greenmachine

http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/compon...m61_a_b_dne.pdf http://orca.st.usm.edu/~jmneal/pre_meas.htm "On average, the mics maintain a remarkably flat response which deviates less than 0.5dB up to 6kHz, transitioning to a gradual rise peaking at +1.9dB at 12.8kHz, and finally settling back to the 0dB reference slightly above 20kHz."

No, the quietest preamp won't improve a noisy microphone, you would still have a S/N of only 58 dB. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Most propably the first one, i don't know about the truth of the rumor how noisy internal MD preamps really are, if it's really worth to use a quieter, external preamp, but if you want to be on the safe side...If the microphone's noisefloor is higher than the preamp's n. depends on the microphone's sensitivity, impedance and propably many other factors. But most propably it is. I'm afraid i can't, but i can recommend you a microphone discussion group with lots of experts instead:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/micbuilders/

Obviously not, the AT803b shows a pretty strong treble boost. Both microphones have the same lowest and highest frequency response, what's happening in between isn't specified. Other manufacturers specify the frequency response deviation in between a certain range, for example +-2 dB. Audio-Technica for some reason doesn't. You have to look at the graph get closer to the whole truth. But this graph shows only the on-axis response at a certain distance. Cardioids tend to colour sounds entering the microphone from the sides and the rear less smooth and even than Omnis - the industry names this "the curtain effect". Expressed in a graph it looks roughly like that: There's also the 'proximity effect' which i mentioned above - the bass response varies for different distances. These two effects have a strong influence on the frequency response of cardioids under non-ideal, real world situations. Two reasons why i perceive omnis as more versatile. It's all explained here: http://www.dpamicrophones.com/page.php?PID=25

SP uses Atrac, not Atrac3. How do you know Atrac3+ has only been tuned for low, not for high bitrates? How do you know 'Sp is just better'? Can You hear a difference at such a high bitrate?

Exactly, i do it all the time.

I think SP's FAQ is pretty confusing and contains some vague statements. I don't agree with #6. However, my goal is not to get a 'crisp' (treble/high frequency-weighted, light in bass) sound, but rather to capture it as neutral as possible. If i want to color the sound in a certain way, i can do it afterwards in post processing. My opinion. Many people seem to play back live recordings through loudspeakers (which is actually a pretty bad idea). This way you'll get twice the room information (basically a 'virtual' room -the room in which you taped- in a 'real' room -the room where you play the recording back). Small to medium sized rooms tend to pronounce low frequencies. You have to apply some kind of bass lowering not to get it too boomy through speakers, preferrably afterwards to keep compatibility with playback through headphones.

Huh? You might get feedback in live sound reinforcement applications, but for pure recording without live monitoring there can't be any. If you use headphones for realtime monitoring and place the mics far enough apart, the risk to get feedback is still very low with any microphone.

Make sure the headphones are plugged in correctly (push the connector all the way in).

You can't simply add these voltages. What you'll get are roughly the 9 volts from the batt. box, nothing more. This should be close enough to bring the mics to their optimal performance.

No, automatic mode adjusts levels automatically, while manual mode obviously doesn't. I suggest to read page 19. It seems to be more comfortable for you to ask than to search and read by yourself.

Here's a little graph how i use the internal level system of Sony MD recorders (with batt. box for mic-in and line-in): I virtually never use the high sens. setting since my mics are already sensitive enough and thus don't need that much amplification in most cases. By using a level below 10 (mic-in) the preamp overload can't be reduced any further - line-in should be used below that point. I don't use a MZ-NH900, it could look slightly different there. I don't care about automatic track marks, they can be easily deleted afterwards.

Unity gain at the mic-in? What's that? Why do you think it's not good to use a low level setting? I think using 10/30 without attenuator for example gives 'cleaner' results than using 15/30 or 20/30 with it.

Now that appears much clearer to me, thank you for taking the time.

When you absolutely need their directional pickup pattern - they have a higher gain to feedback ratio if used properly, which is good for amplifying instruments. Did you understand the information on the dpa site?

How that? I thought the attenuator would be the 'noisy' solution?

There are several standarized stereo positioning techniques which require the use of cardioid microphones. For unobtrusive recording though, nothing beats the HRTF method in my opinion.

What you're perceiving as bass loss, thin sound or whatever you call it, is caused by the so-called 'proximity effect' of directional microphones. The closer you move from the source, the more bass you'll get, the further you move away from the source, the less bass you'll get. This pickup pattern related characteristic is independent from the price of the microphone, all cardioid microphones show it. They have a flat response at a certain distance (in this example 0.3 m) - for all other distances you need to compensate by equalisation. Omnidirectional microphones don't show this effect. This characteristic along with other general differences between directional and omnidirectional microphones is explained here: http://www.dpamicrophones.com/page.php?PID=25

If you take a look at the graph in the first link, you'll see the concequences of the so-called 'proximity effect' on the bass response of directional (cardioid) microphones. The closer you move towards the source, the more bass you'll get - the further you move from the source, the less bass you'll get. They have a relatively flat response at approx. 0.3 m. Omnis don't show this behavior and have a constant frequency response at any distance.

I've been looking for panasonic wm-60 or wm-61 capsules, but since they seem to be unavailable here in europe (?), i've decited to use the panasonic/monacor mce-2000 capsule, which is available at various german online shops for about 3-5 euros each. Maybe they're available in th UK too, just take a look. It's a miniature measurement capsule with a relatively flat frequency response from 20-20000 Hz (+- 2dB). Their specifications look very similar to the panasonic wm60/61 capsules. With a simple modification their perforance at high sound pressure levels can be significantly improved. They should accept SPLS far above 130dB now, which means you're sooner deaf than your mics will overload. I've bought more than i needed to have at least two closely matched capsules. They sound very good, the only more or less recognizable difference from larger/more expensive mics for me is their slightly worse signal to noise performance (>58 dB).

1. http://www.dpamicrophones.com/page.php?PID=25 "From the above it can be concluded that in close miking situations, the choice of a ... omni should be seriously considered. We strongly recommend to always make a habit of trying an omni first! It will often give a more natural sound, it can handle extremely high sound pressure levels, it does not suffer from proximity effect and is not that sensitive to wind, pop or handling noise!" 2. I've recently built this (using heat shrinkable tubing and omnidirectional microphones): 3. Read this http://www.dpamicrophones.com/page.php?PID=131 and experiment a lot to see what works best for you. 4. I'm not from the UK, sorry

quak i just love these little beasts

You're out of luck, this recorder has no microphone preamplifier. You'll need either a different recorder with mic-in (preferably with sensitivity setting) or an external microphone preamplifier.

hehe, i meant new topic - nevermind

dreynolds: maybe you could put your review into a new thread, it seems somewhat lost here.