Hi David,
I'm having great difficulty posting this evening; I've been trying to reply=
to Keith for hours without success. I'll post my reply to him on the end o=
f this, just in case.
OK, I appreciate your reply and the extra input you've given. One thing I'm=
assuming about this mic, is that the decoding is done internally. At this =
point in time my technical knowledge is limited, but as there's no mention =
of having to decode, I'm guessing it won't need to be done. In a way I hope=
it DOES have to be done, because it would be something to learn and play w=
ith in Audition! But as I've said already, I'm not really expecting much fo=
r such a dirt cheap mic, but it was the m/s spec that rather intrigued me. =
Time will tell.
Cheers
Max
--- In "Avocet" <> wrote:
>
> > What do YOU make of the specs? It's so cheap that I'm tempted to buy
> > one whatever, to try with my LS-10.
>
> Max,
>
> It is likely to be value for money, take that as you will. :-) As a
> kickabout mic or for putting on idents, fine, but don't expect much
> with those specs.
>
> The stated noise level is high, whatever weighting is used but I would
> have thought that they would have stated A-weighting if that is what
> they mean. Witn no info, I'd expect a "best case" test. They are
> unlikely to publish a "worst case" test.
>
> The output worries me at 5.6mV/Pa which is low for any mic. With quiet
> sounds like nature recording, the input noise of any affordable
> recorder will probably be audible, even over the 25dB mic spec.
>
> As a music mic, the max SPL of 110 dB rules it out for close miking of
> instruments or even voices. It may be bad for handling noise and prone
> to wind as well due to the fig-8 reponse.
>
> You can't easily separate out the M cardioid capsule so you will
> always have an all-round pickup from the fig-8.
>
> David
>
> David Brinicombe
> North Devon, UK
> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
>
|