tonyptony,
I have just corrected the 10khz mic bump. Look at the first post of his
mic response, 10khz is way off and my recordings have the same issue,
meaning it's the mic for sure.
Look how left and right speaker are the same in that area and how it
gradually progresses, while in the other
nuhi;229419 Wrote:
Please do this when you get the equipment:
use the new preamp with the ecm8000 in the same spot as the m30 and
post a flat correction graphs of both of them for us to see and then I
can check for the differences.
Yes, I was already planning on doing this. I even want to
Nuhi, I'm wondering about this technique. Wouldn't this method be
influenced by the room modes generated?
--
tonyptony
tonyptony's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3397
View this thread:
Glad that seeing my calibration file was helpful. There are some others
around that show a similar response curve, though none seem to be as bad
as mine (out by more than 9db).
Gotta admit a professionally calibrated mic would come in handy, who
knows what else dwells on these recordings.
I
muski;222838 Wrote:
OK, I took the US-122L apart, and, from wikipedia, figured out what an
oscillator looks like (hey, I'm a software guy...).
I think I have found three oscillators. Here are the labels on them:
22.5792i6 (label on circuit board reads X1 22.579MHz)
245KD6H (labeled X2
Toby Dickenson;222851 Wrote:
muski wrote:
OK, I took the US-122L apart, and, from wikipedia, figured out what
an
oscillator looks like (hey, I'm a software guy...).
Congratulations. Its all the same really, just a different interface.
I think I have found three oscillators. Here
tingtong5 wrote:
245KD6H (labeled X2 24.576MHz)
The ratio might be correct, but the absolute frequencies are weird
aren't they?
24.576MHz = 512 * 48kHz
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
Toby Dickenson;222871 Wrote:
tingtong5 wrote:
245KD6H (labeled X2 24.576MHz)
The ratio might be correct, but the absolute frequencies are weird
aren't they?
24.576MHz = 512 * 48kHz
How stupid I am : Mhz and kHz , not the same thing :-X Say no
more :(
;-)
--
tingtong5
And 22.579MHz = 512 * 44.1KHz
So it is doing native 44.1KHz recording...
Very enlightening. Thanks.
--
muski
SB3-Bryston BP25DA-Bryston 4B-SST-Watt Puppy 7s
Transporter-Headrom Max Balanced Amp-Balanced AKG701s HD650s
Phil Leigh;221572 Wrote:
Fascinating...
What soundcard is it? - Must make a note to avoid at all costs!
Creative labs soundblaster live usb.
As the DRC manual already warns:
Most cheap game oriented soundcards often include a sample rate
converter in their design, so that input streams
Thanks - very interesting.
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some
very expensive cables ;o)
Very interesting, indeed.
I wonder if the Tascam US-122L USB audio interface suffers from the
same resampling problem. It is more of a mid-range product, but who
knows if/how it resamples (it supports 44.1, 48 96KHz sample rates) .
Is there anyway to detect if there are resampling artifacts in
muski;221813 Wrote:
Very interesting, indeed.
I wonder if the Tascam US-122L USB audio interface suffers from the
same resampling problem. It is more of a mid-range product, but who
knows if/how it resamples (it supports 44.1, 48 96KHz sample rates) .
Is there anyway to detect if there
Yesterday evening I took new measurements, this time at a 48 kHz
samplerate. Then I resampled to 44.1 kHz using Adobe Audition in
highest quality setting.
Surprise, surprise the earlier perceived brightness was gone and it
seems to sound just right now using my mic calibration file :-)
I did
tingtong5;221565 Wrote:
Yesterday evening I took new measurements, this time at a 48 kHz
samplerate. Then I resampled to 44.1 kHz using Adobe Audition in
highest quality setting.
Surprise, surprise the earlier perceived brightness was gone and it
seems to sound just right now using my mic
tingtong5 wrote:
When using this calibration file with drc the sound becomes way too
bright. So I reversed all the values (plus - minus and vice versa) but
then the sound became too dull (lack of high frequencies).
Ive just started trying drc too (family is out of the house all weekend -
muski;221338 Wrote:
Tingtong --
Where did you get your mic calibrated?
muski
In germany (I live in holland):
http://lasip.hifi-selbstbau.de/cgi-bin/shop/shop.cgi?shop=product=Kalibrierungcart_id=2692111.29825
--
tingtong5
I did got some answers lately:
- the calibration file I got equals the frequency response of my
microphone
- DRC also needs a microphone frequency response file
In other words I could use my calibration file directly with DRC :-)
So I did new measurements and created new filters. The
Toby Dickenson;221436 Wrote:
Ive just started trying drc too (family is out of the house all weekend
-
serious measurement begins tomorrow 8-).
Sounds like big fun :-) Good luck and let us know how you went!
Toby Dickenson;221436 Wrote:
You may get some insight from
graphing the
tingtong5;221478 Wrote:
I did got some answers lately:
- the calibration file I got equals the frequency response of my
microphone
- DRC also needs a microphone frequency response file
In other words I could use my calibration file directly with DRC :-)
So I did new measurements
Phil Leigh;221486 Wrote:
The too bright sound won't be an issue with your current soundcard -
the fact that it is resampling 48-44.1 won't make that much difference
in this context.
I agree, but it could be caused by a non lineair f-response of my cheap
soundcard, so buying a better card
tingtong5;221493 Wrote:
I agree, but it could be caused by a non lineair f-response of my cheap
soundcard, so buying a better card might still be a good idea..
I know, I was already using a curve that rolls off 8 dB at 20 kHz :P
Still too bright..
I already asked and Inguz said his
Phil Leigh;221514 Wrote:
My point was that the response (which is nothing to do with whether or
not the card is re-sampling) will be flat enough for DRC purposes - you
can't hear freq response variations +/- 0.5dB anyway.
You need to roll-off way earlier than that. Cymbals are in the
I had my ecm8000 mic calibrated as well :-)
I made a plot of the calibration values compared to the ones that come
with the drc distribution (ecm8000.txt).
When using this calibration file with drc the sound becomes way too
bright. So I reversed all the values (plus - minus and vice versa) but
That's why I choose to use a flat curve correction file for now instead
of the drc correction curve. Guess its time to have my mic calibrated
:)
--
tingtong5
tingtong5's Profile:
The amount of deviation from the ecm8000 response claimed by Behringer
is so high that if this is really true this means this mic is totally
useless without calibration.
Another conclusion would be the using the drc ecm8000.txt is useless as
well..
Actually proper room correction would not be
Doing RC with an uncalibrated mic is much better than no RC - but not as
good as it should be!
Even rather expensive mics need calibrating for this purpose if you
want the best possible results.
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd
Maybe a little off-topic but I measured the frequency response (from
10-20KHz) of my two mic pre-amps:
- Behringer Tube Ultra Gain Mic 100
- Behringer UB802
+---+
|Filename: mic100-vs-ub802.jpg
tingtong5 wrote:
Maybe a little off-topic but I measured the frequency response (from
10-20KHz) of my two mic pre-amps:
- Behringer Tube Ultra Gain Mic 100
- Behringer UB802
Looks like proof to me that tubes act as tone controls.
--
Pat
tingtong5 wrote:
The amount of deviation from the ecm8000 response claimed by Behringer
is so high that if this is really true this means this mic is totally
useless without calibration.
The graph posted above is not too dissimilar to another ecm8000 calibration
posted here:
Hey all,
I was wondering why there was a bunch of traffic to my website coming
from this thread ;)
I'm the guy who did the microphone calibration for muski, feel free to
ask me any questions about the calibration process. Like I told muski,
I've measured a bunch of ECM8000's over the years
vdorta;214539 Wrote:
Wouldn't this suggest the calibration is wrong?
No, I think it was 'operator error' on my part -- I don't think that I
generated my first set of filters correctly. I have since regenerated
everything, and am not hearing the clipping I noticed the first time
with the
Muski, what I would expect means that I am comparing (by ear) the
original uncorrected sound of my system (flac files), that I know by
experience to have a lumpy bass due to my particular room, but that is
also pretty flat on midrange and highs, to the Inguz-corrected sound
(flac/InguzDSP files).
Thanks. My room is very bright (polished conrete floors and glass and
plaster), so your observation about brightness makes a lot of sense.
Will give it a try this week.
Thanks,
Muski
--
muski
SB3-Bryston BP25DA-Bryston 4B-SST-Watt Puppy 7s
Transporter-Headrom Max Balanced Amp-Balanced
muski;213627 Wrote:
Haven't done a ton of listening with this, but immediately had to switch
from 'normal' to 'soft' -- it was just too bright and there was some
occasional weird digital distortion (maybe it was clipping)
Wouldn't this suggest the calibration is wrong? In my system, with the
krzys;214501 Wrote:
Muski did you get a *.txt file from the calibrator? Is that usaual with
calibrators ?
Chris
Yes, it was included with the service. I think most calibrators do
that. For instance, on the Earthworks audio site it says:
Calibration files are available for every Earthworks
muski;213627 Wrote:
The calibrator's experience with about a dozen ECM8000s is that though
they show pretty good response (esp for the price), but they are all
over the place.
I have not, but I'm not surprised about his comment, Behringer are on
the low end of pro-audio stuff. It would be
That would be an interesting test. Makes you wonder how close a $50
Behringer mic + $50 calibration fee gets you to a $600 Earthworks M30
calibrated mic...
Another slippery slope (or $lippery $lope)... maybe one day.
muski
--
muski
SB3-Bryston BP25DA-Bryston 4B-SST-Watt Puppy 7s
muski;214368 Wrote:
That would be an interesting test. Makes you wonder how close a $50
Behringer mic + $50 calibration fee gets you to a $600 Earthworks M30
calibrated mic...
Another slippery slope (or $lippery $lope)... maybe one day.
You bet.
My guess (only a guess) is that for
I recently had my Behringer ECM8000 microphone calibrated by
Cross-Spectrum Labs with some interesting results (cost $50,
http://www.cross-spectrum.com/measurement/mike_meas.html). A very
different calibration file was the result. See the attached graph --
green is the stock ecm8000.txt file
40 matches
Mail list logo
