[Tobiah]

This has what I need as a hobbyist. Four preamps with two instrument
ready and extra line IO on the back. It has two phone jacks that can be
fed the same, or different mixes.

I can't find much in the way of how flexible the software is. My
present interface, an M-audio Fast Track Ultra, does all of the above,
but also has a great mixer panel. It has a tab for each output, and
for each, I can mix any/all of my computer returns, or hardware inputs.
Anyone know about the mixer for this unit?

Also saw a demo on Youtube at 80db mic gain and I couldn't hear any
noise. Anyone use one of these yet?

Bonus question: Why would I pay $100 extra for the USB-C model?
I mean the protocol is the same, right? Just the plug is different?


Thanks!

[geoff]

On 7/03/2019 12:22 PM, Tobiah wrote:
This has what I need as a hobbyist.Â* Four preamps with two instrument
ready and extra line IO on the back.Â* It has two phone jacks that can be
fed the same, or different mixes.

I can't find much in the way of how flexible the software is.Â* My
present interface, an M-audio Fast Track Ultra, does all of the above,
but also has a great mixer panel.Â* It has a tab for each output, and
for each, I can mix any/all of my computer returns, or hardware inputs.
Anyone know about the mixer for this unit?

Also saw a demo on Youtube at 80db mic gain and I couldn't hear any
noise.Â* Anyone use one of these yet?

Bonus question:Â* Why would I pay $100 extra for the USB-C model?
I mean the protocol is the same, right?Â* Just the plug is different?


Thanks!



Don't know what the bundled software is like, but presumably works
similarly to most other DAWs. Maybe there is a downloadable trial version.

Note that the 'Artist' version of Studio One supplied with the bundle
does NOT allow use of 3rd party VST plugins, which is a major crippling.
I guess they offer an upgrade path to the Pro version.

Also "mixer" - why would you want a mixer, 'cos you are unlikely to want
to do anything outside of the software application ? The 1810 has all
the inputs and outputs you need.

From what I could see USB-C applies to a different (smaller and more
portable) model, and yes, really only means the different USB socket.

geoff

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/6/2019 6:22 PM, Tobiah wrote:
can't find much in the way of how flexible the software is.Â* My
present interface, an M-audio Fast Track Ultra, does all of the above,
but also has a great mixer panel.Â* It has a tab for each output, and
for each, I can mix any/all of my computer returns, or hardware inputs.
Anyone know about the mixer for this unit?

PreSonus calls their mixer application UC-Surface. There must be a video
of it somewhere on the web site. You can take a look at it he
https://www.presonus.com/products/UC-Surface

Personally I think it looks more complicated than it really is, but
PreSonus likes to pack as many features as they can into whatever they
build and leave it to you, the user, to decide what you don't want to
bother with - though I don't know that you make things disappear from
the user interface if you're not going to use them. But it does what the
mixer application for any multi-channel audio interface does - gives you
a low latency mix of your inputs and returns from the DAW software.
Typically, when tracking you'll monitor your inputs, and when
overdubbing, you'll monitor a mix of the inputs you're recording at the
time plus a mix that you create using the DAW mixer (which appears in UC
Surface as another mixer channel strip).

Geoff:
Also "mixer" - why would you want a mixer, 'cos you are unlikely to want to do anything outside of the
software application ? The 1810 has all the inputs and outputs you need.

You can work without the UC Surface mixer and just create monitor mixes
in the DAW, but all the inputs make a trip through the A/D converter,
DAW program, and D/A converter before they get to the output. This can
be more latency than is comfortable. The mix that the UC Surface
application controls is a DSP hardware-based mixer inside the interface
box that offers much less time delay between mic input and headphone or
monitor output.


Also saw a demo on Youtube at 80db mic gain and I couldn't hear any
noise.Â* Anyone use one of these yet?

Turn up your volume, or figure out what the video is really about. I
don't believe that there's really 80 dB of mic gain, but anyway that's
kind of meaningless when it's being digitized anyway. The important
specification - the one that practically nobody publishes - is the
sensitivity at full gain. This is what signal level in gives you a full
scale digital output from the A/D converter.

Bonus question:Â* Why would I pay $100 extra for the USB-C model?
I mean the protocol is the same, right?Â* Just the plug is different?

The USB-C version will work with a smart phone. I suppose it could be
handy if you're doing a live field recording and just capturing multiple
tracks, but only young people who probably only produce EDM from samples
would want to try to pretend that their phone is their audio workstation.


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

[Tobiah]

Also "mixer" - why would you want a mixer, 'cos you are unlikely to
want to do anything outside of the software application ? The 1810
has all the inputs and outputs you need.

Not a physical mixer. I'm talking about the software panel. The card
I have gives a tab for every output. On each is a level for every
software and hardware input. I've had units in the past that were
crippled in this respect.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Tobiah wrote:
Also "mixer" - why would you want a mixer, 'cos you are unlikely to
want to do anything outside of the software application ? The 1810
has all the inputs and outputs you need.

Not a physical mixer. I'm talking about the software panel. The card
I have gives a tab for every output. On each is a level for every
software and hardware input. I've had units in the past that were
crippled in this respect.

Right, why do you want that? You should be able to set the input gains
manually, so you don't care about that. And you should be able to feed
the converter outputs straight into your DAW application, so you don't
care about being able to make premixes.

So this "mixer" is just another layer of software to go wrong.

Now, if you -cannot- set input gains manually, then maybe you need an
application that does that... but that gives me the willies.
--scott


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

[Tobiah]

Right, why do you want that? You should be able to set the input gains
manually, so you don't care about that. And you should be able to feed
the converter outputs straight into your DAW application, so you don't
care about being able to make premixes.

I see what you're saying. I have all the routing and mixing I need
in the DAW software. I guess it goes back to Mike's point about
zero latency monitoring. Let's say a buddy and I are recording two
tracks. If the interface mixer is done correctly, I'd have no problem
making us each an individual phones mix of both of our inputs without making
the trip through the computer.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/8/2019 11:32 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
You should be able to set the input gains
manually, so you don't care about that. And you should be able to feed
the converter outputs straight into your DAW application, so you don't
care about being able to make premixes.

So this "mixer" is just another layer of software to go wrong.

The "mixer" is a DSP chip in the interface. The software is the control
panel for the mixer. This gives you a delay between mic in and headphone
out in the low tenths of a millisecond, compared to the 2 or more
milliseconds that it takes for the signal to go in, through, and out of
the DAW software and back to the interface's headphone output. The small
latency of the DSP mixer pretty much eliminates the comb filtering
effect that you hear on your own voice when speaking into a mic
connected to the interface input and hearing yourself on headphones.

2 or 3 or 4 milliseconds of latency is of little or no consequence when
you're in the control room monitoring musicians playing in the studio,
or when making field recordings, or even when you're playing an
instrument and hearing yourself on headphones. But for vocals, unless
you have the monitor level high enough so that it swamps out the
through-your-head level at your eardrum (which is, I suspect the reason
for the "I've never noticed that effect" reply when I mention it on
line) the un-natural sound of your voice in the headphones bothers many
people, whether they're singing or narrating.


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

[Tobiah]

What do you guys know about the 'XMAX' preamps in this unit.
The Fast Track Ultra I have uses preamps "based on M-Audio's Octane technology"
for what it's worth. I'm looking for high gain and low noise like
for intimate Foley stuff.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/8/2019 12:41 PM, Tobiah wrote:
What do you guys know about the 'XMAX' preamps in this unit.
The Fast Track Ultra I have uses preamps "based on M-Audio's Octane
technology"

Marketing fluff.

I'm looking for high gain and low noise like
for intimate Foley stuff.

I don't believe you'll get what you're dreaming of with the PreSonus
preamps. They're not colored, which I think is a good thing, but they'll
need some help in the gain area with most modern mics when recording
quiet sounds.

While I haven't checked out that particular unit, they expect a fairly
hefty signal going in from the mic. As a benchmark, at full gain,
conversation-level speech a foot away from a Shure SM57 will get you a
peak recording level of around -10 dBFS. Quiescent noise at full gain
with the input terminated will be on the order of -75 dBFS.

You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with
whatever mic you choose (and I'm not recommending an SM57 for Foley
work!), or a really high gain, low noise outboard preamp in order to get
a usable record level without pushing the PreSonus preamp to full gain.

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

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Tobiah wrote:
What do you guys know about the 'XMAX' preamps in this unit.
The Fast Track Ultra I have uses preamps "based on M-Audio's Octane technology"
for what it's worth. I'm looking for high gain and low noise like
for intimate Foley stuff.

I have only used the StudioLive console preamps. They are pretty clean,
but like the Mackies they change somewhat as the trims are altered and they
not really something you want to be using wide open. You can do a whole lot
worse and they are fine for general purpose stuff but don't expect them to be
as quiet or clean as a Millennia.

Then again, if you use a mike with a high enough output you may not need to be
running them full out anyway.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Tobiah]

On 3/8/19 10:53 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Tobiah wrote:
What do you guys know about the 'XMAX' preamps in this unit.
The Fast Track Ultra I have uses preamps "based on M-Audio's Octane technology"
for what it's worth. I'm looking for high gain and low noise like
for intimate Foley stuff.

I have only used the StudioLive console preamps. They are pretty clean,
but like the Mackies they change somewhat as the trims are altered and they
not really something you want to be using wide open. You can do a whole lot
worse and they are fine for general purpose stuff but don't expect them to be
as quiet or clean as a Millennia.

Then again, if you use a mike with a high enough output you may not need to be
running them full out anyway.
--scott


It will be a pair of Rode NT1-A's.

[Tobiah]

You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with
whatever mic you choose (and I'm not recommending an SM57 for Foley
work!), or a really high gain, low noise outboard preamp in order to
get a usable record level without pushing the PreSonus preamp to full
gain.

So any chance of doing better for my pair of NT-1A's for under $500?

[Tobiah]

You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with whatever mic you choose

The cloudlifter looks interesting. $250 for two channels which might suit
me quite nicely. What are they doing inside that they couldn't just build
into a full preamp?

[Tobiah]

You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with
whatever mic you choose
Reading about it, the Cloudlifter if for low output dynamics or ribbons,
and doesn't pass through phantom power. Sounds like it's not right
for the NT1-A's.

[PStamler]

On Friday, March 8, 2019 at 1:48:30 PM UTC-6, Tobiah wrote:
You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with whatever mic you choose

The cloudlifter looks interesting. $250 for two channels which might suit
me quite nicely. What are they doing inside that they couldn't just build
into a full preamp?

Nothing, but manufacturers don't. Most preamps are designed around the expectation that users will psir them with hefty-output condenser mics rather tan low-output moving-coil dynamics and ribbon dynamics. The CloudLifter adds that capability (and, in one model, variable impedance). While you can design those into a full preamp, they cost money which manufacturers, looking at a competitive marketplce, don't want to spend. Thus the Cloudlifter, where the people who need that capability spend the money, but people who don't, don't.

Peace,
Paul

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/8/2019 2:56 PM, Tobiah wrote:
Reading about it, the Cloudlifter if for low output dynamics or ribbons,
and doesn't pass through phantom power.Â* Sounds like it's not right
for the NT1-A's.

Foley is a pretty special thing, usually. If I was going to recommend a
preamp for that application, I'd think about the AEA TRP-2. It can
provide 85 dB of gain (the equivalent of a nominal 60 dB preamp with a
CloudLifter) and while it was designed with ribbon mics in mind, it has
switchable phantom power. But it's about a grand last I looked.

Are you working with your M-Audio interface and not getting good
results? If the A/D converters in it are respectable, you could continue
to use that and try to find a preamp that will give you enough gain at
low enough noise to be usable for your application.

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

[geoff]

On 9/03/2019 6:10 AM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 3/8/2019 11:32 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
You should be able to set the input gains
manually, so you don't care about that.Â* And you should be able to feed
the converter outputs straight into your DAW application, so you don't
care about being able to make premixes.

So this "mixer" is just another layer of software to go wrong.

The "mixer" is a DSP chip in the interface. The software is the control
panel for the mixer.

Surely there is an ASIO driver for the interface, which presents
directly to the DAW of choice, without the likes of a mixer applet.

Amongst others I have a Focusrite unit that operates this way in
addition to a monitor headphone mixer directly from the interface box
itself.

But low latency input monitoring is also available to the normal output
channels as well or instead. Can't imagine the Presonus would be much
different, as 'pro-sumer' level gear.

geoff

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/8/2019 6:08 PM, geoff wrote:
Surely there is an ASIO driver for the interface, which presents
directly toÂ* the DAW of choice, without the likes of a mixer applet.

Of course there's an ASIO driver. Usually with interfaces like this (and
it's the case with your Focusrite) the control panel software for the
hardware DSP mixer gets installed along with the ASIO driver. You can
use it or not.

But low latency input monitoring is also available to the normal output
channels as well or instead.

What does this mean? What "normal output channels?"

Most DAWs offer the option of input monitoring, so, yeah, you can do it
in the DAW, and send it back to the interface so you can hear it in
whatever you have connected to the interface for monitoring - speakers
or headphones or both. The thing is that this takes longer than sending
the input signal through the interface's built-in mixer and to the
monitor output.

By taking advantage of the hardware mixer, you can use large buffers and
eliminate glitches and dropouts and have lower monitor latency than
you'd get even with buffers reduced to the smallest size that still
allows the DAW program to work. It's almost as good as using a hardware
mixer.

Unfortunately, most people recording today have only used a DAW and
don't bother to understand signal flow, so they assume that the 6 to 10
milliseconds of monitor latency that they get using the default buffer
size is just the way it is. Or they aren't perceptive enough to
recognize that there's something that can be improved, or they aren't
recording things were latency matters.

Hearing your guitar in the headphones two or three milliseconds after
you pick a note isn't going to throw off your playing, but hearing your
snare drum flamming in the headphones might be distracting, and hearing
your voice "equalized" with a comb filter is really bothersome to some
singers.

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

[geoff]

On 9/03/2019 12:35 PM, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 3/8/2019 6:08 PM, geoff wrote:
Surely there is an ASIO driver for the interface, which presents
directly toÂ* the DAW of choice, without the likes of a mixer applet.

Of course there's an ASIO driver. Usually with interfaces like this (and
it's the case with your Focusrite) the control panel software for the
hardware DSP mixer gets installed along with the ASIO driver. You can
use it or not.

But low latency input monitoring is also available to the normal
output channels as well or instead.

What does this mean? What "normal output channels?"

The normal (ie not built in headphone monitor jack) signal outputs..

Most DAWs offer the option of input monitoring, so, yeah, you can do it
in the DAW, and send it back to the interface so you can hear it in
whatever you have connected to the interface for monitoring - speakers
or headphones or both. The thing is that this takes longer than sending
the input signal through the interface's built-in mixer and to the
monitor output.

Yes.


By taking advantage of the hardware mixer, you can use large buffers and
eliminate glitches and dropouts and have lower monitor latency than
you'd get even with buffers reduced to the smallest size that still
allows the DAW program to work. It's almost as good as using a hardware
mixer.

With monitoring through the DAW you can send customised mixes to the
output being used for that purpose.
Unfortunately, most people recording today have only used a DAW and
don't bother to understand signal flow, so they assume that the 6 to 10
milliseconds of monitor latency that they get using the default buffer
size is just the way it is. Or they aren't perceptive enough to
recognize that there's something that can be improved, or they aren't
recording things were latency matters.

Yes.
Hearing your guitar in the headphones two or three milliseconds after
you pick a note isn't going to throw off your playing, but hearing your
snare drum flamming in the headphones might be distracting, and hearing
your voice "equalized" with a comb filter is really bothersome to some
singers.

Yes.

One option is to not even send the vocal, and have one headphone cup
side slightly skew-whiff if the singer really needs to here themself. Or
use the dedicate headphone out, if the interface has one. And/or
minimise the latency through the system - that may have been difficult 5
years ago, but with newer PCs of the higher-end and good DAW software,
less so.

geoff

[Tobiah]

Are you working with your M-Audio interface and not getting good
results? If the A/D converters in it are respectable, you could
continue to use that and try to find a preamp that will give you
enough gain at low enough noise to be usable for your application.

I get surprisingly clean results on things like classical guitar.
I turn the gain knobs up about 3/4. When recording quieter things
as I've described, I need to turn the gain up all the way (they
say it's 60dB) and I then hear loads of whiteish noise. What's that
trick I can use to make sure it's not coming from the mics or room?
A resistor placed correctly?

The unit sometimes generates odd blips and squeals which had me
looking at replacing it. It's also really old and was not supported
past Windows 7. I'm running 10 right now. The Presonus 1810 looks
like it does everything I'm used to. I know this means nothing
scientifically, but since they rate their preamps as providing
80dB of gain, I thought, hey, maybe they'll at least be quieter
than the ones I have at 60dB.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 3/8/2019 4:10 PM, Tobiah wrote:
When recording quieter things
as I've described, I need to turn the gain up all the way (they
say it's 60dB) and I then hear loads of whiteish noise. What's that
trick I can use to make sure it's not coming from the mics or room?
A resistor placed correctly?

Make a "dummy mic" by connecting a 150 ohm resistor between pins 2 and 3
of an XLR plug. Plug it into the interface, turn the gain up full, and
record the noise. You don't actually need to record, just read the
record level on the meter of your DAW program.

The unit sometimes generates odd blips and squeals which had me
looking at replacing it. It's also really old and was not supported
past Windows 7. I'm running 10 right now.

Most audio hardware that runs on Windows 7 will work OK on Windows 10,
but it is rather old and the PreSonus probably has better converters in
it. That in itself won't make it any quieter, but it'll probably have
lower distortion than your old interface.

The Presonus 1810 looks
like it does everything I'm used to. I know this means nothing
scientifically, but since they rate their preamps as providing
80dB of gain, I thought, hey, maybe they'll at least be quieter
than the ones I have at 60dB.

It doesn't really have 80 dB of gain. What the spec sheet says is that
it has 80 dB of gain RANGE. This is significant at the opposite end of
the scale than what you're concerned with. It means that if you have a
sensitive mic on a loud source, you can reduce the mic's output level
going into the preamp by as much as 80 dB so that it won't clip. In
reality, it means that you have about 20 dB of attenuation available to
handle loud sources.

Unless you get inside the box and measure the output of the preamp
directly, you really don't know how much gain it has. Since there's no
standard relationship between the input level (volts or dBu) of the D/A
converter and the digital output level (dBFS - what your DAW meters
read), you can't work backwards from the DAW meters to get the preamp
gain. Gain is volts out divided by volts in, not bits out divided by
volts in.

If you have a signal generator and a way to measure its output voltage,
you can measure how many millivolts (or dBu) it takes to give you 0 dBFS
out. This is a spec that's rarely published for an interface like this,
probably because the manufacturers know that most users wouldn't
understand it. If I'm writing a review, I'll measure it and put it in
the review for those who care.

When you know the sensitivity of the preamp and converter combination,
by using the sensitivity of the mic, which is a commonly published spec,
if you know how loud your source is (in dB SPL) you can calculate what
level that will give you going into the preamp. The NT-1A Sensitivity is
-31.9dB re 1 Volt/Pascal (25.00mV @ 94 dB SPL) +/- 2 dB @ 1kHz.

The good thing about the NT-1A is that is has quite low noise output
with no signal (5 dBA SPL equivalent), so the mic itself doesn't
contribute very much to the noise that the A/D converter is going to
convert to digital signal.

By the way, I don't know if this carries through the full Studio line of
PreSonus interfaces, but there's something odd with the output metering.
A friend of mine got a Studio 192 (I think that's it) to use to digitize
some tapes. He noticed, when setting the input gain from the alignment
tones on the tape, that at low frequencies, even though the level of the
tone was steady, the meters would slowly move up and down. The digital
recording was fine, it's just the meters on the output were going
bananas. I suspect that it was aliasing in the LED driver. PreSonus
never noticed it, had no idea what was causing it, and didn't care since
it didn't affect the recording.

You can watch the video he
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHHG9lzQYxc

The two meters that are steady are the input level, the two that bounce
are the on the interface output (which is also steady).


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


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

[Tobiah]

It doesn't really have 80 dB of gain. What the spec sheet says is that
it has 80 dB of gain RANGE.

Oh right. I just saw a close up of the gain knob. The preamp
gain scale goes from -15 to 65 dB. 80dB Range. Bah. You really
have to pay attention.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Tobiah wrote:
I get surprisingly clean results on things like classical guitar.
I turn the gain knobs up about 3/4. When recording quieter things
as I've described, I need to turn the gain up all the way (they
say it's 60dB) and I then hear loads of whiteish noise. What's that
trick I can use to make sure it's not coming from the mics or room?
A resistor placed correctly?

A 200 ohm resistor between pins 2 and 3 will simulate a microphone with
no signal.

But really, the NT1 isn't a very quiet microphone. It's reasonable for the
price but don't expect the kind of noise floor that you get from an MKH-20.
I wouldn't use it on clavichord.

The unit sometimes generates odd blips and squeals which had me
looking at replacing it. It's also really old and was not supported
past Windows 7. I'm running 10 right now. The Presonus 1810 looks
like it does everything I'm used to. I know this means nothing
scientifically, but since they rate their preamps as providing
80dB of gain, I thought, hey, maybe they'll at least be quieter
than the ones I have at 60dB.

Ask a legitimate sales outfit to let you try one for a week on eval. They
will hold your credit card... if you return it, they return the money.
--scott

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

[Tobiah]

But really, the NT1 isn't a very quiet microphone.

NT1-A. I was under the impression that given its high output and low
self noise that it was a phenomenal choice for the application given a
hobby budget. But I'll try the resistor trick. Maybe the mic is the
source of the noise and the high gain just exposes that.


Toby

[Tobiah]

Make a "dummy mic" by connecting a 150 ohm resistor between pins 2 and 3
of an XLR plug. Plug it into the interface, turn the gain up full, and
record the noise. You don't actually need to record, just read the
record level on the meter of your DAW program.

I'm going to go get the resistor today. Cursory search
says that metal film are the best for low noise applications.
Anyone agree?

[John Williamson]

On 09/03/2019 19:53, Tobiah wrote:
Make a "dummy mic" by connecting a 150 ohm resistor between pins 2 and
3 of an XLR plug. Plug it into the interface, turn the gain up full,
and record the noise. You don't actually need to record, just read the
record level on the meter of your DAW program.

I'm going to go get the resistor today.Â* Cursory search
says that metal film are the best for low noise applications.
Anyone agree?

They are, though it is difficult to buy any other type in small
quantities now unless they are surface mount devices.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Tobiah wrote:
Make a "dummy mic" by connecting a 150 ohm resistor between pins 2 and 3
of an XLR plug. Plug it into the interface, turn the gain up full, and
record the noise. You don't actually need to record, just read the
record level on the meter of your DAW program.

I'm going to go get the resistor today. Cursory search
says that metal film are the best for low noise applications.
Anyone agree?

It doesn't matter. But considering that the 1% metal films are about two
cents each, there's really no reason to keep anything else around.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

On 9/03/2019 3:55 PM, Tobiah wrote:
But really, the NT1 isn't a very quiet microphone.

NT1-A.Â* I was under the impression that given its high output and low
self noise that it was a phenomenal choice for the application given a
hobby budget.Â* But I'll try the resistor trick.Â* Maybe the mic is the
source of the noise and the high gain just exposes that.


Toby


I was always under the (mis?)apprehension that the NT-1A was amongst the
quieter of the large-diaphragm condensers ...

But maybe large diaphram is the type of mic needed for the particular
purpose ?

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Tobiah wrote:
But really, the NT1 isn't a very quiet microphone.

NT1-A. I was under the impression that given its high output and low
self noise that it was a phenomenal choice for the application given a
hobby budget.

Oh, it is. But foley work is about the most demanding job ever as far as
noise levels go. There's a reason why the MKH-20 costs a lot more.

But I'll try the resistor trick. Maybe the mic is the
source of the noise and the high gain just exposes that.

Noise comes from everywhere. It's in the preamp, in the microphone
electronics, and mechanically due to brownian movement in the capsule itself.
It's also in the room... you may not notice the room noise but the microphone
will. All of these need to be addressed as much as possible because they all
add up.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

Make a "dummy mic" by connecting a 150 ohm resistor between pins 2 and 3
of an XLR plug. Plug it into the interface, turn the gain up full, and
record the noise. You don't actually need to record, just read the
record level on the meter of your DAW program.

Most room noise is low frequency rumble which will over power the "white noise" on the meters.

The resistor will not have any room rumble obviously.

It would be better to compare the two noise signals with an RTA and then you can ignore the low frequency room rumble.

If you can't use an RTA and are stuck with meters, maybe an appropriate High pass filter will help.

m

[Trevor]

On 10/03/2019 9:09 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Tobiah wrote:
I'm going to go get the resistor today. Cursory search
says that metal film are the best for low noise applications.
Anyone agree?

It doesn't matter. But considering that the 1% metal films are about two
cents each, there's really no reason to keep anything else around.

Right, but it does matter. Old carbon resistors are pretty bad noise
wise, stability wise and long term reliability as well. Which is why no
one bothers with them any more.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 10/03/2019 9:09 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Tobiah wrote:
I'm going to go get the resistor today. Cursory search
says that metal film are the best for low noise applications.
Anyone agree?

It doesn't matter. But considering that the 1% metal films are about two
cents each, there's really no reason to keep anything else around.

Right, but it does matter. Old carbon resistors are pretty bad noise
wise, stability wise and long term reliability as well. Which is why no
one bothers with them any more.

Carbon comp resistors are still occasionally a win because they can handle
huge short-term transients without arcing over or overheating. You still
see them used in high power pulse applications but they actually cost more
than modern metal films.

Carbon film resistors are noisier than metal films, but the difference between
a 1% metal film and a 5% carbon is less than a quarter cent, so why bother
even keeping carbon films in stock?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Michael Beacom[_4_]]

On 2019-03-08 19:56:34 +0000, Tobiah said:



You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with
whatever mic you choose
Reading about it, the Cloudlifter if for low output dynamics or ribbons,
and doesn't pass through phantom power. Sounds like it's not right
for the NT1-A's.


Triton Audio makes a line of inline preamps like the Cloudlifter,
including one that passes phantom power. See:
https://www.tritonaudio.com/fethead-phantom.html

[Tobiah]

On 3/12/19 9:29 AM, Michael Beacom wrote:
On 2019-03-08 19:56:34 +0000, Tobiah said:



You would probably want something like a Cloudlifter in line with
whatever mic you choose
Reading about it, the Cloudlifter if for low output dynamics or ribbons,
and doesn't pass through phantom power.Â* Sounds like it's not right
for the NT1-A's.


Triton Audio makes a line of inline preamps like the Cloudlifter,
including one that passes phantom power. See:
https://www.tritonaudio.com/fethead-phantom.html



The Fethead phantom looks interesting. I'd need 2 @ $100.

[Trevor]

On 13/03/2019 12:33 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 10/03/2019 9:09 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Tobiah wrote:
I'm going to go get the resistor today. Cursory search
says that metal film are the best for low noise applications.
Anyone agree?

It doesn't matter. But considering that the 1% metal films are about two
cents each, there's really no reason to keep anything else around.

Right, but it does matter. Old carbon resistors are pretty bad noise
wise, stability wise and long term reliability as well. Which is why no
one bothers with them any more.

Carbon comp resistors are still occasionally a win because they can handle
huge short-term transients without arcing over or overheating. You still
see them used in high power pulse applications but they actually cost more
than modern metal films.

That's because they are now made in small quantities and hardly stocked
any more.



Carbon film resistors are noisier than metal films, but the difference between
a 1% metal film and a 5% carbon is less than a quarter cent, so why bother
even keeping carbon films in stock?

Precisely. They are crap and you don't save anything any more. Hard to
find a carbon microphone now either. :-)

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 13/03/2019 12:33 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Carbon film resistors are noisier than metal films, but the difference between
a 1% metal film and a 5% carbon is less than a quarter cent, so why bother
even keeping carbon films in stock?

Precisely. They are crap and you don't save anything any more. Hard to
find a carbon microphone now either. :-)

For the folks making phone chargers in China, a quarter cent can be the
difference between profit and loss, though. My margins aren't that thin.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."