Sennheiser MKH 40 vs MKH 8040

[Nityananda_SCSM]

This hasn't been exactly covered, and I bet others want to know.

How does the old Sennheiser "Classic" MKH 40 compare to the new MKH 8040 (and all the Classic vs the MKH 8000 series)?


I have heard different things, and would love to get the opinions of those who have heard both these mics, and it would be AWESOME if somebody posted comparison samples of these two mics on the same source through identical recording chains.

I know that the MKH Classic mics are basically ruler-flat frequency response wise. I was at AES 2009 in NYC and the man there told me that that was achieved actually be small hardware EQ'ing inside the mic that brought down the bumps. It has the reputation among some as being somewhat (here come some "words") "cold" and "clinical." SOS

He told me the new 8000 series is based off of the MKH 800, and it was designed for recording studio / musical applications specifically (aka more musical less neutral/reference.) Supposedly it is a bit "warmer" "airy" and "musical." However in a forum post somebody mentioned that it sounded "hard," and in a non-related post somebody said that the MKH 40 sounded "like butter."

So how about it? How does the sound of two mics compare?
(And if you want, how do they compare to Sennheiser's cheaper K6 series? Like the K6 body with the ME64 cardiod head?)

Thanks for your input and advice


-----------------------------------
-BTW I want this to be an informative thread for everyone, but my personal desire in a mic is for a mic that is non-fatiguing, soft, silky, warm, smooth, and deals with high pitched harsh material well. Comparisons to TLM193, Schoeps CMC6 w/ MK4, AT4047, DPA 4011, MC930, Earthworks, and ribbons welcome.

 

[Shadow_7]

From what I gleaned from that unnamed site you named when the 8040's first came out. The 8040 is similar to the 40, but has improved low end, improved interference rejection, and other things. The samples I've heard are respectable. Maybe a little harsh on some things for the 8040's. But the better low end and such makes them the goto mics for a lot of things, inspite of any unpleasantries.

I've not used either yet. I do plan on getting a pair of 8040's (probably 8020's first), eventually. I tend to skip over the 40's, because if you can't still buy them, how do you replace them if they break, get stolen, or other incidentals? From what I've gathered of others opinions, if you want to enjoy the music, the 40's. If you want to disect the arrangement, transcribe parts, and be a detail monger, 8040's. Although kind of moot, as once you get to that level / price point, the difference between mics is so suttle.

 

[RRuskin]

My experience with the mkh 405, 406, & 40 mics is that they are all excellent but unforgiving. By that I mean they are very placement sensitive. Once found, one would be hard pressed to achieve a better sound. I suspect that the newest versions are the same in this respect.