Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
None wrote:
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I sure hope these measurement microphones are good for recording, Did you look at the noise spec? It doesn't matter, they don't always meet it anyway. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
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. Gary "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... None wrote: "Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I sure hope these measurement microphones are good for recording, Did you look at the noise spec? It doesn't matter, they don't always meet it anyway. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
"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. |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
"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. Gary |
#45
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message
... you live and you learn I suppose. You learn as little as possible, apparently, you suppose. I just thought Just barely. Maybe you could find a grownup to read the manual to you. If that works out, you could have them try reading you that Yamaha book that you’ve been avoiding. Or you could just continue blundering around in the dark. Yeah, that's the ticket! |
#46
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... None wrote: "Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I sure hope these measurement microphones are good for recording, Did you look at the noise spec? It doesn't matter, they don't always meet it anyway. Do they actually publish a noise spec? Trevor. |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
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. |
#48
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Trevor wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... None wrote: "Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I sure hope these measurement microphones are good for recording, Did you look at the noise spec? It doesn't matter, they don't always meet it anyway. Do they actually publish a noise spec? These comments motivated me to take another look at the spec sheet for the Dayton EMM-6. They say: Max. SPL for 1% THD @ 1000Hz: 127 dB S/N ratio: 70 dB A-weighted That looks pretty optimistic to me, but I went to the Primo website (a result of Scott's mentioning of them) and they have some electret capsules with much better specs than the average electrets I'm used to. For example: http://www.primomic.com/php/get_prod...hp?model=EM173 The Dayton and Primo specs both look a little too good to believe. I contacted Primo to see if I can get some of their capsules to try out. |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
In article , Trevor wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... None wrote: "Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I sure hope these measurement microphones are good for recording, Did you look at the noise spec? It doesn't matter, they don't always meet it anyway. Do they actually publish a noise spec? Yes, but like the other numbers on the datasheet it's just a random value that bears no connection to actual performance. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
Jay Ts wrote:
Do they actually publish a noise spec? These comments motivated me to take another look at the spec sheet for the Dayton EMM-6. They say: Max. SPL for 1% THD @ 1000Hz: 127 dB S/N ratio: 70 dB A-weighted Personally I think it would be miracle if you managed to get either one of those numbers consistently. That looks pretty optimistic to me, but I went to the Primo website (a result of Scott's mentioning of them) and they have some electret capsules with much better specs than the average electrets I'm used to. For example: http://www.primomic.com/php/get_prod...hp?model=EM173 The Dayton and Primo specs both look a little too good to believe. I contacted Primo to see if I can get some of their capsules to try out. The Primo specs can be believed, and the reason why the quiet ones are quiet is mostly because they use a conventional FET with external biasing resistors rather than using a "FET-IC" with diodes fabricated on the surface to act as bias resistors. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
Jay Ts wrote:
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. The most humble of these - the ECM8000 - makes a perfectly fine recording mic. There's not that much noise. Whether it works on really shrill electric guitars is another matter. https://myspace.com/bigbananariverband Guitars (2) were done with an ECM8000 apeice. I'm pretty sure that's just what those amps sounded like. 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. Best done in post, IMO. -- Les Cargill |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
Well, aflame with curiosity, I obtained the second ECM8000 and made a stereo
recording of a rehearsal of the wind band that I record for. It sounded pretty good. The only noise I heard was from the air conditioning, I do believe. I set the Phantom power to 24 volts. I wonder if the phantom power settings make much difference. Mikes on stands about 3 ft apart. Great sound, great stereo. Gary Eickmeier |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Jay Ts wrote: Do they actually publish a noise spec? These comments motivated me to take another look at the spec sheet for the Dayton EMM-6. They say: Max. SPL for 1% THD @ 1000Hz: 127 dB S/N ratio: 70 dB A-weighted Personally I think it would be miracle if you managed to get either one of those numbers consistently. That looks pretty optimistic to me, but I went to the Primo website (a result of Scott's mentioning of them) and they have some electret capsules with much better specs than the average electrets I'm used to. For example: http://www.primomic.com/php/get_prod...hp?model=EM173 The Dayton and Primo specs both look a little too good to believe. I contacted Primo to see if I can get some of their capsules to try out. The Primo specs can be believed, and the reason why the quiet ones are quiet is mostly because they use a conventional FET with external biasing resistors rather than using a "FET-IC" with diodes fabricated on the surface to act as bias resistors. That's probably a 2SK596, and I've been reading the datatsheets for it. I was very suspicious of the "resistor" that the manufacturers show in the schematic, and guessed that they were using reverse leakage current from diodes to bias the gate. But I haven't found any confirmation of that idea. Scott, are you sure that's what's going on? I was trying different things with the CUI capsule, and the 2SK596 in it did not respond as any jFETs I'm used to using. I was disappointed by it. Anyway, I'm really interested in the Primo products now, and I hope I can get them to sell me a few! The datasheets suggest that *maybe* they can be made into pretty nice small-diaphragm mics, and I'll have to build up a few to try them and learn how good they can be. There won't be any DPA or Schoeps killers coming out of this, but maybe some decent, much lower cost and useful microphones. |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
On Fri, 13, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
Well, aflame with curiosity, I obtained the second ECM8000 and made a stereo recording of a rehearsal of the wind band that I record for. It sounded pretty good. The only noise I heard was from the air conditioning, I do believe. I set the Phantom power to 24 volts. I wonder if the phantom power settings make much difference. Mikes on stands about 3 ft apart. Great sound, great stereo. Congratulations! Now turn off the air conditioning. About the phantom power, my experience so far designing a phantom-powered electret capsule (Panasonic and CUI) is that they work the best with about 2-4 volts -- that's all! When I used a higher voltage (about 10 volts), they both sounded awful, full of noise and distortion. I asked CUI tech support about that, and was told that although the FET in the capsule can handle up to 10 volts, they list 10 volts as a maximum because the noise and distortion makes them basically unusable for higher voltages. To get my power supply for the electret cartridge, I use a common method of dropping the 48v phantom power voltage down to whatever I need using a zener diode. This is extremely simple, and works just as well with P24 or P12 phantom power. The supply from the preamp could be as low as about 5 volts and it would still work just fine. (I am not trying to say you can always get away with less than 48v, and if you aren't supplying a high enough voltage or current for a particular microphone, you may not get full performance from it. But for electrets, it's pretty easy for me to understand why your mic can work well on 24 volts or even less.) |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
Jay Ts wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Scott Dorsey wrote: The Primo specs can be believed, and the reason why the quiet ones are quiet is mostly because they use a conventional FET with external biasing resistors rather than using a "FET-IC" with diodes fabricated on the surface to act as bias resistors. That's probably a 2SK596, and I've been reading the datatsheets for it. There are more modern ones than that, and the Chinese are making some very, very inexpensive ones, but the 2SK596 is a classic one. I was very suspicious of the "resistor" that the manufacturers show in the schematic, and guessed that they were using reverse leakage current from diodes to bias the gate. But I haven't found any confirmation of that idea. Scott, are you sure that's what's going on? Most IC processes use diodes as resistors. Part of what made the Analog Devices op-amps so much better than their monolithic competitors back in the seventies was that they could actually make real resistors on chip. I was trying different things with the CUI capsule, and the 2SK596 in it did not respond as any jFETs I'm used to using. I was disappointed by it. You'll find a similar device inside the Panasonic capsules, etc. Anyway, I'm really interested in the Primo products now, and I hope I can get them to sell me a few! The datasheets suggest that *maybe* they can be made into pretty nice small-diaphragm mics, and I'll have to build up a few to try them and learn how good they can be. There won't be any DPA or Schoeps killers coming out of this, but maybe some decent, much lower cost and useful microphones. The Primo capsules are used by a lot of mid-range microphone vendors. As are the Panasonics for that matter. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 10:56:52 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Jay Ts wrote: On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Scott Dorsey wrote: The Primo specs can be believed, and the reason why the quiet ones are quiet is mostly because they use a conventional FET with external biasing resistors rather than using a "FET-IC" with diodes fabricated on the surface to act as bias resistors. That's probably a 2SK596, and I've been reading the datatsheets for it. There are more modern ones than that, and the Chinese are making some very, very inexpensive ones, but the 2SK596 is a classic one. I really don't trust the Chinese-made parts. There is one in the CUI electret that I disassembled. I asked CUI for a datasheet for it, and they sent one. I'm very impressed that they have this level of support at all, and I'm thankful for it, but the 2SK596 they are using is made by a company I've never heard of in my life, and doesn't have a website (in English, at least). I suppose it "doesn't matter", and it might work as well as a Motorola part, but I'd like to have more confidence in parts I use. Chinese quality control seems to be this: "If it works when we sell it, it's good enough." I was very suspicious of the "resistor" that the manufacturers show in the schematic, and guessed that they were using reverse leakage current from diodes to bias the gate. But I haven't found any confirmation of that idea. Scott, are you sure that's what's going on? Most IC processes use diodes as resistors. Part of what made the Analog Devices op-amps so much better than their monolithic competitors back in the seventies was that they could actually make real resistors on chip. Ok, thanks. One of my first paying jobs was doing IC design, but that was just digital, and it was a long time ago. I'm always happy to learn more about analog IC design. |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
I have a co-worker who had the really expensive Earthworks analysis mic. I bought the Behringer ECM8000 and loaned it to him so he can tell me the differences. He brought it back and said, "I wasted $350".
|
#58
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Measurement Microphones
cedricl wrote:
I have a co-worker who had the really expensive Earthworks analysis mic. I bought the Behringer ECM8000 and loaned it to him so he can tell me the differences. He brought it back and said, "I wasted $350". Which of the two totally different models of ECM8000 did you buy? Do you know? What is the real response of your individual microphone? The thing about these are... when you are buying cheap uncertified "measurement" mikes like the Earthworks and the ECM8000, what you are paying for is not the microphone but the calibration chart. The calibration chart on the ECM8000 is absent. The calibration chart on the Earthworks is acceptable but I do not believe it's NBS-traceable. Is the calibration worth paying $350 for? Depends on what you're doing. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Measurement microphones | Pro Audio | |||
dbx RTA-M measurement mic. | Pro Audio | |||
measurement microphones? | Pro Audio | |||
DBX RTA-M Measurement Mic | Pro Audio | |||
measurement mic recommendations | Tech |