Caotico
for all the right reasons
What's the story with Behri?????
http://mixonline.com/news/headline/fcc-forfeiture-behringer-022306/
- Status
http://mixonline.com/news/headline/fcc-forfeiture-behringer-022306/
C
chance
Well-known member
What's the story with Behri?????
Forget I even mentioned it LOL. Don't need any more headaches. I must confess that the ACM-510 USB mic sounds great. I use it with "Gizmo project" when talking to China. When I was in Chicago last summer, people at the studio called me with Gizmo and the audio was very clear. Besides myself, one other person got the 510
ausrock
Well-known member
Ahha...........I remember that but i thought there may have been something more recent.
dgatwood
is out. Leave a message.
If I read the code correctly, certification is not required, just verification. That means you have to test to make sure that it A. doesn't send lots of noise back into the computer via the DC line (unlikely to be a problem) and B. doesn't radiate too much noise.
As far as I can tell, the code does not provide standard for testing A. given that the power supplied is highly filtered DC, which makes compliance almost a non-issue. So basically the one that would be a concern is B., and if I read the code correctly, this equipment isn't in a category that gets treated differently for unintentional radiators, so the intentional radiator requirements apply.
http://www.atlasce.com/requirements/unitedstates/subpart_c.htm#Section 15.209
http://www.atlasce.com/requirements/unitedstates/subpart_c.htm#Section 15.227
That said, IANAL, YMMV, SRAEMA-SSFD, CSA10222950.
mshilarious
Banned
I imagine the mic would have either a DC-DC converter, an A/D converter, or both. That would put in within the unintentional radiator rules of Part 15, as a Class B digital device (since it would use timing signals in excess of 9kHz).
As I understand it, that only requires testing by the manufacturer to ensure compliance with the technical standards of Part 15, and a label affixed to the unit. That's potentially easier and cheaper than a certified lab test, but it would still have to be done to comply with the regulation.
PS I wouldn't consider a USB +5V rail highly filtered for audio purposes . . .
dgatwood
is out. Leave a message.
Yes, I was basing my comment on those assumptions. It should fall into the conducted limit requirements of 15.107(a), and the radiated limits of 109(a). Crap. How did I miss that second table? My bad. Please ignore everything in my prior post. I was reading 113 instead of 109.
Correct. That's what I meant when I said it required verification but not certification.
By that, I meant that it is heavily isolated from the incoming AC by a switched mode power supply, a bunch of filter caps, chokes, etc., and thus I'd be amazed if a USB device could produce any noise in the AC lines sufficient to violate 15.107(a). That said, it still is supposed to be tested.
C
chance
Well-known member
Specs are in for the "73" mic pre. Someone send me an E-mail,, you know the drill. I have to go to LA, and will reply with the specs to be posted when I get back
Somnium7
Noise Criminal
...and the geeks in the crowd cheer! 
tarnationsauce2
Welcome to the jungle.
I sent you an email in case no one else has yet.
I have the day off and am just lounging around. So.... I can watch my email.
C
chance
Well-known member
I sent you an email in case no one else has yet.
I have the day off and am just lounging around. So.... I can watch my email.
E-mail sent. I already posted the specs on PSW (why can't I upload here??)
Caotico
for all the right reasons
because this forum's max attachement size is 64kb
, and those images are around 200k. You have to resize them.
tarnationsauce2
Welcome to the jungle.
C
chance
Well-known member
Thanks for posting those. the model numbers will be ACMP-73, 81, and 84 (they forgot the AC LOL) We all know what AC stands for.
I was impressed how they compiled all this data for me. They will be sending me the specs for the "81 & 84" soon.
I was impressed how they compiled all this data for me. They will be sending me the specs for the "81 & 84" soon.
antichef
pornk rock
ahem... ... [drooool] ... mmm..
Do we know whether the specs will be similar for the 81 and 84 on the shared line items?
Do we know whether the specs will be similar for the 81 and 84 on the shared line items?
RightOnMusic
asshat
upon reading about the ams neve 1073 reissues, i've found that the transformer is an incredibly integral part of that 1073 sound. where are your transformers coming from? how close is the pcb layout to the original? isnt the 1073's gain control in 5db steps? by no means am i trying to be a skeptic, i'm sure these things are gonna sound awesome, and i'm stoked to buy a number of them, i'm just curious about how closely you've replicated them. thanks again, chance, you're really going above and beyond to help us all get our hands on some great gear. major kudos.
C
chance
Well-known member
Unfortunately the xfrmers are from China. It would be too costly to have them use some other trans. Those are upgrades that we can do at our liesure just like the mics. The specs for the 81 and 84 are coming soon. This is a new product for them and the specs have to be run and recorded in their lab. If you all notice I took all your questions and had them detail EVERYTHING in the specs. I'm doing some remote recording in June and would LOVE to have them for the gig.
Somnium7
Noise Criminal
I did notice that and I for one appreciate it very much. You are the man!
Looking forward to the recordings!!
I
ittam
New member
Yes!
Matti
Matti
RightOnMusic
asshat
sweet, thanks for the info chance. i'm gonna start keeping an eye out for old marinair/st ives/carnhill transformers. anyone know how common they are and what they might go for?
antichef
pornk rock
this looks like a source for carnhill stuff: http://www.audiomaintenance.com/acatalog/Transformers_and_Inductors.html (but you said "old" -- these look new)
- Status