On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 22:10:43 -0400, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
"Jay Ts" wrote in message
...
"Scott Dorsey" wrote:
None wrote:
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote:
I sure hope these measurement microphones are good for recording,
Did you look at the noise spec?
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
Tried to find it - what is it, 60 or 70 dB? Not sure exactly how they
specify that. I will just listen and see what it does.
Electret capsules are usually listed as about 60 dB, more-or-less. Just
that alone can make getting a clean recording a challenge. Also, you
will also have limited headroom of about 105-110 dB.
You need a source loud enough, and place the microphone at just the
right distance to maximize the SPL at the mic while avoiding overload.
A few times I've had luck by using a noise reduction plug-in on the
track. If you can get it to work, you might be quite happy with the
results! If not, try reviewing the prices for Shoeps and DPA mics. 
Yes, thanks, you live and you learn I suppose. I just thought it would
be a normal microphone but with very flat response, one that is slimmer
and lighter than the AT2050s that I have.
Don't give up on it yet. You are right in that it has a flat response,
and it's smaller and lighter. The AT2050 isn't perfect, either.
You may find applications for using a "measurement mic" or other
electret. For example, recording a percussive sound (e.g., claves). If
you don't need the track to be very present in the mix, you can drop its
level down to the point where it sits nicely in the mix, and with luck,
the noise will drop to inaudibility.
Many years ago, after I made an electret mic from Scott Dorsey's magazine
article, my living room was graced with a very loud cricket. I decided to
take the opportunity to record it with the electret mic, and when I
played it back at a level that sounded good, like you would expect to
hear a cricket, the noise was not much of a problem.
Also, you can try using a noise gate or other type of expander.