| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Capsules types and technologies
This is very interesting
http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Jean-Marie |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jean Marie MATHIEU wrote:
This is very interesting http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? Nobody else. PVC has poor long-term stability, which is why Neumann gave up on it years ago. But, there are folks who still like the sound and can live with the inconsistency and maintenance headaches. Most U47s today have been reskinned with mylar, because the original PVC failed. This changes the sound (and many folks love the sound of the U47 with the brittle PVC diaphragm that is about to fail, too). What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Almost everyone today is using mylar diaphragms with some sort of metal sputtering. Mylar is light, consistent, and stable. Gefell, and some of the measurement microphone people, make a few capsules using very thin nickel foils, with no plastic backing. Schoeps also did this in the 1950s but no longer does. The original technique for this dates back to the Western Electric 640AA. A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. This has a very high mass and results in poor high frequency response. These are the only exceptions I know of. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jean Marie MATHIEU wrote:
This is very interesting http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? Nobody else. PVC has poor long-term stability, which is why Neumann gave up on it years ago. But, there are folks who still like the sound and can live with the inconsistency and maintenance headaches. Most U47s today have been reskinned with mylar, because the original PVC failed. This changes the sound (and many folks love the sound of the U47 with the brittle PVC diaphragm that is about to fail, too). What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Almost everyone today is using mylar diaphragms with some sort of metal sputtering. Mylar is light, consistent, and stable. Gefell, and some of the measurement microphone people, make a few capsules using very thin nickel foils, with no plastic backing. Schoeps also did this in the 1950s but no longer does. The original technique for this dates back to the Western Electric 640AA. A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. This has a very high mass and results in poor high frequency response. These are the only exceptions I know of. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...
Jean Marie MATHIEU wrote: This is very interesting http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? Nobody else. PVC has poor long-term stability, which is why Neumann gave up on it years ago. In 1960 or so, actually. But, there are folks who still like the sound and can live with the inconsistency and maintenance headaches. Most U47s today have been reskinned with mylar, because the original PVC failed. This changes the sound (and many folks love the sound of the U47 with the brittle PVC diaphragm that is about to fail, too). What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Almost everyone today is using mylar diaphragms with some sort of metal sputtering. Mylar is light, consistent, and stable. Just for the record: Mylar is a brand name for a type of polyester. Gefell, and some of the measurement microphone people, make a few capsules using very thin nickel foils, with no plastic backing. Schoeps also did this in the 1950s but no longer does. The original technique for this dates back to the Western Electric 640AA. Neumann makes the K33 capsule, used in the TLM 50 and M 150 microphones. The original version had a nickel membrane, and now they are using titanium. Some (or perhaps all) of the capsules made by Sanken use titanium membranes. A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. This has a very high mass and results in poor high frequency response. These are the only exceptions I know of. --scott Hmm... I can only guess to whom you are refering... Karl Winkler Lectrosonics, inc. http://www.lectrosonics.com |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Jean Marie MATHIEU wrote: This is very interesting http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? Nobody else. PVC has poor long-term stability, which is why Neumann gave up on it years ago. But, there are folks who still like the sound and can live with the inconsistency and maintenance headaches. Most U47s today have been reskinned with mylar, because the original PVC failed. This changes the sound (and many folks love the sound of the U47 with the brittle PVC diaphragm that is about to fail, too). What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Almost everyone today is using mylar diaphragms with some sort of metal sputtering. Mylar is light, consistent, and stable. Gefell, and some of the measurement microphone people, make a few capsules using very thin nickel foils, with no plastic backing. Ty was telling me, when we had a nice chat on the phone awhile back, about a Gefell omni mic that had a nickel diaphragm... can't remember the model, but I remember him being quite impressed with it. I don't believe I've personally ever heard any mics with nickel capsules - anyone have any opinions on what type of colorations one can expect from nickel? Or is it more dependant on the nickel, plus the electronics/overall design of the mic? Neil Henderson |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Jean Marie MATHIEU wrote: This is very interesting http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? Nobody else. PVC has poor long-term stability, which is why Neumann gave up on it years ago. But, there are folks who still like the sound and can live with the inconsistency and maintenance headaches. Most U47s today have been reskinned with mylar, because the original PVC failed. This changes the sound (and many folks love the sound of the U47 with the brittle PVC diaphragm that is about to fail, too). What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Almost everyone today is using mylar diaphragms with some sort of metal sputtering. Mylar is light, consistent, and stable. Gefell, and some of the measurement microphone people, make a few capsules using very thin nickel foils, with no plastic backing. Ty was telling me, when we had a nice chat on the phone awhile back, about a Gefell omni mic that had a nickel diaphragm... can't remember the model, but I remember him being quite impressed with it. I don't believe I've personally ever heard any mics with nickel capsules - anyone have any opinions on what type of colorations one can expect from nickel? Or is it more dependant on the nickel, plus the electronics/overall design of the mic? Neil Henderson |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Neil Henderson" wrote in message . com... "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Jean Marie MATHIEU wrote: This is very interesting http://www.gefell-mics.com/capsules.htm Who, except Gefell, make non mylar gold sputtering capsules ? Nobody else. PVC has poor long-term stability, which is why Neumann gave up on it years ago. But, there are folks who still like the sound and can live with the inconsistency and maintenance headaches. Most U47s today have been reskinned with mylar, because the original PVC failed. This changes the sound (and many folks love the sound of the U47 with the brittle PVC diaphragm that is about to fail, too). What is the technologie of the Schoeps, Neumann, Josephson etc. and why ? Almost everyone today is using mylar diaphragms with some sort of metal sputtering. Mylar is light, consistent, and stable. Gefell, and some of the measurement microphone people, make a few capsules using very thin nickel foils, with no plastic backing. Ty was telling me, when we had a nice chat on the phone awhile back, about a Gefell omni mic that had a nickel diaphragm... can't remember the model, but I remember him being quite impressed with it. I don't believe I've personally ever heard any mics with nickel capsules - anyone have any opinions on what type of colorations one can expect from nickel? Or is it more dependant on the nickel, plus the electronics/overall design of the mic? Neil Henderson There are still individuals in Germany who refurbish nickel capsules. I have a M62, small diaphraghm cardioid nickel capsule, freshly refurbished by a retired Neumann (Gefell?) employee. At least I was told so by a friend of mine who I got it from. I have no reason to doubt his words. On my refurbished and modded M582 it sounds very airy and bright, in the most positive way. The best I've heard so far on acoustic guitar, for example. It also pulls the vocals out of a hopelessly crowded arrangement like nothing else I've tried. I have no other capsules, though and therefore can't say how much it depends on the M582 body. Predrag |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Predrag Trpkov wrote:
There are still individuals in Germany who refurbish nickel capsules. I have a M62, small diaphraghm cardioid nickel capsule, freshly refurbished by a retired Neumann (Gefell?) employee. At least I was told so by a friend of mine who I got it from. I have no reason to doubt his words. Who does these? The real problem with the Schoeps 221b nickel-diaphragm mike is that nobody seems to be able to rebuild the capsules so when the mikes do eventually fail, they fail totally. GRAS used to rebuild the Bruel and Kjaer capsules... I have a box of 4155 capsules that I have bought used and every single one of them is noisy. Anyone that could rebuild these at a reasonable price would be someone I would like to talk to, because GRAS is out of that business now. On my refurbished and modded M582 it sounds very airy and bright, in the most positive way. The best I've heard so far on acoustic guitar, for example. It also pulls the vocals out of a hopelessly crowded arrangement like nothing else I've tried. I have no other capsules, though and therefore can't say how much it depends on the M582 body. I have always liked the 1" nickel measurement capsules for recording work, and I really should try the newer Gefell nickel recording mikes. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
Neil Henderson wrote:
I don't believe I've personally ever heard any mics with nickel capsules - anyone have any opinions on what type of colorations one can expect from nickel? Or is it more dependant on the nickel, plus the electronics/overall design of the mic? Those are good questions, and I wish more people would try to find real-world answers rather than just making assumptions. The Microtech Gefell site emphasizes the practical aspects of various membrane materials for specific applications. It touts the company's versatility as a manufacturer, and the continuity that results from their use of Georg Neumann's original 1928 capsule design in some retro models. But they don't make a major issue over any alleged sonic characteristics of particular membrane materials--and I think they're right not to do so. I have a pair of 1960s-era tube microphones in which one capsule still has its original nickel membrane while the other was fitted with a new Mylar membrane at the factory. The capsules aren't perfectly matched, but are as close in sound as any other unmatched pair of their type would ordinarily be. The nickel capsule doesn't have any "metallic" character, nor any other sonic "fingerprint" that its Mylar counterpart lacks, nor vice versa. Though they're not absolutely identical I would still be quite surprised if anyone could ever specifically identify the membrane material by sound--anyway, I sure can't. I'd even have to do some digging in the paperwork to figure out which one is which any more. Some people seem to assume that the diaphragm is always the main factor in determining a capsule's sonic characteristics--and that "naturally," nickel diaphragms would sound brighter than Mylar (and similarly, that ultra-thin diaphragms would "naturally" have audibly superior transient response and/or high-frequency response). But once a diaphragm has been tensioned so that its resonance is optimal for the capsule's design, its response within the audio band is controlled far more by the air around it than by the intrinsic characteristics of the diaphragm per se. (That's assuming, of course, that the material isn't, like, wood or something.) The membranes get public attention--there are endless debates on various boards concerning center-fixed designs versus edge-fixed, as well as different materials and thicknesses. Those things do matter somewhat. But at best, the diaphragm responds to the air around it, so what really matters most is the exact way in which that invisible, free stuff is affected by sound waves, or is prevented from responding to them. It's a little like the way magicians can do tricks by the most ordinary of means, as long as the audience is distracted from seeing what they're really doing. The backplate and the acoustical chambers surrounding it (between the backplate and the diaphragm, and also behind the backplate) are a lot of where art and science meet in microphone design. Meanwhile we've all been trained to keep our eye on the diaphragm(s). No wonder so many audiophiles approach microphone design as if it were magic ... |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Edi Zubovic edi.zubovic[rem wrote:
--Scott, I would like to know something more about that noisy 4155s. As I know, the body is monel, the membrane is nickel (quartz covered at same variants) and the backplate is monel in a quartz insulating ring. Now what is with the pressure equalization at that capsules? -- I think the very tiny silver wire, inserted in the in the capillary for equalization tuning purposes, _might_ get oxidized over the time and this disturb the free air flow. As to the membrane, did the resonant frequency remain about the same over the time (---- possible ageing changes in the membrane)? The resonant frequency has not changed, and that is really the wonderful thing about these. The long-term stability is very good. The thing is that, because the diaphragms are so thin, they invariably have a couple pinholes in them and that is how I think contaminants are getting back there. At least, that's the only real mechanism I can think of. The problems I am having are all clearly due to contamination, since heating the capsules up will solve the problems briefly. The silver wire should oxidize almost immediately, but that should not change anything. Tarnish is just fine. -- I've read about how a very known company would, in earliest days, make thin microphone membranes: they would dissolve a plastics in alcohol, then sip the mixture onto destilled water in a container of an appropriate diameter, and finally they'd let the alcohol evaporate. Now that was an ingeniously brilliant procedure. I had not heard that. I know that many of the nickel foils were made by plating on gelatin, then washing the gelatin off. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Edi Zubovic edi.zubovic[rem wrote:
Scott, maybe you could see who is servicing Western Electric capsules like WE 640 A in the U.S. They might be qualified to servicing yours too (I think these should be either B&K types 4144 or 4145). As far as I know, there is nobody in the US who can repair a 640A capsule. B&K makes a 640A replacement that can be retrofitted onto an old 640A, I think, but a bad 640A capule is gonr. PS. Do you have some Pistonphone or electostatic calibrating actuator for these as well? I have an ancient GenRad pistonphone, which is actually not bad at all. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Predrag Trpkov wrote: There are still individuals in Germany who refurbish nickel capsules. I have a M62, small diaphraghm cardioid nickel capsule, freshly refurbished by a retired Neumann (Gefell?) employee. At least I was told so by a friend of mine who I got it from. I have no reason to doubt his words. Who does these? I sent the email to that friend of mine and asked that directly, but he skilfully avoided answering the question. Sorry. Predrag |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote: A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Thanks, Peter |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote:
A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Thanks, Peter |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. This has a very high mass and results in poor high frequency response. ** So aluminised Mylar film as used in polyester capacitors has high mass ?? Just like LM301s have lots of crossover distortion - Dorsey has gone dead silent on that one. Dorsey is actually not sure about any damn thing - but just loves to spread misinformation and waste other folk's time and money. ............ Phil |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote: A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. Anodizing? |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" "Scott Dorsey" A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. Anodizing? ** Anodizing = a layer of insulation. ........... Phil |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 23:16:47 +0100, "Predrag Trpkov" wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Predrag Trpkov wrote: There are still individuals in Germany who refurbish nickel capsules. I have a M62, small diaphraghm cardioid nickel capsule, freshly refurbished by a retired Neumann (Gefell?) employee. At least I was told so by a friend of mine who I got it from. I have no reason to doubt his words. Who does these? I sent the email to that friend of mine and asked that directly, but he skilfully avoided answering the question. Sorry. Predrag It was probably done by Gefell in the former Eastern Germany, who made the capsule. However I'm sure they will only deal with their own mics not ones made by anyone else. Al |
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Phil Allison" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" "Scott Dorsey" A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. Anodizing? ** Anodizing = a layer of insulation. Agreed, but that just means you don't anodize the attachment points. |
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Arny Krueger" "Phil Allison" A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. Anodizing? ** Anodizing = a layer of insulation. Agreed, but that just means you don't anodize the attachment points. ** Pure aluminium ( we say al - u - min - i - um ) oxidises with exposure to air, but it has to be a very moist environment for it t become white and encrusted, as would be the case with a vocal mic maybe. If aluminised Mylar film is placed so the aluminium side is against the metal frame of the capsule there is no problem. ........... Phil |
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
|
Phil Allison wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. This has a very high mass and results in poor high frequency response. ** So aluminised Mylar film as used in polyester capacitors has high mass ?? No, not aluminized mylar film, but rolled foil, as used in older film-and-foil types. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott Dorsey wrote: wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote: A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. I'll bet that wouldn't be true near a sea shore. I had the original one panel Magneplanars and they had aluminum wire on the tweeter that worked great for years until I moved to a shore house on Dauphin Island in the Gulf of Mexico and they were each corroded through in one place in a couple of months. When I set out to repair them about six months later the breaks were numerous. Replaced it all with fine copper and Elmer's glue and couldn't hear a difference that I could remember. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#27
|
|||
|
|||
|
Arny Krueger wrote: "Phil Allison" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" "Scott Dorsey" A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. Anodizing? ** Anodizing = a layer of insulation. Agreed, but that just means you don't anodize the attachment points. I don't know how well anodizing would work. It hardens the surface and makes it much thicker than the layer of aluminum it is replacing. It's typically used on surfaces much thicker than this because of the amount of material needed to complete the process. For something this thin I would expect the whole foil to turn to oxide. Also I wonder if the dielectric properties of an oxide layer would effect the capacitance between the diaphragm and the backplate. Peter |
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
I'll bet that wouldn't be true near a sea shore. I had the original one panel Magneplanars and they had aluminum wire on the tweeter that worked great for years until I moved to a shore house on Dauphin Island in the Gulf of Mexico and they were each corroded through in one place in a couple of months. When I set out to repair them about six months later the breaks were numerous. Replaced it all with fine copper and Elmer's glue and couldn't hear a difference that I could remember. As I recall _all_ of those MG-1 and MG-2 speakers did that. And I don't know why the wire corroded so quickly, while the metallized film they are currently using does not. And I don't know why ribbon mikes don't have ribbon corrosion issues either. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Tue, 7 Dec 2004 10:55:56 +1100, "Phil Allison"
wrote: Dorsey is actually not sure about any damn thing - but just loves to spread misinformation and waste other folk's time and money. ........... Phil This from a man who claims that you can add numbers to a harmonic series and still hear the same difference tones. Kurt "I actually own a Bode" Riemann |
|
#31
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Bob Cain" wrote in message ... Scott Dorsey wrote: wrote: Scott Dorsey wrote: A small American manufacturer whose name I won't mention is using aluminum capacitor foil for a diaphragm. What is done to keep the aluminum from oxidizing? Nothing. Although come to think of it, this isn't all that serious a problem with ribbon microphones... the ribbons don't get white and crusty at all, even after decades. I don't know if the condenser would have more of a problem since the materials is thinner, or not. I'll bet that wouldn't be true near a sea shore. I had the original one panel Magneplanars and they had aluminum wire on the tweeter that worked great for years until I moved to a shore house on Dauphin Island in the Gulf of Mexico and they were each corroded through in one place in a couple of months. When I set out to repair them about six months later the breaks were numerous. Replaced it all with fine copper and Elmer's glue and couldn't hear a difference that I could remember. Does anybody have an idea how to repair the mid-low panels on my Magneplanar Tympani I-D The aluminum wire in them is totally rotten and I can't justify the expense of sending four panels over the Atlantic. Predrag |
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
|
Predrag Trpkov wrote: Does anybody have an idea how to repair the mid-low panels on my Magneplanar Tympani I-D The aluminum wire in them is totally rotten and I can't justify the expense of sending four panels over the Atlantic. Those are the push-pull versions, right? If they are single sided, my method of simply replacing it with very thin copper attached by white glue worked great. I've never seen the push-pull to know if they can be disassembled to do the same. Bob -- "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler." A. Einstein |
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
|
Bob Cain wrote:
Predrag Trpkov wrote: Does anybody have an idea how to repair the mid-low panels on my Magneplanar Tympani I-D The aluminum wire in them is totally rotten and I can't justify the expense of sending four panels over the Atlantic. Those are the push-pull versions, right? If they are single sided, my method of simply replacing it with very thin copper attached by white glue worked great. I've never seen the push-pull to know if they can be disassembled to do the same. Somebody used to sell a kit to do it, and I remember them discussing it on rec.audio.high-end a decade ago.... --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Linear Mode
