naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Summary: [Nature Recordists] Re: EIN values and bits and peaks

Subject: Re: Summary: [Nature Recordists] Re: EIN values and bits and peaks
From: "Paul Jacobson" thebrunswicktwitcher
Date: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:53 pm ((PST))
Klas,

The information to do so is out there, on Raimund's site for example.

I've been using an excel spreadsheet I put together several years ago to do=
 what you are describing. I mentioned on the list at the time but the contr=
ibution was dismissed as worthless by at least one of the list guru's.

As it's a while since I did this I'm a bit foggy on the conversions, but  b=
asically what I did was to calculate the output noise based on self-noise a=
nd sensitivity using this calculation:

MicOutputNoise =3D20*LOG(((Sensitivity/1000)/0.775))-94+Self_noise

I'm not a math guru so dB units(U or A) are possibly wrong but this gives a=
 virtually identical result to the RANE table that everyone refers to.

Then convert the dB figure to a voltage:

MicOutputNoise_uV =3D0.775*10^(MicOutputNoise/20)
PreampEIN_uV =3D0.775*10^(PreampEIN/20)

"According to Raimund's site "It is important to note that both noise compo=
nents add geometrically (RMS)." The illustration on the same page (http://w=
ww.avisoft.com/tutorial_mic_recorder.htm) shows this means finding the valu=
e of the hypotenuse (c) using a^2+b^2=3Dc^2.  So take the square root of th=
e summed squares of the two voltages to find "c":

SystemNoise_uV =3DSQRT(MicOutputNoise_uV^2+PreampEIN_uV^2)

Then convert the result back to dB

SystemNoise_dB=3D20*LOG(TotalSystemNoise_uV/0.775,10)

The difference between the SystemNoise and Preamp EIN in dB indicates how m=
uch the system noise floor is degraded by the preamp.

Using your 10dB(A) and 10mV/Pa example the calculated MicOutputNoise is aro=
und -121.79 dB(A).
The two most common rules of thumb are either 6dB or 10dB margin between Mi=
c Output Noise and Preamp EIN.

For 6dB margin the minimum acceptable preamp EIN is -127.8dBu
This gives a System Noise figure of -120.82dB(A), which is 0.97dB(A) higher=
 than the Noise Output of the Mic.

For 10dB margin the minimum acceptable preamp EIN is -131.8dBu
This gives a System Noise figure of -121.37dB(A), which is 0.41dB(A) higher=
 than the Noise Output of the Mic.

If you look at a combination like MKH20 and SD702,  the margin between EIN =
and Output Noise is around 15dB, and System Noise is only 0.15dB higher tha=
n the Mic Output.

This illustrates, as Raimund observes, that ALL preamps add some noise.  Th=
e goal is to limit the noise increase to an acceptable minimum.

The other complication is that A weight doesn't accurately measure the kind=
 of electronic noise we hear in recording gear. Short term repetitive noise=
 eludes the weighting algorithm for example.

I doubt that really helps with your request for a three-dee representation =
but that is my understanding of the interaction. Someone with a deeper unde=
rstanding of the math might be able to explain better//more clearly?

cheers
Paul







On 19/12/2012, at 9:37 AM, Klas Strandberg <> wrote:

> Dan, many of the topics that go in circles here, and has for years,
> concern the relationship between 3 parameters:
> 1/ Input noise (Measured EIN??)
> 2/ Microphone output voltage (measured mV/Pa??)
> 3/ Microphone noise (measured dB(A)??)
>
> I wish that someone with a good enough mathematical skill would make
> a 3D diagram describing these relationships, perhaps also a computer
> program where you fill in 2 of the parameters and get the third.
>
> A IRL example:  If I want to buy a microphone with a self noise of 10
> dB(A) and a output of 10mV/Pa - how good (EIN) must the recorder
> perform, not to add noise?
>
> I don't think such a formula would be used a lot in such IRL matters,
> but I do think that a 3D diagram would have a great value to help
> understanding.
> (I am well aware of that such a diagram would disregard impedance and
> a few other factors, I still think it would have a great teaching value.)
>
> Or is there already such a diagram somewhere? Link?
> I have never seen any.
>
> Klas.
>
>
> At 07:07 2012-12-17, you wrote:
>>> Still, I think the "unclarity" resembles the debate decades ago, when
>>> there was a lot of talk about impedance matching, preamps and
>>> transformers. Some combinations between dynamic mic=B4s, input
>>> transformers and transistors worked, others did not, and noone
>>> actually  knew why, even though "everybody" said they did.
>>
>>
>> The frequency response and output level of a mic will change
>> depending on what kind of load it's driving. An understanding of the
>> history of audio connections might help to explain current practice.
>>
>> The original audio craft was telephony. The talker's mic had to
>> produce enough power to drive the receiver at the other end, with no
>> amplification involved. Experience taught that impedance matching
>> carried the maximum power from one point to another. Pro audio
>> adopted the practices of telephony. Thus line outputs had 600 ohm
>> impedances, and inputs 600 ohms too, "matching" and "terminating."
>>
>> Very long audio lines, meaning miles, still use terminating
>> impedances to prevent the signal from being reflected back. Very
>> high frequency lines, like video and digital audio, use terminating
>> impedances even on short cables, for the same reason.
>>
>> Where there was a "bus" that had to drive several loads, the concept
>> of "bridging" developed, tapping the voltage off a line without
>> loading it. Whereas a terminating input was 600 ohms, a bridging
>> input was perhaps 15 Kohms.
>>
>> A generation later, it was acknowledged that maximum voltage
>> transfer was a better goal than maximum power transfer, and all
>> connections gradually became bridging. In this practice, it's best
>> to have the lowest possible impedance source and a high impedance load.
>>
>> A practical professional microphone circuit has a source impedance
>> of from 50 to 200 ohms, and a load (preamp input impedance) of 2000
>> ohms or more. The factor of ten between source and load insures that
>> the voltage of the source is minimally reduced by the load, i.e.
>> less than 1 dB of loading effect. I dare say all mics sound their
>> best when bridged.
>>
>> PIP mics are a higher impedance source than the balanced
>> professional mics. They are typically 2 to 3 K ohms. That means
>> ideally input impedances of 20 or 30 K ohms. But there are practical
>> limitations to how high the input impedance of a preamp can be
>> without increasing noise, and I imagine that they are generally
>> lower than that. Perhaps someone has measured the actual input
>> impedances of some PIP mic preamp inputs.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
>> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause=
.
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
> Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
> S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
> Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
> email: 
> website: www.telinga.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>







<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
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