Rob Reedijk wrote in message ...
Chris Rossi wrote:
were reactive rather than resistive. I think Mark McQ added some
reactive load (a low pass filter on the input for RF rejection) to his
RNP in part for this reason.

Sorry to change the subject here, but this may relate. As I understand
it, the RNP is a transformerless mic pre. According to a little
birdie who told me things, the blocking capacitors, necessary in
transformerless pres to protect the input from phantom power, cause a
certain amount of signal degradation, particularly in the top end.

However, this supposedly is not a factor when it comes to condensors
since when the phantom is switched on, the biasing to the capacitors
that results, somehow negates this problem.

Assuming any of this is true, has anyone ever tested with a dynamic
mic, plugged into a transformerless pre, whether or not the sound
improves (more clarity in the top end) by switching on the phantom
power!?

You will hopefully get some better technical answers, but for now I'll
just say that it's my understanding that any good designer is going to
make sure any electrolytics in his/her design are properly biased.
I've noted in other discussions a belief by some of the electronic
whizzes of today that the bad name given to capacitors is largely a
result of early poor design resulting from a lack of understanding of
how to properly bias the caps. In general, today, designers today
don't make those mistakes. Anyway, a mic pre that behaved in the
manner you describe would indicate to me a bad design. I do have an
RNP and don't recall having ever encountered a difference in sound
with phantom engaged or not on a dynamic mic. I'll give it a shot
this week, though, just for grins.

rossi