naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

1. Re: iRig pre

Subject: 1. Re: iRig pre
From: "" m_pesente
Date: Sat Jan 5, 2013 5:17 am ((PST))








Hi Raimund,
a few days ago I posted a comparative file for IrigPre Vs. Art Phantom 2 Pr=
o Power 48v, both fed the AT3032. Below are the links to the results (swf a=
nd wave files) which, however, if not equal, seem to be a bit in favor of t=
he IRigPre. I used a Sony M10 with IRigPre on Line IN and ArtPhantom2Pro on=
 Mic IN, matched direcly during recording, no in post production.
On this practical test it seems the IrigPre perfoms not so bad.
Am I wrong in something, some connection or something else?

Thanks.
Regards.

Marco Pesente





https://dl.dropbox.com/u/10964978/ArtPh2Pro-AT3032_vs_IRigPre-AT3032.swf

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/10964978/ArtPh2Pro%2BAT3032_vs_IRigPre%2BAT3032.wa=
v


--- In  "Raimund"  wrote:
>
> > In theory the IRig should be much quieter?
>
> Acording to my measurements, the iRig should be much noisier (EIN -113dBu=
) than the mic preamps of both the SONY PCM-M10 and the Olympus LS 5/10/11 =
recorders (EIN -122dBu).
>
> So, in my perspective it does not make much sense to use the iRig with a =
decent field recorder. If phantom power was required, one could also use a =
simple external phantom power supply box (or maybe use the phantom power pr=
ovided by the iRig and bypass it's preamp).
>
> Regards,
> Raimund
>








<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