[Ty Ford]

Holy Crap is this a quiet mic!

The channel strip software is pretty neat as well.

I'm loading up a 24-bit file to my server in case any one wants to hear it.

Look for TLM103dTyFordBilly.wav. It probably won't be up til later tuesday
evening.

One mic, one pass into PTLE.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[hank alrich]

Soundhaspriority wrote:

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
al.NET...
Holy Crap is this a quiet mic!

7dBA. Same as Rode NT2000.

It came out well before the Rode arrived.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich wrote:
Soundhaspriority wrote:

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
al.NET...
Holy Crap is this a quiet mic!

7dBA. Same as Rode NT2000.

It came out well before the Rode arrived.

However, not before the Sennheiser MKH-40 did, and it uses one of the
tensioning/equalization tricks that Sennheiser pioneered. The good
news about using that trick is that the noise floor can be reduced
below what would normally be the theoretical minimum due to Brownian
noise for a capsule of a given diameter. The bad news is that it
screws the impulse response up a little bit, which on the Sennheisers
results in a little lower midrange weirdness and on the TLM-103 causes
a problem a little bit higher up. Still, for a lot of things it's worth
it.

I have not taken apart an NT2000 so I don't know what they are doing
there. However, I'll say that I trust the numbers on the Neumann data
sheet because they demonstrate how they are derived, and I don't trust the
numbers on most manufacturers' data sheets.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:04:22 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):

hank alrich wrote:
Soundhaspriority wrote:

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
al.NET...
Holy Crap is this a quiet mic!

7dBA. Same as Rode NT2000.

It came out well before the Rode arrived.

However, not before the Sennheiser MKH-40 did, and it uses one of the
tensioning/equalization tricks that Sennheiser pioneered. The good
news about using that trick is that the noise floor can be reduced
below what would normally be the theoretical minimum due to Brownian
noise for a capsule of a given diameter. The bad news is that it
screws the impulse response up a little bit, which on the Sennheisers
results in a little lower midrange weirdness and on the TLM-103 causes
a problem a little bit higher up. Still, for a lot of things it's worth
it.

I have not taken apart an NT2000 so I don't know what they are doing
there. However, I'll say that I trust the numbers on the Neumann data
sheet because they demonstrate how they are derived, and I don't trust the
numbers on most manufacturers' data sheets.
--scott


I should have been more explanatory. There is something different about
digital mics. I heard it before when beyer put out the MCD 100. For lack of
a better explanation; You can hear digital black with these mics. It's not
like listening to an analog mic chain.

The new audio entrant, not already invested in ots of mics and outboard
preamps, can get an mbox, a TLM 103D and/or one of the KM183, 4, 5 D mics and
record though the mBox S/PDIF port, bypassing the entire analog front end of
the mBox. I sort of did this years a go when I bypassed the Digi 001, 2,3
preamps and A/D conversion with better preamps and A/D conversion.

The Neumann RCS software and DMI-2 interface box allow you to store channel
strip settings IN THE MIC. The software and hardware allow you to manipulate
input level, some EQ, compression, limiting, polarity and all of that data is
stored IN THE MIC. You port that right into PTLE, for example, through the
S/PDIF port. The more expensive Neumann mics are multi-pattern and you choose
the pattern using the RCS software. 19 paterns from omni to figure of eight,
I think.

The 183, 4, 5 D mics are different than the KM 183, 4, 5 analog series
because the D models have a system of interchangeable capsules. You may only
need one body.

This may be a bad time in the economy to throw a paradigm shift, but there it
is.

Curiously, I can't get the TLM 103 D to clip right now. Looking into that
with Neumann and asking some questions about some of the settings.

Regards,

Ty Ford



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 00:03:16 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ):


"hank alrich" wrote in message
...
Soundhaspriority wrote:

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
al.NET...
Holy Crap is this a quiet mic!

7dBA. Same as Rode NT2000.

It came out well before the Rode arrived.


True.

The Rode NT1A has a 5 dBA noise figure. The TLM103 came out well before this
Rode arrived too.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511



Wrong ball park entirely.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Scott Dorsey]

Ty Ford wrote:

I should have been more explanatory. There is something different about
digital mics. I heard it before when beyer put out the MCD 100. For lack of
a better explanation; You can hear digital black with these mics. It's not
like listening to an analog mic chain.

I have heard digital mikes that were noisy as hell, too.

I think what you are hearing is the end result of having the gain structure
of the analogue chain PERFECTLY optimized. And I mean absolutely perfectly.

This may be a bad time in the economy to throw a paradigm shift, but there it
is.

Neumann has been pushing this particular shift for quite a few years now
with the System-D. I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, but I warn
you that when true digital microphones (with actual digital transducers)
finally become practical that things are going to change even more.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Rick Ruskin]

On 15 Nov 2008 11:44:38 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Ty Ford wrote:

I should have been more explanatory. There is something different about
digital mics. I heard it before when beyer put out the MCD 100. For lack of
a better explanation; You can hear digital black with these mics. It's not
like listening to an analog mic chain.

I have heard digital mikes that were noisy as hell, too.

I think what you are hearing is the end result of having the gain structure
of the analogue chain PERFECTLY optimized. And I mean absolutely perfectly.

This may be a bad time in the economy to throw a paradigm shift, but there it
is.

Neumann has been pushing this particular shift for quite a few years now
with the System-D. I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, but I warn
you that when true digital microphones (with actual digital transducers)
finally become practical that things are going to change even more.
--scott


But will this or any change result in any improvement with respect ot
the quality of the music being presented to the microphones?


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

[Scott Dorsey]

Rick Ruskin wrote:
On 15 Nov 2008 11:44:38 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Neumann has been pushing this particular shift for quite a few years now
with the System-D. I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, but I warn
you that when true digital microphones (with actual digital transducers)
finally become practical that things are going to change even more.

But will this or any change result in any improvement with respect ot
the quality of the music being presented to the microphones?

That's not my department. Try over in A&R.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

That's not my department. Try over in A&R.

Sorry, they're out to lunch and won't be back until the dinosaurs
return.

--
ha
shut up and play your guitar

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:01:48 -0500, Rick Ruskin wrote
(in article ):

But will this or any change result in any improvement with respect ot
the quality of the music being presented to the microphones?


Rick Ruskin
Lion Dog Music - Seattle WA
http://liondogmusic.com
http://www.myspace.com/rickruskin

Um, that's a red herring. I thought you guys had salmon up there.

Regards,

Ty Ford



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:07:49 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ):


"Ty Ford" wrote in message
al.NET...
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:04:22 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):

hank alrich wrote:
Soundhaspriority wrote:

[snip]

I should have been more explanatory. There is something different about
digital mics. I heard it before when beyer put out the MCD 100. For lack
of
a better explanation; You can hear digital black with these mics. It's not
like listening to an analog mic chain.

I suspect that is because the gain of the pre internal to the mike is
exactly what is necessary, no more. This is necessary to make digital max
equal to the maximum SPL the designers intend it to handle. With an external
preamp of blameless nature, the gain can be cranked up high enough to
amplify the shot noise of the stages internal to the mike.

This would also tend to explain why the mike cannot be clipped; the headroom
of the internal electronics is precisely matched to the capsule. If the
output of the capsule exceeded the range of the A/D, then Neumann would have
been forced to lop the stated dynamic range of the mike down from the
typical 130-150 to the limit imposed by the A/D.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

No. The pre-gain and gain of the mic circuit are both variable.

I got an email back from Neumann. There's a gain reduction circuit that will
prevent accidental overs. I realize that having an unremovable gain reduction
circuit (in addition to the separate compressor and limiter) may raise the
hackles of some of our folks, but so far, it doesn't seem to be active unless
I jack the gain of the mic way past what it should be.

When I zoom into those waveforms afterwards, the less abusive ones look nice
and rounded on the top. They sound good; much better than the efforts of
Aphex's 1100 optical limiter. In fact, they don't really have a sound until
you really push the gain reduction quite a bit. With such abusive levels, I
can hear the gain reduction, but that's better than hearing digital overs.

I'm thinking I'll compare one of my TLM 103 analog mics with the TLM 103D,
recording simultaneously, to hear what that sounds like.

Regards,

Ty Ford




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:33:02 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ) :

2. A service calibration procedure that quickly regenerates a compensation
table internal to the mike.

They do have calibration built into the D mics. These are "smart mics" (my
feeble term).

I don't have the impression that Neumann exploited the potential (yet) in
any significant way. Analog cables are not death to fidelity.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

Well that just sounds snooty, Bob. Especially since you haven't heard them.

Regards,

Ty Ford




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Mike Rivers]

Soundhaspriority wrote:

This is a true advance. I know of only one comparable limiter: the dual
A/D's of the little Sony PCM-D50.

I've heard two explanations of how the limiter in the Solution D mics
work. One was similar to the one in the Sony PCM-D50, the other one wasn't.



--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Mike Rivers]

Soundhaspriority wrote:

I've heard two explanations of how the limiter in the Solution D mics
work. One was similar to the one in the Sony PCM-D50, the other one
wasn't.

Do you happen to recall the non-Sony explanation?

Not specifically. I don't recall anything radical about it, so I guess
it was more like a digital limiter. The Sony D-50 limiter isn't a
limiter in the conventional sense, it's an automatic fixer-upper.
Functionally, what it does is to continuously record the input 10 dB
lower in a buffer. When it detects an "over" it takes what's in the
buffer, normalizes it to 0 dBFS, and replaces the clipped segment with
the one recorded at a lower level. This sounds like it would probably
take too long to accomplish so the mic wouldn't be effectively a real
time device (which of course we expect it to be).


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:50:11 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ) :


"Ty Ford" wrote in message
al.NET...
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 02:33:02 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ) :

2. A service calibration procedure that quickly regenerates a
compensation
table internal to the mike.

They do have calibration built into the D mics. These are "smart mics" (my
feeble term).

I don't have the impression that Neumann exploited the potential (yet)
in
any significant way. Analog cables are not death to fidelity.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

Well that just sounds snooty, Bob. Especially since you haven't heard
them.

Regards,

Ty Ford


Forgive me. It would be interesting to take a plot to see whether their
digital cal smoothes out the mike.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511




forgiven.

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:40:31 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ) :

Ty,
A very detailed comparison of the MXL2003 with the Neumann TLM103:
http://k6jrf.com/FT_Mic1.html Check out the graphs. Quoting from the article,

begin quote----------------------------------------- "The PN sweeps are shown

in red and aqua. Note the results! 1) The MXL2003 mic is a little 'brighter'
from 3Khz on (about +3db). 2) The TLM103 mic is a little 'heavier' from 50hz
to 100hz (about +1dB).

But the overwhelming results show that BOTH MICS ARE ALMOST IDENTICAL! This
makes the decision much easier on which mike to buy! Based on the price ($399

vs $1170), there's really not much question, is there?" end
quote------------------------------------------

And as we all know, it's not just about the numbers. ESPECIALLY about EQ
curves.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA