Just curious... would a Scott Dorsey mic mod work on a Studio Project C1?
Would it be worth the effort? (The Royer mod on the ADK mic' certainly
was).

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Nick Busigin wrote:
Just curious... would a Scott Dorsey mic mod work on a Studio Project C1?
Would it be worth the effort? (The Royer mod on the ADK mic' certainly
was).

I don't think the board will fit. The electronics will work, but you
may have to do some cut and paste work. I don't know how much improvement
you'll get since I never measured the C1 electronics.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 11:15:39 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Nick Busigin wrote:
Just curious... would a Scott Dorsey mic mod work on a Studio Project
C1? Would it be worth the effort? (The Royer mod on the ADK mic'
certainly was).

I don't think the board will fit. The electronics will work, but you
may have to do some cut and paste work. I don't know how much
improvement you'll get since I never measured the C1 electronics.
--scott

Hi Scott,

I have a number of C1 mic's and I'd be interested in giving it a try on
one of them. Which issue of Recording Magazine do I need to order a back
issue of in order to get the details on how to do your mod ?

By cut and paste, am I correct in assuming you are referring to the
fact that I'd have to redesign the circuit board layout to fit the mic?
Not having done this before (just done point-to-point wiring projects
up to now), what method would you recommend for producing the circuit
board? I have a scanner with which I could scan in your design and
CAD software I could use to do the cut & paste work.

Say if I sent you one of my C1 mic's, how would you go about evaluating/
measuring it up? I'm not asking if you'll do this as I am sure you have
lots of better things to do. I'm just interested in what you look at.

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

"Nick Busigin" wrote in message

Which issue of Recording Magazine do I need to order a back
issue of in order to get the details on how to do your mod ?
snipped

January 2002

$5.95 + Postage

Ph: 303-516-9118

S.

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 01:30:39 -0500, Sloth wrote:

"Nick Busigin" wrote in message

Which issue of Recording Magazine do I need to order a back
issue of in order to get the details on how to do your mod ?
snipped

January 2002

$5.95 + Postage

Ph: 303-516-9118

S.

Thanks S.!!!

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Nick Busigin wrote:

I have a number of C1 mic's and I'd be interested in giving it a try on
one of them. Which issue of Recording Magazine do I need to order a back
issue of in order to get the details on how to do your mod ?

The modification you're talking about is for Shanghai microphones,
not for the Beijing-style microphones like the C1. It's detailed in

Making Mikes Better: A Practical DIY Project
Recording, Vol 15, No. 4 (January 2002)

Which you can get with a call to the recordingmag.com guys.

By cut and paste, am I correct in assuming you are referring to the
fact that I'd have to redesign the circuit board layout to fit the mic?
Not having done this before (just done point-to-point wiring projects
up to now), what method would you recommend for producing the circuit
board? I have a scanner with which I could scan in your design and
CAD software I could use to do the cut & paste work.

You could wire it point to point on perfboard if you were careful and kept
all the distances very short. You might be able to saw a board down to
fit; I don't know. But the original article has the board layout in exact
size, so you can compare it with what you've got inside your mike and see
if you can make it fit.

Say if I sent you one of my C1 mic's, how would you go about evaluating/
measuring it up? I'm not asking if you'll do this as I am sure you have
lots of better things to do. I'm just interested in what you look at.

First thing I'd do is listen to it on various sources, and do a key jingle
test. I'd use a laser interferometer made with a cheap laser pointer and
a beam splitter to see how evenly tensioned the diaphragm is and how flat
the backplate is. I'd measure the frequency response on and off axis, and
then I'd disconnect the capsule and inject a signal into the electronics
and see what the response and distortion specs of just the electronics are.

But most of what is wrong with the Chinese microphones show up very clearly
on a key jingle test.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Nick,

The Dorsey mod I think is mainly intended to replace a circuit
featuring a somewhat less than stellar output transformer. The C1 and
the Dorsey mod are already the same basic circuit. The big difference
is that the C1 has a DC-DC converter which generates a higher
polarization voltage for the capsule, whereas the Dorsey circuit
relies on straight phantom power voltage for this task.
Basically all the Dorsey mod would serve to do for the C1 is to cut
the capsule voltage down by nearly half, which would result in a lower
output, decreased sensitivity, etc.
I think you would be better served to try Scott's circuit on a
different mic.

Regards,
Brent Casey
Studio Projects Microphones
877-563-6335



Hi Scott,

I have a number of C1 mic's and I'd be interested in giving it a try on
one of them. Which issue of Recording Magazine do I need to order a back
issue of in order to get the details on how to do your mod ?

By cut and paste, am I correct in assuming you are referring to the
fact that I'd have to redesign the circuit board layout to fit the mic?
Not having done this before (just done point-to-point wiring projects
up to now), what method would you recommend for producing the circuit
board? I have a scanner with which I could scan in your design and
CAD software I could use to do the cut & paste work.

Say if I sent you one of my C1 mic's, how would you go about evaluating/
measuring it up? I'm not asking if you'll do this as I am sure you have
lots of better things to do. I'm just interested in what you look at.

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Brent Casey wrote:

The Dorsey mod I think is mainly intended to replace a circuit
featuring a somewhat less than stellar output transformer. The C1 and
the Dorsey mod are already the same basic circuit. The big difference
is that the C1 has a DC-DC converter which generates a higher
polarization voltage for the capsule, whereas the Dorsey circuit
relies on straight phantom power voltage for this task.

Right. I played with a DC-DC converter with the Shanghai mikes, and found
that running at the higher voltage tended to exaggerate the inconsistencies.
That shouldn't be the case for the C1.

Basically all the Dorsey mod would serve to do for the C1 is to cut
the capsule voltage down by nearly half, which would result in a lower
output, decreased sensitivity, etc.

I dunno, you'd still benefit from better capacitors and maybe a cleaner
front end, but I agree it wouldn't be anywhere near the improvement that
you'd get from the mikes it was designed for, and the lower polarization
voltage would definitely be a big loss.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article writes:

I'd use a laser interferometer made with a cheap laser pointer and
a beam splitter to see how evenly tensioned the diaphragm is and how flat
the backplate is.

You've mentioned using a laser pointer to check diaphragm tension
before, but how do you do this? What's the "display" and what do you
look for? (25 words or less, of course)



--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:13:58 -0500, Brent Casey wrote:

Nick,

The Dorsey mod I think is mainly intended to replace a circuit featuring
a somewhat less than stellar output transformer. The C1 and the Dorsey
mod are already the same basic circuit. The big difference is that the
C1 has a DC-DC converter which generates a higher polarization voltage
for the capsule, whereas the Dorsey circuit relies on straight phantom
power voltage for this task. Basically all the Dorsey mod would serve to
do for the C1 is to cut the capsule voltage down by nearly half, which
would result in a lower output, decreased sensitivity, etc. I think you
would be better served to try Scott's circuit on a different mic.

Regards,
Brent Casey
Studio Projects Microphones
877-563-6335

Hi Brent,

Thanks for the info' on the C1 internals. I do appreciate that there is
probably less to gain by modifying the C1 mic as opposed to some of the
other Chinese mic's, but I'd like to try anyways. It's not because I'm
unhappy with the way my C1's sound (I've got 4 of them and they work
very well). I'd simply like to see if I bring out a little different
character out of the capsule by changing the electronics in one of them.
Maybe instead of Scott's mod I should try the Royer (tube) mod? Which
one would you suggest?

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:19:44 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Basically all the Dorsey mod would serve to do for the C1 is to cut the
capsule voltage down by nearly half, which would result in a lower
output, decreased sensitivity, etc.

I dunno, you'd still benefit from better capacitors and maybe a cleaner
front end, but I agree it wouldn't be anywhere near the improvement that
you'd get from the mikes it was designed for, and the lower polarization
voltage would definitely be a big loss. --scott

Taking into account the better cap's and a cleaner front end (that I'm
assuming that Scott Dorsey mod would have) vs. the loss of the lower
polarization voltage of the original design - do you think I'd still be
gaining some quality with the mod' ?

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I don't know anything about the C1s circuit, but I always figured it
had some type of EQ going on there as well. I always wanted to modify
it to give just the pure, unadulterated tone of the capsule, but
without the EQ.

Nick Busigin wrote:

Thanks for the info' on the C1 internals. I do appreciate that there is
probably less to gain by modifying the C1 mic as opposed to some of the
other Chinese mic's, but I'd like to try anyways. It's not because I'm
unhappy with the way my C1's sound (I've got 4 of them and they work
very well). I'd simply like to see if I bring out a little different
character out of the capsule by changing the electronics in one of them.
Maybe instead of Scott's mod I should try the Royer (tube) mod? Which
one would you suggest?

I would suggest the Royer circuit, if only because the transformer in
there is specifically designed to impart a different character to the
sound. So you'll find it definitely much different than the original
sound.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Nick Busigin wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:19:44 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Basically all the Dorsey mod would serve to do for the C1 is to cut the
capsule voltage down by nearly half, which would result in a lower
output, decreased sensitivity, etc.

I dunno, you'd still benefit from better capacitors and maybe a cleaner
front end, but I agree it wouldn't be anywhere near the improvement that
you'd get from the mikes it was designed for, and the lower polarization
voltage would definitely be a big loss. --scott

Taking into account the better cap's and a cleaner front end (that I'm
assuming that Scott Dorsey mod would have) vs. the loss of the lower
polarization voltage of the original design - do you think I'd still be
gaining some quality with the mod' ?

Dunno, and it would be a pain shoehorning it in there to begin with. I'd
be more apt to keep the original board and just try getting some film caps
in there, if you're really interested in modifying the thing.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...
Brent Casey wrote:

Basically all the Dorsey mod would serve to do for the C1 is to cut
the capsule voltage down by nearly half, which would result in a lower
output, decreased sensitivity, etc.

I dunno, you'd still benefit from better capacitors and maybe a cleaner
front end, but I agree it wouldn't be anywhere near the improvement that
you'd get from the mikes it was designed for, and the lower polarization
voltage would definitely be a big loss.
--scott


In the C1, there are only three coupling capacitors between the
capsule and the XLR jack. All three are WIMA MKS 2 series. It may be
worth a try to build, but perhaps a bit heavy-handed to replace an
entire circuit board because of three capacitors...
As far as cleaning up the front end, do you mean the FET?? Perhaps the
gate shunt resistor could be upgraded to improve the noise floor a
little, but I do not know what type of resistor you have spec'ed.

Brent Casey
Studio Projects Microphones
877-563-6335

The modification you're talking about is for Shanghai microphones,
not for the Beijing-style microphones

Well, ****... here we go; in 20 years, we'll all be discussing the diferences
betwen "vintage shanghai" and "vintage beijing" microphones.
And loving it.

NeilH

On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:35:07 -0500, Scott Dorsey wrote:

Nick Busigin wrote:

Thanks for the info' on the C1 internals. I do appreciate that there is
probably less to gain by modifying the C1 mic as opposed to some of the
other Chinese mic's, but I'd like to try anyways. It's not because I'm
unhappy with the way my C1's sound (I've got 4 of them and they work
very well). I'd simply like to see if I bring out a little different
character out of the capsule by changing the electronics in one of them.
Maybe instead of Scott's mod I should try the Royer (tube) mod? Which
one would you suggest?

I would suggest the Royer circuit, if only because the transformer in
there is specifically designed to impart a different character to the
sound. So you'll find it definitely much different than the original
sound.
--scott

Thanks Scott. I may try both approaches. I'm looking at this as
learning experience as well as something that may give me a different and
if all goes well, an improved sonic character to the mic's. I recently
acquired an ADK mic with the Royer mod and I really like the sound of it.
That's what got me thinking in this direction.

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Brent Casey wrote:

In the C1, there are only three coupling capacitors between the
capsule and the XLR jack. All three are WIMA MKS 2 series. It may be
worth a try to build, but perhaps a bit heavy-handed to replace an
entire circuit board because of three capacitors...
As far as cleaning up the front end, do you mean the FET?? Perhaps the
gate shunt resistor could be upgraded to improve the noise floor a
little, but I do not know what type of resistor you have spec'ed.

The gate leak resistor basically can be noisy as hell, since it is
effectively bypassed by the capacitor that is the capsule. But a higher
value will always be a better, at least until you hit the limits of the
FET. I have been using 1G resistors of unknown noise performance,
probably not much better than those flag-shaped Chinese microphones when
they actually get into the circuit.

There are also two ways to polarize the capsule.... and you can look at
the Royer mod for one of them, and my mod for the other one. Royer's
method (which is the Neumann method) eliminates a DC blocking cap, and
the quality of that cap on the input of the FET is pretty critical if
you don't use that method.

The FET I am selling is a little better than the average 2SK170BL, but
not all that much better. Certainly not enough to pay the vastly inflated
price I am charging for them when you buy them without the board.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Neil Henderson wrote:
The modification you're talking about is for Shanghai microphones,
not for the Beijing-style microphones

Well, ****... here we go; in 20 years, we'll all be discussing the diferences
betwen "vintage shanghai" and "vintage beijing" microphones.
And loving it.

Yeah, I am still trying to wrap my head around the idea that people actually
want a Fairchild 670 at any price, let alone the cost of a Mercedes. Wierd.
--scott

Well, a low-end Mercedes.
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Nick Busigin wrote in message news:

Hi Brent,

Thanks for the info' on the C1 internals. I do appreciate that there is
probably less to gain by modifying the C1 mic as opposed to some of the
other Chinese mic's, but I'd like to try anyways. It's not because I'm
unhappy with the way my C1's sound (I've got 4 of them and they work
very well). I'd simply like to see if I bring out a little different
character out of the capsule by changing the electronics in one of them.
Maybe instead of Scott's mod I should try the Royer (tube) mod? Which
one would you suggest?

Nick

I'd suggest the Royer mod.
BTW, we are happy to sell you a capsule or two if you don't want to
tear up your C1.

Regards,

Brent Casey
PMI AUDIO GROUP
877-563-6335

In article writes:

Yeah, I am still trying to wrap my head around the idea that people actually
want a Fairchild 670 at any price, let alone the cost of a Mercedes. Wierd.

Yeah, espeicallly since you can get the plug-in for $149. It even has
the calibration adjustments. I wonder if it drifts, too.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers - )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 18:45:53 -0500, Brent Casey wrote:

Nick Busigin wrote in message news:

Hi Brent,

Thanks for the info' on the C1 internals. I do appreciate that there
is probably less to gain by modifying the C1 mic as opposed to some of
the other Chinese mic's, but I'd like to try anyways. It's not because
I'm unhappy with the way my C1's sound (I've got 4 of them and they
work very well). I'd simply like to see if I bring out a little
different character out of the capsule by changing the electronics in
one of them. Maybe instead of Scott's mod I should try the Royer (tube)
mod? Which one would you suggest?

Nick

I'd suggest the Royer mod.
BTW, we are happy to sell you a capsule or two if you don't want to tear
up your C1.

Regards,

Brent Casey
PMI AUDIO GROUP
877-563-6335

Thanks Brent. I'll try the Royer mod. Since I have 4 C1 mic's I think
I'll use one of them for the mod. That way I won't have to cobble up a
mic' body and I'll still be able to use same C1 shock mount.

Thanks also for the offer of the capsules. If I get bit by the mic'
building/modding bug after this project I may take you up on it!

Nick

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
http://www.songbirdofswing.com
Nick Busigin
Visit Our Indie Jazz CD Construction Project!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=