Microphone Rumble

[Gary Eickmeier]

I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." In my
current multimiking project, you may recall my hum problem with one mike, at
that time the one stuck under the piano lid. I have now done a second
session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
singer, another a voice mike for the pianist. Different brands of
microphone, different locations on the stage, wiring all above and away from
other wires. I stopped and did a volume up, down routine on all channels to
listen for it, and it was unconclusive on site, but when I got home I put
the tracks on the multitrack line and watched the meters as I went up, down
on the recorder and saw that it was the aforementioned two tracks only.

So on to filtering - someone suggested the FFT filter set in Audition 2, so
I tried their 60 Hz filter first, no effect. Then I tried one called
"microphone rumble" which is just a steep step to get rid of everything
below about 100 Hz. Bingo - hum all gone, but what would that do to the
sound? Trying to remaster the CD now, but if that is missing a lot of the
bass, I could conceive of filtering just the offending channels and not the
entire mix and I will be home free.

But what the devil is this problem and why would it happen on two different
mikes and none of the others on that same stage?

Thought this might help others as well, or if you have experienced this
thing before you could tell me about it.

Gary Eickmeier

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/19/2015 12:46 PM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." I have now done a second
> session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
> similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
> singer, another a voice mike for the pianist.

> So on to filtering - someone suggested the FFT filter set in Audition 2, so
> I tried their 60 Hz filter first, no effect. Then I tried one called
> "microphone rumble" which is just a steep step to get rid of everything
> below about 100 Hz. Bingo - hum all gone, but what would that do to the
> sound?

Well, you can hear it. What did it do to the sound? If there was
something down there that you wanted to hear, then it would take it out
along with the rumble. Try applying the filter just to the tracks with
the noise and re-mixing.

You really need a better way of monitoring while you're recording
because you should have caught that before the session started. Is it a
hum, a buzz, wind noise? You need to first hear it, then figure out
what's causing it, then fix that problem.

Why not post a short clip of the individual tracks that have the noise?
It might give a clue.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Mike Rivers" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> On 3/19/2015 12:46 PM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>> I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." I have
>> now done a second
>> session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
>> similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
>> singer, another a voice mike for the pianist.
>
>> So on to filtering - someone suggested the FFT filter set in Audition 2,
>> so
>> I tried their 60 Hz filter first, no effect.

FIRST you analyze and find out what is actually going on.

> Why not post a short clip of the individual tracks that have the noise? It
> might give a clue.

Could indeed be helpful.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Gary Eickmeier]

I could hear it on site, and tried to isolate the source, but no luck. In
the quiet of the studio (home studio) I could do it a little easier and try
the filters. Mind you, this is not necessarily what they are calling
microphone rumble, just that I have eliminated it by filtering before 100
Hz. But since it is a filter in the FFT set, they must know what causes that
and it might be a commonly known thing.

Gary

PS also having a lot of trouble with both of my computers, the mouse on this
one and the processor on the other one. Please no one tell me about Google.




On site in a church there is no way to have a monitoring system other than
my
"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/19/2015 12:46 PM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>> I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." I have
>> now done a second
>> session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
>> similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
>> singer, another a voice mike for the pianist.
>
>> So on to filtering - someone suggested the FFT filter set in Audition 2,
>> so
>> I tried their 60 Hz filter first, no effect. Then I tried one called
>> "microphone rumble" which is just a steep step to get rid of everything
>> below about 100 Hz. Bingo - hum all gone, but what would that do to the
>> sound?
>
> Well, you can hear it. What did it do to the sound? If there was something
> down there that you wanted to hear, then it would take it out along with
> the rumble. Try applying the filter just to the tracks with the noise and
> re-mixing.
>
> You really need a better way of monitoring while you're recording because
> you should have caught that before the session started. Is it a hum, a
> buzz, wind noise? You need to first hear it, then figure out what's
> causing it, then fix that problem.
>
> Why not post a short clip of the individual tracks that have the noise? It
> might give a clue.
>
>
> --
> For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com
>

[[email protected]]

>
> >I could hear it on site, and tried to isolate the source, but no luck. In
> >the quiet of the studio (home studio) I could do it a little easier and try
> >the filters. Mind you, this is not necessarily what they are calling
> >microphone rumble, just that I have eliminated it by filtering before 100
> >Hz. But since it is a filter in the FFT set, they must know what causes that
> >and it might be a commonly known thing.
> >
> >

try N Track Studio.

The DAW has a spectrum analyzer and EQ combined.

You can see the offending frequencies and draw an EQ curve to notch them out.

Try a piece of carpet under the mic stand.

High pass filtering on VOX mics is standard operating procedure.

Voices typically have no components below 100 Hz.

I prefer to do filtering in the DAW after the fact, not while recording, that way you can adjust as needed instead of getting one shot to guess it right.


Mark

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> I could hear it on site, and tried to isolate the source, but no
> luck. In the quiet of the studio (home studio) I could do it a
> little easier and try the filters. Mind you, this is not necessarily
> what they are calling microphone rumble, just that I have eliminated
> it by filtering before 100 Hz. But since it is a filter in the FFT set,
> they must know what causes that and it might be a commonly known thing.

I do not see the applicability of the "but since ... etc" but it doesn't
really matter. What is relevant is that you understand that you use the FFT
analysis window to understand what is wrong and the FFT equalizer window to
design a suitable filter. Or post a link to an example audio file, your
problem description is vague.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

> try N Track Studio.

> The DAW has a spectrum analyzer and EQ combined.

He has Audition and it has both and some of the time it is best not to have
to learn new tools in the middle of a troubleshooting process.

> I prefer to do filtering in the DAW after the fact,
> not while recording, that way you can adjust as needed
> instead of getting one shot to guess it right.

Mostly I agree, but wind noise should be prevented with a suitable
windscreen as it tends to gobble up headroom and make meter readings poorly
correlated to the music. As for the actual problem there is not even enough
information to place bets and I'm beginning to wonder if it is the same
problem he attributed to the bass amplification, it too was never really
well understood.

> Mark

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Frank Stearns]

writes:

>> >I could hear it on site, and tried to isolate the source, but no luck. In
>> >the quiet of the studio (home studio) I could do it a little easier and try
>> >the filters. Mind you, this is not necessarily what they are calling
>> >microphone rumble, just that I have eliminated it by filtering before 100
>> >Hz. But since it is a filter in the FFT set, they must know what causes that
>> >and it might be a commonly known thing.
>> >
>> >

>try N Track Studio.
>The DAW has a spectrum analyzer and EQ combined.
>You can see the offending frequencies and draw an EQ curve to notch them out.

Sweet.

>Try a piece of carpet under the mic stand.

Might help a little; might also make the stand less stable, depending on its
configuration and C of G based on stand mass and mic mass. Usually it's better to
get really good mounts, or use that spendy but very effective in-line mechnical
isolator from AEA. Also, be sure to mechanically isolate the cable itself, such as
with a loop. It's amazing how much vibration travels up the cable and right into
the mic.

>High pass filtering on VOX mics is standard operating procedure.
>Voices typically have no components below 100 Hz.

Mostly true, though some classical singers go below that -- if not in tone so much,
there is a definite feeling of LF "presence" that you don't want to lose with such
voices. Use a steep high-pass and listen carefully. You might need to keep the HP as
low as 50 Hz, though certainly go as high as you can before affecting the voice.
Use 24 dB/octive minimum.

With a modern DAW you can also do some dynamic HP. One of my favorite choral clients
performed in a nice hall with good acoustics but it had HORRID HVAC. Everything was
wrong -- too much velocity, not enough returns, small ducts, restricted filters, and
blower units right on top of the hall. The physical plant people were totally
uncooperative and would NEVER shut it down, even for some major recording projects.

Fortunately, an automated HP frequency can sweep up when no low voices are present
to help mask the rumble, then pull go back down when the guys (or other LF
instruments) appear.

>I prefer to do filtering in the DAW after the fact, not while recording, that way
>you can adjust as needed instead of getting one shot to guess it right.

Yes, absolutely.

My guess is that Gary is likely fighting bad and/or cheap HVAC design. It's a
problem everywhere. Very few venues have actually paid any attention to quieting
their systems. The heartbreak is that in the grand scheme of building a hall,
quieting the HVAC by even 10 dB costs very little. (You can do 5 dB for just about
nothing.)

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[PStamler]

On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 10:44:59 AM UTC-6, Gary Eickmeier wrote:

> But what the devil is this problem and why would it happen on two different
> mikes and none of the others on that same stage?

There are several possible explanations; any and all of them could be contributing.

The most likely is that some piece of HVAC equipment in the room is making noise down in the bass regions.

Why is it in some mics and not others? Most likely explanation: the dimentsions of the room are such that the noise excites standing waves which are at their maxima at or near the mics you're having trouble with.

Other possible explanation: the troublesome mics may have more bass response than the rest of the ones you're using.

It would help if you could post a couple seconds' worth of the noise someplace so we could check it out.

Peace,
Paul

[JackA]

On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-4, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." In my
> current multimiking project, you may recall my hum problem with one mike, at
> that time the one stuck under the piano lid. I have now done a second
> session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
> similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
> singer, another a voice mike for the pianist. Different brands of
> microphone, different locations on the stage, wiring all above and away from
> other wires. I stopped and did a volume up, down routine on all channels to
> listen for it, and it was unconclusive on site, but when I got home I put
> the tracks on the multitrack line and watched the meters as I went up, down
> on the recorder and saw that it was the aforementioned two tracks only.
>
> So on to filtering - someone suggested the FFT filter set in Audition 2, so
> I tried their 60 Hz filter first, no effect. Then I tried one called
> "microphone rumble" which is just a steep step to get rid of everything
> below about 100 Hz. Bingo - hum all gone, but what would that do to the
> sound? Trying to remaster the CD now, but if that is missing a lot of the
> bass, I could conceive of filtering just the offending channels and not the
> entire mix and I will be home free.
>
> But what the devil is this problem and why would it happen on two different
> mikes and none of the others on that same stage?
>
> Thought this might help others as well, or if you have experienced this
> thing before you could tell me about it.
>
> Gary Eickmeier

I like troubleshooting!! I'm not sure what these microphones are feeding. Is it a equipment problem or a microphone problem. With all the problems you're having, it seems an equipment problem. I'd get a shielded cord, and would short one end, microphone jack on the other. I'd move this cord channel to channel with the gain at maximum - record and/or monitor all this. If it's a grounding issue (equipment) it should appear (noise). If you find no noise at all, remove those two microphones, replace them.

Just my two cents.

Jack

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." In my
>current multimiking project, you may recall my hum problem with one mike, at
>that time the one stuck under the piano lid. I have now done a second
>session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
>similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
>singer, another a voice mike for the pianist.

This is why everyone told you to use shockmounts on your mikes. It can also
help to loop the cables to reduce conduction up the cable across the shock
mount.

A sharp highpass can help... listen to the lowest notes, then turn the knob
on the highpass until you hear it change, then back off a little. How high
you can go depends on the piece and the instrument. Crank the Q as high
as it'll go.

I'd also make sure that you don't have any narrowband resonances in your
monitoring too.
--scott

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

[Gary Eickmeier]

As far as shockmounts goes, I use whatever mount comes with the microphone
when I buy it. The 2050s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long mikes
that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for. My thanks for all of the
suggestions and I am sorry I have had no time to keep up with my own thread
today. I was busy at work and trying filtering the offending tracks and
leaving the others alone, which seems to have solved the problem. I will
upload the file that shows the problem tomorrow after I can get some sleep.

But I have a new one for you this round. In discussing the issue with the
piano player, who was going to try and help me do the mix, he asked me if it
could be cell phones. His other church made it a rule that no one on the
stage can have a cell phone turned on because it causes a hum that gets into
their entire sound system.

I have discovered for my own purposes that I will turn my phone completely
off during a job because I sit so close to my recorder and microphones and I
did hear some garbage in one or two tracks previously which were otherwise
unexplainable. In yesterday's case I was sitting next to the recorder with
my phone off, but both singers had theirs on and were sitting near their
mikes but not the recorder. I think I would love to go back to the church
and do a few experiments and see exactly what is happening. Might be of some
help to us all.

Anyone out there have experience with this cell phone problem getting into
your tracks? It would explain why some of my tracks got the problem and
others were clear. Last time I reported a hum problem it was the mike under
the piano lid, which would have been near the pianist's phone, and when I
moved that mike a few inches the problem diminished. Maybe we need RF
filters on our mikes to go along with our wind screens...

Gary




"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>>I desperately need to learn something about "microphone rumble." In my
>>current multimiking project, you may recall my hum problem with one mike,
>>at
>>that time the one stuck under the piano lid. I have now done a second
>>session, the real one that we are depending on, and I experience a very
>>similar problem, but on just two tracks - one of them a voice mike on the
>>singer, another a voice mike for the pianist.
>
> This is why everyone told you to use shockmounts on your mikes. It can
> also
> help to loop the cables to reduce conduction up the cable across the shock
> mount.
>
> A sharp highpass can help... listen to the lowest notes, then turn the
> knob
> on the highpass until you hear it change, then back off a little. How
> high
> you can go depends on the piece and the instrument. Crank the Q as high
> as it'll go.
>
> I'd also make sure that you don't have any narrowband resonances in your
> monitoring too.
> --scott
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> As far as shockmounts goes, I use whatever mount comes with the microphone
> when I buy it. The 2050s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
> which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long
> mikes that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for.

Oh, you do? - check what the (online) stores has on offer.

> But I have a new one for you this round. In discussing the issue
> with the piano player, who was going to try and help me do the mix ...,
> he asked me if it could be cell phones. His other church made it
> a rule that no one on the stage can have a cell phone turned on
> because it causes a hum that gets into their entire sound system.

It doesn't, not hum, no way.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>As far as shockmounts goes, I use whatever mount comes with the microphone
>when I buy it. The 2050s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
>which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long mikes
>that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for. My thanks for all of the
>suggestions and I am sorry I have had no time to keep up with my own thread
>today. I was busy at work and trying filtering the offending tracks and
>leaving the others alone, which seems to have solved the problem. I will
>upload the file that shows the problem tomorrow after I can get some sleep.

Well, get some shockmounts then. But when you use them, be careful how
the cables are run, don't let them be tight so they can carry vibration
from the stand.

>But I have a new one for you this round. In discussing the issue with the
>piano player, who was going to try and help me do the mix, he asked me if it
>could be cell phones. His other church made it a rule that no one on the
>stage can have a cell phone turned on because it causes a hum that gets into
>their entire sound system.

It's not a hum, it's a popping sound, at least with GSM. Plug a cable into
a cheap transformerless preamp, don't put a mike at the end. Put a GSM phone
next to the cable. You'll hear exactly what it sounds like, it is very
distinctive. It's not where your rumble is coming from.
--scott

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

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...

> It's not a hum, it's a popping sound, at least with GSM. Plug a cable
> into
> a cheap transformerless preamp, don't put a mike at the end. Put a GSM
> phone
> next to the cable. You'll hear exactly what it sounds like, it is very
> distinctive. It's not where your rumble is coming from.
> --scott

OK here it is - you may have to turn your system up some, but this is very
audible in my recording. What you will hear and see is all tracks during my
quiet time test. First I turned everything down, then I turned up one at a
time until I heard the culprit. You can actually see the three bumps on the
timeline that are tracks 1 and 2 as I turn them up, then down, then I turne
a few of the others up and down and it is not audible. Then I gradually turn
everything up again and you can see the noise and pulsating huim from tracks
1 & 2. On site it didn't seem all that bad, but when I got home I could hear
it on the editing bench. I want to go over to the church again and do some
tests.

https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/hum-section-2wav

Gary

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/hum-section-2wav

Please enable download for it if possible, makes it a lot easier, the
drivers for the soundcard in this machine does not offer record what you
play.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Richard Kuschel]

On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 10:36:54 PM UTC-6, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> As far as shockmounts goes, I use whatever mount comes with the microphone
> when I buy it. The 2050s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
> which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long mikes
> that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for. My thanks for all of the
> suggestions and I am sorry I have had no time to keep up with my own thread
> today. I was busy at work and trying filtering the offending tracks and
> leaving the others alone, which seems to have solved the problem. I will
> upload the file that shows the problem tomorrow after I can get some sleep.
>
> But I have a new one for you this round. In discussing the issue with the
> piano player, who was going to try and help me do the mix, he asked me if it
> could be cell phones. His other church made it a rule that no one on the
> stage can have a cell phone turned on because it causes a hum that gets into
> their entire sound system.
>
> I have discovered for my own purposes that I will turn my phone completely
> off during a job because I sit so close to my recorder and microphones and I
> did hear some garbage in one or two tracks previously which were otherwise
> unexplainable. In yesterday's case I was sitting next to the recorder with
> my phone off, but both singers had theirs on and were sitting near their
> mikes but not the recorder. I think I would love to go back to the church
> and do a few experiments and see exactly what is happening. Might be of some
> help to us all.
>
> Anyone out there have experience with this cell phone problem getting into
> your tracks? It would explain why some of my tracks got the problem and
> others were clear. Last time I reported a hum problem it was the mike under
> the piano lid, which would have been near the pianist's phone, and when I
> moved that mike a few inches the problem diminished. Maybe we need RF
> filters on our mikes to go along with our wind screens...
>
> Gary
>
>

There are shock mounts out there for every microphone ever built.
Here are leads to a few of them:

Audio-Technica AT8410a

WindTech SP-20

Audio-Technica Universal Shockmount

Atlas VM-1 Mic Stand Shock Mount

I use the Atlas VM-1 under my stereo microphone arrays, and the AT-Universal on individual microphones, especially when I am on a wood floor.

The only microphones that I have that came with Shock mounts are my Schoeps and U87 Neumann


Now as to the Cell Phone interference problem.

GSM phones can be a problem and should be shut off when in close proximity to equipment. The quality of equipment and cables can also affect cell phone interference.

Properly designed balanced inputs and lines greatly diminish the effects of RF.

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
k...
> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
>
>> https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/hum-section-2wav
>
> Please enable download for it if possible, makes it a lot easier, the
> drivers for the soundcard in this machine does not offer record what you
> play.
>
>> Gary
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter Larsen

OK I tried - see if it works and let me know.

Gary

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 13:26:06 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
> wrote:

>
>"Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
k...
>> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
>> ...
>>
>>> https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/hum-section-2wav
>>
>> Please enable download for it if possible, makes it a lot easier, the
>> drivers for the soundcard in this machine does not offer record what you
>> play.
>>
>>> Gary
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Peter Larsen
>
>OK I tried - see if it works and let me know.
>
>Gary
>

Don't worry about the hum, it is way better sounding than either the
words - which have been written without regard for either rhyme or
metre - or the singing in Sample Broken.

d

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Don Pearce" > wrote in message
...


> Don't worry about the hum, it is way better sounding than either the
> words - which have been written without regard for either rhyme or
> metre - or the singing in Sample Broken.
>
> d

I haven't posted the final result of this session yet, but I realize that
this is not Carly Simon. All I am interested in is experimenting with multi
tracking and ironing out all of these little problems that come up with a
more complicated job. This annoying microphone noise I have not encountered
before. Soundcloud is beginning to annoy me as well.

Gary

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 00:07:29 -0400, "Gary Eickmeier"
> wrote:

>
>"Don Pearce" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>> Don't worry about the hum, it is way better sounding than either the
>> words - which have been written without regard for either rhyme or
>> metre - or the singing in Sample Broken.
>>
>> d
>
>I haven't posted the final result of this session yet, but I realize that
>this is not Carly Simon. All I am interested in is experimenting with multi
>tracking and ironing out all of these little problems that come up with a
>more complicated job. This annoying microphone noise I have not encountered
>before. Soundcloud is beginning to annoy me as well.
>
>Gary
>

Then just post the files to Dropbox or something similar. None of the
"play it online" nonsense - just download.

d

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> "Don Pearce" > wrote in message
> ...

>> Don't worry about the hum, it is way better sounding than either the
>> words - which have been written without regard for either rhyme or
>> metre - or the singing in Sample Broken.

> I haven't posted the final result of this session yet, but I realize that
> this is not Carly Simon. All I am interested in is experimenting with
> multi tracking and ironing out all of these little problems that come up
> with a more complicated job. This annoying microphone noise I have not
> encountered before. Soundcloud is beginning to annoy me as well.

Let Don grumble, it doesn't matter, it is nicer to work with well sounding
noise generators, but not necessary for coming to grips with how imaging
works.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> "Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
> k...

>> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
>> ...

>>> https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/hum-section-2wav

>> Please enable download for it if possible, makes it a lot easier, the
>> drivers for the soundcard in this machine does not offer record what you
>> play.

> OK I tried - see if it works and let me know.

Didn't work, so no analysis, but the hum sounds as if coming from an
amplifier in the room and not from your setup.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
k...

> Didn't work, so no analysis, but the hum sounds as if coming from an
> amplifier in the room and not from your setup.
>
>> Gary
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter Larsen

OK - I just thought Soundcloud allowed downloads if you put Public on the
account. No matter, but thanks for your help as always. We can drop this
thread now unless I go back there and find something definite, or someone
else has encountered the same thing and knows what it is.

Gary

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> "Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
> k...

>> Didn't work, so no analysis, but the hum sounds as if coming from an
>> amplifier in the room and not from your setup.

> OK - I just thought Soundcloud allowed downloads if you put Public on the
> account. No matter, but thanks for your help as always. We can drop this

You allow download by allowing download in file properties.

> thread now unless I go back there and find something definite, or someone
> else has encountered the same thing and knows what it is.

I told you what sounds to me as being but you didn't read it. I can be more
specific. It is most probably the bass guitar that has a faulty ground and
thus hums when somebody is close to it but possibly not when the operator
has his hand on the strings. Could be cable, could be internal. No amount of
mic suspension gadget is going to fix it.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

Peter Larsen > wrote:
>I told you what sounds to me as being but you didn't read it. I can be more
>specific. It is most probably the bass guitar that has a faulty ground and
>thus hums when somebody is close to it but possibly not when the operator
>has his hand on the strings. Could be cable, could be internal. No amount of
>mic suspension gadget is going to fix it.

This might be consistent with Gary's statement that a 100 Hz brickwall
eliminates it but that a 60 Hz filter of unknown Q doesn't eliminate it.

Gary, try a notch filter centered on 60 Hz with the Q as high as possible,
possibly with a second one at 120 Hz. Does it go away? If so, it isn't
rumble.
--scott

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

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Peter Larsen > wrote:
>>I told you what sounds to me as being but you didn't read it. I can be
>>more
>>specific. It is most probably the bass guitar that has a faulty ground and
>>thus hums when somebody is close to it but possibly not when the operator
>>has his hand on the strings. Could be cable, could be internal. No amount
>>of
>>mic suspension gadget is going to fix it.
>
> This might be consistent with Gary's statement that a 100 Hz brickwall
> eliminates it but that a 60 Hz filter of unknown Q doesn't eliminate it.
>
> Gary, try a notch filter centered on 60 Hz with the Q as high as possible,
> possibly with a second one at 120 Hz. Does it go away? If so, it isn't
> rumble.
> --scott

OK, going back there right now to test some theories. Peter just gave me
some new info to test and I thank you for the suggestions. Please (everyone)
don't get ahead of me and accuse me of not listening to your ideas. I
haven't had time yet!

Gary

[[email protected]]

Looks like all 60 Hz on N tracks FFT.
Its up to you to figure out if the source is
Acoustical or electrical.

Mark

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> Please (everyone) don't get ahead of me and accuse me of not
> listening to your ideas. I haven't had time yet!

You've been ignoring good advice. Nobody has to get ahead of you to
note that you might have avoided your present problems if you had been
heeding the advice you've been given months ago.

[Gary Eickmeier]

"None" > wrote in message
...
> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Please (everyone) don't get ahead of me and accuse me of not listening to
>> your ideas. I haven't had time yet!
>
> You've been ignoring good advice. Nobody has to get ahead of you to note
> that you might have avoided your present problems if you had been heeding
> the advice you've been given months ago.

Which was?

Gary

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
>>> Please (everyone) don't get ahead of me and accuse me of not
>>> listening to your ideas. I haven't had time yet!
>> You've been ignoring good advice. Nobody has to get ahead of you to
>> note that you might have avoided your present problems if you had
>> been heeding the advice you've been given months ago.
>
> Which was?

The very question shows that you weren't listening. For starters,
proper monitoring. And shock mounting.

I doubt that your current issue is caused by lack of shock mounting,
but you could have ruled out that possibility from the start if you
had been taking the good advice you've been given. As for proper
monitoring, well, there's been a lot of good advice on that front too,
but maybe it was drowned out by the reverberation from the bottomless
well of excuses. Always struggling to figure out what went wrong last
time seems to appeal to you much more than learning to prevent things
from going wrong next time.

[hank alrich]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:

> Trying to remaster the CD now, but if that is missing a lot of the
> bass,

You should be able to tell that at once just by listening.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:

> 50s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
> which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long mikes
> that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for.

You appear to be a living assumptions factory.

I am not going to run the search for you. You don't seem to care enough
to expend the effort to learn.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Gary Eickmeier]

"None" > wrote in message
...
> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> ...
>>>> Please (everyone) don't get ahead of me and accuse me of not listening
>>>> to your ideas. I haven't had time yet!
>>> You've been ignoring good advice. Nobody has to get ahead of you to note
>>> that you might have avoided your present problems if you had been
>>> heeding the advice you've been given months ago.
>>
>> Which was?
>
> The very question shows that you weren't listening. For starters, proper
> monitoring. And shock mounting.
>
> I doubt that your current issue is caused by lack of shock mounting, but
> you could have ruled out that possibility from the start if you had been
> taking the good advice you've been given. As for proper monitoring, well,
> there's been a lot of good advice on that front too, but maybe it was
> drowned out by the reverberation from the bottomless well of excuses.
> Always struggling to figure out what went wrong last time seems to appeal
> to you much more than learning to prevent things from going wrong next
> time.

Fascinating. I don't recall this problem being discussed by me or anyone
else, but be that as it may, if there is something I did wrong during this
session, what was it and what advice didn't I follow? I used shock mounts on
my large mikes, I monitored on headphones and detected the problem during
the session but couldn't determine the exact cause except the location
having some electrical or acoustical interference. Should I have rented a
sound truck and monitored from outside on speakers? Run my XLR through some
custom metal conduit? Spent a few thousand more on microphones? I could hang
some mikes from the ceiling but my back won't permit me to climb on that
high a ladder and they probably wouldn't invite me back.

Sorry if my forgetfulness offends you, but if you could be more specific as
to what I did wrong you may be the only one in the group with the answer.

Gary

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 12:49:23 PM UTC-4, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> "None" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>>> Please (everyone) don't get ahead of me and accuse me of not listening
> >>>> to your ideas. I haven't had time yet!
> >>> You've been ignoring good advice. Nobody has to get ahead of you to note
> >>> that you might have avoided your present problems if you had been
> >>> heeding the advice you've been given months ago.
> >>
> >> Which was?
> >
> > The very question shows that you weren't listening. For starters, proper
> > monitoring. And shock mounting.
> >
> > I doubt that your current issue is caused by lack of shock mounting, but
> > you could have ruled out that possibility from the start if you had been
> > taking the good advice you've been given. As for proper monitoring, well,
> > there's been a lot of good advice on that front too, but maybe it was
> > drowned out by the reverberation from the bottomless well of excuses.
> > Always struggling to figure out what went wrong last time seems to appeal
> > to you much more than learning to prevent things from going wrong next
> > time.
>
> Fascinating. I don't recall this problem being discussed by me or anyone
> else, but be that as it may, if there is something I did wrong during this
> session, what was it and what advice didn't I follow? I used shock mounts on
> my large mikes, I monitored on headphones and detected the problem during
> the session but couldn't determine the exact cause except the location
> having some electrical or acoustical interference. Should I have rented a
> sound truck and monitored from outside on speakers? Run my XLR through some
> custom metal conduit? Spent a few thousand more on microphones? I could hang
> some mikes from the ceiling but my back won't permit me to climb on that
> high a ladder and they probably wouldn't invite me back.
>
> Sorry if my forgetfulness offends you, but if you could be more specific as
> to what I did wrong you may be the only one in the group with the answer.
>
> Gary

use your DAW,
lay a 60 Hz notch filter over the offending tracks,
and your good to go
no big deal

Mark

[Gary Eickmeier]

> wrote in message
...


> use your DAW,
> lay a 60 Hz notch filter over the offending tracks,
> and your good to go
> no big deal
>
> Mark

Thanks Mark but no, doesn't work. If it was that simple I wouldn't be
bothering the group with it. The only filter that helped was one called
"microphone rumble," which is just a steep cutoff below 100 Hz.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>> 50s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
>> which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long
>> mikes
>> that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for.
>
> You appear to be a living assumptions factory.
>
> I am not going to run the search for you. You don't seem to care enough
> to expend the effort to learn.

Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I respect
you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am researching shock
mounts and their applications for microphones that weigh 2.9 ounces, but my
statement was simply that there is no specific AT2021 mount that comes with
it or is available as one of its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the
mike that I am talking about:

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html

My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts. The
XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to isolate vibrations from
the floor or airborne (it seems to me from common sense) But let me just cut
to the chase and ask you if you think all microphones need shock mounts?
Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick up
some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>> Trying to remaster the CD now, but if that is missing a lot of the
>> bass,
>
> You should be able to tell that at once just by listening.

Why did you even say that?

Gary

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I respect
>you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am researching shock
>mounts and their applications for microphones that weigh 2.9 ounces, but my
>statement was simply that there is no specific AT2021 mount that comes with
>it or is available as one of its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the
>mike that I am talking about:
>
>http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html

There is, it is the AT8410A.

However, permit me to recommend the Shure A53M, which is lower profile and
less ugly and works about as well.

>My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
>light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts. The
>XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to isolate vibrations from
>the floor or airborne (it seems to me from common sense) But let me just cut
>to the chase and ask you if you think all microphones need shock mounts?
>Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick up
>some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
>conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?

If I hear anything below 20 Hz, I will immediately jump to the conclusion that
it is a shock mounting problem and there is conducted vibration.

But... the first thing I do before a session is to walk around, put my hands
lightly on the mike stands and on a few places around the hall and feel for
structure-borne vibration. I do the same thing during the rehearsal, feeling
for kettle drums moving the building around. At the same time, I also listen
for acoustical hums from the building HVAC system, from amplifiers, from
organ blowers and from vibraphone motors. I jump up and down on the
conductors podium and see if it squeaks. I shake the folding chairs that
the orchestra is using and make sure none of them are creaky.

Find the noises before the performance, not afterward.

And yes, I will always shockmount everything if I can. The one exception is
if I am using microphones with internal shockmounting that works well, like
the Sennheiser 441, for instance. Hanging mikes should always be shockmounted
since the taut line holding them can very easily conduct vibration, and the
ceiling and catwalk often are shaking a lot. PZMs get a foam pad.

Lav mikes are a weird exception, and the good news with lavs is that you
can cut all the bottom end off without it being too much of a problem in
most cases. People use lav mikes when appearance is more important than
sound quality, for the most part.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[hank alrich]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:

> "hank alrich" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
> >
> >> 50s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
> >> which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long
> >> mikes
> >> that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for.
> >
> > You appear to be a living assumptions factory.
> >
> > I am not going to run the search for you. You don't seem to care enough
> > to expend the effort to learn.
>
> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I respect
> you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am researching shock
> mounts and their applications for microphones that weigh 2.9 ounces, but my
> statement was simply that there is no specific AT2021 mount that comes with
> it or is available as one of its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the
> mike that I am talking about:
>
> http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html
>
> My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
> light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts. The
> XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to isolate vibrations from
> the floor or airborne (it seems to me from common sense) But let me just cut
> to the chase and ask you if you think all microphones need shock mounts?
> Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick up
> some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
> conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?
>
> Gary

If you take time to think this through you may able to pinpoint what
about a certain type of shockmount determines what mass will be damped
effectively…

There is a standard method for dealing with the mic cable…

There is shielded three-conductor cable in a variety of weights…

There are soldering irons…

There are companies which specialize in custom cable assembly for those
who do not solder. (Not learning to solder decently can be semi-suicidal
for a location recordist.)

RedCo…

Show your work. ;-)

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey > wrote:

> And yes, I will always shockmount everything if I can. The one exception is
> if I am using microphones with internal shockmounting that works well, like
> the Sennheiser 441, for instance.

Sidebart query: do you know if the MD541 "Backbirtd" version has
similarly effective internal shock mounting?

I have read that Josephsons have such, but I have none of David's mics.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:

> "hank alrich" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
> >
> >> Trying to remaster the CD now, but if that is missing a lot of the
> >> bass,
> >
> > You should be able to tell that at once just by listening.
>
> Why did you even say that?
>
> Gary

"If that is missing a lot of the bass"

Well, is it, or is it not missing a lot of the bass?

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich > wrote:
>Scott Dorsey > wrote:
>
>> And yes, I will always shockmount everything if I can. The one exception is
>> if I am using microphones with internal shockmounting that works well, like
>> the Sennheiser 441, for instance.
>
>Sidebart query: do you know if the MD541 "Backbirtd" version has
>similarly effective internal shock mounting?

I think they are the same mike with different paint.
There were various output modules available for the 441, and only one for
the 541, but it doesn't really matter. They're all fantastic. If I had
to have only one mike in my kit, it might be a 441.
--scott

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

[PStamler]

We still haven't tracked down the source of Gary's low-frequency noise. Gary, can you put up a 1-second clip that's just noise, no music?

I'm still betting on HVAC as a source and standing waves in the room reinforcing it at some locations and cancelling it at others. That's not a shock-mount issue, unless the same vibration is present in the floor.

And while we were talking about shock-mounts, it's a shame Electro-Voice dropped the 303. It worked well for a lot of mics, including low-mass ones like KM 84s.

But I'm still betting that his problem is noise in the air.

Peace,
Paul

[Scott Dorsey]

PStamler > wrote:
>We still haven't tracked down the source of Gary's low-frequency noise. Gary, can you put up a 1-second clip that's just noise, no music?

I thought he had decided it was the bass amp humming?

>But I'm still betting that his problem is noise in the air.

If it is the bass amp humming, that would indeed be true.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 1:23:39 PM UTC-4, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> > use your DAW,
> > lay a 60 Hz notch filter over the offending tracks,
> > and your good to go
> > no big deal
> >
> > Mark
>
> Thanks Mark but no, doesn't work. If it was that simple I wouldn't be
> bothering the group with it. The only filter that helped was one called
> "microphone rumble," which is just a steep cutoff below 100 Hz.
>
> Gary

this is one of those cases where your eyes can do much better than your ears

did you LOOK on a spectrum analyzer?

your DAW has an analyzer, right?

its very simple once you LOOK at the noise

an analyzer may not be terrible useful for mixing , but it does work very well for identifying unwanted sounds

I looked at your clip, and the noise was primarily a 60 Hz discrete.


Mark

[Gary Eickmeier]

> wrote in message
...
> On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 1:23:39 PM UTC-4, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>
>> > use your DAW,
>> > lay a 60 Hz notch filter over the offending tracks,
>> > and your good to go
>> > no big deal
>> >
>> > Mark
>>
>> Thanks Mark but no, doesn't work. If it was that simple I wouldn't be
>> bothering the group with it. The only filter that helped was one called
>> "microphone rumble," which is just a steep cutoff below 100 Hz.
>>
>> Gary
>
> this is one of those cases where your eyes can do much better than your
> ears
>
> did you LOOK on a spectrum analyzer?
>
> your DAW has an analyzer, right?
>
> its very simple once you LOOK at the noise
>
> an analyzer may not be terrible useful for mixing , but it does work very
> well for identifying unwanted sounds
>
> I looked at your clip, and the noise was primarily a 60 Hz discrete.
>
>
> Mark

I will look again but which DAW, which function? I have the Audition 2.0 but
I also have Audition CS 5.5. Not real good at operating them and using all
of their functions yet.....

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>>Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I
>>respect
>>you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am researching
>>shock
>>mounts and their applications for microphones that weigh 2.9 ounces, but
>>my
>>statement was simply that there is no specific AT2021 mount that comes
>>with
>>it or is available as one of its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the
>>mike that I am talking about:
>>
>>http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html
>
> There is, it is the AT8410A.
>
> However, permit me to recommend the Shure A53M, which is lower profile and
> less ugly and works about as well.
>
>>My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
>>light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts.
>>The
>>XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to isolate vibrations from
>>the floor or airborne (it seems to me from common sense) But let me just
>>cut
>>to the chase and ask you if you think all microphones need shock mounts?
>>Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick
>>up
>>some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
>>conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?
>
> If I hear anything below 20 Hz, I will immediately jump to the conclusion
> that
> it is a shock mounting problem and there is conducted vibration.
>
> But... the first thing I do before a session is to walk around, put my
> hands
> lightly on the mike stands and on a few places around the hall and feel
> for
> structure-borne vibration. I do the same thing during the rehearsal,
> feeling
> for kettle drums moving the building around. At the same time, I also
> listen
> for acoustical hums from the building HVAC system, from amplifiers, from
> organ blowers and from vibraphone motors. I jump up and down on the
> conductors podium and see if it squeaks. I shake the folding chairs that
> the orchestra is using and make sure none of them are creaky.
>
> Find the noises before the performance, not afterward.
>
> And yes, I will always shockmount everything if I can. The one exception
> is
> if I am using microphones with internal shockmounting that works well,
> like
> the Sennheiser 441, for instance. Hanging mikes should always be
> shockmounted
> since the taut line holding them can very easily conduct vibration, and
> the
> ceiling and catwalk often are shaking a lot. PZMs get a foam pad.
>
> Lav mikes are a weird exception, and the good news with lavs is that you
> can cut all the bottom end off without it being too much of a problem in
> most cases. People use lav mikes when appearance is more important than
> sound quality, for the most part.
> --scott

Thanks once again Scott - some useful procedures. I have had just one really
bad encounter with stage vibration, which I now guard against like a
banshee. I was videoing my daughter's string quartet with the Zoom H2
mounted on a Jam stand with a heavy base, but sitting on a wooden stage
extension. Everything sounded fine before the kids came out. Of course by
then I am already behind the camera and staying there until the end. When I
got home, the recorder was picking up every move they made on stage, from
dragging their chairs into position to tapping their feet to walking on and
off. NEVER put a mike stand on a wooden stage again! I will at least be
aware of the problem. Fortunately, I was able to easily edit around the
problem because I also had the camera sound to work with.

A more weird one (possibly weirder than even you have experienced) was the
accessory MS microphone capsule on my Zoom H6. I was getting a "sproing"
like vibration from the least touch of the stand, the body of the recorder,
the capsule itself, or even any chair or stand nearby the Zoom's stand. It
was, like, EVIL. I isolated it to the capsule itself being defective or
loose. Got another one, no more problem.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> PStamler > wrote:
>>We still haven't tracked down the source of Gary's low-frequency noise.
>>Gary, can you put up a 1-second clip that's just noise, no music?
>
> I thought he had decided it was the bass amp humming?
>
>>But I'm still betting that his problem is noise in the air.
>
> If it is the bass amp humming, that would indeed be true.
> --scott


During the actual concert I just put three AT2050s on the altar, left,
center, and right. Combined with the soundboard from the church, got a fine
mix, but did think I heard the hum again during the quiet parts, but
generally there was loud enough music or audience that this was no problem.

I could post the results but to my ear it was inconclusive

Might have to go back a third time for testing. Bothers me. Want to fing out
what to guard against in the future.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>> "hank alrich" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Trying to remaster the CD now, but if that is missing a lot of the
>> >> bass,
>> >
>> > You should be able to tell that at once just by listening.
>>
>> Why did you even say that?
>>
>> Gary
>
> "If that is missing a lot of the bass"
>
> Well, is it, or is it not missing a lot of the bass?

Yes, it was missing a lot of the bass. I fixed that issue by filtering only
the offending tracks, which just hapened to be the voice tracks, but not the
other ones like the drum kit and the piano, where missing everything below
100 WOULD be very audible. So, noise gone, bass still intact, and got a
pretty good mix. Will post something later when I get time again.

Gary

[[email protected]]

Use any DAW that has a FFT spectrum analyzer to look at the noise.
Again, it is standard op procedure to routinly apply 100 Hz Hpf
Onto Vox channels. Do not worry about this.

It is also standard procedure to apply different filtering to different
recording tracks. Do not worry about this.

Mark

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> I am researching shock mounts and their applications for microphones
> that weigh 2.9 ounces, but my statement was simply that there is no
> specific AT2021 mount that comes with it or is available as one of
> its dedicated accessories.

Your statement seems based on the "assumption machine" rather than the
manufacturer's technical information. The microphone manufacturer's
own website lists more than one specific microphone shock mount for
use with the AT2021. How the heck are you "researching shock mounts"
if you can't even find this simple information?

> If you pick up some hum and you are already using shock mounts
> would you jump to the conclusion that it is a shock mounting
> problem?

Not for hum, but it was described as rumble. A shock mounting issue
might be a reasonable starting point for a problem described as a
microphone rumble. But if it's hum rather than a rumble, and if
there's nothing indicating a microphone problem, you might be barking
up the wrong tree due to an inaccurate description of the problem. Who
was it that called it "microphone rumble"? Oh yeah, that's who; the
assumption factory.

[Richard Kuschel]

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 11:38:45 AM UTC-6, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
SNIP
>
> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I respect
> you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am researching shock
> mounts and their applications for microphones that weigh 2.9 ounces, but my
> statement was simply that there is no specific AT2021 mount that comes with
> it or is available as one of its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the
> mike that I am talking about:
>
> http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html
>
> My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
> light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts. The
> XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to isolate vibrations from
> the floor or airborne (it seems to me from common sense) But let me just cut
> to the chase and ask you if you think all microphones need shock mounts?
> Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick up
> some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
> conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?
>
> Gary

Again here is the number for the Audio Technica Shock Mount.

http://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-AT-8415-Low-Profile-Universal-Flexible/dp/B0006NMQJO

It will work perfectly with your AT 2021 microphone.

Fasten the cable to the microphone stand and leave enough slack so that you can have a loop in the cable to isolate between the stand and the microphone.

If your problem is not that sound is being transmitted up through the
microphone stand, and is airborne, then you must eliminate the noise by first locating it and then doing whatever is necessary to stop it. Turn off the AC, have the bass player mute his instrument when not plating it, unplug the refrigerator. To remember to turn back on the refrigerator, leave your car keys in the fridge.

If you can't do anything about it then you will be learning noise reduction techniques on the computer.

[Phil W[_3_]]

makolber:

> Use any DAW that has a FFT spectrum analyzer to look at the noise.

Alternative: use 3rd party plug-ins within your DAW software
There are some good free plug-ins, that can be helpful.

http://www.meldaproduction.com/plugins/product.php?id=MEqualizer

Note: the built-in analyzer, that can be switched on/off

"MEqualizer" demo (+ some basic EQ tutorial):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8UyyC61ndA


Phil

[hank alrich]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:

> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear,

One more thing, Gary. It is behond ****ing hilarious for you to suggest
I am a troll here. In perspective, I first arrived years ago, when I met
sync channel output amplifier trouble with my Studer A80 1" VUT, and
found this haunt. Within minutes Mike Rivers and Scott Dorsey correctly
diagnosed it. I have been participating ever since.

I have sometimes been the doorman, taking on idiots and trolls and
flaming them into either submission or disappearance. Often this has not
been a pretty sight, but battlefields are rarely tidy. That those who
are much more tolerant and polite still accept my company suggest that
while I may be an asshole, I may also be a worthy and occasionally
informative asshole.

If I have something different to contribute here it derives from being
one who is a performer, a producer of both recorded and live music, a
former studio owner whose team built consoles from scratch, built the
recording and control acoustical environments from scratch, a recordist
and mixerhuman, and a live sound op. The sum of all those factors
results in a multifaceted perspective.

I now focus on creating and performing music, with some nifty consulting
and production jobs. For instance, for the last five years I have been
production directior of the music festival embedded in the Armadillo
Christmas Bazaar in Austin TX. I have taken a sonic and musical mess and
turned into the best performing and listening environment of its kind in
the state of Texas.

We present a very good lineup of Texas musical artists.

http://www.armadillobazaar.com/schedule/

I am presently managing a series of live recordings of four-hand boogie
woogie piano by Riley Osbourn and Floyd Domino, using my mobile rig of a
Metric Halo 2882 2d interface, original Great River preamps, Schoeps
mics, and so forth. I am not ****ing around.

I have met our rec.audio.pro trolls and indentified two types. The first
are those who are deliberately trolling with no other purpose, and the
rest comprise a segment that runs entirely on assumptions and refuses to
accept advice, refuses to study fundamentals, insists that the products
of their fertile technical imagination trump the work of Blulmlein, etc.
Anyone posturing that anything from Bose is some kind of accurate audio
monitoring system is running very close th that latter category, from
the gitgo.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[PStamler]

On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 3:30:58 PM UTC-6, Gary Eickmeier wrote:

> > an analyzer may not be terrible useful for mixing , but it does work very
> > well for identifying unwanted sounds
> >
> > I looked at your clip, and the noise was primarily a 60 Hz discrete.
> >
> >
> > Mark
>
> I will look again but which DAW, which function? I have the Audition 2.0 but
> I also have Audition CS 5.5. Not real good at operating them and using all
> of their functions yet.....

No, I meant post a short segment of the noise as an audio file, a .wav (or if you need it to be more compact, a .flac). I want to look at it with the analysis tools I have; they're probably not a lot different from yours, but I want to see for myself.

Peace,
Paul

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html

> My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
> light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts.

DPA probably has a costly solution if it has to be costly, or look at what -
just one example - what an online shop like Thomann has on offer of spider
suspensions.

> Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick
> up some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
> conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?

HOWEVER, the problem this was about was clearly identified on the recording
by people speaking in the room as a sound in the room - and sounds like so
being, so I will jump to the conclusion that it wasn't "mic rumble",
whatever that is, it is musicians incompetence in the genre gear
maintenance.

<subtle>
Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some reason
and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the ensemble for some
other reason.
</subtle>

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[None]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear,
>
> One more thing, Gary. It is behond ****ing hilarious for you to
> suggest
> I am a troll here.

He's probably complaining about me. He doesn't like being reminded
that he's begging for advice and then ignoring it, as a long-term
pattern that's self-perpetuating. He'd rather whine about trolls than
listen to experts. He has no interest in studying fundamentals, and
you're right, he's an assumption factory. He doesn't want to learn to
fish, he wants to be given a fish, and then he leaves the fish to rot,
which can stink up the newsgroup. One thing is certain: he'll continue
to ignore good advice, refuse to learn the fundamentals, and return
here to try to get people to troubleshoot problems that he's too lazy
to avoid.

Re-inventing the wheel is pretty stupid, especially if you keep coming
up with square wheels. You can only tell him so many times that wheels
should be round before you just get sick of his yammering about his
square wheel theory, and why it really should work. But can you help
him figure out why it doesn't work? After all, he's never seen a round
wheel, and he doubts their existence. And he has years of experience
with square wheels. Maybe if the square-wheeled cart were in front of
the donkey, it would roll better. Or maybe he needs a better jackass.
Or more square wheels, yeah, that's the ticket!

He knows the square wheel will work eventually, so don't distract him
with that round wheel stuff, because he's on a roll. Which doesn't
roll.

Yup, he can be ****ing hilarious.

[Luxey]

For the matter of square wheels, they can work in right environment, as in below picture:

http://alturl.com/sa6zp
(Preview: http://preview.alturl.com/sa6zp)

[hank alrich]

Peter Larsen > wrote:

> <subtle>
> Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some reason
> and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the ensemble for some
> other reason.
> </subtle>

Gives a stout sense of reality, a sense of setting to the material.

When I do that I give the spoken introduction its own track ID so that a
listener may choose to hear it or not from repeated playback. The intros
are often interesting the first listen or even first few listenings, but
not every talkin' part holds up as well as "Alice's Restaurant".

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

Luxey > wrote:

> For the matter of square wheels, they can work in right environment, as in
> below picture:
>
> http://alturl.com/sa6zp
> (Preview: http://preview.alturl.com/sa6zp)

Traction!

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Gary Eickmeier]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear,
>
> One more thing, Gary. It is behond ****ing hilarious for you to suggest
> I am a troll here. In perspective, I first arrived years ago, when I met
> sync channel output amplifier trouble with my Studer A80 1" VUT, and
> found this haunt. Within minutes Mike Rivers and Scott Dorsey correctly
> diagnosed it. I have been participating ever since.
>
> I have sometimes been the doorman, taking on idiots and trolls and
> flaming them into either submission or disappearance. Often this has not
> been a pretty sight, but battlefields are rarely tidy. That those who
> are much more tolerant and polite still accept my company suggest that
> while I may be an asshole, I may also be a worthy and occasionally
> informative asshole.
>
> If I have something different to contribute here it derives from being
> one who is a performer, a producer of both recorded and live music, a
> former studio owner whose team built consoles from scratch, built the
> recording and control acoustical environments from scratch, a recordist
> and mixerhuman, and a live sound op. The sum of all those factors
> results in a multifaceted perspective.
>
> I now focus on creating and performing music, with some nifty consulting
> and production jobs. For instance, for the last five years I have been
> production directior of the music festival embedded in the Armadillo
> Christmas Bazaar in Austin TX. I have taken a sonic and musical mess and
> turned into the best performing and listening environment of its kind in
> the state of Texas.
>
> We present a very good lineup of Texas musical artists.
>
> http://www.armadillobazaar.com/schedule/
>
> I am presently managing a series of live recordings of four-hand boogie
> woogie piano by Riley Osbourn and Floyd Domino, using my mobile rig of a
> Metric Halo 2882 2d interface, original Great River preamps, Schoeps
> mics, and so forth. I am not ****ing around.
>
> I have met our rec.audio.pro trolls and indentified two types. The first
> are those who are deliberately trolling with no other purpose, and the
> rest comprise a segment that runs entirely on assumptions and refuses to
> accept advice, refuses to study fundamentals, insists that the products
> of their fertile technical imagination trump the work of Blulmlein, etc.
> Anyone posturing that anything from Bose is some kind of accurate audio
> monitoring system is running very close th that latter category, from
> the gitgo.

Hank, I have already told you that I have respect for you from just the
brief tidbits of info you have given in some of your replies that weren't
nasty from the start. My intro to you was this kind of post. Later you
seemed to get more serious and I bought your CD that you told us about and
asked a question about.

So you have been around. I am a 71 year old man, retired Air Force officer,
navigation instructor and course writer. I am into photography, video, and
audio, and have been since childhood. Got my first stereo tape recorder at
about 17 and have been building a system ever since - like most of us. Got
seriously technically interested in the acoustics and psychoacoustics of
stereo around 1982 and joined the AES, presented a paper, built speakers,
and so on. Got interested in recording to complete the loop in Toole's
famous "Circle of Confusion" so that I know exactly what is going into my
system and learn all of the variables that go into a recording. I have tried
most of the techniques that I have read about and learned about here. Also
had to try a few of my own for fun and learning.

As for the constant accusation of not following someone's advice or not
learning etc, I am afraid I can't see where that comes from - unless some
have told me to do a few things that I am not capable of or can't afford.
The typical cycle of a post here is I am puzzled by some aspect of
recording, ask a simple question like where could this noise be coming from
and have you experienced it in your work, then I get some good solid avenues
to look into, which I do as in this thread, then more people start getting a
little too enthusiastic about it and start over analyzing and taking over
and giving me stuff that I can't do or couldn't do before the problem
appeared, then blaming me for not knowing it in the first place.

Then the trolls chime in and start the insult and accusation phase. Notice
who followed you this time, Luxey and None. I call trolls the assholes
waiting under the bridge to jump you and make general accusations to try and
make themselves look good. They think that this will cause others to gang on
and finish me off. The best approach is to just ignore them, but sometimes I
am up for a little sport and I pretend to take them seriously and answer
their questions in a way that shows respect and spoils their troll.

Of course most members here are gentlemen and very helpful and I read every
word. To be accused of not listening hurts a little because it turns me into
an accused troll. Stop. I bought your CD and commented on it. I have bought
a lot of the books that Scott and others have recommended. I changed my
equalizer that I was getting from Behringer to the DEQ 2496 that was so
highly recommended here and I had a bit of a learning curve on that one, but
it was worth it. One particular post from Scott was a turning point for me
when he told me what was wrong with widely spaced omnis and got me off that.
In this thread, I have shown my newly gained respect for multi-miking
techniques and how I am trying to learn what is involved with that and doing
it, not just talking about it. I have had some thrilling results so far and
shall pursue it more.

In our "Don't Feed the Trolls" thread that I stayed away from because I
thought maybe I would be one of them that we were talking about, I think
that what you all were referring to was the few who break in with just
general audio questions that belong more in rec.audio.high-end, just to see
if they can start a discussion. Jack A comes to mind, but is he the only
one? And why didn't someone suggest blocking or filtering such people out? I
have thought of plonking a couple of members but haven't done it yet.

I am here to learn, I do not ignore your advice (but cannot do every one of
them), and I do not post to hear myself talk, cause trouble, or get a rise
out of someone. Nor am I a professional, working recording engineer, so I
may not be up to your level of knowledge, experience, or abilities.

Gary Eickmeier

[Gary Eickmeier]

> wrote in message
...
> On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 1:23:39 PM UTC-4, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>
>> > use your DAW,
>> > lay a 60 Hz notch filter over the offending tracks,
>> > and your good to go
>> > no big deal
>> >
>> > Mark
>>
>> Thanks Mark but no, doesn't work. If it was that simple I wouldn't be
>> bothering the group with it. The only filter that helped was one called
>> "microphone rumble," which is just a steep cutoff below 100 Hz.
>>
>> Gary
>
> this is one of those cases where your eyes can do much better than your
> ears
>
> did you LOOK on a spectrum analyzer?
>
> your DAW has an analyzer, right?
>
> its very simple once you LOOK at the noise
>
> an analyzer may not be terrible useful for mixing , but it does work very
> well for identifying unwanted sounds
>
> I looked at your clip, and the noise was primarily a 60 Hz discrete.
>
>
> Mark

You are correct sir! I just looked again in Audition 2, and learned how to
expand the frequency analysis display to show the lower freqs. At first when
I opened it, it showed only a very coarse display above 3k or so. I finally
maneuvered it around to show the lower freqs and saw the little hump around
60 Hz when the hum was playing. Found that I could filter it by taking it
down from about 40 to 80 Hz in the FFT filter, as someone suggested earlier.

So I think I am going to have to chalk this whole thing up to 60 cycle hum
and not shock mounts, air conditioner, or cell phones.

Thanks! Multiple lessons learned here!

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"hank alrich" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>> "hank alrich" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>> >
>> >> 50s are a very heavy mike and come with shockmounts,
>> >> which I actually use. The little 2021s are small diaphragm 4 inch long
>> >> mikes
>> >> that I doubt even have a shock mount designed for.
>> >
>> > You appear to be a living assumptions factory.
>> >
>> > I am not going to run the search for you. You don't seem to care enough
>> > to expend the effort to learn.
>>
>> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I
>> respect
>> you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am researching
>> shock
>> mounts and their applications for microphones that weigh 2.9 ounces, but
>> my
>> statement was simply that there is no specific AT2021 mount that comes
>> with
>> it or is available as one of its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the
>> mike that I am talking about:
>>
>> http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html
>>
>> My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate such a
>> light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on shock mounts.
>> The
>> XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to isolate vibrations
>> from
>> the floor or airborne (it seems to me from common sense) But let me just
>> cut
>> to the chase and ask you if you think all microphones need shock mounts?
>> Lapels? Hanging mikes? PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick
>> up
>> some hum and you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the
>> conclusion that it is a shock mounting problem?
>>
>> Gary
>
> If you take time to think this through you may able to pinpoint what
> about a certain type of shockmount determines what mass will be damped
> effectively.
>
> There is a standard method for dealing with the mic cable.
>
> There is shielded three-conductor cable in a variety of weights.
>
> There are soldering irons.
>
> There are companies which specialize in custom cable assembly for those
> who do not solder. (Not learning to solder decently can be semi-suicidal
> for a location recordist.)
>
> RedCo.
>
> Show your work. ;-)

Now see this is the type of post that is going to get me accused of not
listening to the expert. At my level, all I know to do is go to the Guitar
Center or Carleton Music Center and buy a certain length of XLR. I am not
likely to know how to determine the specs of some esoteric cable that has
just the right weight for the shock mount that I don't know that I need for
the new microphone that I just bought (cheaply) to be able to have enough
tracks available for multimiking this group. Way beyond what I am asking in
my simple question.

I will keep it in mind though.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

I just want to post my Soundcloud file of one of the tracks of the final
mix, where I filtered out the hum from two of the tracks and got it within
reason. Yes, I know this is not a professional group, but I am not ready for
prime time either!

https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/here-i-am-3-line-filterwav

Gary

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>So I think I am going to have to chalk this whole thing up to 60 cycle hum
>and not shock mounts, air conditioner, or cell phones.

Right. But where did it come from?

Might well have been from a bass amp or an air conditioner. Your job now is
to find out.
--scott

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

[John Williamson]

On 24/03/2015 16:47, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> Now see this is the type of post that is going to get me accused of not
> listening to the expert. At my level, all I know to do is go to the Guitar
> Center or Carleton Music Center and buy a certain length of XLR. I am not
> likely to know how to determine the specs of some esoteric cable that has
> just the right weight for the shock mount that I don't know that I need for
> the new microphone that I just bought (cheaply) to be able to have enough
> tracks available for multimiking this group. Way beyond what I am asking in
> my simple question.
>
> I will keep it in mind though.

>The spec for a cable to reduce transmission of shock noise is "As light
and flexible as possible" Get one made up with an XLR plug one end and a
socket the other, about half a metre (18 inches) long or less, and use
that to connect your microphone to the main cable, leaving as large a
loop hanging as possible. The losses will be negligible, and more than
compensated for by the reduction in structure borne noise.


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> You are correct sir! I just looked again in Audition 2, and learned how to
> expand the frequency analysis display to show the lower freqs. At first
> when I opened it, it showed only a very coarse display above 3k or so. I
> finally maneuvered it around to show the lower freqs and saw the little
> hump around 60 Hz when the hum was playing. Found that I could filter it
> by taking it down from about 40 to 80 Hz in the FFT filter, as someone
> suggested earlier.

Set the fft window to max.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

> So I think I am going to have to chalk this whole thing up to 60 cycle hum
> and not shock mounts, air conditioner, or cell phones.
>
> Thanks! Multiple lessons learned here!
>
> Gary
>

[PStamler]

So it sounds like you've concluded that this noise is airborne rather than structure-borne. (I'd still like to see one a clip of the noise, *not* filtered.)

For future reference, here's a down-and-dirty way to find out if a particular mic is susceptible to structure-borne noise:

1. Set up the mic on a normal boom-stand -- not one of the super-massive, super-expensive stands, but an ordinary stand. Set it up using a shock mount if that's how you normally use the mic. Plug it into a preamp, console or interface, set for the amount of gain that you'd normally use with that mic and someone speaking in a normal tone of voice. Don't use the low-cut on your preamp if it has one. Dress the cable in the last foot to leave some slack at the mic end to try and avoid having the cable conduct vibrations to the mic. In other words, set up some reasonable facsimile of a normal mic setup.

2. Tap the boom a few inches from the mic with the ball of your finger (not the nail or knuckle -- you want a soft, padded surface tapping the boom). Listen on headphones for the thumping noise; if you hear it. the mic has a conducted-noise problem. If you don't, it probably doesn't. In either case, record the result and look at the recording with the frequency analyzer on a DAW.

3. If you want to be thorough, try this test with the shock mount and without, just using a mic clip.

This isn't a rigorous scientific experiment, but a down-and-dirty check to see if the mic has obvious issues with sound conducted up through the mic stand.

Peace,
Paul

[PStamler]

Oh, and Gary noted that he's limited in his selection of mic cable to what he can go down to Guitar Center and buy. Not quite; Gary, if you want, Markertek will make up custom cables for you, any length or color you like, using Star-Quad cable (which is nice and flexible) and good-quality XLR plugs. Their prices are very reasonable -- sometimes cheaper than Guitar Center. After decades of making my own cables I've decided to punt; I get them from Markertek now.

Peace,
Paul

[Luxey]

уторак, 24. март 2015. 16..59.53 UTC+1, Gary Eickmeier је напи�ао/ла:

> Then the trolls chime in and start the insult and accusation phase. Notice
> who followed you this time ...

If 71 years was not enough ...

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 10:42:15 -0500, (hank alrich)
wrote:

>Luxey > wrote:
>
>> For the matter of square wheels, they can work in right environment, as in
>> below picture:
>>
>> http://alturl.com/sa6zp
>> (Preview: http://preview.alturl.com/sa6zp)
>
>Traction!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgbWu8zJubo

d

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> As for the constant accusation of not following someone's advice or
> not learning etc, I am afraid I can't see where that comes from

Yeah, that's obvious. I don't think anyone will disagree with that
statement. You haven't a clue and you can't seem to remember more than
a few days back. You obviously couldn't find a shockmount from amp,
despite that fact that it's clearly listed on the manufacturer's
website. You didn't even believe that such a mount exists. So it's no
surprise that you can't even find any Usenet conversation that you've
had in the past; all those recommendations are just evaporated as far
as you can tell.

> - unless some have told me to do a few things that I am not capable
> of or can't afford. The typical cycle of a post here is I am puzzled
> by some aspect of recording, ask a simple question like where could
> this noise be coming from and have you experienced it in your work,
> then I get some good solid avenues to look into, which I do as in
> this thread, then more people start getting a little too
> enthusiastic about it and start over analyzing and taking over and
> giving me stuff that I can't do or couldn't do before the problem
> appeared,

Or that you just didn't bother to do, despite it being explained to
you repeatedly.

> then blaming me for not knowing it in the first place.

Or simply forgetting it as soon as you "learned" it.


> Then the trolls chime in and start the insult and accusation phase.
> Notice who followed you this time, Luxey and None. I call trolls the
> assholes waiting under the bridge to jump you and make general
> accusations to try and make themselves look good.

You think I do this to make myself look good? Clearly, you're in a
different reality.

> They think that this will cause others to gang on and finish me off.

There goes the assumption factory! It must be so much easier than
rational thinking.

> And why didn't someone suggest blocking or filtering such people
> out? I have thought of plonking a couple of members but haven't done
> it yet.

Someone could explain it to you, but then you'd be back pretending
that you couldn't possibly know how to do it.

> I am here to learn, I do not ignore your advice

Whopper alert!

[None]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>>
>>So I think I am going to have to chalk this whole thing up to 60
>>cycle hum
>>and not shock mounts, air conditioner, or cell phones.
>
> Right. But where did it come from?
>
> Might well have been from a bass amp or an air conditioner. Your
> job now is
> to find out.

Apparently his job is to do no such thing, and start from scratch next
time without the clue that it would have given him. This is the type
of very good advice that he refuses to take to heart, repeatedly. No
followup, just stumble into the next session as clueless as he was
when he stumbled into the last one.

[None]

"PStamler" > wrote in message
...
> So it sounds like you've concluded that this noise is airborne
> rather than structure-borne. (I'd still like to see one a clip of
> the noise, *not* filtered.)
>
> For future reference, here's a down-and-dirty way to find out if a
> particular mic is susceptible to structure-borne noise:
>
> 1. Set up the mic on a normal boom-stand -- not one of the
> super-massive, super-expensive stands, but an ordinary stand. Set it
> up using a shock mount if that's how you normally use the mic. Plug
> it into a preamp, console or interface, set for the amount of gain
> that you'd normally use with that mic and someone speaking in a
> normal tone of voice. Don't use the low-cut on your preamp if it has
> one. Dress the cable in the last foot to leave some slack at the mic
> end to try and avoid having the cable conduct vibrations to the mic.
> In other words, set up some reasonable facsimile of a normal mic
> setup.
>
> 2. Tap the boom a few inches from the mic with the ball of your
> finger (not the nail or knuckle -- you want a soft, padded surface
> tapping the boom). Listen on headphones for the thumping noise; if
> you hear it. the mic has a conducted-noise problem. If you don't, it
> probably doesn't. In either case, record the result and look at the
> recording with the frequency analyzer on a DAW.
>
> 3. If you want to be thorough, try this test with the shock mount
> and without, just using a mic clip.
>
> This isn't a rigorous scientific experiment, but a down-and-dirty
> check to see if the mic has obvious issues with sound conducted up
> through the mic stand.
>
> Peace,
> Paul

Nice summary. Hear the sound of it whooshing past Eickmeier with not a
glimmer of comprehension.

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>>
>>So I think I am going to have to chalk this whole thing up to 60 cycle hum
>>and not shock mounts, air conditioner, or cell phones.
>
> Right. But where did it come from?
>
> Might well have been from a bass amp or an air conditioner. Your job now
> is
> to find out.
> --scott

I think I would like to go back again and do just that. I have purchased the
8415 shock mounts for the small microphones and also some more expensive XLR
with some fancy shielding and four connectors, just to cover all bets.

When I called Audio Technica and asked about the shock mounts, they said no,
there is no mount designed FOR the 2021, but the recommended model is the
8415, and he sent a pdf of how to insert the mike into it for best
isolation. I will be interested to see exactly what conditions it reduces
the vibrations under, such as stomping around on a wood platform or maybe
putting the mike under the piano lid. That may be the most direct way to
mike a piano, but it may also be a wonderland of vibrations that you don't
expect. The first time I did it I used the 2050 with schock mount. The
second time I used just the little stand clamp that comes with the 2021.
They sounded about the same - after I moved the 2050 a few inches.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
k...
> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
>
>> You are correct sir! I just looked again in Audition 2, and learned how
>> to expand the frequency analysis display to show the lower freqs. At
>> first when I opened it, it showed only a very coarse display above 3k or
>> so. I finally maneuvered it around to show the lower freqs and saw the
>> little hump around 60 Hz when the hum was playing. Found that I could
>> filter it by taking it down from about 40 to 80 Hz in the FFT filter, as
>> someone suggested earlier.
>
> Set the fft window to max.

Yes! One of my problems is that they use a lot of terms on those windows
that I am not familiar with. I play around with them, but it isn't always
apparent what they are doing. I have two books on Audition, but they are not
a huge help.

Gary

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
> k...
>> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
>> ...
>>
>>> You are correct sir! I just looked again in Audition 2, and
>>> learned how to expand the frequency analysis display to show the
>>> lower freqs. At first when I opened it, it showed only a very
>>> coarse display above 3k or so. I finally maneuvered it around to
>>> show the lower freqs and saw the little hump around 60 Hz when the
>>> hum was playing. Found that I could filter it by taking it down
>>> from about 40 to 80 Hz in the FFT filter, as someone suggested
>>> earlier.
>>
>> Set the fft window to max.
>
> Yes! One of my problems is that they use a lot of terms on those
> windows that I am not familiar with. I play around with them, but it
> isn't always apparent what they are doing. I have two books on
> Audition, but they are not a huge help.

Yes, when they use words that you don't understand, and you can't find
them in your two books, of course that means that there is no way you
could possibly ever know what they mean, right? One thing that's been
recommended many times is acquiring an understanding of the
fundamental principles of audio (and that includes digital audio if
you're using digital audio products).

Have you ever taken that advice? Do you even remember ever reading
that advice?

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...

> During the actual concert I just put three AT2050s on the altar, left,
> center, and right. Combined with the soundboard from the church, got a
> fine mix, but did think I heard the hum again during the quiet parts, but
> generally there was loud enough music or audience that this was no
> problem.
>
> I could post the results but to my ear it was inconclusive
>
> Might have to go back a third time for testing. Bothers me. Want to fing
> out what to guard against in the future.

Ya know, this vibrations thing is really a lot bigger than I had imagined.
Another case that I encountered was during video taping a church play. I
wanted to put my little Zoom H2 up front just off the stage, in addition to
the house sound off their board. Little did I realize the sick effect that
stage monitors close to your recorder can wreak, especially if your mikes
are not in the field of the tweeters, just the woofs. I got this weird
momble jumble from the woofers mixed in with my kids' voices and it was
almost unusable.

Hey soon I will have made every mistake possible and it will never happen
again! You learn by doing.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"John Williamson" > wrote in message
...
> On 24/03/2015 16:47, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>> Now see this is the type of post that is going to get me accused of not
>> listening to the expert. At my level, all I know to do is go to the
>> Guitar
>> Center or Carleton Music Center and buy a certain length of XLR. I am not
>> likely to know how to determine the specs of some esoteric cable that has
>> just the right weight for the shock mount that I don't know that I need
>> for
>> the new microphone that I just bought (cheaply) to be able to have enough
>> tracks available for multimiking this group. Way beyond what I am asking
>> in
>> my simple question.
>>
>> I will keep it in mind though.
>
>>The spec for a cable to reduce transmission of shock noise is "As light
> and flexible as possible" Get one made up with an XLR plug one end and a
> socket the other, about half a metre (18 inches) long or less, and use
> that to connect your microphone to the main cable, leaving as large a loop
> hanging as possible. The losses will be negligible, and more than
> compensated for by the reduction in structure borne noise.
>
>
> --
> Tciao for Now!

I have just gone to BH Photo Video and bought some

KOM5010 2 Premier Quad Pro 5000 Series XLR M to XLR F Microphone Cable



and I will see if I can find some light weight ones at the store, where I
can touch and examine it. Good ideas - so you are attaching the cable to the
stand a couple or three feet down from the mike, to give the flexible loop?
Can do!

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

PStamler wrote:
> Oh, and Gary noted that he's limited in his selection of mic cable to
> what he can go down to Guitar Center and buy. Not quite; Gary, if you
> want, Markertek will make up custom cables for you, any length or
> color you like, using Star-Quad cable (which is nice and flexible)
> and good-quality XLR plugs. Their prices are very reasonable --
> sometimes cheaper than Guitar Center. After decades of making my own
> cables I've decided to punt; I get them from Markertek now.
>
> Peace,
> Paul

Actually, I just didn't know there were so many design factors to consider
for XLR cable. I just got some 10 foot lengths of high quality stuff from BH
Photo, but I know Markertek well and will give them a try. I do not enjoy
soldering either.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

Richard Kuschel wrote:
> On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 11:38:45 AM UTC-6, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> SNIP
>>
>> Hank I know it is about time for the insult trolls to appear, but I
>> respect you and your abilities and I expect no less from you. I am
>> researching shock mounts and their applications for microphones that
>> weigh 2.9 ounces, but my statement was simply that there is no
>> specific AT2021 mount that comes with it or is available as one of
>> its dedicated accessories. FYI, this is the mike that I am talking
>> about:
>>
>> http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/2e21cfb668854714/index.html
>>
>> My mechanical sense tells me that it would be difficult to isolate
>> such a light microphone with the usual elastic materials used on
>> shock mounts. The XLR cable alone wouldn't have enough elasticity to
>> isolate vibrations from the floor or airborne (it seems to me from
>> common sense) But let me just cut to the chase and ask you if you
>> think all microphones need shock mounts? Lapels? Hanging mikes?
>> PZMs? Hand helds? What are you using? If you pick up some hum and
>> you are already using shock mounts, would you jump to the conclusion
>> that it is a shock mounting problem?
>>
>> Gary
>
> Again here is the number for the Audio Technica Shock Mount.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Audio-Technica-AT-8415-Low-Profile-Universal-Flexible/dp/B0006NMQJO
>
> It will work perfectly with your AT 2021 microphone.
>
> Fasten the cable to the microphone stand and leave enough slack so
> that you can have a loop in the cable to isolate between the stand
> and the microphone.
>
> If your problem is not that sound is being transmitted up through the
> microphone stand, and is airborne, then you must eliminate the noise
> by first locating it and then doing whatever is necessary to stop it.
> Turn off the AC, have the bass player mute his instrument when not
> plating it, unplug the refrigerator. To remember to turn back on the
> refrigerator, leave your car keys in the fridge.
>
> If you can't do anything about it then you will be learning noise
> reduction techniques on the computer.

OK yes yes yes, got it. Shock mount and new cable coming on the 27th.

Of course all of these locations that I have been going to to beg to record
somebody, somewhere, have a myriad of noise makers. And yes, at one of them
the clubhouse refrigerator is the worst one, and I happen to have done just
what you are saying! Except for the car keys...

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

None wrote:
> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> ...
>> As for the constant accusation of not following someone's advice or
>> not learning etc, I am afraid I can't see where that comes from
>
> Yeah, that's obvious. I don't think anyone will disagree with that
> statement. You haven't a clue and you can't seem to remember more than
> a few days back. You obviously couldn't find a shockmount from amp,
> despite that fact that it's clearly listed on the manufacturer's
> website. You didn't even believe that such a mount exists. So it's no
> surprise that you can't even find any Usenet conversation that you've
> had in the past; all those recommendations are just evaporated as far
> as you can tell.
>
>> - unless some have told me to do a few things that I am not capable
>> of or can't afford. The typical cycle of a post here is I am puzzled
>> by some aspect of recording, ask a simple question like where could
>> this noise be coming from and have you experienced it in your work,
>> then I get some good solid avenues to look into, which I do as in
>> this thread, then more people start getting a little too
>> enthusiastic about it and start over analyzing and taking over and
>> giving me stuff that I can't do or couldn't do before the problem
>> appeared,
>
> Or that you just didn't bother to do, despite it being explained to
> you repeatedly.
>
>> then blaming me for not knowing it in the first place.
>
> Or simply forgetting it as soon as you "learned" it.
>
>
>> Then the trolls chime in and start the insult and accusation phase.
>> Notice who followed you this time, Luxey and None. I call trolls the
>> assholes waiting under the bridge to jump you and make general
>> accusations to try and make themselves look good.
>
> You think I do this to make myself look good? Clearly, you're in a
> different reality.
>
>> They think that this will cause others to gang on and finish me off.
>
> There goes the assumption factory! It must be so much easier than
> rational thinking.
>
>> And why didn't someone suggest blocking or filtering such people
>> out? I have thought of plonking a couple of members but haven't done
>> it yet.
>
> Someone could explain it to you, but then you'd be back pretending
> that you couldn't possibly know how to do it.
>
>> I am here to learn, I do not ignore your advice
>
> Whopper alert!

Plonk.

Gary Eickmeier

[Gary Eickmeier]

hank alrich wrote:
> Peter Larsen > wrote:
>
>> <subtle>
>> Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some
>> reason and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the
>> ensemble for some other reason.
>> </subtle>
>
> Gives a stout sense of reality, a sense of setting to the material.
>
> When I do that I give the spoken introduction its own track ID so
> that a listener may choose to hear it or not from repeated playback.
> The intros are often interesting the first listen or even first few
> listenings, but not every talkin' part holds up as well as "Alice's
> Restaurant".

One thing I notice about announcers or narrators being included alongside
the music is that there is a level difference that can be annoying. At first
blush you think that this happens because the engineers are making the
levels the same on the meters, making the spoken parts ridiculously as loud
as the music. But if it is singing with the music it is not as annoying,
because we are used to hearing the singer equal to the music. I know that my
recording engineer friend in town includes a lot of announcments with the
school bands he records, and I have to duck when the spoken parts come in.
So I usually just leave them out and stick to the music parts.

Peter I must mention that you gave me some of the most useful advice ever in
the thread about the Thrumbing Bass. I had (and still have) this bassist who
is hard of hearing and turns his bass all the way up and overwhelms everyone
else, especially in a recording. I have tried to talk to him, but hey, he's
deaf. Anyway, you told me about the "Orange Curve" I think you called it,
where most well balanced recordings rise to ta peak at about 100 Hz, then
fall gradually toward 20k. So I made that happen in this particular case and
it cleared up everything and gave me one of the best recordings of our jazz
group I have yet done. That is the kind of thing you cannot read in a book.

Gary

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> Plonk.

Is that a real plonk, or a Sears plonk?

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> When I called Audio Technica and asked about the shock mounts, they
> said no, there is no mount designed FOR the 2021,

Their website begs to differ.

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
>> If you can't do anything about it then you will be learning noise
>> reduction techniques on the computer.
>
> OK yes yes yes, got it. Shock mount and new cable coming on the
> 27th.

What you seem to have missed, amid all your handwaving and
excuse-making, is that there is no evidence whatsoever that the
problem at hand is related to shock mounts or mechanical transmission
via the cable.

The only reason that anyone went down this road is that YOU initially
described the problem as "Microphone Rumble." That diagnosis seemed to
have come from the usual Assumption Factory, so there is no reason to
give it any credibility. A rudimentary analysis of the recording
indicates otherwise, to anyone with a basic knowledge of the
fundamentals (that leaves you out, Mr Assumption Eickmeier). But you
don’t need no stinking fundamentals, the Assumption Factory knows
better!

[hank alrich]

None > wrote:

> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Plonk.
>
> Is that a real plonk, or a Sears plonk?

Bada BOOM… Kachuk

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[PStamler]

Gary, a few messages ago you were talking about announcements that were mixed too high vis-a-vis the music. When I've produced live concert recordings I've found that if the music is at 0vu, and the announcements are at -3vu, it seems to make a good audible balance. Note that those are readings on real VU meters, which are averaging meters, *not* on peak-reading meters. There are software plug-ins out there that simulate VU meter ballistics pretty well.

Peace,
Paul

PS Looking at the original standards for VU meters, never repealed, I discover that it's proper to refer to the meters themselves as VU or V. U. meters, but the units themselves are lower case -- e.g., -3vu. Go figure.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> "Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
> k...
>> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
>> ...

>>> You are correct sir! I just looked again in Audition 2, and learned how
>>> to expand the frequency analysis display to show the lower freqs. At
>>> first when I opened it, it showed only a very coarse display above 3k or
>>> so. I finally maneuvered it around to show the lower freqs and saw the
>>> little hump around 60 Hz when the hum was playing. Found that I could
>>> filter it by taking it down from about 40 to 80 Hz in the FFT filter, as
>>> someone suggested earlier.

>> Set the fft window to max.

> Yes! One of my problems is that they use a lot of terms on those windows
> that I am not familiar with. I play around with them, but it isn't always
> apparent what they are doing. I have two books on Audition, but they are
> not a huge help.

They dumbified the manual, search term "Cool Edit Pro manual", it is out
there somewhere. Stuff has changed since then, but a lot has not.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> hank alrich wrote:

>> Peter Larsen > wrote:

>>> <subtle>
>>> Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some
>>> reason and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the
>>> ensemble for some other reason.
>>> </subtle>

>> Gives a stout sense of reality, a sense of setting to the material.
>
>> When I do that I ... [snippety]

> One thing I notice about announcers [snippety]

Neither of you grasped what I really wrote, perhaps I was too subtle. Try
again, I used a simple ploy that it is important to be able to read through.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Luxey]

On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 03:40:47 UTC+1, None wrote:
> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Plonk.
>
> Is that a real plonk, or a Sears plonk?

Good laugh for the start of the day.

[Luxey]

On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 20:39:44 UTC+1, Don Pearce wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 10:42:15 -0500, (hank alrich)
> wrote:
>
> >Luxey > wrote:
> >
> >> For the matter of square wheels, they can work in right environment, as in
> >> below picture:
> >>
> >> http://alturl.com/sa6zp
> >> (Preview: http://preview.alturl.com/sa6zp)
> >
> >Traction!
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgbWu8zJubo
>
> d

Wrong thing to do, following Hank's post. Now you're on
Gary's list of trolls.

[Phil W[_3_]]

Peter Larsen:
> "Gary Eickmeier" >:

>> Yes! One of my problems is that they use a lot of terms on those windows
>> that I am not familiar with. I play around with them, but it isn't always
>> apparent what they are doing. I have two books on Audition, but they are
>> not a huge help.

Then get a knowledge resource on AUDIO TERMS and not more books for a
certain program. But that would probably be making way too much sense for
your approach.

> They dumbified the manual, search term "Cool Edit Pro manual", it is out
> there somewhere. Stuff has changed since then, but a lot has not.

Well, a dumbified manual for a dumbified piece of crapware used by an
obviously dumbified person, that´s unwilling to get the slightest clue or
accept helpful hints... there´s some kind of pattern involved.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/24/2015 11:14 PM, None wrote:
> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote i..
>> When I called Audio Technica and asked about the shock mounts, they
>> said no, there is no mount designed FOR the 2021,

> Their website begs to differ.

It's surprising how frequently that happens, with many web sites.
Sometimes when you call Tech Support you'll get someone reading from a
script, but other times you'll get someone who understands the products
and their applications and may have some personal experience with the
problem you're trying to solve. I suspect that Audio Technica is this
type of company.

The 2021 is an inexpensive mic, and it's not likely that A-T would spend
the money to design a shock mount specifically for it. It would cost too
much for the design and test. And, as you no likely discovered when you
bought the 8415s, that they cost about half as much as the mic. Their
marketing department probably nixed the idea of a published
recommendation for fear that customers looking for an inexpensive mic.
But the tech support person you spoke to understood your application and
offered a solution that he felt would work. Hopefully it will help you,
if indeed you have a vibration problem.

When you described the problem as "rumble" and didn't post a clear
example so that we could hear what you were talking about, many of us
believed that you knew what "rumble" meant in context, and were
suggesting mechanical isolation. Then you said you solved the problem
with a different mic cable. If that's indeed the correct solution, you
had "hum" and not "rumble." And "buzz" is yet a different kind of sound,
which has a different solution.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Steve L.[_5_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in
:

>
> Actually, I just didn't know there were so many design factors to
> consider for XLR cable. I just got some 10 foot lengths of high
> quality stuff from BH Photo, but I know Markertek well and will give
> them a try. I do not enjoy soldering either.
>
> Gary
>
>

I've used these guys before
http://store.haveinc.com/t-cable-shop.aspx

[Gary Eickmeier]

PStamler wrote:
> Gary, a few messages ago you were talking about announcements that
> were mixed too high vis-a-vis the music. When I've produced live
> concert recordings I've found that if the music is at 0vu, and the
> announcements are at -3vu, it seems to make a good audible balance.
> Note that those are readings on real VU meters, which are averaging
> meters, *not* on peak-reading meters. There are software plug-ins out
> there that simulate VU meter ballistics pretty well.
>
> Peace,
> Paul
>
> PS Looking at the original standards for VU meters, never repealed, I
> discover that it's proper to refer to the meters themselves as VU or
> V. U. meters, but the units themselves are lower case -- e.g., -3vu.
> Go figure.

Interesting, if only because I can turn my Zoom H6 into a VU meter with a
simulated little needle and everything! Of course I am not going to do that
level thing during recording, but if I recorded announcements on a separate
track that would be a great point to remember.

Had the opposite effect on my group's live recording this weekend. I
recorded a separate track to get high quality sound for the video, and when
we put my track on the timeline, we found the gain varied way too much
between the talking part and the music part. I was on manual gain, the video
was on AGC, but it still surprised me. So I compressed my track a little and
it fixed it, and you would hardly know the difference.

Gary

[None]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/24/2015 11:14 PM, None wrote:
>> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote i..
>>> When I called Audio Technica and asked about the shock mounts,
>>> they
>>> said no, there is no mount designed FOR the 2021,
>
>> Their website begs to differ.
>
> It's surprising how frequently that happens, with many web sites.
> Sometimes when you call Tech Support you'll get someone reading from
> a script, but other times you'll get someone who understands the
> products and their applications and may have some personal
> experience with the problem you're trying to solve.

But in this case, no personal experience was required. Audio
Technica's own website gives explicit information about exactly which
of their specific AT shockmounts are suitable for use with specific AT
microphones. They probably didn't go to the trouble of designing a
mount just for the AT2021; they make a small family of shockmounts,
and each mount can work with more than one AT microphone. Just as
Shure offers mic clips that are designed to fit both the SM57 and
SM58, AT offers mounts that are compatible with the AT2021, the
AT4041, the PRO 37, etc.; all mics with the same case. So no, it's not
specific to the AT2021 alone; it fits any other mic that has that same
microphone body.

Which mount(s) match which microphones(s) is all clearly
cross-referenced on the Audio Technica website. There's no mystery
about it. It's not rocket surgery.

[Scott Dorsey]

None > wrote:
>
>Apparently his job is to do no such thing, and start from scratch next
>time without the clue that it would have given him. This is the type
>of very good advice that he refuses to take to heart, repeatedly. No
>followup, just stumble into the next session as clueless as he was
>when he stumbled into the last one.

This may have useful information about rumble:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWUfy0kF-xI

Well, it's better than the Link Wray one anyway.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>
>Actually, I just didn't know there were so many design factors to consider
>for XLR cable. I just got some 10 foot lengths of high quality stuff from BH
>Photo, but I know Markertek well and will give them a try. I do not enjoy
>soldering either.

What I use are some short (three foot) lengths of Belden 1804A. Right angle
female XLR on one end, straight male on the other end. The 1804A is very
very flexible. The switchcraft right angle XLRs are insanely overpriced but
slightly reduce the profile of the mike on camera.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/25/2015 8:31 AM, None wrote:
> Which mount(s) match which microphones(s) is all clearly
> cross-referenced on the Audio Technica website. There's no mystery about
> it. It's not rocket surgery.

So what's your point? That Gary didn't completely read the web site?
It's people like him that keeps Tech Support in business. And it's
companies like A-T who have people in tech support who knows what works
(but who may not have read the web site either).

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[hank alrich]

Steve L. > wrote:

> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in
> :
>
> >
> > Actually, I just didn't know there were so many design factors to
> > consider for XLR cable. I just got some 10 foot lengths of high
> > quality stuff from BH Photo, but I know Markertek well and will give
> > them a try. I do not enjoy soldering either.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
>
> I've used these guys before

> http://store.haveinc.com/t-cable-shop.aspx

Thanks, Steve, There are a few good ones out there of which I know.

http://www.markertek.com/

http://www.redco.com/

http://www.proaudiola.com/

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

Peter Larsen > wrote:

> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
>
> > hank alrich wrote:
>
> >> Peter Larsen > wrote:
>
> >>> <subtle>
> >>> Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some
> >>> reason and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the
> >>> ensemble for some other reason.
> >>> </subtle>
>
> >> Gives a stout sense of reality, a sense of setting to the material.
> >
> >> When I do that I ... [snippety]
>
> > One thing I notice about announcers [snippety]
>
> Neither of you grasped what I really wrote, perhaps I was too subtle. Try
> again, I used a simple ploy that it is important to be able to read through.
>
> > Gary
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter Larsen

In my case never overlook that you are dealing with a dumbass guitar
player!

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"hank alrich" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> Peter Larsen > wrote:

>> Neither of you grasped what I really wrote, perhaps I was too subtle. Try
>> again, I used a simple ploy that it is important to be able to read
>> through.

> In my case never overlook that you are dealing with a dumbass guitar
> player!

Don't throw yourself behind the train just yet ...

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Phil W[_3_]]

Mike Rivers:
> On 3/25/2015 8:31 AM, None wrote:
>> Which mount(s) match which microphones(s) is all clearly
>> cross-referenced on the Audio Technica website. There's no mystery about
>> it. It's not rocket surgery.
>
> So what's your point? That Gary didn't completely read the web site?

It´s probably rather about Gary´s repeatedly shown behaviour of only
complaining instead of thinking about other possible ways to solve the
problem.
Even, when he´s provided with a direct link, he won´t see there, what´s
obviously there - and keeps complaining...

Sorry, but the guy seems just resistant/immune to any help offered on a
silver plate in front of his mouth.

BTW: Yes, there are websites, that are quirky. Use a Google search with the
right terms and it will very likely give you a direct link to the page
containing the searched information.

> It's people like him that keeps Tech Support in business. And it's
> companies like A-T who have people in tech support who knows what works
> (but who may not have read the web site either).

Nobody cares about whether somebody read the website or not. What matters,
is that one is able to find the desired information.

[hank alrich]

Peter Larsen > wrote:

> "hank alrich" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
>
> > Peter Larsen > wrote:
>
> >> Neither of you grasped what I really wrote, perhaps I was too subtle. Try
> >> again, I used a simple ploy that it is important to be able to read
> >> through.
>
> > In my case never overlook that you are dealing with a dumbass guitar
> > player!
>
> Don't throw yourself behind the train just yet ...
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter Larsen

I tried that already, Peter, but the bass player was in my way.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 01:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Luxey >
wrote:

>On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 20:39:44 UTC+1, Don Pearce wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 10:42:15 -0500, (hank alrich)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Luxey > wrote:
>> >
>> >> For the matter of square wheels, they can work in right environment, as in
>> >> below picture:
>> >>
>> >> http://alturl.com/sa6zp
>> >> (Preview: http://preview.alturl.com/sa6zp)
>> >
>> >Traction!
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgbWu8zJubo
>>
>> d
>
>Wrong thing to do, following Hank's post. Now you're on
>Gary's list of trolls.

I'll do my best to bear my pain and anguish.

d

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Peter Larsen" > skrev i en meddelelse
k...

> <subtle>
> Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some reason
> and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the ensemble for
> some other reason.
> </subtle>

Which means: leave the bassplayers hum in so that he can hear it.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/24/2015 11:14 PM, None wrote:
>> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote i..
>>> When I called Audio Technica and asked about the shock mounts, they
>>> said no, there is no mount designed FOR the 2021,
>
>> Their website begs to differ.
>
> It's surprising how frequently that happens, with many web sites.
> Sometimes when you call Tech Support you'll get someone reading from a
> script, but other times you'll get someone who understands the products
> and their applications and may have some personal experience with the
> problem you're trying to solve. I suspect that Audio Technica is this type
> of company.
>
> The 2021 is an inexpensive mic, and it's not likely that A-T would spend
> the money to design a shock mount specifically for it. It would cost too
> much for the design and test. And, as you no likely discovered when you
> bought the 8415s, that they cost about half as much as the mic. Their
> marketing department probably nixed the idea of a published recommendation
> for fear that customers looking for an inexpensive mic. But the tech
> support person you spoke to understood your application and offered a
> solution that he felt would work. Hopefully it will help you, if indeed
> you have a vibration problem.
>
> When you described the problem as "rumble" and didn't post a clear example
> so that we could hear what you were talking about, many of us believed
> that you knew what "rumble" meant in context, and were suggesting
> mechanical isolation. Then you said you solved the problem with a
> different mic cable. If that's indeed the correct solution, you had "hum"
> and not "rumble." And "buzz" is yet a different kind of sound, which has a
> different solution.

Hi Mike -

No, and again, I didn't describe the problem as rumble, all I said was when
I went to the set of FFT filters (presets) listed in Audition 2, the one
that worked was called Microphone Rumble. So I asked the group if that was
some commonly understood term and if so what is it. I also posted the hum
test section of my recording on Soundcloud. I am still wrestling with
Soundcloud and its capabilities. I thought you could download clips from it
because that is its purpose in life, but someone said that he couldn't. So I
upgraded to Pro to see if that gave more options. I fished around a little
but didn't have time to get some kind of tech support so I posted a question
on their useless User Forum. But the question I need answered is what do you
see when you go to one of my links there? On my computer when I click on my
own link to a specific song, I get that plus every other one I have posted.
This may be just because I am the author of that page, or section, but it
might also be that you can look around and find the hum clip. Anyway, I will
post it again and anyone who missed it the first time around can hear it.

Gary

https://soundcloud.com/eickmeier-1/hum-section-2wav

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 3/24/2015 11:14 PM, None wrote:
>>> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote i..
>>>> When I called Audio Technica and asked about the shock mounts,
>>>> they
>>>> said no, there is no mount designed FOR the 2021,
>>
>>> Their website begs to differ.
>>
>> It's surprising how frequently that happens, with many web sites.
>> Sometimes when you call Tech Support you'll get someone reading
>> from a script, but other times you'll get someone who understands
>> the products and their applications and may have some personal
>> experience with the problem you're trying to solve. I suspect that
>> Audio Technica is this type of company.
>>
>> The 2021 is an inexpensive mic, and it's not likely that A-T would
>> spend the money to design a shock mount specifically for it. It
>> would cost too much for the design and test. And, as you no likely
>> discovered when you bought the 8415s, that they cost about half as
>> much as the mic. Their marketing department probably nixed the idea
>> of a published recommendation for fear that customers looking for
>> an inexpensive mic. But the tech support person you spoke to
>> understood your application and offered a solution that he felt
>> would work. Hopefully it will help you, if indeed you have a
>> vibration problem.
>>
>> When you described the problem as "rumble" and didn't post a clear
>> example so that we could hear what you were talking about, many of
>> us believed that you knew what "rumble" meant in context, and were
>> suggesting mechanical isolation. Then you said you solved the
>> problem with a different mic cable. If that's indeed the correct
>> solution, you had "hum" and not "rumble." And "buzz" is yet a
>> different kind of sound, which has a different solution.
>
> Hi Mike -
>
> No, and again, I didn't describe the problem as rumble,

Yes you did, as anyone can plainly see. It's the Subject field of your
original post on March 19. Are you able to ignore your own Subject
field, which is staring you in the face? I know you like to ignore,
forget, or fail to comprehend many posts, but even your own thread
starter? You are indeed, as others have said, a hilarious buffoon!

You opened with "I desperately need to learn something about
"microphone rumble'", although nobody would be surprised if you deny
it. Desperation is so ... desperate.

Maybe you should read the Soundcloud help. (That's a joke; of course
you would never do such a thing, nor would you comprehend it if you
did read it). Thanks for more hilarity, you're a lot funnier than the
other idiot trolls around here.

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/25/2015 8:31 AM, None wrote:
>> Which mount(s) match which microphones(s) is all clearly
>> cross-referenced on the Audio Technica website. There's no mystery about
>> it. It's not rocket surgery.
>
> So what's your point? That Gary didn't completely read the web site? It's
> people like him that keeps Tech Support in business. And it's companies
> like A-T who have people in tech support who knows what works (but who may
> not have read the web site either).

OK I must confess I went back to the web site and still cannot find any
microphone/ mount cross reference list. Please show me the URL. I think one
person thought he saw it too, but told me the wrong mount. Show me.

As for "people like me who keep tech support in business," I asked the
specific question to search on the site for the proper mount, and came up
with "Please call tech support at (phone number)."

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>>
>>Actually, I just didn't know there were so many design factors to consider
>>for XLR cable. I just got some 10 foot lengths of high quality stuff from
>>BH
>>Photo, but I know Markertek well and will give them a try. I do not enjoy
>>soldering either.
>
> What I use are some short (three foot) lengths of Belden 1804A. Right
> angle
> female XLR on one end, straight male on the other end. The 1804A is very
> very flexible. The switchcraft right angle XLRs are insanely overpriced
> but
> slightly reduce the profile of the mike on camera.
> --scott

Thanks. I will search the sites that Hank and others have given until I find
that one. But the right angle suggestion would apply to a front address
model mainly, right? My 2021s are front address but the 2050s are side
address, in which case the connector faces downward and maybe is better
suited to the straight connector? Anyway, I am mainly interested in it for
the 2021, so I will get a pair of the angle connector ones.

Gary

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> OK I must confess I went back to the web site and still cannot find
> any microphone/ mount cross reference list. Please show me the URL.
> I think one person thought he saw it too, but told me the wrong
> mount. Show me.

So you can claim that nobody showed you?

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks. I will search the sites that Hank and others have given
> until I find that one. But the right angle suggestion would apply to
> a front address model mainly, right?

Did you even read the reason Dorsey suggested the more expensive
right-angle connector? If so, do you still remember, a few minutes
later?

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
k...
> "Peter Larsen" > skrev i en meddelelse
> k...
>
>> <subtle>
>> Sometimes when I edit, I leave musicians introductions in for some reason
>> and sometimes, when it is a documentary recording for the ensemble for
>> some other reason.
>> </subtle>
>
> Which means: leave the bassplayers hum in so that he can hear it.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Peter Larsen

Hey - you know what? Remember my problem bass player? When he turned his amp
all the way up, I noticed excess hum coming from his speaker. I guess that
makes the bass the chief suspect in this one too!

I am going to suggest that he drop it in a tub of water to quiet it down.

Gary

[Luxey]

Reference is body style, seams you were laazy to read 2 lines of text.

[Luxey]

Now he's pretending nobody told him it was bass amp and posing as he made
it on his own "genius". Always the same behaviour.

[None]

"Luxey" > wrote in message
...
> Now he's pretending nobody told him it was bass amp and posing as he
> made
> it on his own "genius". Always the same behaviour.

Hey, that's a serious accusation. Maybe you should provide a link for
him to ignore now, and deny later. He's denying that he was the first
one to call it "Rumble", and that was only a few days ago.

I wonder if he has a big bulbous red nose that honks, size 27 canoe
shoes, and a tiny little bicycle. Like the bozo that he is.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

"Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
...

> Hey - you know what? Remember my problem bass player? When he turned his
> amp all the way up, I noticed excess hum coming from his speaker. I guess
> that makes the bass the chief suspect in this one too!

> I am going to suggest that he drop it in a tub of water to quiet it down.

Nah, he will just get another, suggest he gets his rig serviced. It is also
a health and safety issue.

> Gary

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[UnsteadyKen[_5_]]

In article: >

Gary Eickmeier says...

> But the question I need answered is what do you
> see when you go to one of my links there?
>
The file plays automatically and this is what I see.
http://www.tiikoni.com/tis/view/?id=fb9d809


--
Ken O'Meara

List of UK hi-fi & audio dealers:
http://unsteadyken.esy.es/

[Gray_Wolf]

On 25 Mar 2015 09:10:12 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Gary Eickmeier > wrote:
>>
>>Actually, I just didn't know there were so many design factors to consider
>>for XLR cable. I just got some 10 foot lengths of high quality stuff from BH
>>Photo, but I know Markertek well and will give them a try. I do not enjoy
>>soldering either.
>
>What I use are some short (three foot) lengths of Belden 1804A. Right angle
>female XLR on one end, straight male on the other end. The 1804A is very
>very flexible. The switchcraft right angle XLRs are insanely overpriced but
>slightly reduce the profile of the mike on camera.
>--scott

Scott, I recorded Gary's sound file and looked at it with Audition
CS6. The frequency analysis shows a 60 Hz peak that's above everything
else along with the usual harmonics. I'll see if I can get away with
posting the waveform here. :-)

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/25/2015 9:43 PM, None wrote:
>> [Gary] I didn't describe the problem as rumble,

> Yes you did, as anyone can plainly see. It's the Subject field of
> your original post on March 19. You opened with "I desperately need
> to learn something about "microphone rumble'"

Perhaps it would have been clearer to all if the subject had been
"Microphone Rumble Filter in Adobe Audition."

The hardest thing to learn when using a forum to get information is how
to ask the question so that people will know what you're really asking
about.

1. I have a problem with low frequency noise in my recording
2. Adobe Audition has a filter preset called "Microphone rumble" that helps
3. I'd like to know what this filter is actually doing.
4. Is there something I can learn about how to prevent this low
frequency noise in the future?

That would just about cover everything that's been beaten about here.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Scott Dorsey]

Gray_Wolf > wrote:
>
>Scott, I recorded Gary's sound file and looked at it with Audition
>CS6. The frequency analysis shows a 60 Hz peak that's above everything
>else along with the usual harmonics. I'll see if I can get away with
>posting the waveform here. :-)

No need... I think the LAST thing any of us need is to look at it at
this point...
--scott

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

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Luxey" > wrote in message
...
> Reference is body style, seams you were laazy to read 2 lines of text.

I saw the ref to the S1 body (size). Is that your idea of a cross
referencing chart for mikes to mounts? Does that tell you that the 8415
would be ideal for the 2021 mike?


Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Mike Rivers" > wrote in message
...
> On 3/25/2015 9:43 PM, None wrote:
>>> [Gary] I didn't describe the problem as rumble,
>
>> Yes you did, as anyone can plainly see. It's the Subject field of
>> your original post on March 19. You opened with "I desperately need
>> to learn something about "microphone rumble'"
>
> Perhaps it would have been clearer to all if the subject had been
> "Microphone Rumble Filter in Adobe Audition."
>
> The hardest thing to learn when using a forum to get information is how to
> ask the question so that people will know what you're really asking about.
>
> 1. I have a problem with low frequency noise in my recording
> 2. Adobe Audition has a filter preset called "Microphone rumble" that
> helps
> 3. I'd like to know what this filter is actually doing.
> 4. Is there something I can learn about how to prevent this low frequency
> noise in the future?
>
> That would just about cover everything that's been beaten about here.

Sorry Mike, sometimes there is a gap between the communicator sender and the
receiver. But that is pretty much what I thought I said in my OP. Still, I
think this subject was worth a healthy exchange - I have learned a lot in it
and I hope someone else has as well. This is a whole side area that is
perhaps less "technical" and perfectly understood as other ones, but one
that can ruin a session if you don't pay attention to all that has been
mentioned here. Would be a GREAT subject for Paul Stamler in his microphones
series (speaking for myself of course).

Gary

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Luxey" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Reference is body style, seams you were laazy to read 2 lines of
>> text.
>
> I saw the ref to the S1 body (size). Is that your idea of a cross
> referencing chart for mikes to mounts? Does that tell you that the
> 8415 would be ideal for the 2021 mike?

The loud whooshing sound continues to deafen Eickmeier, as he begs for
someone else to do his thinking for him.

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach him to fish, and
he'll eat for a lifetime. Since Eickmeier has no interest in learning
anything, people keep throwing fish at him, maybe just to keep him
occupied. But what he really wants is for Mommy to nuke a frozen
fishstick for him, cut it up into little pieces, and feed them to him
one little plastic spoonful at a time. So he can spit them out and
whine that he doesn't have any fish to eat, and he doubts that fish
even exist.

This parable is brought to you by the Gorton's fisherman, the Fischer
Price "Baby's First Fishfork" playset, and Fisher Electronics; drowned
out by the sound of flying fish sailing over Eickmeier's head.

[Gary Eickmeier]

Gray -

Yes, we have covered this. I hope that we don't keep re-posting this image
in our replies. But yes, I have seen the waveform now and it does filter out
with a steep filter from about 40 to 80, which leads me to the Bass Guitar
theory as the main problem with its hum.

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"Luxey" > wrote in message
...
> Now he's pretending nobody told him it was bass amp and posing as he made
> it on his own "genius". Always the same behaviour.

Guys - not sure how to say this - my presence here in this group is for what
I consider serious, practical reasons having to do with wanting to learn
"some" of your experience in recording. I realize that I am not a recording
professional but the entire group can't be all Scott Dorsey or there would
be no reason for it. I am a professional videographer and photographer and
highly respected in other groups. The band that lets me record them are very
thankful for my work. I use them to practice on, of course, and whatever I
am doing they just love it. Of course, you need to pay attention to the
sound in video work as well, which is the other half of my need to visit
here to both share and ask questions. I am an interested, enthusiastic
learner with respect for most contributors here and hopefully an ease of
discussions back and forth due to a mutual respect that I am reluctant to
let go of. I have spoken to some of you on the phone and exchanged
recordings with some, had personal discussions on Email, bought some books
or recordings, read your articles and on and on.

But I just cannot accept spitballs from some (very few) members throughout
an adult discussion that I think has been useful (especially to me) and
which has received a lot of contributions from distinguished members who
really don't need to be wasting time trying to help me out if I am some dope
who never listens or is incapable of grasping what you are talking about. I
can take the occasional slap upside the head if I ever display such behavior
or attitude, but I will never give you the kind of disrepect that such would
indicate if I just ignore or try to throw it back in your face for or
something.

All of which goes to explain that it pains me to block someone, anyone,
because it makes me look like a whiner or it makes it look like a criticism
of the group, which it certainly is not. I will already never see another
post from None, who probably will try and get another insult in edgewise by
using an alias, and I think I am going to have to do the same with Luxey. If
this invites criticism toward me go ahead and have at me; I have sincerely
tried to be a good, intelligent, contributing member here but if I have
stumbled or offended please DO let me know.

I can (gulp) take it....

Gary

[Gary Eickmeier]

"UnsteadyKen" > wrote in message
...
>
> In article: >
>
> Gary Eickmeier says...
>
>> But the question I need answered is what do you
>> see when you go to one of my links there?
>>
> The file plays automatically and this is what I see.
> http://www.tiikoni.com/tis/view/?id=fb9d809
>
>
> --
> Ken O'Meara

Hi Ken -

When I clicked on your link to my Soundcloud, what I saw was several of my
clips all available for you to play, but not unless and until you sign in as
a member! I hate that. All I want is a site where I can park a file and get
a URL so I can send someone a link to it. Someone a year or two back created
just such a thing, but I have lost track of it now. I still don't have my
own web site, which I would like to, so I suppose I am starting in on
another learning curve very soon....

Gary

PS yes, I know about Dropbox, which I also pretty much hate, but I will try
again to use that.

[Luxey]

My dear Gary,

I'm not hiding behind aliases, luxey... is easy to follow and find all various
pages aand identities it's cconnected to. Nothing is hidden, it's just not
up front.

I don't think my previous couple of posts were offensive. For the matter,
your raant about people who follow Hank's posts was very offenssive. However,
offended paarties, including my self, resstraained from continuing in that
unpolite, ill mannered way you proposed as sstandaard.

Re S1 body type: weather particular shock mount is ideal for your application,
nobody can tell you. Only you can know, after trying out severaal options.
As far as I'm concerned, there's not a single reason 8415
would suit you better than 8410a, except if your stand's 3/8 thread and you do
not have an adapter. Actually, I think it's the difference of $8 that made AT
help dessk reccomend you what they have.

[None]

"Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
...
>I will already never see another post from None, who probably will
>try and get another insult in edgewise by using an alias

Another whopper from the assumption factory.

[hank alrich]

None > wrote:

> "Gary Eickmeier" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Peter Larsen" > wrote in message
> > k...
> >> "Gary Eickmeier" > skrev i en meddelelse
> >> ...
> >>
> >>> You are correct sir! I just looked again in Audition 2, and
> >>> learned how to expand the frequency analysis display to show the
> >>> lower freqs. At first when I opened it, it showed only a very
> >>> coarse display above 3k or so. I finally maneuvered it around to
> >>> show the lower freqs and saw the little hump around 60 Hz when the
> >>> hum was playing. Found that I could filter it by taking it down
> >>> from about 40 to 80 Hz in the FFT filter, as someone suggested
> >>> earlier.
> >>
> >> Set the fft window to max.
> >
> > Yes! One of my problems is that they use a lot of terms on those
> > windows that I am not familiar with. I play around with them, but it
> > isn't always apparent what they are doing. I have two books on
> > Audition, but they are not a huge help.
>
> Yes, when they use words that you don't understand, and you can't find
> them in your two books, of course that means that there is no way you
> could possibly ever know what they mean, right? One thing that's been
> recommended many times is acquiring an understanding of the
> fundamental principles of audio (and that includes digital audio if
> you're using digital audio products).
>
> Have you ever taken that advice? Do you even remember ever reading
> that advice?

Be not misled by the title.

Sound Reinforcement Handbook / Edition 2

by Ralph Jones (Composer)

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/sound-reinforcement-handbook-ralph-jones/1118864427?ean=9780881889000&itm=1&usri=9780881889000

http://tinyurl.com/keyqedm


--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[hank alrich]

Gary Eickmeier > wrote:

> know this is not a professional group,

This group is thick with genuine professionals.

You have no idea.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic