That was very enlightening. And points out just how much difference there i=
s.
I came across this on eBay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=3D3281&item=3D576767=
1174&rd=3D1
Anyone have opinions about these?
At 09:32 AM 4/14/2005, you wrote:
>First, I would like to thank Dan Dugan for lending a Sony MS957 mic
>and to Nick Roast for letting me include the FELS in the test.
>
>Below is a link to a test made as a follow-up to our discussions
>about how self noise from consumer grade (MD, HiMD, Walkman DATs etc)
>mic preamplifiers might be detracting from the spatial transparency
>in recordings made with high record level gain in quiet locations.
>Nick and others suggested that boosting a mic's output 20 dB with a
>FELS unit before the PIP mic pre could help reduce noise similar to
>the way higher mic sensitivity (effective output level) can.
>
>There was also the possibility asserted that most of today's built-in
>mic pres are "good" so one would not expect a lot quality gain using
>an external mic pre and the MD's analog line iput. I included a test
>with a Sound Devices MP2 with Rode NT1A's for this comparison.
>Sorry, I didn't have the cables I needed to run one of the other
>higher noise PIP mics through the MP2 which would have made a better
>comparison. A pair of NT1A's are in the same price range though.
>
>I guess the test can also be used to judge a particular type of
>performance between some of the mics often discussed at the entry
>level. This test assumes you're after spatial transparency in
>relatively quiet location recordings-- not to be confused foreground
>recordings of individual calls or uses in much louder urban spaces,
>etc. The Marshall VM63 mic is used only because Nick sent me a very
>compact FELS unit that works only with mono mics. Its not really a
>mic I recall us talking about before but I needed a mono battery
>powered mic which the FELS requires.
>
>Recordings were made at 16 bit PCM on the HiMD so I've kept them at
>full resolution to eliminate other variables. No EQ, of course. I
>tried to match the levels psycho-acoustically and som of the levels
>seem a little different without the headphones I used. You can still
>make distinctions, I think.
>
>The test is a BIG 33mb QuickTime movie. Sorry Dial- Uppers!
>
>http://www.uwm.edu/~type/Mic%20Preamps/Mic&PreTransparencyTests/media/Tran=
sMic&PreTestsSor3_01.mov
>
>If your browser needs a free, QuickTime plug or update:
>http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/
>
>You should be able to use "save as QT movie" with the button on the
>far right of the movie window after it fully loads. Any one up for
>making some spectral pictures? Rob D.
>
>
>--
>Rob Danielson
>Film Department
>University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|