Sennheiser MD 211 question

[Bob Moose]

For the same price as a K&M stereo bar I have picked up an old MD 211 dynamic omnidirectional microphone.

When comparing the MD 211 with a MD 421, the 421 rolls of the upper high frequencies a lot compared to the 211.

Moreover the MD 211 rolls off the low frequencies from about 350Hz, and at 100Hz its output is 16dB lower than the one of the MD 421 (tested with a sinusoid, with 1m between the microphones and the speaker).
In the MD 211 manual, the frequency curve LF roll-off starts at 150Hz, not 350...

All this makes the MD 211 the brightest sounding microphone I have, which can of course be useful for some recording techniques.

But I am not sure if this is normal. Can someone confirm that the MD 211 is best known as a very bright (but not harsh-sounding) microphone? Maybe the one I have is damaged.

Cheers
-j

[John Willett]

The MD 211 is an excellent dynamic omni-directional mic.

It does roll-off at the bottom end, with the shoulder at about 150Hz - it's -10dB at 30Hz.

You can download the owners manual HERE.

The diaphragm is very close to the front and is easily damaged if dropped - maybe you should get it checked by your local Sennheiser main agent.

[Bob Moose]

Thanks for your answer John

The MD 211 is an excellent dynamic omni-directional mic.

It does roll-off at the bottom end, with the shoulder at about 150Hz - it's -10dB at 30Hz.

Mine sounds indeed very well, except it does not have any bass.

You can download the owners manual HERE.

I had downloaded it some time ago actually, and for sure my MD 211 does not have the regular frequency range below 400Hz.

The diaphragm is very close to the front and is easily damaged if dropped - maybe you should get it checked by your local Sennheiser main agent.

Some cosmetic details indeed reveal that it could have been dropped. I guess that's the problem. Is there a chance I can save the low frequencies of this microphone then?

Best regards,
-j

[ROLO46]

i have a MD211
it was the classic bbc tv omni handheld music mic in the 60's
i love em
everybody used them tom jones to ella
no proximity ,no popping

[Bob Moose]

The output of this microphone is a 6-pin DIN socket, and I wonder if the supplied DIN-to-XLR cable is correct.

I could not find the numbering convention for DIN 45322 so I will have to number the pins randomly (really sorry for this):

Female DIN 45322 connector
---3---
--2-4--
---6---
-1---5-

Male XLR connector
-1---2-
---3---

So here is the wiring of the cable:

Male XLR pin 1 ---> Female DIN 45322 pin "3" AND pin "6"
Male XLR pin 2 ---> Female DIN 45322 pin "1"
Male XLR pin 3 ---> Female DIN 45322 pin "5"

Is it normal?

Best,
-j

[Hugh Robjohns]

JW will know for sure, but I don't recall ever seeing a 6-pin DIN version, only the standard 3-pin DIN version (the N type as described in the handbook)...

But that would still be compatible with a 6-pin DIN socket, and that being the case, DIN Pin 2 is the case screen and goes to XLR 1. DIN Pin 3 is the cold side and goes to XLR 3, and DIN Pin 1 is the hot side and goes to XLR 2.

Which is all well and good if we are talking about the same pin numbering! UNfortunately we're not becaues you've made up your own (admittedly perfectly logical) arrangement!

This website describes the standard DIN pin numbers:

http://www.electronics2000.co.uk/pin-out/dincon.php

As you can see, the numbers aren't sequential but skip about, basically because the connector started out as a 3-pin thing, numbered sequentially, and then additional pins were added later, so the sequence is actually:

......... 2
...... 4.....5
......... 6
.... 1........3

Comparing these numbers with yours, and your cable wiring, it appears that XLR1 is currently connected to DIN 2 and 6, which is correct (although 6 won't be doing anything). XLR2 is connected to DIN 1, which is also correct. And XLR3 is connected to DIN 3, which is correct again.

So everything is wired up correctly.... I think.

As for the lack of measured bass, that could in part be down to the way you've tried to measure it. Do you get a flat response if you use a knowon good mic in place of the MD211?

Hugh

[John Willett]

Hugh just said it all correctly, so I won't add anything.

[Bob Moose]

As for the lack of measured bass, that could in part be down to the way you've tried to measure it. Do you get a flat response if you use a knowon good mic in place of the MD211?

My measuring method is not very accurate, and my room is (currently) not very good, but it is very clear that I get something a lot flatter (I mean, below 350Hz) using other microphones. I compared this MD 211 to a SDC Oktava MK-012 that I borrowed for testing, and to my MD 421 (cardioid, but at 1m of distance the proximity effect should not be too important).
I also tried to record a "Fender Rhodes" (actually, a stage piano), and it sounds as if all the bass was removed with a near-brickwall high pass filter... I mean, it's something pretty extreme.

-j

[Bob Moose]

Seriously, should I return it and try to find another one?

[ROLO46]

bob
my MD211 is not lacking in bass
omni is different bass to cardioid
smoother silkier
Tuchel is the plug you need
locking three pin
i have a spare if you want one
roger

[Bob Moose]

bob
my MD211 is not lacking in bass
omni is different bass to cardioid
smoother silkier
Tuchel is the plug you need
locking three pin
i have a spare if you want one
roger

Thanks a lot Roger, but my MD211 is the 6-pin version and both Hugh and John said my cable has the right wiring...

[ROLO46]

does it have a locking thread bob?

[Bob Moose]

does it have a locking thread bob?

Yes there is a locking thread on the cable connector... Why are you asking this question? Could there be a problem with this thread?

-j

[John Willett]

... my MD211 is the 6-pin version and both Hugh and John said my cable has the right wiring...

Er- as far as I know there never was a 6-pin version. Only the 3-pin as indicated in the owners manual.

If your unit has a 6-pin plug on the mic. is may be a dual impedance version and you have it connected incorrectly.

I think I would send it to Sennheiser UK for checking.

[Bob Moose]

Er- as far as I know there never was a 6-pin version. Only the 3-pin as indicated in the owners manual.

If your unit has a 6-pin plug on the mic. is may be a dual impedance version and you have it connected incorrectly.

I think I would send it to Sennheiser UK for checking.

Well, at this point, why don't I make another cable myself and just check it? Can it be dangerous for the microphone or for the rack preamplifier?
Where can I find the proper wiring for dual impedance MD 211 microphones? I only heard very few about dual-impedance microphones. I guess it's better to use the lowest impedance with the modern rack preamplifiers...

Thanks a lot for your help
-j

[John Willett]

As far as I know there never was a dual-impedance version of the MD 211 (and I have checked Sennheiser specs back to 1975).

It may be a special version made for someone as there is no 6-pin connector listed in the Sennheiser Revue (the HL versions of the consumer mics used a 3-pin connector unbalanced).

I would send it to Sennheiser UK to look at.

[Bob Moose]

All right, I am not in the UK but I called the local Sennheiser technical headquarters and they also confirmed there has never been any 6-pin MD 211. They told me they cannot repair it because they don't have most spare parts anymore. They advised me to send it to Sennheiser Germany or Sennheiser UK, but it would cost me a lot for shipping (relatively to the price of the microphone) and there would be little hope for getting it fixed.

So I will to return it to the original seller...

I think I am going to search for another MD 211.

Thanks John, Hugh and Roger for you help.
-j

[Hugh Robjohns]

Hmmm... sounds like maybe someone has retro-fitted the 6-pin Tuchel for some reason -- maybe to bodge in alternative impedance or unbalanced output options.

Probably best to return it and look elsewhere as you say.

hugh

[Bob Moose]

The MD 211 is an excellent dynamic omni-directional mic.

I am still interested in buying one, but are there any alternative models?
I am looking for some neutral, flat, dynamic omni mics, for using in multi-microphone recordings. Usually, I add some main microphones, like spaced sdc omnis, or even a horizontal B-format array sometimes. Ideally, two great main microphones should work for me but on too many occasions the room or the instruments are not ideal.

I currently have a MD 421 and a MD 441 (521 and 541 actually, ie the versions without the built-in highpass filter). I would like to find some similar microphones, albeit with an omnidirectional polar pattern. They would probably not be used as main microphones but rather on single instruments or sections.

I have heard about the RFT DM 622 too. I don't understand very well how RFT is related to Neumann, Telefunken and Gefell. These microphones are from the former East Germany. Are they good? How do they compare to the MD 211? I could not find any recording nor specification chart about them...

Best regards
-j

PS: there is also the Beyerdynamic M 101 but it's almost impossible to find one.

[ROLO46]

bob
keep looking for the md211 they are MOST excellent and quite small
not many about, were expensive and used mostly in tv
also worth a look AKG D109 lavaliers,lots of these about at low prices, excellent tiny md omnis
what country are you bob?
ROGER

[Bob Moose]

bob
keep looking for the md211 they are MOST excellent and quite small

I have bought another one from the Internet. It should arrive soon. Let's hope it is working properly...

also worth a look AKG D109 lavaliers,lots of these about at low prices, excellent tiny md omnis

I have some experience of the DPA 4060 and the Sennheiser MKE 2 but I don't know this AKG. Usually such tiny microphones are pretty noisy, but I never compared their noise to the noise of a dynamic microphone.

what country are you bob?

In France

Best regards
-j

[ROLO46]

akg d109 big by electret standard but small in comp to md211

[John Willett]

akg d109 big by electret standard but small in comp to md211

The D109 is a lavalier mic. (using "lavalier" as it should be used).

The MD211 is a small dynamic recording mic (similar in size to an LDC)

[Bob Moose]

Hello,

The new Sennheiser MD 211 has arrived. I don't know if it's perfect, but at least it sounds a lot better than the one I returned. The first MD 211 recorded so few low frequencies that I had to raise the preamplifier gain a lot in order to get an acceptable recording level, hence the recording was very noisy. With the second MD 211, the preamplifier gain was similar to the one of the MD 421, and the noise was not an issue with any of these microphones.

I admit I only tested it quickly above one of the speakers of a stage piano that has good, near-broadband speakers (sorry I did not have any other broadband instrument).

Comparing it to my MD 421, when recording close to the speaker, the MD 211 seemed to record more mid-range, which added a kind of subjective "vintage" character to it — to put it differently, the MD 421 was brighter and had more low frequency "thump", probably because of the proximity effect (actually I have the 521 version, without the built-in HPF). Both sounded very differently, but I liked these two sounds, and mixing them can be very helpful. Also, I found the MD 211 track was very easy to EQ (I could get the more modern-sounding bass tone of the MD 421, for example).

At a distance of about 1m, the low frequencies had a similar level though they sounded differently, but I prefered the MD 211 (more natural, less harsh, fuller sound); of course it was just a very quick test and it should depend a lot on the recording context actually.

Waiting to test it in a true recording session!

All the best,
-j