160 dB SPL?

[jason]

A B&H catalog showed up the other day. I came across a ribbon mic that
claims to handle SPL of 160 dB. I think that's louder than standing next
to a Space Shuttle launch. The samples would need more than 24 bits.
What's the rationale for that capability? Bragging rights?

The mic is a "Golden Age Project R1 MKII Ribbon Microphone".

[jason]

On Fri, 23 May 2014 19:00:58 -0400 "Jason" > wrote
in article >
>
> A B&H catalog showed up the other day. I came across a ribbon mic that
> claims to handle SPL of 160 dB. I think that's louder than standing next
> to a Space Shuttle launch. The samples would need more than 24 bits.
> What's the rationale for that capability? Bragging rights?
>
> The mic is a "Golden Age Project R1 MKII Ribbon Microphone".

I noticed another Golden Age mic in the catalog that claims 165 dB. Maybe
that's for the occasional dual Shuttle launch...

[geoff]

On 24/05/2014 2:03 p.m., Jason wrote:
> On Fri, 23 May 2014 19:00:58 -0400 "Jason" > wrote
> in article >
>>
>> A B&H catalog showed up the other day. I came across a ribbon mic that
>> claims to handle SPL of 160 dB. I think that's louder than standing next
>> to a Space Shuttle launch. The samples would need more than 24 bits.
>> What's the rationale for that capability? Bragging rights?
>>
>> The mic is a "Golden Age Project R1 MKII Ribbon Microphone".
>
> I noticed another Golden Age mic in the catalog that claims 165 dB. Maybe
> that's for the occasional dual Shuttle launch...
>


Maybe that's just the way it turned out. The 160dB isn't actually
*compulsory* ....


geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Jason > wrote:
>A B&H catalog showed up the other day. I came across a ribbon mic that
>claims to handle SPL of 160 dB. I think that's louder than standing next
>to a Space Shuttle launch. The samples would need more than 24 bits.
>What's the rationale for that capability? Bragging rights?
>
>The mic is a "Golden Age Project R1 MKII Ribbon Microphone".

1. Most of the specifications for these inexpensive microphones exist only
for bragging rights.

2. Most of them are made up out of whole cloth and bear no connection to
reality.

3. It's possible to create a sound in a sealed tube of 160dBSPL without too
much work. Air becomes nonlinear as much lower levels, so you start
getting a very asymmetric waveform.

4. There is some frequency far from the ribbon resonance where any ribbon mike
will be able to handle ludicrously high levels. There is some other
frequency much closer to the resonance where it will be much easier to
damage.
--scott



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

[Eric Weaver]

On 05/24/2014 08:20 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> 4. There is some frequency far from the ribbon resonance where any ribbon mike
> will be able to handle ludicrously high levels. There is some other
> frequency much closer to the resonance where it will be much easier to
> damage.

Um... JOOC, what IS a typical ribbon resonant frequency?

--
Weav
Former CE, KFJC, KNGY

[Scott Dorsey]

Eric Weaver > wrote:
>On 05/24/2014 08:20 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> 4. There is some frequency far from the ribbon resonance where any ribbon mike
>> will be able to handle ludicrously high levels. There is some other
>> frequency much closer to the resonance where it will be much easier to
>> damage.
>
>Um... JOOC, what IS a typical ribbon resonant frequency?

20-25 Hz for an RCA 44, 40-45 Hz for an RCA 77. But the Beyer ribbons are
much much tighter, with a resonance above 120 Hz which is why they are not
so easily damaged.
--scott

>
>--
>Weav
>Former CE, KFJC, KNGY
>


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

[geoff]

On 25/05/2014 6:21 a.m., Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Eric Weaver > wrote:
>> On 05/24/2014 08:20 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> 4. There is some frequency far from the ribbon resonance where any ribbon mike
>>> will be able to handle ludicrously high levels. There is some other
>>> frequency much closer to the resonance where it will be much easier to
>>> damage.
>>
>> Um... JOOC, what IS a typical ribbon resonant frequency?
>
> 20-25 Hz for an RCA 44, 40-45 Hz for an RCA 77. But the Beyer ribbons are
> much much tighter, with a resonance above 120 Hz which is why they are not
> so easily damaged.
> --scott
>
>>
>> --
>> Weav
>> Former CE, KFJC, KNGY
>>
>
>


Not to mention damage to the mic-stand and surroundings !

geoff

[[email protected]]

Eric Weaver wrote: "Um... JOOC, what IS a typical ribbon resonant frequency? "

Why do you refer to Dorsey as "Jooc"?


BTW that spec kind of reminds me of a US$19.95 kids telescope, with a tube diameter of a toilet paper roll, boasting 500X magnifying power - not!

[Tobiah]

On 05/24/2014 06:45 PM, wrote:
> Eric Weaver wrote: "Um... JOOC, what IS a typical ribbon resonant
> frequency? "
>
> Why do you refer to Dorsey as "Jooc"?
>
>
> BTW that spec kind of reminds me of a US$19.95 kids telescope, with a
> tube diameter of a toilet paper roll, boasting 500X magnifying power
> - not!
>

Just out of curiosity, ICAWW.