At 10:08 PM +0000 2/12/05, digidandy wrote:
> > What's Len's general opinion of the 183's? Think he would he consider
>> modifying and selling them again? He'd be able to buy them in batch
>> and match em better than out luck of the draw. Rob D.
>
>His exact reply was:
>
>
>"The price that you'd pay for a pair of Shure R-183 capsules and C-122
>cables approaches what a set of Core Sound Binaural microphones would
>cost, and the CSBs have a much flatter and wider frequency response
>and much, much wider dynamic range. The Shures have a 5 dB peak at
>around 10 KHz and that will be clearly audible. The CSBs also are
>considerably smaller and more rugged than the Shures. The only
>specification that the R-183 betters the CSBs is self noise."
>
>
>Also, you mention matching them. What's the odds of me buying two
>"wildly" different WL183s if ordering them from, say, B&H in NY?
>
I haven't used Len's CSB's. Perhaps some nature recordists have.
Extending the dynamic range of a capsule can be useful for some
applications, but this spec is not a top priority for most nature and
ambient locations. The highest sensitivity Panasonic omni capsule I'm
aware of, the WM-61A, has similar sensitivity to the Shure 183, but
its self noise is about 10dBA higher. Len may have a line on some
very different capsules, but I notice that most of the user comments
are from music tapers where higher noise would be less of an issue.
The four 183's capsules I've personally soldered-up have been within
1dB of matched gain. There are some frequency response differences
but they don't leap out.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|