So, I built two pair, and due to the odd fact that I had two slightly diffe=
rent types of capsules, I , ended up doing them a bit differently. =A0On on=
e set, I soldered the capsules to the RCA plugs because they did NOT have a=
ttached wires. =A0They had two short stiff "wires" that were intended for i=
nsertion into a computer board. =A0Because of that, I opted to solder the s=
hort wired directly to RCA plugs, as I had no wired to just twist on(my int=
ent today just being experimentation as to if they were even usable from th=
e self noise aspect). =A0Once it was done(and tested that they were working=
), I shrink tubed the whole bits up to form the "body" of the =A0mics. =A0 =
On the second pair, I just wanted to try a slightly different set of mic ca=
psules I had, but since I was not yet sure how "permanent" I wanted them, a=
nd give that they did have regular wires pre attached, I just twisted the w=
ires to the RCA plugs, and did NOT=A0shrink=A0tube them, I just wrapped
some=A0electricity tape around them to temporarily offer some support of t=
he mics. =A0 =A0Now..the strange part. =A0Once tested, the "rough" ones(I k=
now...both are very primitive compared to what you guys do), actually sound=
ed better. =A0They had slightly less self noise, and=A0definitely=A0had a b=
it more gain. =A0 Since both sets of =A0mics were on RCA plugs, and I had a=
couple of 3.5 to RCA cords, I tried different cords and got the same resul=
ts(telling me it's not the cords). =A0 My question is this...could I have d=
one something to the capsules when I soldered/heat shrunk them? =A0I was=A0=
careful=A0=A0=A0to not keep heat to them for very long, and the capsules th=
emselves never got more then warm to the touch(the solder ON the capsules t=
hemselves, that =A0held the short stiff computer board wire never melted ei=
ther), so I really would not think I damaged them, but how=A0susceptible=A0=
to heat damage in this way are they? =A0 =A0I suppose at the end of the day=
, it's more
likely to just be differences in the quality of the capsules, but I'd like=
to know if I might have done something! =A0 Thanks to anyone who can help,=
and sorry for my ignorance.
Paul
PS, the capsules used for these test runs are just inexpensive radio shack =
models. =A0Interestingly enough, BOTH sets I made using these Radio Shack c=
apsules sound better, have less noise, then the=A0commercial=A0ones I bough=
t last year!(won't say the brand, but it's been talked about on here before=
). =A0 =A0The commercial ones have MUCH more self noise, and less gain then=
either of the ones I made. =A0So, it was at least in that regard, a succes=
s. =A0 At least if I can get the process down, I suspect that decent capsul=
es will sound quite a bit better yet.
From: Avocet <>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2012 5:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Mic. self build question.
> This "run" is mainly for test/practice, I'm using all inexpensive
> parts just to make sure I have the process down first. Once I know
> what I'm doing, I'll start using better hardware.
Paul,
Nothing wrong with experimenting with cheap mics. I put up a
comparison last year which is still on my web site <stowford.org> and
nobody diagnosed one rig to have three zeros in its cost and the other
$30 equivalent. :-)
David
David Brinicombe
North Devon, UK
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
------------------------------------
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
Yahoo! Groups Links
|