[Arny Krueger]

"RoninTO" wrote in message
...
On Feb 26, 2:00 pm, wrote:

Do you have a recommended and trusted mic in mind for my purposes?

The Behringer ECM 8000 is generally good enough for beginners and
non-critical field use. Some well-known and widely esteemed audio
engineers/speaker designers like Ken Kantor (co-founder of NHT) recommend
it. While the frequency response of inexpensive microphones can be
surprisingly good, their actual sensitivity can vary by sample, temperature,
climate, and age. People who base critical decisions on measurement mics
obtain microphone calibrators, which enable you to manage the issues
relating to variable sensitivity.

I've had the loan of a pair of the so-called B&K (actually DPA) 4007
microphones for over a year. If I measured a speaker with a number of
different ECM 8000s and either DPA 4007 concurrently, the basic 1/3 octave
response was pretty much the same within a small fraction of a dB from 30 to
15,000 Hz.

The DPAs had smooth response up to about 40,000 Hz, and down to no higher
than 5 Hz and a different (lower) noise level and noise spectrum. The DPAs
also had far more stable output with variations in sample, temperature,
humidity, and age. In particular I've had ECM 8000s that might lose 3-6 dB
output in a few years. Of course for $50 each, you just scrap the lame ones
and replace them, and still come out many dollars ahead of the cost of the
next most expensive mic, which I believe is the Audix.

The ca. $30 ominidirectional electret mics sold on eBay are probably about
as good as the ECM8000. The ECM 8000 is larger, handles like a pro mic, and
very solidly made. The ECM 8000s working end will engage a standard 1/2"
mic calibrator port.

Last I priced them, DPA 4007s ran about $1300 each. The Earthworks run
$300-500 each last I priced them. The Audix was under $200, last I priced
it. ECM8000s are widely available for about $50 each.

There were also minor variations in the comparative frequency response of
the DPAs and the Behringers above 5 KHz that showed up in spot measurements,
narrowband measurements, multitone measurements and swept tone measurements.
These variations were within the variations shown by the manufacturer's
calibration curve for the 4007, so it is not clear which mic was *right* and
which one was *wrong*. Neither was very wrong. Both were very right.

If you developed a loudspeaker or tuned a room or even developed a typical
subwoofer with an ECM 8000 rather than a DPA 4007, I doubt that anybody
would be able to tell the difference.

[RoninTO]

On Mar 2, 10:47*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"RoninTO" wrote in message

...

On Feb 26, 2:00 pm, wrote:
Do you have a recommended and trusted mic in mind for my purposes?

The Behringer ECM 8000 is generally good enough for beginners and
non-critical field use. Some well-known and widely esteemed audio
engineers/speaker designers like Ken Kantor (co-founder of NHT) recommend
it. While the frequency response of inexpensive microphones can be
surprisingly good, their actual sensitivity can vary by sample, temperature,
climate, and age. People who base critical decisions on measurement mics
obtain microphone calibrators, which enable you to manage the issues
relating to variable sensitivity.

[substantial quoting snipped. - dsr ]

If you developed a loudspeaker or tuned a room or even developed a typical
subwoofer with an ECM 8000 rather than a DPA 4007, I doubt that anybody
would be able to tell the difference.

OK, it sounds like the ECM8000 would be a good starting point for my
purposes. Thx