Neumann rates the KK 104 A for maximum rear rejection at 180 degrees, while the KK 105 A rejects most strongly around 135 degrees. One geometry change matters more for wedge placement than the usual shorthand about cardioid being broad and supercardioid being tight.
The Neumann KK 104 A and KK 105 A capsule heads are both built for feedback-prone stages, but neither capsule magically defeats a badly aimed monitor. The useful question is where the loudspeaker sits relative to the mic, how much the singer moves, and whether drums, guitars, or sidefill are already pouring into the vocal channel.
The KK 105 A works differently. Its supercardioid pattern narrows the front pickup and moves the strongest rejection away from straight behind the mic toward roughly 135 degrees. A wedge sitting dead center behind the singer is therefore not automatically in the best spot, even though the capsule is more directional overall.
This is where the usual “supercardioid rejects more” advice gets sloppy. More directional does not mean less sensitive from every rear angle. Supercardioid patterns keep a small rear lobe, so the monitor wants to sit closer to the off-axis rejection zone rather than directly behind the microphone. The Goldmidi piece on proper feedback control makes the same practical point across directional microphones in general.
Two wedges can suit the KK 105 A when they can sit to the rear-left and rear-right instead of both firing straight up the mic’s back. The layout lets monitor energy meet the capsule nearer its rejection regions while the singer stays centered between them. A single center wedge often makes the KK 104 A layout easier to get right.
The KK 104 A is more forgiving because its cardioid pickup leaves more room for head and microphone movement. The KK 105 A rewards steadier technique because its tighter pickup gives you better separation only while the singer keeps the useful axis where it belongs.
This matters with wedges because feedback is a loop, not a microphone feature you can judge in isolation. Stage-monitor feedback systems have been dealing with the same basic microphone, amplifier, and loudspeaker path for decades. Move one part of the geometry and the frequency that reaches instability first can change with it.
Crowded stages add another wrinkle. The KK 105 A can reject neighboring instruments better than the KK 104 A, which may clean up the vocal channel before you touch EQ. Less spill can make the vocal easier to mix, but it does not guarantee more usable wedge level if the monitor sits in the wrong part of the pattern.
The KK 105 A starts making more sense when stage spill is the bigger problem, the singer has consistent mic technique, or monitor wedges can be placed around its off-axis rejection angles. Engineers moving from an older KK 205 should also check the A-series polar-pattern changes before copying an old wedge position without thinking.
In-ear monitoring changes the weighting but not the physics. Removing a floor wedge takes one major feedback path out of the equation, so the KK 105 A’s tighter isolation becomes more about drums, backline, sidefills, and nearby singers. On a quieter stage, the KK 104 A’s movement tolerance may be more useful than maximum isolation.
Neither capsule wins on pattern name alone. Start with where the monitor can physically go, then look at how the singer holds the mic and how much unwanted stage sound reaches the vocal position. Once those three things are known, 104 A versus 105 A becomes a fairly mechanical stage-layout decision.
The Neumann KK 104 A and KK 105 A capsule heads are both built for feedback-prone stages, but neither capsule magically defeats a badly aimed monitor. The useful question is where the loudspeaker sits relative to the mic, how much the singer moves, and whether drums, guitars, or sidefill are already pouring into the vocal channel.
Monitor geometry decides which pattern behaves better
A cardioid capsule such as the KK 104 A has its deepest rejection directly behind the microphone. Put a single wedge on the mic’s rear axis, and the geometry is simple. The singer can also move the handheld a little more without immediately steering the monitor into a more sensitive part of the pattern.The KK 105 A works differently. Its supercardioid pattern narrows the front pickup and moves the strongest rejection away from straight behind the mic toward roughly 135 degrees. A wedge sitting dead center behind the singer is therefore not automatically in the best spot, even though the capsule is more directional overall.
This is where the usual “supercardioid rejects more” advice gets sloppy. More directional does not mean less sensitive from every rear angle. Supercardioid patterns keep a small rear lobe, so the monitor wants to sit closer to the off-axis rejection zone rather than directly behind the microphone. The Goldmidi piece on proper feedback control makes the same practical point across directional microphones in general.
Two wedges can suit the KK 105 A when they can sit to the rear-left and rear-right instead of both firing straight up the mic’s back. The layout lets monitor energy meet the capsule nearer its rejection regions while the singer stays centered between them. A single center wedge often makes the KK 104 A layout easier to get right.
The singer can ruin a perfect monitor layout in seconds
Paper polar plots assume the microphone keeps pointing where you planned. Singers do not. A performer who drops the mic toward the chest between lines, cups the grille, turns sideways, or points the transmitter across the stage changes the acoustic relationship between capsule and monitor immediately.The KK 104 A is more forgiving because its cardioid pickup leaves more room for head and microphone movement. The KK 105 A rewards steadier technique because its tighter pickup gives you better separation only while the singer keeps the useful axis where it belongs.
This matters with wedges because feedback is a loop, not a microphone feature you can judge in isolation. Stage-monitor feedback systems have been dealing with the same basic microphone, amplifier, and loudspeaker path for decades. Move one part of the geometry and the frequency that reaches instability first can change with it.
Crowded stages add another wrinkle. The KK 105 A can reject neighboring instruments better than the KK 104 A, which may clean up the vocal channel before you touch EQ. Less spill can make the vocal easier to mix, but it does not guarantee more usable wedge level if the monitor sits in the wrong part of the pattern.
The stage layout should pick the capsule
For a singer using one conventional wedge directly behind the microphone position, the KK 104 A is the straightforward starting point. Its 180-degree rear rejection lines up naturally with that layout, and its greater tolerance of head movement gives the performer fewer ways to wreck the setup during the show.The KK 105 A starts making more sense when stage spill is the bigger problem, the singer has consistent mic technique, or monitor wedges can be placed around its off-axis rejection angles. Engineers moving from an older KK 205 should also check the A-series polar-pattern changes before copying an old wedge position without thinking.
In-ear monitoring changes the weighting but not the physics. Removing a floor wedge takes one major feedback path out of the equation, so the KK 105 A’s tighter isolation becomes more about drums, backline, sidefills, and nearby singers. On a quieter stage, the KK 104 A’s movement tolerance may be more useful than maximum isolation.
Neither capsule wins on pattern name alone. Start with where the monitor can physically go, then look at how the singer holds the mic and how much unwanted stage sound reaches the vocal position. Once those three things are known, 104 A versus 105 A becomes a fairly mechanical stage-layout decision.
