naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: EM172 capsule frequency response

Subject: Re: EM172 capsule frequency response
From: "Paul Willison" wolfen49508
Date: Wed Feb 29, 2012 2:50 am ((PST))
Thanks Greg. =C2=A0Any pointers on wiring those(the boundries)? =C2=A0 The =
"cheap" ones do not come with a preamp...will I need that? =C2=A0Sorry for =
the 64 questions, but I'm certainly interested in trying both!



From: Gregory O'Drobinak <>
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 2:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] EM172 capsule frequency response


=C2=A0
The 'real' frequency response curves for both the EM172s and the EM173s tha=
t I
have (from Primo) show the low end as flat to 80 Hz, but I suspect that it =
goes
much lower. I've never run out of LF response in my own recordings using th=
em in
natural settings. I don't know of any other inexpensive capsules that are a=
s
good as the Primos, with perhaps one exception.

The MX391 boundary mics that were available on eBay for $26 each are equall=
y
good with a low end that goes down to 20 Hz before it starts to drop off. B=
ut
they are designed to be placed on a boundary, which helps to boost the LFs =
as
the boundary area gets larger.

My own comparisons of the Primo EM172s with the MX391s using only the PIP f=
rom
my Sony PCM-M10 to power the capsules, shows that the self-noise is compara=
ble
for both capsules but the MX391s have a more pleasant noise spectrum; the E=
M172s
have a more objectionable HF hiss to them which is more difficult to EQ out=
. The
specs say that the self noise is 14 dB-A, but to me, subjectively, I'm not =
sure
that this is true.
Both of those capsules are nearly identical in size, so if they are made we=
ll
and the preamp FETs are as low noise as possible, then I would expect the
self-noise to be quite the same, but not necessarily the same spectrum-wise=
.

It also seems that the EM172s may have 2 dB more in output level than the M=
X391s
(using the M10 PIP), but that is certainly not huge.

So by yourself a pair of each, make the appropriate adapter cables and you'=
re
still under $100 for the complete kit. It'll get you going to do some real =
work
and afterwards you can decide if you want to spend at least another $700.00=
 on
better mics. I use the AT-4022s for the 'better' set in a self-made 'SASS' =
type
boundary array.

BTW, I've heard some superb nature recordings done by John Grzinich using a=
 pair
of AT-4021s, which are the cardiod counterparts to the AT-4022 omnis. He us=
es
them in an ORTF configuration. It sounds pretty sweet to me!

Good luck in your work,

Greg

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: EM172 capsule frequency response, Paul Willison <=
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU