antichef
pornk rock
That never even occurred to me -- I'll definitely do that next timeA trick to prevent short circuiting is to strip the shielding off a wire about the same gauge as the leads, then slip the shielding over the leads.
That never even occurred to me -- I'll definitely do that next timeA trick to prevent short circuiting is to strip the shielding off a wire about the same gauge as the leads, then slip the shielding over the leads.
Got my two mxl 603s in the mail two days ago.
One is making the sweeping ringing noise. Not loud but enough to ruin a take for me. It goes from high to low pitched... never heard that before.
Might be time to try and use the warranty ?
sure, but if you're asking me, you'll have to settle for newb answersCan I ask a Couple Newb questions?
Left to my own devices, it would be trial and error, but we're lucky enough to have folks on the board like Marik, who have a strong background in eletro-acoutics and actually understand the circuits and the physical aspects of the microphones, so I pretty much just listen to them, and experiment in very narrow bands.1. Is most modding trial and error... and once someone finds the right Cap for improvement the word spreads? Or is it just known that Cheap caps are used in low end gear (so the manufacture can save $.50 per unit) and replacing them w/ a higher quality one will ALWAYS be best.
I think so -- I'm getting to the point where I look for ceramic caps in the signal path to replace, since that's usually where the easiest improvements are. Understanding the circuit completely (which I generally don't) is key, because I've seen ceramics in the signal path that sound just fine (or at least, don't yield noticeable improvement when replaced). That's why web searching is my friend -- Folks with an electronics background generally make it to the finish line in this area more quickly.2. Once someone is experienced, can they pretty much look at the board and tell right away that there are sub par Caps and Resistors in there and which ones will, if replaced, make a improvement?
The example is over my head -- perhaps Marik saw an opportunity to improve the circuit that was overlooked by the engineers who designed the circuit, or perhaps there were other non-sound concerns (certainly including cost - .22uf caps are cheaper than 1uf caps, everything else remaining the same), etc. -- the physical size of the caps would certainly have been a concern. Also I know some other mods I've performed, such as removing inner grill baskets, have had the effect of physically weakening a mic or making it more susceptible to EM interference (neither would be the case here, I'm sure), and although the sound was [occasionally] improved, I might not want to sell them, because I don't know what situation they're going into and worry they might fail the new owner -- that kind of stuff. Additionally, with regard to mass produced electronics, once you get FCC (and other non-USA governmental) approval on a particular design, it's expensive and time consuming to change it, so you might do better to live with a suboptimal design rather than go after an improvement3. I guess I'm wondering if it's not just the quality but the # rating on the Cap like .22 to 1.0 then why doesn't MXL just put in the Cap w/ the rating that will best suit the Mic?
I mostly record acoustic guitar with these type of mics, so this is really what's important to me. I think I generally like the MC-012 better - seems fuller.
very similar -- essentially the same. I got mine the same way - $49.99 at GC. I've done a lot of soldering practice on the 990 and the 991 .Wait...there seems to be some mentioning here of this microphone semi-interchangeably with the 991. Are they similar?
A higher value will allow more low frequencies to pass, but there is a point that it becomes indistinguishable and possibly harmful. For example allowing super low frequencies like 10Hz or even 1Hz. The caps are there to block DC voltage from leaving the output of the mic. Larger caps take longer to block the DC. A very large cap can take several seconds to block the DC and you may damage your preamp or run out of headroom in your DAW while it blocks the DC. On the flip-side a value too high will block too much low frequency and give the mic a filtered sound.Is there any common wisdom about what cap to use for the coupling cap on mics in general? The reason I ask is that all the Chinese condensers (both SDCs and LDCs) I've looked at all have visually indistinguishable tantalum caps, none of which have any markings that look like numbers with a uF/pF after them.
Short of removing them from the circuit and using a capacitance meter (which I do have and can do), is there any general rule that I should follow, e.g. 1 uF for SDCs, or should I just pull them and test them one at a time?
A higher value will allow more low frequencies to pass, but there is a point that it becomes indistinguishable and possibly harmful. For example allowing super low frequencies like 10Hz or even 1Hz. The caps are there to block DC voltage from leaving the output of the mic. Larger caps take longer to block the DC. A very large cap can take several seconds to block the DC and you may damage your preamp or run out of headroom in your DAW while it blocks the DC. On the flip-side a value too high will block too much low frequency and give the mic a filtered sound.
The value of an output cap can be just about anything. The value is determined by the output impedance of the mic. And that is different from mic to mic.
The example is over my head -- perhaps Marik saw an opportunity to improve the circuit that was overlooked by the engineers who designed the circuit, or perhaps there were other non-sound concerns (certainly including cost - .22uf caps are cheaper than 1uf caps, everything else remaining the same), etc. -- the physical size of the caps would certainly have been a concern.
*scratches head*
How can it be acting as a DC block when it goes between the two legs of the capsule, one of which is, AFAIK, the voltage source, the other of which is, AFAIK, the output? That voltage should already be blocked by the capacitance of the capsule...
The 1um has a lower cutoff frequency--the reason you heard bass response improvement.
One "leg" of the capsule connected to the ground and another is a "signal" side, which also receives bias voltage. The capacitor blocks this voltage.
Best, M
Since the .22uF has a fair amount of lows already, would .47uf be suitable compared to a 1uF? I guess it's a matter of preference, isn't it?
What's the word on silver mica caps? I'm not clear as to what the quality is on these. Are they an improvement over ceramics, or just as bad in you opinion?
One "leg" of the capsule connected to the ground and another is a "signal" side, which also receives bias voltage. The capacitor blocks this voltage.
But it still isn't blocking the voltage even with the output being on the + side of the capsule. If it is in parallel with the capsule, that means that one end of the capacitor sees a bias voltage and signal, the other end of the capacitor is grounded, so there should be neither a bias voltage nor a signal usable at that point.