Dan, you wrote,
> Raimund, you wrote,
>
> >I will use a sine sweep played through a portable CD player. A sine swee=
p
> >would probably better suited because it could be difficult to distinguis=
h
> >between emitted noise and the ambient/self noise.
>
> I dunno, it's harder to interpret, harder to display a sweep. I'd use
> pink noise turn off the source for part of each setup to get a
> recording of the ambience. Then you ignore the parts of the response
> where you don't have 10 dB or better s/n.
Yes, there are various approaches for measuring frequency responses. The
noise approach is definitely easier to interpret. The sine sweep approach w=
ould
require spectrographic analysis. Though it would even be possible to use a
simple spectrum display for analyzing a short linear sine sweep (as long as=
the
spectra are computed from a single sweep and without applying any weighting
windows as Hamming or something similar).
So, perhaps I will prepare a CD that contains both sine sweeps and short
noise bursts.
Raimund
--
GMX ProMail (250 MB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS, Virenschutz, 2,99 EUR/Monat...)
jetzt 3 Monate GRATIS + 3x DER SPIEGEL +++ http://www.gmx.net/derspiegel ++=
+
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
>From Tue Mar 8 18:26:56 2005
Message: 19
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2004 04:44:05 -0800 (PST)
From: umashankar <>
Subject: Re: testing paras (was: Introduction)
i use a log sine sweep method for measuring the
acoustics of a space. You convolve with an inverse of
the sweep to generate an impulse response of the room
or outdoor space or whatever. there is purpose made
software called aurora which does this. probably it
can be used for microphone measurements too.
umashankar
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search - Find what you=92re looking for faster
http://search.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
>From Tue Mar 8 18:26:56 2005
Message: 18
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 22:13:58 +1300
From: grantfinlay <>
Subject: Re: UPGRADE OF ME 67
>
Just thought i'd point out that ONLY the early versions of the mkh816
have a different connector, it's called a "tuchel" it's a sort of screw
locking early xlr, has nothing to do with being "T" powered, but is
just an old school connector.
(you can get "T" powered 12 volt mics with either a 3 pin xlr or the
tuchel connector, depends on the age)
You can get ph48 to T power converters from any reputable location
sound supplier, normally they are enclosed in a xlr barrel connector
and are around $25usd. So don't be put off by a T powered mike, also
the tuchel connectors can also be bought from most of the same
retailers.
Would just like to clarify that "T power" is a different way of
powering the mic, switching your mixer to 12v phantom will not work!
Grant Finlay
> More MKH 816's on ebay are T powered than
> are phantom powered. Make sure and check if considering one, it's not
> just different powering, but different connectors.
>
> That's actually something to be aware of. All current MKH require
> phantom power, no internal battery option as you have with ME.
>
> Walt
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|