Hi,

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to preform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still preform according to what the specs state? Im going to do
room equilisation measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

Thanks
Witek.

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I havn't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?
Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?
If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definately seems like a good little mic for the price,
I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I havn't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?
Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?
If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definately seems like a good little mic for the price,
I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I havn't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?
Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?
If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definately seems like a good little mic for the price,
I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq.
response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works well
with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is a regulated
power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I havn't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the
mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic considerably
without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?
Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a FET and a
transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC buffer and
transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling yours to identify it,
as the mic element leads are very fine and are exceedingly easy to break.
The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3 of a mic I know for sure to be
transformerless was about 200 K, and from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a
DVM. I presume that the transformer version would have a far smaller
resistance between pins 2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.

I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass end, with
its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?
If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on the
matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Mergence) turned me on to them.
I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about 40 times as much.
From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of frequency response. BTW,
Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13 mic preamps that only put out
about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definately seems like a good little mic for the price,
I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

"Simon Byrnand" wrote in message
om
Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the
freq. response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works
well with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is
a regulated power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I haven't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs. voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

I think that was true of the two previous generations of Ultracurve as well.

There is a standard involving low Phantom voltages in the 12-15 volt range.

A Friend has a Benchmark Media mic preamp with 15 volt phantom power as
well.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will
the mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic
considerably without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?

No, just the web page I cited.

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

I've never actually had one of the old-style ECM 8000s in my hands.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a
FET and a transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC
buffer and transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling
yours to identify it, as the mic element leads are very fine and are
exceedingly easy to break. The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3
of a mic I know for sure to be transformerless was about 200 K, and
from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a DVM. I presume that the
transformer version would have a far smaller resistance between pins
2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

Hey, we caught Behringer in a lie. ;-) Oh, I get it, the box is symbolic.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.


I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass
end, with its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?

AFAIK, both.

If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf


I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on
the matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Vergence) turned me on
to them. I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about
40 times as much. From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of
frequency response. BTW, Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13
mic preamps that only put out about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definitely seems like a good little mic for the price,

Says a lot about the mic and the price!

I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

It's not the only Behringer product with a roll-off like that. Their PEQ
2200 equalizer is -3 at 18 Hz, -1 at 36 Hz. Quiet buggar, though.

Was Ken referring to the transformer version or IC version ?

Given the time frame, I'd guess Ken was using the transformerless versions.
He said nothing about the rolloff, that's my addition. I noticed it in my
comparisons with a DPA measurement mic and then noticed that it was implied
by some specs I'd seen for the ECM 8000. Ironically, it appears that Ken
was designing a subwoofer with it. I'm sure he knew all about the roll off
and was compensating for it, at least in his mind.

"Simon Byrnand" wrote in message
om
Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the
freq. response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works
well with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is
a regulated power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I haven't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs. voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

I think that was true of the two previous generations of Ultracurve as well.

There is a standard involving low Phantom voltages in the 12-15 volt range.

A Friend has a Benchmark Media mic preamp with 15 volt phantom power as
well.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will
the mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic
considerably without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?

No, just the web page I cited.

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

I've never actually had one of the old-style ECM 8000s in my hands.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a
FET and a transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC
buffer and transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling
yours to identify it, as the mic element leads are very fine and are
exceedingly easy to break. The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3
of a mic I know for sure to be transformerless was about 200 K, and
from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a DVM. I presume that the
transformer version would have a far smaller resistance between pins
2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

Hey, we caught Behringer in a lie. ;-) Oh, I get it, the box is symbolic.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.


I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass
end, with its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?

AFAIK, both.

If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf


I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on
the matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Vergence) turned me on
to them. I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about
40 times as much. From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of
frequency response. BTW, Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13
mic preamps that only put out about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definitely seems like a good little mic for the price,

Says a lot about the mic and the price!

I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

It's not the only Behringer product with a roll-off like that. Their PEQ
2200 equalizer is -3 at 18 Hz, -1 at 36 Hz. Quiet buggar, though.

Was Ken referring to the transformer version or IC version ?

Given the time frame, I'd guess Ken was using the transformerless versions.
He said nothing about the rolloff, that's my addition. I noticed it in my
comparisons with a DPA measurement mic and then noticed that it was implied
by some specs I'd seen for the ECM 8000. Ironically, it appears that Ken
was designing a subwoofer with it. I'm sure he knew all about the roll off
and was compensating for it, at least in his mind.

"Simon Byrnand" wrote in message
om
Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the
freq. response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works
well with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is
a regulated power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I haven't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs. voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

I think that was true of the two previous generations of Ultracurve as well.

There is a standard involving low Phantom voltages in the 12-15 volt range.

A Friend has a Benchmark Media mic preamp with 15 volt phantom power as
well.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will
the mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic
considerably without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?

No, just the web page I cited.

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

I've never actually had one of the old-style ECM 8000s in my hands.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a
FET and a transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC
buffer and transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling
yours to identify it, as the mic element leads are very fine and are
exceedingly easy to break. The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3
of a mic I know for sure to be transformerless was about 200 K, and
from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a DVM. I presume that the
transformer version would have a far smaller resistance between pins
2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

Hey, we caught Behringer in a lie. ;-) Oh, I get it, the box is symbolic.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.


I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass
end, with its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?

AFAIK, both.

If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf


I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on
the matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Vergence) turned me on
to them. I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about
40 times as much. From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of
frequency response. BTW, Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13
mic preamps that only put out about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definitely seems like a good little mic for the price,

Says a lot about the mic and the price!

I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

It's not the only Behringer product with a roll-off like that. Their PEQ
2200 equalizer is -3 at 18 Hz, -1 at 36 Hz. Quiet buggar, though.

Was Ken referring to the transformer version or IC version ?

Given the time frame, I'd guess Ken was using the transformerless versions.
He said nothing about the rolloff, that's my addition. I noticed it in my
comparisons with a DPA measurement mic and then noticed that it was implied
by some specs I'd seen for the ECM 8000. Ironically, it appears that Ken
was designing a subwoofer with it. I'm sure he knew all about the roll off
and was compensating for it, at least in his mind.

"Simon Byrnand" wrote in message
om
Hi Arny,

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Witek" wrote in message
om

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of
phantom power to perform according to specs. ( as stated on the
freq. response graph)

48 volts is not an absolute requirement for the ECM 8000 . It works
well with considerably less phantom voltage. Inside the mic there is
a regulated power supply running someplace around 12 volts.

I just recently got an ECM8000 to go with the DEQ2496 equalizer, and
the measured phantom voltage on the MIC input of that is only 14.9v so
one would assume that anything from 15v to 48v would be ok if they
have a built in 12v regulator...(I haven't actually got around to doing
a sensitivity vs. voltage measurement yet, but will some time)

I think that was true of the two previous generations of Ultracurve as well.

There is a standard involving low Phantom voltages in the 12-15 volt range.

A Friend has a Benchmark Media mic preamp with 15 volt phantom power as
well.

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own
phantom power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will
the mike still perform according to what the specs state?

Actually, the ECM 8000 you buy today will probably not precisely meet
Behringer's published specs because they've changed the mic
considerably without changing the model number or spec sheet.

Hmm, interesting.... do you have any info on how they are different ?

No, just the web page I cited.

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

Sensitivity ? Rolloff frequencies etc ? Have you done any direct
comparision between them ?

I've never actually had one of the old-style ECM 8000s in my hands.

There are two significantly different ECM 8000 designs, one with a
FET and a transformer and true balanced output, and one with an IC
buffer and transfomerless output. I don't recommend disassembling
yours to identify it, as the mic element leads are very fine and are
exceedingly easy to break. The resistance to ground from pins 2 & 3
of a mic I know for sure to be transformerless was about 200 K, and
from pin 2 to 3 I measured 330 K with a DVM. I presume that the
transformer version would have a far smaller resistance between pins
2 & 3.

Just measured mine and I get 196K from ground to pin 2 or 3, and 355K
from pin 2 to pin 3, so I guess I have the one without the
transformer. Bit sneaky that the box still shows a diagram of a
transformer coupled output ;-)

Hey, we caught Behringer in a lie. ;-) Oh, I get it, the box is symbolic.

I've only seen detailed photos of the transformer version.


I'm going to do
room equalization measurements with the thing, so the freq response
properties are rather important to me.

Another thing to remember is that the ECM 8000 rolls off the bass
end, with its - 3dB point someplace around 40 Hz.

Was that for the original transformer version or the new IC version ?

AFAIK, both.

If that was for the transformer version its possible that the
transformer itself may have been rolling off the bottom end as well,
and the IC version may go a bit lower...(one can hope anyway

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf


I have no phantom power supply yet, so I can test anything myself.
Can anyone with any experience with the ECM8000 shed some light on
the matter?

It's a great mic for the price, and not a bad mic overall. Ken Kantor
(senior designer for AR & founder of NHT and Vergence) turned me on
to them. I've compared them side-by-side to B&K mics costing about
40 times as much. From 40 to 23 KHz, it's a horse race in terms of
frequency response. BTW, Ken recommended using them with Rolls MP-13
mic preamps that only put out about 22 volts of phantom power.

Good to know... definitely seems like a good little mic for the price,

Says a lot about the mic and the price!

I also made up a transformer based balanced to unbalanced isolation
and phantom power box using a couple of 9v batteries so I could use it
with my computer, and it seems to work fine. Pity about the bottom end
rolloff below 40Hz though. (Although the previous microphone I had
rolled off below 150Hz so its a definite improvement

It's not the only Behringer product with a roll-off like that. Their PEQ
2200 equalizer is -3 at 18 Hz, -1 at 36 Hz. Quiet buggar, though.

Was Ken referring to the transformer version or IC version ?

Given the time frame, I'd guess Ken was using the transformerless versions.
He said nothing about the rolloff, that's my addition. I noticed it in my
comparisons with a DPA measurement mic and then noticed that it was implied
by some specs I'd seen for the ECM 8000. Ironically, it appears that Ken
was designing a subwoofer with it. I'm sure he knew all about the roll off
and was compensating for it, at least in his mind.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:59:30 +0000, Witek wrote:

Hi,

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of phantom
power to preform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq. response
graph)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own phantom
power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the mike still
preform according to what the specs state?

If you go to the Behringer site and download a file called
ECM8000_C_Specs.pdf you'll see it says the +15V to +48V. So your 17V
should be just fine.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:59:30 +0000, Witek wrote:

Hi,

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of phantom
power to preform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq. response
graph)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own phantom
power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the mike still
preform according to what the specs state?

If you go to the Behringer site and download a file called
ECM8000_C_Specs.pdf you'll see it says the +15V to +48V. So your 17V
should be just fine.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:59:30 +0000, Witek wrote:

Hi,

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of phantom
power to preform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq. response
graph)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own phantom
power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the mike still
preform according to what the specs state?

If you go to the Behringer site and download a file called
ECM8000_C_Specs.pdf you'll see it says the +15V to +48V. So your 17V
should be just fine.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2004 02:59:30 +0000, Witek wrote:

Hi,

Can anyone please tell me if the Behringer ECM8000 requires 48V of phantom
power to preform according to specs. ( as stated on the freq. response
graph)

What I'm basically trying to ask is, if I take and build my own phantom
power supply and it only supply it with lets say 17V, will the mike still
preform according to what the specs state?

If you go to the Behringer site and download a file called
ECM8000_C_Specs.pdf you'll see it says the +15V to +48V. So your 17V
should be just fine.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of
the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if they are
the same or just very similar?

TonyP.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of
the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if they are
the same or just very similar?

TonyP.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of
the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if they are
the same or just very similar?

TonyP.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version of
the
ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if they are
the same or just very similar?

TonyP.

"TonyP" wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version
of the ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if
they are the same or just very similar?

The only way I know to settle that is to buy one of each and compare them
exhaustively. Hardly seems worth the trouble given that the ECM 8000 is as
good as it is, and so readily available.

"TonyP" wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version
of the ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if
they are the same or just very similar?

The only way I know to settle that is to buy one of each and compare them
exhaustively. Hardly seems worth the trouble given that the ECM 8000 is as
good as it is, and so readily available.

"TonyP" wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version
of the ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if
they are the same or just very similar?

The only way I know to settle that is to buy one of each and compare them
exhaustively. Hardly seems worth the trouble given that the ECM 8000 is as
good as it is, and so readily available.

"TonyP" wrote in message
u
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I suspect that this is the *real* spec sheet for the current version
of the ECM 8000.

http://www.soundfirst.org/audiotoolb..._datasheet.pdf

But one is quoted as 200 ohm and the other as 600 ohm, I wonder if
they are the same or just very similar?

The only way I know to settle that is to buy one of each and compare them
exhaustively. Hardly seems worth the trouble given that the ECM 8000 is as
good as it is, and so readily available.

I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

-k


(Simon Byrnand) wrote in message
. com...



Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

-k


(Simon Byrnand) wrote in message
. com...



Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

-k


(Simon Byrnand) wrote in message
. com...



Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

-k


(Simon Byrnand) wrote in message
. com...



Was Ken refering to the tranformer version or IC version ?

Regards,
Simon

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside. After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

-k


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside. After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

-k


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside. After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

-k


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside. After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

-k


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om
I have no idea, but I will open up a few tomorrow. I can say that I
check my mics frequently (we have MB, ACO and B&K references), and I
have not yet seen a Behringer that was 3dB down at 20 KHz. I wouldn't
worry much about it unless you need really "traceable" accuracy.

I haven't seen any down at 20 KHz either, But what about 20 Hz?

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside.

Been three, done that. Mine was transformeless, too. All of mine are less
than a year old. Two are functioning as choir mics.

Here's picture of the elusive?? transformer equipped ECM 8000:

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

Still using the Rolls?

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

When I did my comparison I compared it to a DPA 4007 using the two channels
of a Symmetrix 202, running into a LynxTwo. The

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside.

Been three, done that. Mine was transformeless, too. All of mine are less
than a year old. Two are functioning as choir mics.

Here's picture of the elusive?? transformer equipped ECM 8000:

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

Still using the Rolls?

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

When I did my comparison I compared it to a DPA 4007 using the two channels
of a Symmetrix 202, running into a LynxTwo. The

"Ken Kantor" wrote in message
om

Based on terminal measurements, none of my ECM-8000's appear to have
transformers. To verify, I actually opened one up this evening.
Needless to say, I messed it up, since the wiring is very tight
inside.

Been three, done that. Mine was transformeless, too. All of mine are less
than a year old. Two are functioning as choir mics.

Here's picture of the elusive?? transformer equipped ECM 8000:

http://www.imagendv.com/altavoces/micro_med.htm

After I repaired it, I had to re-test its response. (I curse
Usenet, again...) Compared to the reference mic (in this case a
GenRad), it was within 1 dB down to 10 Hz, the limit of my test jig.
I tested a second unit that was identical at the low end. Of course,
the quality and input Z of the of the preamp will make a difference at
the frequency extremes.

Still using the Rolls?

I have to say, though, that I haven't bought one of these mics in a
few years, and so I can't be sure the design hasn't changed. Next
time I am in GC, I will pick one up.

When I did my comparison I compared it to a DPA 4007 using the two channels
of a Symmetrix 202, running into a LynxTwo. The