ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down

Author Topic: E845 vs E945..  (Read 37235 times)

jim whitmer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
E845 vs E945..
« on: January 22, 2010, 10:48:26 am »

How dramatic is the change?

Just wondering as I've been messing around with the 845 and like it.

I don't have the chance to hear a 945 anywhere so I was hoping someone here has played around with both and could compare.
Logged

Joseph Dixon

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 285
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2010, 11:55:17 am »

jim whitmer wrote on Fri, 22 January 2010 10:48

How dramatic is the change?

Just wondering as I've been messing around with the 845 and like it.

I don't have the chance to hear a 945 anywhere so I was hoping someone here has played around with both and could compare.


Well, I hate to NOT be able to answer your ACTUAL question (man, I hate thjat...). I've never used an e845 but I own some e945's. I've used e835's plenty of times and there's a pretty big difference.

I like the warmth of the e835 but sometimes I've wished for a bit more clarity. It doesn't slice through the mix the way the e945's do. The e835 has worked very well with screechy singers though (I come across a lot of them).

I've heard great things about the e935. The only negative thing I heard was that they picked up a lot of cymbal wash. I've experienced this with the e835's.

So I called and talked to someone at Sennheiser to find out the difference between the e935 and the e945. They pretty much said the e935 was warmer but the feedback rejection was MUCH better than the e945. So I ordered 3 e945's.

Well, they really sound great! The high end is very smooth and pristine. I remember the first time I use them, I made very little EQ moves. But right off, I noticed the lack of (what I call) the built-in e835 warmth. Now don't get me wrong, the e945 doesn't sound brittle or thin or anything like that, I guess I was just hoping it would be an e835 with the same warmth, but added clarity, and better feedback rejection.

I've had trouble with a few singers around here that have a very chest cold-like, nasaly tone. The e945 really cleared them up! But I don't know about the feedback rejection though. It doesn't seem as good as it was talked up. When I PFL the channel, you can hear all kinds of things in the backround. They don't have the rejection of an OM7. Some have told me they thought the feedback rejection was the same as an OM7. I don't know about all that...

Well, I hope that helped you out at least a little bit. I don't know nearly as much as most on this forum, but I'm tryin' to get there. Feel PM me if you have any further questions!
Logged

Tim Padrick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5008
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2010, 03:29:10 am »

An email from K to J that was forwarded to me (that does not answer your question, but might be helpful):

"I have been using the 935 on lead for some time and it's my go to mic always. I can get it louder than any other mic I own. I have beta 58 & 57, OM6, OM7, 835, 865, VX10, M88. I just ordered a 945, so I can't comment much on them. I did have a band one night that used two 945s. One had a vocal processor that made too much highs at 8-10KHz. The other singer was straight into the snake and I liked it. I hear that the 945 does not have as much peak in the 2-4 KHz range, but does have a little more up higher that makes it sound like a condenser. I have a screechy voiced female country singer that the 835 sounds best. It's a little darker mic. As far as monitor gain before feedback, the 935 has a peak around 2-2.5 K that once notched gets really loud and ballsy. Monitor EQ wise, it's similar to a Beta 58 and is swappable with almost no EQ change. But sounds much better. I'm expecting the 945 should do a little better. To me the OM7 doesn't get as loud and sounds a little phasey before feeding back. In my experience, cardioid mics sound more natural than hyper or super. As soon as the singer gets slightly off axis on the OM7 and KMS105 or when they approach feedback, they sound phasey. That's why my current set-up is all cardioid. But giving the 945 a chance.

Currently, I'm not using the OM7s on my main rig except for sometimes on singing drummers. The OM7 needs the singer to eat the mic. Drops off fast. Using 935 on lead, 835 on backing vocs. Once I get the 945 and see how it works, I'll get either more 935 or more 945. And keep an 835 handy for those screechy singers. The difference between the 835 & 935 is very noticeable."

(BJ) Benjamin Fisher

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 389
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2010, 10:56:04 am »

I cant say much, but I have used the 935 and love it. Its great for loud, rock singers that push hard. I prefer it over the B58 any day. As for the 835 and 845, I think they are better than SM58 but I dont have any currently. I prefer the sound of Sennheiser, but the durability of Shure, but thats not the discussion at hand.
Logged
BJ Fisher
Stealthy Sound
Columbus,OH

Phil Lewandowski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1101
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2010, 11:14:52 am »

Hey Jim,

I'm in the same boat as many as I own the e835, e935, and e945.

I started off with a 3-pack of e835's which was a great starting vocal mic pack.  They worked well, although I found quickly that they sounded great (And much better than a 58) on some vocals, while others where just very harsh and shrill with the e835, and just didn't work well.

I then invested in e935 and that is very apparent the huge difference between the two, I many times I recommend going right to the e935 as I have had better luck with it just sounding good with more voices than the 835.  I wanted to get an e945 to see if the differences since I heard that the 945 was a little smoother up top and to see if I could tell a difference on the tighter pattern.

Between the e945 and e935 I have found the 945 to be a touch smoother in the 6-10kHz range. (When side by side the 935 just has a very, very slight "graininess" when compared to the 945.  But, what I did find is that the 935 seems to cut through in a louder room/mix/stagewash a touch better than the 945.  I have been able to try both in many different situations and switching them back and forth in the same room/PA and these are just some of the things I found.  As someone else told me, when trying to choose between the 945 and 935 really the best thing to do is have several of both.



Take Care!
Phil


P.S.  I did just pick up that 3-pack of EV PL80a's that Musiciansfriend has for $150 so I am looking forward to using them tonight since I have heard some good comments from people I respect on here.
Logged
"It is good to be Alive!"

L and L: Live Sound
landllivesound.com

jim whitmer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2010, 12:29:59 pm »

Good stuff. Seems the 845 is not very popular. Just my luck.

So far, on this thread and others I've found it's agreed that there is a substantial difference (all say for the better) between the 835 and 935. Doesn't mean that's the same scenario between the 845 and 945 though. Anyone want to send me a 945 so I can do an A/B comparison??? Laughing

What is interesting is that the 935 (according to some here) has as good or better GBF than some super-cardiod.

I can get the 845 as loud as a B58 and OM7 but the bleed is much more. However the 845 sounds better to me.

95% of my work is on small stages with LOUD bands and as much as the OM7 is far from natural/sweet sounding, it works best for these applications with minimal eq and acceptable results (although high maint). The B58 is right behind it in this situation. The 845 would lose out on these gigs due to bleed so the OM7’s stay for the high db small room shows.

BUT on those 5% where the room permits or stage volumes are more realistic (will still need decent rejection though), I need a more natural/neutral sounding mic than the OM7 that won’t break the bank. So far I like the 845. I was just wondering if the 945 was that much better or just different. Guess I’ll have to keep an eye out and pick one up and see.

Someone on this form said something to the effect that all live vocal mics suck and I'm kind of in that camp. Find a mic that fits your particular situation(s) and system and you can pretty much make them acceptable most of the time. At the weekend warrior level I can't have a case full of mics to fit the singer of the day. And some “singers” you just can't fix!
Twisted Evil
Logged

Robert Alan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2010, 07:11:00 pm »

Joseph,

you said "I've had trouble with a few singers around here that have a very chest cold-like, nasaly tone"

that may be the audix mics your using or at least its being exacerbated by them. they can have a nasal, hollow sound at times.

Phil,

the slight graininess you mentioned of the e935 over the e945 is exactly what i found. its still a really fantastic mic, one of my favorites ive sung with. would be interested to hear what you think of the EV PL80´s. ive been testing one at home and i wasnt massively impressed straight away. sounded too grainy and wooly, not enough articulation. when i added some high EQ it sounded quite some better (though i wouldnt say quite up to the e935/e945 standard)what i did notice though is that it seems to have extremely good off axis rejection, quite some better than the e945.


Jim,

ive owned/sung with the e845, e935 and e945. both the e845 and e945 are excellent mics out the box and both have a natural, smooth tone however the e845 sounds warmer and a little fatter which tends to not cut through a loud, dense mix as well. the e945 has a bit lighter, less weighty tone but still retains a nice rich fullness and is more present which cuts through a mix better. if i had to pick one over the other in a standard band situation i would choose the e945. i remember speaking to sennheiser about the 900 series when they came out and they said that they were designed in response to the 800 series not cutting through a mix as well though im sure if youve got the gear and the skills you can probably EQ a e845 to cut good. one thing i found peculiar (though this wouldnt be considered the fairest of tests, but hey if something works in a dire situation then its good to go on stage) was that when i tested the 945 and 845 at a very loud heavy metal band rehearsal the 945 didnt seem to be as stable or have the off axis rejection of the 845. in fact i couldnt stop it from screaming with feedback and had to resort to using the 845. i know others have found this to be the opposite but from that experience i concluded that in "normal" loud situations the 945 would be my first choice as i do think it is one of the best sounding dynamics out there but for warp factor 11 loud situations it wasnt ideal.
out the box the e935 seemed to have better than average GBF and off axis response for a cardioid but the e945 seemed only OK to me compared to some other super and hyper cardioids.
Logged

jim whitmer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 109
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2010, 08:49:55 pm »

Robert Alan wrote on Sun, 24 January 2010 00:11



ive owned/sung with the e845, e935 and e945. both the e845 and e945 are excellent mics out the box and both have a natural, smooth tone however the e845 sounds warmer and a little fatter which tends to not cut through a loud, dense mix as well. the e945 has a bit lighter, less weighty tone but still retains a nice rich fullness and is more present which cuts through a mix better. if i had to pick one over the other in a standard band situation i would choose the e945. i remember speaking to sennheiser about the 900 series when they came out and they said that they were designed in response to the 800 series not cutting through a mix as well though im sure if youve got the gear and the skills you can probably EQ a e845 to cut good. one thing i found peculiar (though this wouldnt be considered the fairest of tests, but hey if something works in a dire situation then its good to go on stage) was that when i tested the 945 and 845 at a very loud heavy metal band rehearsal the 945 didnt seem to be as stable or have the off axis rejection of the 845. in fact i couldnt stop it from screaming with feedback and had to resort to using the 845. i know others have found this to be the opposite but from that experience i concluded that in "normal" loud situations the 945 would be my first choice as i do think it is one of the best sounding dynamics out there but for warp factor 11 loud situations it wasnt ideal.
out the box the e935 seemed to have better than average GBF and off axis response for a cardioid but the e945 seemed only OK to me compared to some other super and hyper cardioids.


Thanks. Exactly the type of feedback I was looking for. I've got lots of eq ability on the LS9 and like I said the 845 is sounding quite nice.

I'll still keep an eye out for a used 945 to hear for myself the difference between the two.

I was hoping the 945 had better rejection than the 845 so it could replace the OM7's but that doesn't seem to be the case.

So that means it'll have to sound MUCH better than the 845 for me to invest the extra $$.

From what you describe I may actually prefer the 845 on the situations where I get to use them. Very Happy
Logged

Robert Alan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2010, 09:48:33 pm »

Jim,

not to take away from what i said but i made that conclusion from that experience and also im coming from the perspective of being a singer who has had to deal with doing sound in rehearsal situations and a few own gig situations. there are some pro sound guys on here as well as sennheiser themselves who say that they find the e945 to be more stable and have better GBF than the e845 though i dont know specifically about the bleed issue. to me e945 is worth getting and i personally do prefer it sound wise to the e845 but then i feel it shines best in "standard" loud to "moderate" loud situations.
for "ear suicide" loud levels the e945 is definitely not as good as a OM7 for bleed issues but then the OM7 has one of, if not THE tightest pickup pattern of any stage vocal mic.

i suggest if you want to try some other flavour mics than the OM7 but that also have great GBF and off axis rejection then i would see if you can demo the EV N/D967, EV PL80a, audix OM6 and beyerdynamic tgx-60  Smile
p.s. the two that are closest to the sound of the e845 IMO(if you really dig its sound) but that im pretty confident would have better GBF and off axis rejection are the audix OM6 and beyer tgx-60.
Logged

Adam Schaible

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 917
Re: E845 vs E945..
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2010, 12:34:10 am »

I was using some Shure mic's but recently I bought a 3 pack of 835's.  I will say they did sound warmer than the B58's I used the last gig, but I'm not sure I preferred the sound.  I'm still deciding and need more time around them.

That said I just picked up an 835 wireless.  I'm going to get a 935 or 945 capsule.  The band is on ears so I'm not concerned about feeding back from the monitors but sometimes when the mains get close and subs are center clustered I do have to be concerned about that.

I am thinking it's a crap shoot between the 935 and 945 for feedback rejection depending on the room.  Do you folks have any suggestions?

I could also go for the 965 capsule, as I understand that just allows you to flip a switch between the 935 and 945 capsule?

Thanks, this discussion has been helpful.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.044 seconds with 19 queries.