Seeking URL - Dark vs Bright, Colored vs. Transparent mics

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Somewhere on the internet I saw a useful chart measuring typical microphones
placed in a two axis chart - Dark vs Bright and Colored vs. Transparaent.
Now I can't find that URL anymore... can someone assist? Thanks!

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

RD Jones wrote:
> My Last Sigh wrote:
>
> > Somewhere on the internet I saw a useful chart measuring typical microphones
> > placed in a two axis chart - Dark vs Bright and Colored vs. Transparaent.
> > Now I can't find that URL anymore... can someone a ssist? Thanks!
>
> Is this it ?
>
> http://studioforums.com/eve/ubb.x/ [...] 6776029135
>
> I'm not sure I fully agree with some of the
> placements. No EV models ...
>



Fascinating idea, but really bizarre implementation there. How do you
posit an AKG 451 as being near the top of the Brightness axis (which I
would agree with) and also yet leaning towards the Transparency end of
the spectrum??? Isn't Brightness a form of Color?

And putting the T.H.E. KA-04 in the Colored quadrant is not only a
questionable choice, but also totally meaningless unless you specify
which capsule it's used with.

Beyer M160 more Colored than a Shure SM57? All the Shure KSM series in
the exact same coordinates? Did someone make this graph with a
dartboard???

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Willie K. Yee, MD" <wkyee@bestweb.net> wrote in message
news:42f68177.176060359@nntp.bestweb.net
> On 7 Aug 2005 14:03:38 -0700, "Bob Ross"
> <bross@berklee.net> wrote:
>
>> Did someone make this graph with a
>> dartboard???


>> http://studioforums.com/eve/ubb.x/ [...] 6776029135

> I think the author said it was just a starting point and
> would welcome some input.

I'm wondering where he found a SM-57 that wasn't
artificially bright.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
newsd6f2f$3v7$1@panix2.panix.com
> Arny Krueger <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm wondering where he found a SM-57 that wasn't
>> artificially bright.
>
> See, I wouldn't consider the SM-57 _bright_, because it
> really has no top end. I would call it _forward_ because
> of that huge presence peak.

I guess we agree about the facts but are saying what we
perceive differently.

> Some folks might call the presence peak brightness.

Me, for one! ;-)

> And that's sort of the problem with all of these
> descriptions.

Agreed.