[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Good mics, medium mics, the best mics - what's the difference on

Subject: Re: Good mics, medium mics, the best mics - what's the difference on
From: madl74
Date: Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:37 am ((PDT))
> As time progresses though, and you jump over that 500 hurdle, you will re=
alise that the difference in price (luckily) brings a noticeable difference=
 to your ears as well. For me personally, it was hearing the world through =
a Neumann for the first time, and then recently through a Sanken. I don=EF=
=BF=BDt know how to describe it other than that it recalibrates your ears. =
A good microphone will do that, regardless of the cost.


A reason I would suggest for this is that mic specs are only a guide to onl=
some of the mic characteristics. A spec is essentially part of the sales
system and it only gives a partial account of quality.

Characteristics not covered in mic specs include colouration, pulse
response, enharmonic distortion and off-axis responses. It is difficult to=

quote these in figures in a reliable and consistent way, but out ears detec=

Colouration, for instance, does not feature on frequency responses. It is
standard practice to smooth the frequency response, and a common way to do=

this is to use a warble tone to measure a response curve.

Hopefully what you get by adding a zero to the cost is a cleaner sound, but=

there are no standards for this, only comparisons with trained ears, and yo=
can't sell that.

David Brinicombe

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

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