[Gary Morrison]

I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Ian Bell]

Gary Morrison wrote:

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

IAn

[Frank Stearns]

Gary Morrison writes:

I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.

Sounds to me like something is broken along the way -- normally, even with
a soft spoken voice this combination should give you PLENTY of clean
signal. (Hell, the last time I had a 4033 into my Grace 801 I had to use
the 20 dB pad and turn the gain down quite a bit -- true, it was a singing
voice and not a spoken voice, but we're talking 50+ dB of attenuation
below the max gain that the chain could provide. And it sounded great.)

Have you swapped each element in the chain? Mic? cables? Some other pre?
What are you feeding this into, and how is that component set up?

Was this combo fine at some point but recently doesn't seem right?

How are you monitoring? Etc, etc. Many things to methodically check.

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

--

[Mike Rivers]

Gary Morrison wrote:
I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

How are you defining "appreciable amount of signal?" How are you
measuring it, and what's the next device in the chain after the preamp?
You might be making the common beginner's mistake of not leaving any
headroom and trying to make everything hit the top of the meter scale.
Or you may just not have gains adjusted properly throughout the system.
An eyeball average of around -20 on a digital meter is a perfectly
acceptable recording level, particularly if you're recording 24-bit
data. 20 dB more gain that what it takes to produce that average level
will produce audible hiss on just about any system.

So unless your mic or preamp is actually broken, it may be that you're
the one causing the problem.

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.

What you already have should work just fine for that.

[Agent 86]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:15:45 -0600, Gary Morrison wrote:

I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.

The 4033 has a switched 10dB pad. Make sure it's not engaged. If the pad
is off and the problem persists, then re-read Mike's post carefully.

[Agent 86]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Gary Morrison wrote:

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:15:45 -0500, Gary Morrison wrote
(in article ):

I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.



try another cable.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[hank alrich]

Gary Morrison wrote:

I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

Something's not right, Gary. That combo should not be exhibiting that
problem at all. Get both pieces checked-out by a competent tech.

--
ha
"Iraq" is Arabic for "Vietnam"

[John Albert]

This is a little off-the-original topic, but something I'd been thinking about
and wondering how I should ask the question - or if it should be asked at all.

I've read postings here previously that mentioned that the sound of a mic had
a great deal to do with the preamp that it was attached to. No problems there,
completely understandable.

If that's the case, then I would think that there are _some_ mic/preamp
combinations out there that, for whatever reason, just seem to work especially
well together.

On the recommendation from folks here, I picked up an FMR RNP and it's been a
good purchase for me.

I use it with a couple of mics (CAD M-179 and Audio Technica AE5100), and they
work OK to my aging and untrained ears... but...

For those who have used the RNP, have you happened onto a mic here or there
that seems to work particularly well with it?

The mic/RNP combo will be used for male vocals and acoustic string instruments
(guitar, banjo, mandolin). I don't really have the luxury of being able to
"audition" various mics; guess if I _did_, I wouldn't have to ask!

Thanks,
- John

[Gary Morrison]

First of all, thanks for all of the replies.

Second, I apologize in advance for the rather long posting here!

Here's a little more information on the setup:
1. I just now bought a second copy of this setup, and was disappointed
find it to be noisy, by which I mean that it has a fair amount of
electronic, tape-like background hiss (actually, I think it's a little
more broad-band (white) than the blue-noise of tape hiss).
2. I tried it along with the original mic/preamp setup, and found it to
be pretty much the same. I hadn't used that first setup for quite a
while, so either I'd forgotten how noisy it is, or my ideas of what
constitutes a noisy setup have changed.
3. I noticed, however, that the volume knobs on the preamp were in fact
set to a very high volume from when I used it last.
4. The original mic seems very slightly louder (signal and noise) than
the new one. Otherwise they seem to be producing pretty much the same
results.
5. I tried disconnecting the mics from the preamps (at the mic end of
the cable) and turning the volume on the amps all the way up high.
There was some hiss, but all in all, it was fairly quiet.
6. I then wrapped up one of the mics tightly in a large bathrobe to try
to block as much sound from it as I could. Speaking intuitively (I
don't have a dB meter), that probably increased the overall noise by a
factor of 4 or so.
7. Unwrapping the mic, the noise (presumably due to air circulating in
the room) probably increased the overall noise by a factor of 2 or so.
8. The "rest of the system," during this experimentation, consists of a
Yamaha integrated amp (a high-end home model from probably 8 years ago),
listening through decent-grade Sony headphones. The volume of that
setup is set to where music from a CD player instead is at a reasonable
listening volume.
9. The 10dB pad switch that "Agent 86" mentioned is off, as is the low-cut.

From that experiment, it sounds like the potentially biggest culprit is
the microphones or their connections to their preamps.

Given this new information, the most especially interesting comments I
heard from you folks seem to me to be:
1. "This combination should give you PLENTY of clean signal" (i.e., Mr.
Stearns reports having gotten good results from this same combination.
However, I have a Grace 101, whereas he reported using an 801, which I
gather to be an 8-channel version of my 101, with similar specs, correct?
2. "How are you defining 'appreciable amount of signal?'" Well, that's
a good question and some related questions include: "how close to the
microphone?" and "how noisy is 'too noisy'?" Here's what I can say
about those questions:
a. My immediate assignment is to create a CD consisting of only two
voices in my studio, so I'm comparing those results to a CD of a vaguely
similar setup: A violin solo with piano accompaniment.
b. With the preamp volumes at maximum and the power amp at the same
level, my voice sounds a little quieter than the violin in the
recording, with my mouth about one foot from the microphones, and the
background noise level is probably about twice what I hear in that
professional recording. Does that sound like what I should expect? It
seems like I should expect a lot better S/N, and I shouldn't expect to
have the pre-amp volumes set so high.
3. "Try another cable": When it comes to hiss (as opposed to hum), I'm
not sure right off how the cable could affect things, unless it's wired
wrong, so that the amp is differencing across the one of the inputs and
ground rather than across the two differential inputs. I ohmed out the
right mic's cable, and it reads as a "straight through" cable, with a
fraction of an ohm between the ends and no shorts between any of the leads.

So, waddaya folks think?

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Gary Morrison]

Gary Morrison wrote:

b. With the preamp volumes at maximum and the power amp at the same
level, my voice sounds a little quieter than the violin in the
recording, with my mouth about one foot from the microphones, and the
background noise level is probably about twice what I hear in that
professional recording. Does that sound like what I should expect? It
seems like I should expect a lot better S/N, and I shouldn't expect to
have the pre-amp volumes set so high.

And to clarify further, I'd characterize the volume and nature of my
voice in this experiment as more or less a typical public-speaking sort
of voice (reasonably loud, but not yelling).

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Mike Rivers]

Gary Morrison wrote:

So, waddaya folks think?

So right now you're connecting the mic to the preamp, the preamp output
to the receiver, and you're listening to the receiver on headphones? And
comparing this to the volume of a CD?

The CD may have been processed to death to optimize it for volume and
your mic has not.

I think that you need to make some measurements. You say you want to
record a CD, so you must have a recorder. This can be a real recorder,
or more likely these days, a computer equipped with a sound card of
sorts, hopefully a more predictable and controllable one than the one
built into your computer.

So what do you have that you can use for a real world test?

--
I'm really Mike Rivers ) but you can't send anything
larger than 30K to that account, do don't try.

[Ian Bell]

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Gary Morrison wrote:

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is a
good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not expensive
and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one and use it
all the time.

The dbx 286A is a good general purpose low noise mic pre. It has a good
dynamics section too including a de-esser which makes it ideal for voice.
It also has a line level insert which mean you can also use it as an
external FX unit for that classic dbx compression. I have one and use it
all the time with my NT1-A mic.

Ian

Ian

[Edwin Hurwitz]

In article ,
Gary Morrison wrote:

I'm a little disappointed with my combination of Grace 101 microphone
preamp and AT4033 mic. I'm not sure which is most at fault, but I find
that I have to turn the volume waaaay up on the pre-amps to get any
appreciable amount of signal from them, and the noise then goes up
similarly.

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.

You do have the phantom power engaged, right? This should be plenty loud
and plenty quiet.

Edwin

[Agent 86]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is a
good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not expensive
and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one and use it
all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,
but it has pretty low self noise on paper. It's a pretty significant step
down from the 4033 which to OP already owns, but it has pretty low self
noise on paper.



The dbx 286A is a good general purpose low noise mic pre. It has a good
dynamics section too including a de-esser which makes it ideal for
voice. It also has a line level insert which mean you can also use it as
an external FX unit for that classic dbx compression. I have one and use
it all the time with my NT1-A mic.

Well it's a mic pre anyway. And it has a dynamics section and a de-esser
and a line level insert. It's a pretty significant step down from the
Grace which the OP already owns, but it is a mic pre with a dynamics
section and a de-esser and a line level insert.

[Don Pearce]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:12:13 -0500, Agent 86
wrote:

Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is a
good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not expensive
and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one and use it
all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,
but it has pretty low self noise on paper. It's a pretty significant step
down from the 4033 which to OP already owns, but it has pretty low self
noise on paper.

Disagree strongly. The NT1-A is a very natural sounding mic. What it
lacks is the upper mid hump which many seem to regard as giving a mic
"character". I prefer my mics flat - I'll bugger with the response
later myself if I feel like it.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Ian Bell]

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is
a good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not
expensive and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one
and use it all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,

Agreed, it does not sound very good, it sounds incredible.

Ian

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:12:13 -0500, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is a
good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not expensive
and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one and use it
all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,
but it has pretty low self noise on paper. It's a pretty significant step
down from the 4033 which to OP already owns, but it has pretty low self
noise on paper.

Persactly. Proceed to the Neumann TLM 103 which has lowself noise and sounds
good.


The dbx 286A is a good general purpose low noise mic pre. It has a good
dynamics section too including a de-esser which makes it ideal for
voice. It also has a line level insert which mean you can also use it as
an external FX unit for that classic dbx compression. I have one and use
it all the time with my NT1-A mic.

Well it's a mic pre anyway. And it has a dynamics section and a de-esser
and a line level insert. It's a pretty significant step down from the
Grace which the OP already owns, but it is a mic pre with a dynamics
section and a de-esser and a line level insert.

Strangely, the dbx 286a defies the standard price/performance ratio by
sounding a lot better than it should. A review of it in in my On Line
Archives.

Regards,

Ty Ford




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:37:26 -0500, Ian Bell wrote
(in article 45aa99e3.0@entanet):

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is
a good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not
expensive and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one
and use it all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,

Agreed, it does not sound very good, it sounds incredible.

Ian

Sounds OK, but not that amazing. Very good for the price point.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Gary Morrison]

Edwin Hurwitz wrote:

You do have the phantom power engaged, right? This should be plenty loud
and plenty quiet.

Yes, phantom power is on, but thanks for the reminder.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Gary Morrison]

Mike Rivers wrote:

So what do you have that you can use for a real world test?

I'd say you're right that taking some more-specific measurements would
be worthwhile. I suspect I could get some numbers from various widgets
in Digital Performer.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Gary Morrison]

Mike Rivers wrote:

So right now you're connecting the mic to the preamp, the preamp output
to the receiver, and you're listening to the receiver on headphones? And
comparing this to the volume of a CD?

Yes.


The CD may have been processed to death to optimize it for volume and
your mic has not.

This particular recording is probably not what most would describe as a
really extraodinary recording. In particular, it's one of the
demonstration recordings for Suzuki violin students (yeah OK, sounds
strange, but it's something of vaguely similar nature I happened to find
sitting around).

I do have various means to clean up the sound further, such as various
plug-ins to Digital Performer. As we all know though, such widgets
almost always work better if they're used very sparingly upon sound that
is already as good as we can realistically make it.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Gary Morrison]

Mike Rivers wrote:

I think that you need to make some measurements.

FWIW, my current guess is that a substantial part of it comes from
underestimating how much room noise I have.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[hank alrich]

Ian Bell wrote:

Agent 86 wrote:

Bell wrote:

Gary Morrison wrote:

Any of you have any suggestions for low-noise mic (preferably condenser)
and preamp for "close in" recording of individual instruments and
voices, the voices being mostly spoken narration.


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it is a
good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not expensive
and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one and use it
all the time.

The dbx 286A is a good general purpose low noise mic pre. It has a good
dynamics section too including a de-esser which makes it ideal for voice.
It also has a line level insert which mean you can also use it as an
external FX unit for that classic dbx compression. I have one and use it
all the time with my NT1-A mic.

The rig he has should not be making the racket he's hearing. It really
is that simple, and if he gets whatever is screwed up fixed, he will not
need to replace anything. You are sugesting a setup that is a
significant downgrade all 'round.

--
ha
"Iraq" is Arabic for "Vietnam"

[hank alrich]

Gary Morrison wrote:

Mike Rivers wrote:

I think that you need to make some measurements.

FWIW, my current guess is that a substantial part of it comes from
underestimating how much room noise I have.

That could be a good call, Gary. Like several of us have suggested,
unless something is _wrong_ that pre and mic shold not be bothering you
with noise. But if there is any noise at all to speak of in that room,
and you open up that preamp with that mic hooked to it, you're going to
get loads of noise in the tracks.

People forget that the first item in a real studio is a real room,
including some serious isolation.

--
ha
"Iraq" is Arabic for "Vietnam"

[Geoff]

Ty Ford wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:12:13 -0500, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and
it is a good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It
is not expensive and is available in matched pairs for stereo work.
I have one and use it all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very
good, but it has pretty low self noise on paper. It's a pretty
significant step down from the 4033 which to OP already owns, but it
has pretty low self noise on paper.

Persactly. Proceed to the Neumann TLM 103 which has lowself noise and
sounds good.


..... If you like over-bright and glary...


geoff

[[email protected]]

Gary Morrison wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:

I think that you need to make some measurements.

FWIW, my current guess is that a substantial part of it comes from
underestimating how much room noise I have.

That would make sense given your situation. I just made a quick sound
check with an AT4033 into a Sound Devices 702 and the residual noise
level is greater than 70 dB below the voice envelope peaks. Most of
that is my room noise. The mic and preamp self noise are much lower
still.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[[email protected]]

Gary Morrison wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:

I think that you need to make some measurements.

FWIW, my current guess is that a substantial part of it comes from
underestimating how much room noise I have.

Sorry for the second post and this is probably a silly suggestion, but
by any chance are you recording into the "back" of the AT4033?

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
we organize chaos
http://www.bsstudios.com

[Gary Morrison]

Much to my surprise, I think this is all just a big boondoggle!

I decided to go forward with the recording itself, assuming that I can
correct the problems with various computer widgets and such. I'm still
not completely sure why, but my experiments that suggest that there's a
problem just didn't correspond to the reality of doing the actual
recording itself. During the actual recording session, when I did the
preparatory sound checks and such, the volume went down to about where I
would expect it, the noise level was reasonable, and so were the signal
levels.

So, in short, I don't think it's a problem after all. Thanks again for
the suggestions and ideas.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[Gary Morrison]

Soundhaspriority wrote:

If you've used just one cable, it is possible that the ground lead is
broken. This would cause the mike to see zero phantom voltage.

Ah. Good point.

--

(Preferably reply to the newsgroup, please. If you reply by Email, I
will sincerely try to receive your message, but it will probably get
buried in spam.)

[hank alrich]

Geoff wrote:

If you like over-bright and glary...

Harvey submitted tracks to the first RAP CD, used a whole lot of TLM103,
and none of that was happening. Like Ty keeps saying, the mic and the
pre constitute a system.

--
ha
"Iraq" is Arabic for "Vietnam"

[Paul Stamler]

"Gary Morrison" wrote in message
...
Edwin Hurwitz wrote:

You do have the phantom power engaged, right? This should be plenty loud
and plenty quiet.

Yes, phantom power is on, but thanks for the reminder.

Have you measured the actual voltage at the input terminals when phantom is
turned on and nothing is connected? It should be +48V, +/- a few.

Peace,
Paul

[Ian Bell]

hank alrich wrote:


The rig he has should not be making the racket he's hearing. It really
is that simple, and if he gets whatever is screwed up fixed, he will not
need to replace anything. You are sugesting a setup that is a
significant downgrade all 'round.


Hi Hank, good to hear from you again. I have to disagree. The OP was
principally concerned about noise. For starters the AT4033 has a self noise
of 17dB SPL and the NT1-A has only 5dB SPL, in other words it's 12 dB
quieter - hardly a downgrade. I mentioned the dbx 286A simply because I
have direct experience of it with the NT1-A and I know the combination
exhibits extremely low noise even at high gains.

Ian

[Ian Bell]

Ty Ford wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:12:13 -0500, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it
is a good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not
expensive and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one
and use it all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,
but it has pretty low self noise on paper. It's a pretty significant step
down from the 4033 which to OP already owns, but it has pretty low self
noise on paper.

Persactly. Proceed to the Neumann TLM 103 which has lowself noise and
sounds good.



Persactly not. The TLM103 has a self noise of 7.5dB-A (per IEC651) and the
NT1-A has 5db-A (per IEC651).

Ian

[Mike Rivers]

Gary Morrison wrote:

FWIW, my current guess is that a substantial part of it comes from
underestimating how much room noise I have.

That's clearly nothing wrong with the mic and preamp, but you can
easily determine this by setting up the mic, setting the gain to where
you need it in order to get a good recording level, and record some
"silience." Then listen to what you have. If you hear a constant hum or
buzz, this indicates that there may be a problem with a cable, or (less
likely) a problem with the mic or preamp. If you hear any recognizable
noises like a furnace (or air conditioner if you're in that part of the
world) fan, a computer fan, traffic, kids playing in the yard - that's
a problem with room noise.

You don't need to measure the noise level so much as to determine the
character of the noise. Maybe you could put a short sample up on a web
site for those who want to listen to it. But you should try to measure
signal levels to make sure that you don't have, for instance, a low
level coming out of the preamp and need to boost the gain of the A/D
converter in order to get the signal level up, then you'll be
amplifiying both room noise and any electrical noise. If you can get
the desired signal (voice, piano, etc) well above the level of the room
noise by moving the mic closer, you'll improve the signal-to-room noise
ratio.

[Mike Rivers]

Gary Morrison wrote:

I decided to go forward with the recording itself, assuming that I can
correct the problems with various computer widgets and such. I'm still
not completely sure why, but my experiments that suggest that there's a
problem just didn't correspond to the reality of doing the actual
recording itself. During the actual recording session, when I did the
preparatory sound checks and such, the volume went down to about where I
would expect it, the noise level was reasonable, and so were the signal
levels.

This is a common "beginner" problem. You think you should test out your
system (always a good thing) but you don't realize what you're actually
testing. You turn up the gain or monitor volume until you can hear a
problem and then think you have a problem. But then you find, as you
have, that in practice you can't use that much gain for what you're
recording.

[Ty Ford]

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:23:29 -0500, hank alrich wrote
(in article ):

Geoff wrote:

If you like over-bright and glary...

Harvey submitted tracks to the first RAP CD, used a whole lot of TLM103,
and none of that was happening. Like Ty keeps saying, the mic and the
pre constitute a system.



Yes, when used with the wrong preamp, the TLM 103 can be wrong, but still
righter than an NT-1a

Regards,

Ty Ford

--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:22:16 -0500, Soundhaspriority wrote
(in article ):


"Ty Ford" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:12:13 -0500, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

[snip]

Persactly. Proceed to the Neumann TLM 103 which has lowself noise and
sounds
good.

The TLM103 has Neumann's classic center-terminated capsule.
The NT1A has an edge terminated capsule, as is also found in Neumann's newer
designs.

The center termination, which pins the diaphram at the center as well as the
edges, results in resonant behavior more like a smaller diaphram. I wonder
if this could be the primary cause of your preference?

Bob Morein
Dresher, PA
(215) 646-4894

No. It's getting the right mic plugged into the right preamp. I was finally
able to get this info into the microphone chapter of the (rather large) NAB
Engineering book this past issue.

The world will be a better place.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ty Ford]

On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 01:58:41 -0500, Ian Bell wrote
(in article 45ab2b7d.0@entanet):

Ty Ford wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 15:12:13 -0500, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 19:12:35 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:

Agent 86 wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 07:00:29 +0000, Ian Bell wrote:


Rode NT1-A
dbx 286A

Why?

The NT1-A has one of the lowest self noise figures around today and it
is a good all round mic suitable for instruments and voice. It is not
expensive and is available in matched pairs for stereo work. I have one
and use it all the time.

Yes, it has pretty low self noise on paper. It doesn't sound very good,
but it has pretty low self noise on paper. It's a pretty significant step
down from the 4033 which to OP already owns, but it has pretty low self
noise on paper.

Persactly. Proceed to the Neumann TLM 103 which has lowself noise and
sounds good.



Persactly not. The TLM103 has a self noise of 7.5dB-A (per IEC651) and the
NT1-A has 5db-A (per IEC651).

Ian

Ah, yes, well you're not taking into consideration the sensitivity of the
mics. The TLM 103, I think, is more sensitive. As a result, you have to boost
the NT1-a up to where the selfnoise is more evident.

The again, if the mic sounds nasty, who cares about selfnoise.

Regards,

Ty Ford



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

[Ricky Hunt]

"Geoff" wrote in message
...

Persactly. Proceed to the Neumann TLM 103 which has lowself noise and
sounds good.


.... If you like over-bright and glary...


I wouldn't call it that. But then again I also have a C1...