At 11:13 PM +0200 9/4/05, Klas Strandberg wrote:
> >
>>Pardon my persistence. Are you _not_ saying that 14dBA self noise
>>will serve as a reference for a mic used with NH900 mic pre,
>>regardless of mic sensitivity?
>
>I'm still not convinced that we talk about the same thing....?
I think I read "too much" into your post. Sorry.
I do understand now. I guess it still comes down
to continuing to test specific combinations of
mics with the HIMD pre. The more I try to apply
table #3=A0 http://www.rane.com/note148.htm , the
more contradictions I come across.
My personal guess is that one can use a very
quiet phantom powered mic with a Rolls and a HiMD
pre and and get very little pre noise if its
sensitivity is about 10mV/Pa and higher.
I agree there are many better options than low
output electret mics but we need specific models
to suggest. There are about 8 condenser mics
candidates from $125-300/pair with 15-19dB(A) and
10-22 mV/Pa -- some of them very compact, some,
ever versatile omnis. A pair of SM-58's and
MD-421's might be good to add too. Eric B and I
are starting to design the test. A dealer who
carries most of the brands who willing to let us
return about $3000 of immaculate mics after
testing them over 3-4 days would be a huge boon
at this stage. Rob D.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
"Microphones are not ears,
Loudspeakers are not birds,
A listening room is not nature."
Klas Strandberg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|