Anybody try these? http://www.shinybox.com/index.php (click on condenser
mikes.)
Whether you have or not, I have afew questions that may relate to ribbons in
general.

1. A load of 1000 ohms is recommended. Can I obtain this simply by
paralleling the pre's input with a 1000 ohm resistor?

2. No load capacitance is specified. ??? Wouldn't it be critical to this
dynamical system?

3. Shiny Box offers installation of a transformer in the mic body, as a
rather expensive mod, which allegedly smooths the frequency response. Is
there a generic rationale for this, or just something funny he's pulling
with these mics? I don't see how it would be productive to change the output
impedance.

4. The "46" has a smaller body than a "23", and allegedly extended frequency
response, with less proximity effect.
a. Is there a generic fact about the size of ribbon mic bodies that applies
here?
b. I assume that with a transducer as delicate as a ribbon, this type of mic
is best used for distance miking. Wouldn't it be crazy to risk use of one at
a distance where the proximity effect is active?

5. As passive devices with large surface transducers, the self noise is
probably not significant. However, the low output does emphasize pre noise.
In use, how do ribbons compare to condensers as far as noise measured at the
pre out:?

6. Is there a criticality to construction of ribbons, exceeding that of
German condenser knockoffs, that limits how good they can be for $150 ?

TIA,
Bob Morein

"soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...
[snip]

I've answered this one:

5. As passive devices with large surface transducers, the self noise is
probably not significant. However, the low output does emphasize pre
noise. In use, how do ribbons compare to condensers as far as noise
measured at the pre out:?

I have done a little Googling, and learned that self noise is a problem.

Interesting link:
http://www.harmony-central.com/Recor...y/RSM_2-1.html

On Thu, 11 May 2006 04:22:44 -0400, "soundhaspriority"
wrote:


"soundhaspriority" wrote in message
m...
[snip]

I've answered this one:

5. As passive devices with large surface transducers, the self noise is
probably not significant. However, the low output does emphasize pre
noise. In use, how do ribbons compare to condensers as far as noise
measured at the pre out:?

I have done a little Googling, and learned that self noise is a problem.

Any info on the mechanism that generates it? It is hard to see how it
could be that far above thermal noise given what is in it.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"soundhaspriority"


1. A load of 1000 ohms is recommended.

** Same as for any 200 ohm mic.


2. No load capacitance is specified. ???

** No need to.

Same as for any 200 ohm mic.


3. Shiny Box offers installation of a transformer in the mic body, as a
rather expensive mod, which allegedly smooths the frequency response.


** There is a no-name tranny in their already.

They offer two up grades, the C and L models.


4. The "46" has a smaller body than a "23", and allegedly extended
frequency response, with less proximity effect.
a. Is there a generic fact about the size of ribbon mic bodies that
applies here?
b. I assume that with a transducer as delicate as a ribbon, this type of
mic is best used for distance miking. Wouldn't it be crazy to risk use of
one at a distance where the proximity effect is active?


** Hand held vocal mics have been made by Beyer using ribbons.

The spec on that site for 165 dB SPL is absurd.



5. As passive devices with large surface transducers, the self noise is
probably not significant.

** Can be - ribbons are typically low output mics.


6. Is there a criticality to construction of ribbons,

Of course.




......... Phil

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 11 May 2006 04:22:44 -0400, "soundhaspriority"
wrote:


"soundhaspriority" wrote in message
om...
[snip]

I've answered this one:

5. As passive devices with large surface transducers, the self noise is
probably not significant. However, the low output does emphasize pre
noise. In use, how do ribbons compare to condensers as far as noise
measured at the pre out:?

I have done a little Googling, and learned that self noise is a problem.

Any info on the mechanism that generates it? It is hard to see how it
could be that far above thermal noise given what is in it.

I believe the given mechanism is thermal, elevated by the extremely high
gain to line level.

All I can say is I heard a 23 up against a AT3035 and AT4033
for female vox and I thought the singer sounded more
"on mic" from about 2' off the 23 than she did singing
a lot closer to the AT mikes. On the 23 she sounded more
natural and intimate, too. The ATs gave a more processed
sound. After hearing the comparison, I want to get a
chinese ribbon. Yeah, the chinese ones I'm sure aren't
as good as the more expensive ribbons, but I guess they
still have the ribbon character.
The way I'd compare what I heard is the ATs sounded
like for use with pop music and the ribbon sounded
like something for blues or jazz.

"soundhaspriority" wrote in message


Anybody try these? http://www.shinybox.com/index.php
(click on condenser mikes.)
Whether you have or not, I have afew questions that may
relate to ribbons in general.

1. A load of 1000 ohms is recommended. Can I obtain this
simply by paralleling the pre's input with a 1000 ohm
resistor?

Yes. The easiest way to do this involves a soldering iron and a few mods to
a Hosa polarity inverter adaptor. Basically, you rewire the jumpers between
pins 2 & 3 so that the inversion is gone, and then solder the 1K resistor
between pins 2 and 3. I mention the Hosa polarity inverter because its far
easier to find than the Switchcraft M/F empty shell adaptor.

2. No load capacitance is specified. ??? Wouldn't it be
critical to this dynamical system?

Capacitance is only significant when its impedance within the audible range
is less than 10 times any parallel resistance. Three relevant resistances
are 13K (the approximate maximum input impedance of a mic pre with phantom
power), 2 K (the approximate input impedance of many mic preamps, and 600
ohms.

I did a little spread sheet and came up with the following capacitances for
20 KHz and the three resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF

The capacitance for the highest resistance is equivalent to a mic cable
about 100 foot long.


3. Shiny Box offers installation of a transformer in the
mic body, as a rather expensive mod, which allegedly
smooths the frequency response. Is there a generic
rationale for this, or just something funny he's pulling
with these mics? I don't see how it would be productive
to change the output impedance.

Most ribbon mics have built-in step-up transformers because a ribbon mic is
usually a very low-Z, low output device.

I'm going to take a wild guess and speculate that the three options net out
to be:

Standard model mic - Chinese generic matching transformer
"C" model mic - Cinemag matching transformer
"L" model mic - Lundahl matching transformer

conspiciously missing is the "J" model.

4. The "46" has a smaller body than a "23", and allegedly
extended frequency response, with less proximity effect.

a. Is there a generic fact about the size of ribbon mic
bodies that applies here?

I suspect the body was lengthened to house a longer ribbon.

b. I assume that with a transducer as delicate as a
ribbon, this type of mic is best used for distance
miking. Wouldn't it be crazy to risk use of one at a
distance where the proximity effect is active?

Ever hear of external pop filters? ;-)

5. As passive devices with large surface transducers, the
self noise is probably not significant. However, the low
output does emphasize pre noise. In use, how do ribbons
compare to condensers as far as noise measured at the pre
out:?

Depends on the matching transformer. Generally, ribbon mics have at least as
low output as regular dynamic, which in turn generally have low output
compared to condensor mics.

6. Is there a criticality to construction of ribbons,
exceeding that of German condenser knockoffs, that limits
how good they can be for $150 ?

Yup.

"Arny Krueger"

Capacitance is only significant when its impedance within the audible
range is less than 10 times any parallel resistance. Three relevant
resistances are 13K (the approximate maximum input impedance of a mic pre
with phantom power), 2 K (the approximate input impedance of many mic
preamps, and 600 ohms.

I did a little spread sheet and came up with the following capacitances
for 20 KHz and the three resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF


** All WILDLY wrong numbers !!

The "correct" values a

1320 pF, 390 pF and 60 pF.

C = 1 / ( 2. pi. F. R )


The capacitance for the highest resistance is equivalent to a mic cable
about 100 foot long.


** Nope - about 1 foot long.

A totally silly and pointless calc.

Arny's premise is false - again.

Yawnnnn ......



......... Phil

I did a little spread sheet and came up with the following
capacitances for 20 KHz and the three resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF

Arny, why didn't you round off these values?

"William Sommer******"

I did a little spread sheet and came up with the following
capacitances for 20 KHz and the three resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF

Arny, why didn't you round off these values?



** Maybe Arny was having an attack of digititis ....






........ Phil

"Phil Allison" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger"

Capacitance is only significant when its impedance
within the audible range is less than 10 times any
parallel resistance. Three relevant resistances are 13K
(the approximate maximum input impedance of a mic pre
with phantom power), 2 K (the approximate input
impedance of many mic preamps, and 600 ohms. I did a little spread sheet
and came up with the
following capacitances for 20 KHz and the three
resistances: 600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF


** All WILDLY wrong numbers !!

That is true. Thanks for the general correction.

The "correct" values a

1320 pF, 390 pF and 60 pF.

almost, see below.

C = 1 / ( 2. pi. F. R )

You forgot the factor of 10 in your equation, Phil.

The true equation is:

C = 1 / ( 20 * pi * F * R )

Your math may be off a tad as well, as I get:

1326 pF, 398 pF and 61 pF.

I'll put my money on the error being in your estimation of Pi.

But thanks for the check-out. ;-)

"Phil Allison" wrote in message
...
I did a little spread sheet and came up with the following capacitances
for 20 KHz and the three resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF


** All WILDLY wrong numbers !!

The "correct" values a

1320 pF, 390 pF and 60 pF.

C = 1 / ( 2. pi. F. R )

Also wrong. The correct values are 13.2nF, 3.98nF and 612pF

Meindert

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
message

I did a little spread sheet and came up with the
following capacitances for 20 KHz and the three
resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF

Arny, why didn't you round off these values?

Quick cut-and-paste from Excel.

Also very wrong as Phil correctly pointed out

Reworked answers:

600 ohms 1326 pF
1,000 ohms 398 pF
13,000 ohms 61 pF

"Meindert Sprang"

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF


** All WILDLY wrong numbers !!

The "correct" values a

1320 pF, 390 pF and 60 pF.

C = 1 / ( 2. pi. F. R )

Also wrong. The correct values are 13.2nF, 3.98nF and 612pF

Meindert


** I was expecting some ****WIT to say tat.

Go read Arny's post again.

His dodgy premise was Xc = 10 x R at 20kHz




........ Phil

"Arny Krueger"

** All WILDLY wrong numbers !!

That is true. Thanks for the general correction.

The "correct" values a

1320 pF, 390 pF and 60 pF.

almost, see below.

C = 1 / ( 2. pi. F. R )

You forgot the factor of 10 in your equation, Phil.


** Not at all.

I supplied the general equation for Xc.

One inputs R as required.



The true equation is:

C = 1 / ( 20 * pi * F * R )

Your math may be off a tad as well, as I get:

1326 pF, 398 pF and 61 pF.

I'll put my money on the error being in your estimation of Pi.

But thanks for the check-out. ;-)



** Love to see Arny's collection of mic leads.

Specially the 1 foot ones.

LOL



........ Phil

"Phil Allison" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger"

** All WILDLY wrong numbers !!

That is true. Thanks for the general correction.

The "correct" values a

1320 pF, 390 pF and 60 pF.

almost, see below.

C = 1 / ( 2. pi. F. R )

You forgot the factor of 10 in your equation, Phil.


** Not at all.

I supplied the general equation for Xc.

One inputs R as required.



The true equation is:

C = 1 / ( 20 * pi * F * R )

Your math may be off a tad as well, as I get:

1326 pF, 398 pF and 61 pF.

I'll put my money on the error being in your estimation
of Pi. But thanks for the check-out. ;-)



** Love to see Arny's collection of mic leads.

Specially the 1 foot ones.

LOL

I actually do have a 1 foot mic lead, Phil. It's a polarity inverter
implemented as a cable for mechanical & durability reasons. It's on the mic
under the piano at church, so that it has the same polarity as the PZM on
top.

"Arny Krueger"

** Love to see Arny's collection of mic leads.

Specially the 1 foot ones.

LOL

I actually do have a 1 foot mic lead, Phil.


** An adaptor lead does not qualify as a mic lead.





........ Phil

On Thu, 11 May 2006 08:27:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I actually do have a 1 foot mic lead, Phil. It's a polarity inverter
implemented as a cable for mechanical & durability reasons. It's on the mic
under the piano at church, so that it has the same polarity as the PZM on
top.

And it's been blessed!

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Thu, 11 May 2006 08:27:05 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

I actually do have a 1 foot mic lead, Phil. It's a
polarity inverter implemented as a cable for mechanical
& durability reasons. It's on the mic under the piano at
church, so that it has the same polarity as the PZM on
top.

And it's been blessed!

Hmm. It's almost like we're watching Paul Packer morph into Art Sackman.
;-)

Arny Krueger wrote:
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in
message

I did a little spread sheet and came up with the
following capacitances for 20 KHz and the three
resistances:

600 ohms 0.066314561 uF
2,000 ohms 0.019894368 uF
13,000 ohms 0.003060672 uF

Arny, why didn't you round off these values?

Quick cut-and-paste from Excel.

Also very wrong as Phil correctly pointed out

Reworked answers:

600 ohms 1326 pF
1,000 ohms 398 pF
13,000 ohms 61 pF

and the correct resistance number to use is the output Z of the mic
which is typically less than 600 Ohms which is why cable C is typically
not an issue..

Mark

On Thu, 11 May 2006 06:56:36 -0400, wrote
(in article .com):

All I can say is I heard a 23 up against a AT3035 and AT4033
for female vox and I thought the singer sounded more
"on mic" from about 2' off the 23 than she did singing
a lot closer to the AT mikes. On the 23 she sounded more
natural and intimate, too. The ATs gave a more processed
sound. After hearing the comparison, I want to get a
chinese ribbon. Yeah, the chinese ones I'm sure aren't
as good as the more expensive ribbons, but I guess they
still have the ribbon character.
The way I'd compare what I heard is the ATs sounded
like for use with pop music and the ribbon sounded
like something for blues or jazz.


Given the gain of a ribbon mic, I find that a hyperbolic statement.
Even a Royer, who make some of the best ribbon mics these days, would find a
two foot distance a problem unless the vocalist was a screaming operatic
soprano.

My Beyer m160 wouldn't even be the right choice for that.

Sorry, just VERY difficult to believe.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com