[Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[Laurent Wermenlinger]

I am in the process of acquiring a Surround Mic. Ideally with the Ambisonic 
technology. Has anyone ever used the Core Sound Tetramic and if so, could you 
provide a evaluation. Thank you.

Laurent   
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

[Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Richard Lee]

Just a short note about noise.

While the ST450 is slightly quieter than TetraMic, in practice, TetraMic 
noise has never been a problem when Recording Music .. even in very quiet 
studios.

Paul Hodges recorded his son in the Warehouse, a well known studio in 
London, so you can judge for yourself.

http://ambisonic.info/audio/paulhodges/others.html
http://ambisonic.info/tetramic/samples.html
http://ambisonic.info/tetramic/results.html

I wouldn't use TetraMic for recording distant bird calls in the Norfolk 
salt marshes .. but I wouldn't use a ST450, or even a Mk4, for that either 
8>D

In case it isn't obvious, my completely biased opinion is that the Mk4 
Soundfield is the best microphone of the last Millenium while TetraMic 
holds that position in this Millenium.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 11/01/2013 08:05 PM, Laurent Wermenlinger wrote:

I am in the process of acquiring a Surround Mic. Ideally with the
Ambisonic technology. Has anyone ever used the Core Sound Tetramic
and if so, could you provide a evaluation. Thank you.


if you can live with flimsy connectors and four separate phantom power 
adapters, its price/performance ratio is hard to beat. for me, it's too 
noisy for soft nature ambience recordings or very soft music in the far 
field, but for everything else it's great.


i prefer its unequalised sound over that of the ST450, which costs about 
five times as much. the st450 however is a lot more rugged and slightly 
quieter.


about 2 years ago, i was able to get an st450 prototype for evaluation 
and ran it against a tetramic: 
http://stackingdwarves.net/download/TetraMic_vs_ST450/


since then, i have finally acquired an st450 for critical main 
microphone purposes, but the tetramic remains a valuable addition to my 
toolbox.


you can check out the resurrected ambisonia.com for a number of tetramic 
recordings.




--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[umashankar manthravadi]

brahma would be an even cheaper alternative. it is not field tested yet, but it 
comes with a simple box with four xlr outs, powered by phantom or by a nine 
volt battery.
 
umashankar
 
> Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 20:18:38 +0100
> From: netti...@stackingdwarves.net
> To: sursound@music.vt.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic
> 
> On 11/01/2013 08:05 PM, Laurent Wermenlinger wrote:
> > I am in the process of acquiring a Surround Mic. Ideally with the
> > Ambisonic technology. Has anyone ever used the Core Sound Tetramic
> > and if so, could you provide a evaluation. Thank you.
> 
> if you can live with flimsy connectors and four separate phantom power 
> adapters, its price/performance ratio is hard to beat. for me, it's too 
> noisy for soft nature ambience recordings or very soft music in the far 
> field, but for everything else it's great.
> 
> i prefer its unequalised sound over that of the ST450, which costs about 
> five times as much. the st450 however is a lot more rugged and slightly 
> quieter.
> 
> about 2 years ago, i was able to get an st450 prototype for evaluation 
> and ran it against a tetramic: 
> http://stackingdwarves.net/download/TetraMic_vs_ST450/
> 
> since then, i have finally acquired an st450 for critical main 
> microphone purposes, but the tetramic remains a valuable addition to my 
> toolbox.
> 
> you can check out the resurrected ambisonia.com for a number of tetramic 
> recordings.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jörn Nettingsmeier
> Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487
> 
> Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
> Tonmeister VDT
> 
> http://stackingdwarves.net
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131102/c726ffcd/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Eric Carmichel]

Greetings,
RE

**I am in the process of acquiring a Surround Mic. Ideally with the Ambisonic 
technology. Has anyone ever used the Core Sound Tetramic and if so, could you 
provide a evaluation. Thank you.
**Laurent


**if you can live with flimsy connectors and four separate phantom power 
adapters, its price/performance ratio is hard to beat. for me, it's too noisy 
for soft nature ambience recordings or very soft music in the far field, but 
for everything else it's great.**

**brahma would be an even cheaper alternative. it is not field tested yet, but 
it comes with a simple box with four xlr outs, powered by phantom or by a nine 
volt battery.**


Eric C's two cents worth:
I've been using a TetraMic in the field and with very good results. I have to 
agree about the noise. It might be fair to state (if this is true) that 
Ambisonic mics, in general, tend to be noisier because the noise of four 
capsules is additive. That is, noise isn't averaged or subtracted as with 
correlation measures made with multiple mics. I don't use FFT filtering (too 
many artifacts), and correlation measures would sort-of defeat the purpose of 
each elements ability to pick up 'different' (uncorrelated) sounds. But the IR 
cal method would allow the TetraMic to be used as a sound power probe--a very 
interesting concept.

I suppose the flimsy connectors are needed to keep size small? Something like 
the Game Boy connector (later to be used as FireWire connect) might be more 
rugged, but not circular (thus making it more difficult to machine the mic's 
body). One does have to be careful with connectors and wires when using a 
TetraMic.

The link and video regarding the Brahma was interesting, but seemed a lot like 
the TetraMic in concept (which, in turn, based on work of Gerzon et al). Both 
manufacturers make clear reference to the origins of their respective mics. My 
question regarding the Brahma is that of cost. While mic elements alone aren't 
terribly expensive, the cost of labor can be high. Careful calibration is 
labor-intensive, and this might be sacrificed if production or demand booms. 
Words like 'cheaper alternative' are vague (don't mean to be rude): Should the 
buyer expect to spend $200, $600, ?? I am looking forward to the availability 
of the Brahma, but would like more info regarding actual price and anticipated 
release date. Thanks.

Best regards,
Eric C. (alias El Diode in my electronics classes)
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Michael Chapman]

>
>
> Eric C's two cents worth:



> I suppose the flimsy connectors are needed to keep size small? Something
> like the Game Boy connector (later to be used as FireWire connect) might
> be more rugged, but not circular (thus making it more difficult to machine
> the mic's body). One does have to be careful with connectors and wires
> when using a TetraMic.
>

The ideal connector (for whatever tetrahedral) would (IMHO) be CAT-5.
You can get 4 channels of audio and phantom down CAT-5.

The phantom needs to be a reasonable voltage (e.g. 48V, and not 5V) for
reasonable cable runs.

CAT-5 plugs and sockets have a reputation of being wobbly, but NEUTRIK
make bulletproof ones (housed in standard metal, click-lock, XLR sleeves).

Have no connection with any manufacturer ... except as a customer.

Michael

PS The wonders of recording with fifty metres of CAT-5 lead have to be
experienced !!!




___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[John Leonard]

Just to echo the others, really. The TetraMic has its faults, but at the price, 
it can't be beaten, although it looks as though the Brahma (prices are on the 
Kickstarter site, Eric C) will run it close. I'm hoping for a demo model quite 
soon, at which point I'll be able to do comparisons.

Having been through most of the available tetrahedral arrays, I now only have 
the two: a TetraMic, which I use mainly for indoor music work, at which it 
excels, and the ST450, which I use mainly for outdoor effects work, at which it 
excels.

There are plenty of opinions regarding the TetraMic, on this list, Gearslutz 
and JWSound - quite a lot of them written by me, so do a search and you should 
find them.

Regards,

John

On 1 Nov 2013, at 19:05, Laurent Wermenlinger  
wrote:

> I am in the process of acquiring a Surround Mic. Ideally with the Ambisonic 
> technology. Has anyone ever used the Core Sound Tetramic and if so, could you 
> provide a evaluation. Thank you.
> 
> Laurent 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Fons Adriaensen]

On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 11:13:57AM -0700, Eric Carmichel wrote:

> It might be fair to state (if this is true) that Ambisonic mics,
> in general, tend to be noisier because the noise of four capsules
> is additive. That is, noise isn't averaged or subtracted as with
> correlation measures made with multiple mics.

In fact it *is*, you gain in S/N ratio by combining the mic
signals in the A/B matrix. The W signal will actually be better
than any of the individual capsules over most of the frequency
range (but unfortunately it also requires some boost above 1kHz
or so). 

Most of the noise will be in the X,Y,Z components as these 
typically require extra gain, the capsules usually being
subcardioid (i.e. the first order component is smaller than
the zero-order one, and needs to be amplified to match).

The weak point of the Tetramic is indeed the rather flimsy
cables. If you find a suitable piece of 5 core + screen
flexible cable, the thing to do is to make your own
cable with a mini-XLR on the mic end and a full size XLR-6M
on the other, going into a single box with the four phantom
adaptors.

Ciao,

-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[Fons Adriaensen]

On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 08:51:24PM +, John Leonard wrote:
 
> Having been through most of the available tetrahedral arrays,
> I now only have the two: a TetraMic, which I use mainly for
> indoor music work, at which it excels,

Confirmed. 

I wonder if anyone ever tried a Tetramic at the focal point of
a parabolic reflector (the Z-axis aligned with the direction
pointed to). Then if you keep the e.g. X-axis horizontal and
decode to a virtual stereo mic, you should get an 'enlarged
stereo' of the remote sound. 

Given its small size, the Core Sound Tetramic should be ideal
for such a setup.

The same thing is routinely done with radio waves - some large
parabolic antennas used for satellite reception have outputs
equivalent to W,X,Y, with the latter two used to make the antenna
track the source (by a servo loop that tries to maintain zero X
and Y, using W as the phase reference).

Ciao,


-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[len moskowitz]

Laurent,

You can find many user comments about TetraMic on our User Comments web 
page:


 http://core-sound.com/TetraMic/11.php


Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of TetraMic

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 11/02/2013 08:51 PM, Michael Chapman wrote:


PS The wonders of recording with fifty metres of CAT-5 lead have to be
experienced !!!


absolutely. we just used an eigenmike (2nd version, with the handle) off 
of a 75m cat6 lead, and it was very convenient. i flew it upside-down on 
the neutrik ethercon, with a thin safety line attached to both cable and 
mic body just in case. worked like a charm, now that mh acoustics 
finally got their act together and fixed the cable driver (the first 
eigenmike was horrible in that respect)...


now if somebody made an analog tetramic-to-CAT5 interface like the 
insta-snake, small box about the size of the handle of an sm58, one end 
with 6pin mini-xlr and maybe a rubber gasket to hold the tetramic, four 
balancing transformers/ppas to match the twisted pair, and a nice 
ethercon at the end, i would order it right now. and with the ethercon, 
the shield could be properly wired to the connector sleeve, which i'd 
find more robust than the instasnake magic...


i'm using a 4-core with the tetra right now, but i'm still depending on 
the flimsy split and the four ugly ppas (well, each of them looks good, 
but certainly not a bunch of four), all in plain sight... not the most 
relaxing setup for a recording where you usually can't get to the 
microphone easily.


--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Michael Chapman]

> On 11/02/2013 08:51 PM, Michael Chapman wrote:
>
>> PS The wonders of recording with fifty metres of CAT-5 lead have to be
>> experienced !!!
>
> absolutely. we just used an eigenmike (2nd version, with the handle) off
> of a 75m cat6 lead, and it was very convenient. i flew it upside-down on
> the neutrik ethercon, with a thin safety line attached to both cable and
> mic body just in case. worked like a charm, now that mh acoustics
> finally got their act together and fixed the cable driver (the first
> eigenmike was horrible in that respect)...
>
> now if somebody made an analog tetramic-to-CAT5 interface like the
> insta-snake, small box about the size of the handle of an sm58, one end
> with 6pin mini-xlr and maybe a rubber gasket to hold the tetramic, four
> balancing transformers/ppas to match the twisted pair, and a nice
> ethercon at the end, i would order it right now. and with the ethercon,
> the shield could be properly wired to the connector sleeve, which i'd
> find more robust than the instasnake magic...

> J�rn Nettingsmeier

Mmmm   I tried 'nudging' Len years back: Mainly laziness, but also a
moral feeling that it is his product and he should have first bite at
making the accessories.
Then i ordered some bits off him to start making one, and (IIRC) he wished
me well and even suggested i should think of commercialising it if it
worked   . . .  (So all credit for his positive and open-minded response.)

I had a young student (well younger than me) and we had this scheduled,
but more interesting projects intervened. (I lack 3-D vision for close
objects, which makes fiddling with micro-connections 'challenging';-)>

Anyway to the point:

The PP units invert the signal.
Can this be avoided (not against inversion, but see next) ?
The whole project becomes much easier (naìvely) if one has only one 48V
to 5V converter.
Is that a realistic possibility?  You've obviously considered this!

Still have this as an ambition  so any other users' comments would be
appreciated.

Michael

With one converter i thought the whole thing might go in a 'box' like the
Neutrik Cat-5 to Cat-5 female/female connector ...







___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Paul Hodges]

--On 03 November 2013 09:06 + Michael Chapman  wrote:


The PP units invert the signal.


My understanding is that the early ones did, but the later ones are 
different and do not.


Paul

--
Paul Hodges


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Michael Chapman]

A CAT-5 socket (in an XLR housing) on umashankar's Zoom is an interesting
possibility ...

Michael


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Michael Chapman]

> --On 03 November 2013 09:06 + Michael Chapman 
> wrote:
>
>> The PP units invert the signal.
>
> My understanding is that the early ones did, but the later ones are
> different and do not.

> Paul Hodges

Does that mean you can get away with only one 

(With CAT-5 there is only one 48V wire to the mic stand ... and with a
(IIRC) six pin plug to the TetraMic there can only be one 5V wire into the
mic.? ... naìve... ? )

Michael


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Dave Malham]

Nope - at least on earlier units one ppl wouldn't really provide enough
current and in any case you need all four to provide unbalanced to balanced
conversions.

   Dave


On 3 November 2013 13:08, Michael Chapman  wrote:

> > --On 03 November 2013 09:06 + Michael Chapman 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The PP units invert the signal.
> >
> > My understanding is that the early ones did, but the later ones are
> > different and do not.
>
> > Paul Hodges
>
> Does that mean you can get away with only one 
>
> (With CAT-5 there is only one 48V wire to the mic stand ... and with a
> (IIRC) six pin plug to the TetraMic there can only be one 5V wire into the
> mic.? ... naìve... ? )
>
> Michael
>
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 

As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University.

These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University

Dave Malham
Honorary Fellow, Department of Music
The University of York
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[Matthew Palmer]

I'm hoping for a demo model quite soon, at which point I'll be able to do
comparisons.

>> I think a lot of us would appreciate a comprehensive comparison between
the TetraMic & the Brahma.


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 12:08 AM, len moskowitz
wrote:

> Laurent,
>
> You can find many user comments about TetraMic on our User Comments web
> page:
>
>  http://core-sound.com/TetraMic/11.php
>
>
> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
> Core Sound LLC
> www.core-sound.com
> Home of TetraMic
>
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[Matthew Palmer]

umashankar, if the kickstarter happens to not reach its goal (though it's
boding well now), can the people still buy mics at that price? also i just
read your comparisons on the kickstarter page, thats what i was looking
for, thank you


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Matthew Palmer wrote:

> I'm hoping for a demo model quite soon, at which point I'll be able to do
> comparisons.
>
> >> I think a lot of us would appreciate a comprehensive comparison between
> the TetraMic & the Brahma.
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 12:08 AM, len moskowitz  > wrote:
>
>> Laurent,
>>
>> You can find many user comments about TetraMic on our User Comments web
>> page:
>>
>>  http://core-sound.com/TetraMic/11.php
>>
>>
>> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
>> Core Sound LLC
>> www.core-sound.com
>> Home of TetraMic
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>>
>
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic

[umashankar manthravadi]

dear mathew
 
the kickstarter campaign is worryingly sluggish, but yes, we will not increase 
the price. it may take us longer to make and calibrate. everytime I build a 
mic, I turn my living room into a test chamber. the kickstarter campaign will 
provide for that.
 
I cant post photographs here, but I will put up my calibration system photos 
somewhere and provide a link
 
umashankar
 
> Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 14:52:15 -0500
> From: palme...@mymail.vcu.edu
> To: sursound@music.vt.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Tetramic
> 
> umashankar, if the kickstarter happens to not reach its goal (though it's
> boding well now), can the people still buy mics at that price? also i just
> read your comparisons on the kickstarter page, thats what i was looking
> for, thank you
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> 
> > I'm hoping for a demo model quite soon, at which point I'll be able to do
> > comparisons.
> >
> > >> I think a lot of us would appreciate a comprehensive comparison between
> > the TetraMic & the Brahma.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 12:08 AM, len moskowitz  > > wrote:
> >
> >> Laurent,
> >>
> >> You can find many user comments about TetraMic on our User Comments web
> >> page:
> >>
> >>  http://core-sound.com/TetraMic/11.php
> >>
> >>
> >> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
> >> Core Sound LLC
> >> www.core-sound.com
> >> Home of TetraMic
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Sursound mailing list
> >> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> >> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> >>
> >
> >
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131103/05500ebe/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131104/9152b24d/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Len Moskowitz]

Jörn wrote:


now if somebody made an analog tetramic-to-CAT5 interface like the
insta-snake, small box about the size of the handle of an sm58, one end
with 6pin mini-xlr and maybe a rubber gasket to hold the tetramic, four
balancing transformers/ppas to match the twisted pair, and a nice
ethercon at the end, i would order it right now. and with the ethercon,
the shield could be properly wired to the connector sleeve, which i'd
find more robust than the instasnake magic...


There's something like that coming, but I can't give details yet. It's 
enough to say that it will address the connector concerns.


And some other interesting developments are coming too.


Michael Chapman wrote:


The PP units invert the signal.
Can this be avoided (not against inversion, but see next) ?


The original PPA inverted. The current PPA does not.


Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of TetraMic

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 11/04/2013 05:29 AM, Len Moskowitz wrote:

Jörn wrote:


now if somebody made an analog tetramic-to-CAT5 interface like the
insta-snake, small box about the size of the handle of an sm58, one end
with 6pin mini-xlr and maybe a rubber gasket to hold the tetramic, four
balancing transformers/ppas to match the twisted pair, and a nice
ethercon at the end, i would order it right now. and with the ethercon,
the shield could be properly wired to the connector sleeve, which i'd
find more robust than the instasnake magic...


There's something like that coming, but I can't give details yet. It's
enough to say that it will address the connector concerns.


great news for tetramic users! and no matter what you say, i _will_ hold 
my breath :-D



And some other interesting developments are coming too.


core sound, the masters of suspense :-D




--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[David Worrall]

I've used the TetraMic almost exclusively for outdoor 'nature' recordings, 
including much at dead-of-night.
I've never had a real problem w. noise from the mic, (in reality, nature very 
noisy) - my problems have almost all been with RF and I would love a balanced 
solution.

David
On 05/11/2013, at 11:34 AM, Richard Lee wrote:

> Just a short note about noise.
> 
> While the ST450 is slightly quieter than TetraMic, in practice, TetraMic 
> noise has never been a problem when Recording Music .. even in very quiet 
> studios.
> 
> Paul Hodges recorded his son in the Warehouse, a well known studio in 
> London, so you can judge for yourself.
> 
> http://ambisonic.info/audio/paulhodges/others.html
> http://ambisonic.info/tetramic/samples.html
> http://ambisonic.info/tetramic/results.html
> 
> I wouldn't use TetraMic for recording distant bird calls in the Norfolk 
> salt marshes .. but I wouldn't use a ST450, or even a Mk4, for that either 
> 8>D
> 
> In case it isn't obvious, my completely biased opinion is that the Mk4 
> Soundfield is the best microphone of the last Millenium while TetraMic 
> holds that position in this Millenium.
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

__
Prof. Dr. David Worrall
Emerging Audio Research (EAR)
Audio Department
International Audio Laboratories Erlangen
Fraunhofer-Institut für Integrierte Schaltungen IIS
Am Wolfsmantel 33
91058 Erlangen
Telefon  +49 (0) 91 31 / 7 76-62 77
Fax  +49 (0) 91 31 / 7 76-20 99
E-Mail: david.worr...@iis.fraunhofer.de
Internet: www.iis.fraunhofer.de 

Senior Adjunct Research Fellow,
Australian National University.
david.worr...@anu.edu.au






-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[John Leonard]

It's not so much the microphone, but what you connect it to: because of the 
relatively low sensitivity, you really need a low-noise pre-amp. I use a Metric 
Halo ULN-8, which works extremely well with the TetraMic. The ST450 outputs at 
line level, so mic pre-amps are not an issue. And of course, Australian nature 
is a damned site louder that the English variety...

Regards,

John

On 5 Nov 2013, at 07:57, David Worrall  wrote:

> I've used the TetraMic almost exclusively for outdoor 'nature' recordings, 
> including much at dead-of-night.
> I've never had a real problem w. noise from the mic, (in reality, nature very 
> noisy) - my problems have almost all been with RF and I would love a balanced 
> solution.
> 
> David
> 
> 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Moritz Fehr]

Hi all,

what other preamps (portable?) are you using with your TetraMic ? I have tested 
it with a Motu Traveler which is not bad, and an Edirol R44, which is quite 
noisy.

Regards
Moritz


Am 05.11.2013 um 16:16 schrieb John Leonard :

> It's not so much the microphone, but what you connect it to: because of the 
> relatively low sensitivity, you really need a low-noise pre-amp. I use a 
> Metric Halo ULN-8, which works extremely well with the TetraMic. The ST450 
> outputs at line level, so mic pre-amps are not an issue. And of course, 
> Australian nature is a damned site louder that the English variety...
> 
> Regards,
> 
> John
> 
> On 5 Nov 2013, at 07:57, David Worrall  wrote:
> 
>> I've used the TetraMic almost exclusively for outdoor 'nature' recordings, 
>> including much at dead-of-night.
>> I've never had a real problem w. noise from the mic, (in reality, nature 
>> very noisy) - my problems have almost all been with RF and I would love a 
>> balanced solution.
>> 
>> David
>> 
>> 
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

*
Moritz Fehr
mobil: 01749231733
moritzf...@web.de
www.moritzfehr.de

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Dave Hunt]

Hi,


From: John Leonard 
Date: 5 November 2013 15:16:42 GMT

And of course, Australian nature is a damned site louder that the  
English variety...



On 5 Nov 2013, at 07:57, David Worrall  wrote:

I've used the TetraMic almost exclusively for outdoor 'nature'  
recordings, including much at dead-of-night.
I've never had a real problem w. noise from the mic, (in reality,  
nature very noisy) - my problems have almost all been with RF and  
I would love a balanced solution.


The main problem in the UK is getting away from ambient noise  
(traffic, aircraft, people, barking dogs, wind in trees & grass, rain  
and other water etc.). Then there's still a residual of Brownian air  
motion from everywhere. Apart from frogs if you're patient (or  
possibly bees or crickets/grasshoppers) most creatures are trying to  
avoid you and remain 'stumm' until they're some distance away.


Ciao,

Dave
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Michael Chapman]

> Hi,

>
> The main problem in the UK is getting away from ambient noise
> (traffic, aircraft, people, barking dogs, wind in trees & grass, rain
> and other water etc.). Then there's still a residual of Brownian air
> motion from everywhere. Apart from frogs if you're patient (or
> possibly bees or crickets/grasshoppers) most creatures are trying to
> avoid you and remain 'stumm' until they're some distance away.
>

The converse can be worrying.

I did a series of 'dawn choruses' in a wetland nature reserve,
We put ourselves 50m from the mic and recorded.
We and the mic were on 'walkways' above the wetlands (probably designed by
Daleks).
Two mornings we got distinct footfalls along the walkways ... they weren't
human ... but they weren't small.
Still, all crew accounted for.

Michael



___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[John Leonard]

Mind you, I have a lovely recording of the Dambusters memorial fly-past that 
was ruined both by a BBC news crew in a helicopter, but also by some very cross 
Canada Geese. Very spectacular in surround if you need a Lancaster Bomber, 
mixed with a helicopter and geese, all from a variety of different directions, 
but bugger all use otherwise. 

In the words of the late, great Viv Stanshall, sometimes you just can't win. 

John. 

On 5 Nov 2013, at 18:27, "Michael Chapman"  wrote:

>> Hi,
> 
>> 
>> The main problem in the UK is getting away from ambient noise
>> (traffic, aircraft, people, barking dogs, wind in trees & grass, rain
>> and other water etc.). Then there's still a residual of Brownian air
>> motion from everywhere. Apart from frogs if you're patient (or
>> possibly bees or crickets/grasshoppers) most creatures are trying to
>> avoid you and remain 'stumm' until they're some distance away.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[David Worrall]

Hi Moritz,
John or me? - I'm sending it straight to a Tascam DR-640.

David

On 05/11/2013, at 4:30 PM, Moritz Fehr wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> what other preamps (portable?) are you using with your TetraMic ? I have 
> tested it with a Motu Traveler which is not bad, and an Edirol R44, which is 
> quite noisy.
> 
> Regards
> Moritz
> 
> 
> Am 05.11.2013 um 16:16 schrieb John Leonard :
> 
>> It's not so much the microphone, but what you connect it to: because of the 
>> relatively low sensitivity, you really need a low-noise pre-amp. I use a 
>> Metric Halo ULN-8, which works extremely well with the TetraMic. The ST450 
>> outputs at line level, so mic pre-amps are not an issue. And of course, 
>> Australian nature is a damned site louder that the English variety...
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> On 5 Nov 2013, at 07:57, David Worrall  wrote:
>> 
>>> I've used the TetraMic almost exclusively for outdoor 'nature' recordings, 
>>> including much at dead-of-night.
>>> I've never had a real problem w. noise from the mic, (in reality, nature 
>>> very noisy) - my problems have almost all been with RF and I would love a 
>>> balanced solution.
>>> 
>>> David
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
> 
> *
> Moritz Fehr
> mobil: 01749231733
> moritzf...@web.de
> www.moritzfehr.de
> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

__
Prof. Dr. David Worrall
Emerging Audio Research (EAR)
Audio Department
International Audio Laboratories Erlangen
Fraunhofer-Institut für Integrierte Schaltungen IIS
Am Wolfsmantel 33
91058 Erlangen
Telefon  +49 (0) 91 31 / 7 76-62 77
Fax  +49 (0) 91 31 / 7 76-20 99
E-Mail: david.worr...@iis.fraunhofer.de
Internet: www.iis.fraunhofer.de 

Senior Adjunct Research Fellow,
Australian National University.
david.worr...@anu.edu.au






-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[John Abram]

On 5 November 2013 08:30, Moritz Fehr  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> what other preamps (portable?) are you using with your TetraMic ? I have
> tested it with a Motu Traveler which is not bad, and an Edirol R44, which
> is quite noisy.
>
> Regards
> Moritz
>

I use a first generation MOTU Traveler with the Black Lion Audio
modifications, and their (BLA's) first generation microclock. I record
mostly classical music indoors, and the noise levels are generally
acceptable, better than a good number of older commercial recordings I
cherish. The flexibility in post-production (I use Reaper on Macs for
Tetramic work) is staggering - it's possible to all manner of corrective
mic "placement" after the fact, and to get some mind bending effects if
you're into that…

with best wishes, John
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Peter Lennox]

what sort of mind-bending effects?
Dr Peter Lennox

School of Technology,
Faculty of Arts, Design and Technology
University of Derby, UK
e: p.len...@derby.ac.uk
t: 01332 593155

From: Sursound [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of John Abram 
[johnbab...@gmail.com]
Sent: 05 November 2013 21:01
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

On 5 November 2013 08:30, Moritz Fehr  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> what other preamps (portable?) are you using with your TetraMic ? I have
> tested it with a Motu Traveler which is not bad, and an Edirol R44, which
> is quite noisy.
>
> Regards
> Moritz
>

I use a first generation MOTU Traveler with the Black Lion Audio
modifications, and their (BLA's) first generation microclock. I record
mostly classical music indoors, and the noise levels are generally
acceptable, better than a good number of older commercial recordings I
cherish. The flexibility in post-production (I use Reaper on Macs for
Tetramic work) is staggering - it's possible to all manner of corrective
mic "placement" after the fact, and to get some mind bending effects if
you're into that…

with best wishes, John
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131105/931430c4/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

_
The University of Derby has a published policy regarding email and reserves the 
right to monitor email traffic. If you believe this email was sent to you in 
error, please notify the sender and delete this email. Please direct any 
concerns to info...@derby.ac.uk.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Paul Hodges]

--On 05 November 2013 21:41 +0100 David Worrall  
wrote:



John or me? - I'm sending it straight to a Tascam DR-640.

David

On 05/11/2013, at 4:30 PM, Moritz Fehr wrote:


Hi all,

what other preamps (portable?) are you using with your TetraMic ? I have
tested it with a Motu Traveler which is not bad, and an Edirol R44,
which is quite noisy.


Taking the query as open, I currently use a Tascam DR-680 most of the time, 
though sometimes I use the Traveler.  I've not done a direct noise 
comparison, but I think the Traveler is slightly quieter.  I've also modded 
my Tascam with much larger smoothing capacitors on the phantom supplies; 
I've not found a big change with the TetraMic, but some people have had 
major problems using some mics without the mod.


Info on the mod I did, and the possible need for it, is here:


Paul

--
Paul Hodges


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[John Abram]

On 5 November 2013 14:03, Peter Lennox  wrote:

> what sort of mind-bending effects?
> Dr Peter Lennox
>

For example, virtually rotating the mic while placed over a piano, also to
some degree zooming in and out.
Most clients don't want that on their recordings, but John Oswald recorded
Gordon Monahan's piano music with a (literally) roving Soundfield.

with best wishes, John
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Fons Adriaensen]

On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:16:42PM +, John Leonard wrote:

> It's not so much the microphone, but what you connect it to:
> because of the relatively low sensitivity, you really need
> a low-noise pre-amp.

Using the specs provided by Core Sound:

Self noise: 19 dB(A)
Sensitiviy:  7 mv/Pa

a preamp with an EIN of -116 dBm(A) would produce as much
noise as the mic. My cheap Edirol UA5 has an EIN of around
-120 dBm(A), low-noise mic preamps are around 10 dB better.

Which means it's unlikely that the preamp will be the limiting
factor, it will be either the mic or the ambient noise.

Ciao,

-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[John Leonard]

Hmm, not what I've found: I mean, really not what I've found. Sorry to 
disagree, but I've tried a number of systems and have found that the low-cost 
recorders that I've used, un-modded, have had unacceptable noise levels when 
cranked up.

Regards,

John


On 5 Nov 2013, at 21:45, Fons Adriaensen  wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 03:16:42PM +, John Leonard wrote:
> 
>> It's not so much the microphone, but what you connect it to:
>> because of the relatively low sensitivity, you really need
>> a low-noise pre-amp.
> 
> Using the specs provided by Core Sound:
> 
> Self noise: 19 dB(A)
> Sensitiviy:  7 mv/Pa
> 
> a preamp with an EIN of -116 dBm(A) would produce as much
> noise as the mic. My cheap Edirol UA5 has an EIN of around
> -120 dBm(A), low-noise mic preamps are around 10 dB better.
> 
> Which means it's unlikely that the preamp will be the limiting
> factor, it will be either the mic or the ambient noise.
> 
> Ciao,
> 
> -- 
> FA
> 
> A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
> It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
> and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Fons Adriaensen]

On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 10:20:35PM +, John Leonard wrote:

> Hmm, not what I've found: I mean, really not what I've found.

No point in discussing basic physics, a self noise of 19 dB(A)
and a sensitivity of 7 mv/Pa amount to -116 dBm(A) at the
input of the preamp. Unless I botched up the the calculations:

7 mV = -43.1 dBV = -40.9 dBm 
1 Pa = 94 dB SPL

19 - 40.9 - 94 = -115.9

> Sorry to disagree, but I've tried a number of systems and have
> found that the low-cost recorders that I've used, un-modded, have
> had unacceptable noise levels when cranked up.

And what EIN levels do the specs of these recorders state ?

There may be a different issue at work here. EIN is normally 
measured at maximum gain. A well-designed preamp should have
more or less constant EIN for the upper 25..30 dB of the gain
range, but many don't.

Ciao,

-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[John Leonard Main]

Not arguing with the figures, just stating empirical findings. 

Will see if I can find details of the two machines at some point. Ditched one 
manufacturer because of poor quality control, so may just have been unlucky.

John
Sent from my iPad

> On 5 Nov 2013, at 22:41, Fons Adriaensen  wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 10:20:35PM +, John Leonard wrote:
>> 
>> Hmm, not what I've found: I mean, really not what I've found.
> 
> No point in discussing basic physics, a self noise of 19 dB(A)
> and a sensitivity of 7 mv/Pa amount to -116 dBm(A) at the
> input of the preamp. Unless I botched up the the calculations:
> 
> 7 mV = -43.1 dBV = -40.9 dBm 
> 1 Pa = 94 dB SPL
> 
> 19 - 40.9 - 94 = -115.9
> 
>> Sorry to disagree, but I've tried a number of systems and have
>> found that the low-cost recorders that I've used, un-modded, have
>> had unacceptable noise levels when cranked up.
> 
> And what EIN levels do the specs of these recorders state ?
> 
> There may be a different issue at work here. EIN is normally 
> measured at maximum gain. A well-designed preamp should have
> more or less constant EIN for the upper 25..30 dB of the gain
> range, but many don't.
> 
> Ciao,
> 
> -- 
> FA
> 
> 
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

I found this website comparing signal to noise on a lot of recording devices:
http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm
Seems they have at least used the same equipment to measure all the devices.

- Bosse

-Original Message-
From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of John Leonard 
Main
Sent: den 6 november 2013 10:11
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

Not arguing with the figures, just stating empirical findings. 

Will see if I can find details of the two machines at some point. Ditched one 
manufacturer because of poor quality control, so may just have been unlucky.

John
Sent from my iPad

> On 5 Nov 2013, at 22:41, Fons Adriaensen  wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 10:20:35PM +, John Leonard wrote:
>> 
>> Hmm, not what I've found: I mean, really not what I've found.
> 
> No point in discussing basic physics, a self noise of 19 dB(A) and a 
> sensitivity of 7 mv/Pa amount to -116 dBm(A) at the input of the 
> preamp. Unless I botched up the the calculations:
> 
> 7 mV = -43.1 dBV = -40.9 dBm
> 1 Pa = 94 dB SPL
> 
> 19 - 40.9 - 94 = -115.9
> 
>> Sorry to disagree, but I've tried a number of systems and have found 
>> that the low-cost recorders that I've used, un-modded, have had 
>> unacceptable noise levels when cranked up.
> 
> And what EIN levels do the specs of these recorders state ?
> 
> There may be a different issue at work here. EIN is normally measured 
> at maximum gain. A well-designed preamp should have more or less 
> constant EIN for the upper 25..30 dB of the gain range, but many 
> don't.
> 
> Ciao,
> 
> --
> FA
> 
> 
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[Fons Adriaensen]

On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:09:26PM +, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote:
> 
> I found this website comparing signal to noise on a lot of recording devices:
> http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm
> Seems they have at least used the same equipment to measure all the devices.

Interesting. And it confirms what John wrote: some of these devices
have a *really bad* EIN. These are probably also the ones that don't
even quote any value in their specs. Caveat emptor...

Building a mic preamp with say -118 dBm(A) EIN is absolutely no
problem, even using only cheap mass-produced components and no
transformer. Just connecting directly to a 5532 opamp will give
you -120 dBm(A) or better. No black art neccessary.

There's really no excuse for anything that's 10 or 20 dB worse.

Ciao,

-- 
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic

[umashankar manthravadi]

their excuse is, they want to run it on two AA cells, and last ten hours.
 
Umashankar
 
> Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 14:24:38 +
> From: f...@linuxaudio.org
> To: sursound@music.vt.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Core Sound TetraMic
> 
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:09:26PM +, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote:
> > 
> > I found this website comparing signal to noise on a lot of recording 
> > devices:
> > http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm
> > Seems they have at least used the same equipment to measure all the devices.
> 
> Interesting. And it confirms what John wrote: some of these devices
> have a *really bad* EIN. These are probably also the ones that don't
> even quote any value in their specs. Caveat emptor...
> 
> Building a mic preamp with say -118 dBm(A) EIN is absolutely no
> problem, even using only cheap mass-produced components and no
> transformer. Just connecting directly to a 5532 opamp will give
> you -120 dBm(A) or better. No black art neccessary.
> 
> There's really no excuse for anything that's 10 or 20 dB worse.
> 
> Ciao,
> 
> -- 
> FA
> 
> A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
> It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
> and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
  
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131106/860cf652/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound