the Schoeps would be more prone to feedback but who knows! I’ll see if I could try them both out before making my mind…
Click to expand...

I believe the term used for the Schoeps MK 41 is “Supercardoid” that’s slightly different from a “Hypercardoid”. As I recall, DPA 4099Dvote is a figure 8 (Shotgun) There are different ways to tame feedback. The Schoeps CMC6/CMC1 bodies are among the finest in the world. Along with MK6 and MK41 capsules their used for recording music live on motion picture sets.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kristian and Kaspar Vadsholt
#18
So, I just had another go A/B-ing the Schoeps to the Neumann. It’s a bit of an apple-to-orange comparison, due to the placement (see picture).
(The Neumann’s is mounted via a DPA cello holder +gaffer’s tape, since it’s a demo model).
I must take back what I said about Schoeps being more feedback prone. This time it was the Neumann, that came closest to howl.
This was in my loft versus an open church space last time, so that probably was a factor.
The Schoeps to me is the superior mic. It should be, costing a lot more.
The sound guys at my regular gig, (the Danish Radio Bigband) loved the Neumann, however. It’s probably due to the fact that it picks up more of the whole picture. Using it the “Grenadier way”, the Schoeps is definitely easier to use.
 

Attachments

  • E0E899B7-4B7E-4CC9-BFFC-E342901C2FA9.jpeg
    E0E899B7-4B7E-4CC9-BFFC-E342901C2FA9.jpeg
    857.1 KB · Views: 457
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jason Hollar, Martin Spure, Ric Vice and 4 others
#19
Kaspar Vadsholt said:
So, I just had another go A/B-ing the Schoeps to the Neumann. It’s a bit of an apple-to-orange comparison, due to the placement (see picture).
(The Neumann’s is mounted via a DPA cello holder +gaffer’s tape, since it’s a demo model).
I must take back what I said about Schoeps being more feedback prone. This time it was the Neumann, that came closest to howl.
This was in my loft versus an open church space last time, so that probably was a factor.
The Schoeps to me is the superior mic. It should be, costing a lot more.
The sound guys at my regular gig, (the Danish Radio Bigband) loved the Neumann, however. It’s probably due to the fact that it picks up more of the whole picture. Using it the “Grenadier way”, the Schoeps is definitely easier to use.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the update! Ok, it’s back to plan A then… ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sam Reese and Kaspar Vadsholt
#20
Nice picture Kaspar!

The capsule on the Neumann looks a bit larger than the DPA. My take is that, if I had the disposable funds, it get the Schoeps CMC1/MK41 and separate the body from the capsule via their Lemo cable. Then figure out a way to have someone
make me a goosneck that accepts the capsule and attaches to the afterlengths just like the DPA and Neumann does. Seems like a no brainer to me, but I'm sure that like doing acrobatics on a trampoline it's not as easy as it sounds.
I have the pair of Remic D54000's and they are so easy to mount that it's likely what I'll continue to use FOH the Remic's sound beautiful with my bass. Just my take however
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back