naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

1. Re: iRig pre

Subject: 1. Re: iRig pre
From: "Max" oatcruncher
Date: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:19 am ((PST))
Good afternoon all,
Due to being unusually busy over the week-end I haven't as yet done any fur=
ther testing. It would appear however, from recent posts from both Vicky an=
d Raimund that there is very little to do. Clearly my memory didn't fail me=
 re LOW SENSE 10 being the quietest pre setting. All I therefore need to do=
, is to use this setting and gradually increase gain on the iRig, while rec=
ording in as quiet a situation as possible. The major problem with this is =
obvious; there are no marks on the very small thumb wheel of the iRig gain =
control, so it's going to be completely unscientific. I don't want to take =
the gain to maximum because that would be far beyond what I would use in a =
natural situation.
It might be worth going back to the beginning here, and stating the origina=
l purpose of all of this. That was to be able to use a quiet, good quality,=
 mono mic with my LS-10. The iRig supplies 48v phantom  power and allows th=
is to happen. My belief, which is now confirmed, was that the LOW SENSE 10 =
setting was the best to use in terms of quietness of internal noise. Theref=
ore all that was required was a small pre that would boost gain sufficientl=
y to be able to use this setting in all situations. It is my belief already=
 that the iRig will do what I want it to do (it has far more gain than requ=
ired), but I still intend to do the test I mention above, and will post it =
to the files section as soon as completed.
I'm very grateful to Vicky and Raimund for contributing their confirmations=
 here.
Cheers
Max




--- In  "Raimund" <> wrot=
e:
>
> > I'm always interested when practice doesn't follow theory because
> > theory should follow reality. Have you got a recording of "soft calls"
> > with different settings so I can hear what's happening? Don't tell me
> > and see if I can hear the difference. :-)
>
> David,
>
> I think that this observation still meets theory. We discussed this issue=
 here many times (for instance at  http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/natur=
erecordists/message/38171).
>
> To summarize it, the SENSE HIGH, LEVEL 2 setting will first attenuate the=
 incoming signal and then amplify it again by the same amount, which is cou=
rse nonsense (the intermediate very low signal level in the signal chain wi=
ll then degrade the noise performance).
>
> The SENSE LOW, LEVEL 10 setting on the other hand will just bypass this u=
seless additional attenuation and subsequent amplification.
>
> Regards,
> Raimund
>








<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 1. Re: iRig pre, Max <=
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