"so we compare noise floors equally (if thats possible) I'd say they (the
EM172s) are nearly identical with a lower noise floor above 15 Khz."
Higher noise rather than lower, the shure capsules tail off the primo is fl=
at in the same region. Thus with the shure capsule the noise tone is warm s=
ounding and the primo more prominent where our ears are the most sensitive.=
-Mike
--- In "Mike Rooke" <> wrote:
>
> WL183's may be better on the M10, the D50 two or more EM172's work very w=
ell.
> - Ive used up to 3 capsules per channel. The Shure capsule engineering is=
better or rather the capsule / mic housing is far more robust than an alum=
inium can hanging from a wire. Ive mounted EM172's inside machined brass cy=
linders.
>
> Comparing two sets of single mics I use.
>
> Shure MX391O capsule removed from its boundary housing and
> Primo EM172 mounted inside a brass cylinder to resemble the shure.
>
> Quick summary: The Shures "noise" is below 2Khz its warm, the Primos is a=
bove 2 Khz and is harsh.
>
> I use them as is, or stuffed inside silicone ears in a blimp. This negate=
s most of the noise due to the ears amplification but requires post EQ.
>
> Considering Single capsules:
>
> A single EM172 when using the D50 vs the Shure capsule at the *same* gain=
level:
> maybe I shouldn't say this but the Shure capsules sound better. Let me su=
bstantiate that.
>
> At 1Khz the EM172 exhibits 4.31dB more output than the capsule from a Shu=
re MX391O boundary mic which is essentially the same as the WL183.
>
> So the EM172 is more sensitive. However thats not the whole picture.
>
> Above 2 Khz the EM172's noise floor is 4.74dB ABOVE the Shure capsules, w=
hich means the sensitivity benefit comes at the expense of noise. This I do=
n't quite follow since by the numbers the EM172 IS lower noise than the WL1=
83, except the noise "tone" (to use Robs?) expression sounds far harsher in=
the EM172 than the WL183 which has a warmer tone.
>
> So what about matching levels... If the EM172 levels are matched to the S=
hure, so we compare noise floors equally (if thats possible) I'd say they =
(the EM172s) are nearly identical with a lower noise floor above 15 Khz.
>
> What does all the above mean in a quiet recording location? - > With no s=
ignal at 5khz your listening to the noise of the capsule, and the Shure cap=
sules will have less noise there than the Primo's.
>
> See this graph to visually check what Im talking about:-
> http://urlme.net/audio/RedShurePrimoYel.tiff
>
> Red trace is the Shure capsule, yellow is the Primo - the bumps are due t=
o environmental noise (household) - this was made at gain level 8 using the=
D50. The noise for the Shures falls off above 2Khz, yet the primo is flat,=
ok ok - so if we set levels identical where a signal t the primos is at th=
e same level when using the shures the noise floor of the Primos will defin=
ately be lower but that flat response region 2-10Khz will still be present =
and the Shure capsule will sound less harsh in that area.
>
> Thats my experience of the Primo capsule, I first used the capsule back i=
n August 2009 and sorry to say I no longer use them favoring the Shure caps=
ule "sound" and even more recently Im using Dynamic mics with the D50 in 96=
+% humidity soaking wet with condensation. Lower noise doesn't always tran=
slate to better sound.
>
> -Mike.
>
>
>
>
> --- In "Kawika" <dkuhn012001@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I am re-visiting Guatemala in January (I led a series of tours there in=
the 1980's) and want to go low-profile with recording gear, leaving behind=
SD702, MKH20 SASS, M-S set-up, and Telinga dish. I will be taking both Son=
y D50 and PCM 10 for recorders, and I'm looking at the Telinga clip-ons to =
use with either recorder for ambient sounds in quiet forest as well as mark=
et-places. Can anyone offer recent experience with this set-up?
> >
> > Here are some notes from some testing work by Rob Danielson et.al. from=
last year
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/message/40053
> >
> > and more--
> > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/message/41343
> >
> > (for Klas--I can't seem to find out much recent info from your site or =
elsewhere about these)
> >
> > Many thanks,
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > David Kuhn
> > www.soundshawaiian.com
> > david@
> > dkuhn012001@
> > 808 335 0398
> > Cell 808 651 8247
> > Mail to: PO Box 1018
> > Waimea, Kaua'i HI 96796
> > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> >
>
|