At 1:04 AM +0000 4/21/06, Rich Peet wrote:
>This is one thing that is worth hearing at the campouut. Rob has a
>recording chain that is the lowest noise in the biz.
>
Ha! In the QuickTime movie tests, one can hear that the HiMD pre is
still a good deal noisier than the 722's
As for the discovery (;-)), some may recall it goes back to me
claiming that I could hear pre noise from my Sharp MD recorder's mic
pre when using a Rode NT-4. Dan and Klas said this didn't make sense
to them. In an attempt to save face, I did the obvious and used a
phantom supply to power very low noise mics (Rode NT1-A's) and
conduct "listen for yourself," tests on some consumer mic pres, HiMD
among them. I would have never guessed the outcome as I was sort of
hopeful of proving the opposite!
>I am happy with what I am doing but I suspect the day will not come
>where I can compete head on with Robs low noise systems. I will be
>content to compete on a reproduced image.
Have you ever thought about what mic-pre-array performance
characteristic plays the largest role in spatial imaging with your
cube set-up? Rob D.
>
>
>--- In "Bruce Wilson"
><> wrote:
>>
>> > I estimate the EIN for the HiMD mic pres between -125dBu and -128dBu.
>> > For reference, this is almost quiet enough to amplify the signals
>> > from Rode NT1-A's (6dBA self-noise) without adding noise. (I hear
>> > the noise to be about 50% from the NT1-A mics and 50% from the HiMD
>> > pre).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|