mic hiss

  • Thread starter Thread starter timtimtim
  • Start date Start date
T

timtimtim

Member
Harvey Gerst in his excellent threads says that large diaphragm condenser mics are quieter than small, but how do they compare with dynamic? Is a dynamic mic quieter (less pre amp hiss) than a LDC? I'm having problems comparing mic specs because some mics have a db figure (e.g. -65dB, relative to what?), and some give sensitivity as mV/Pa. What is Pa? How do I compare a mic which says -65dB with one which says 1.5mV/Pa? And some mics say 15dB self noise - what does that mean? I need to know which mic is giving the least hiss relative to the signal from a given sound level picked up by the mic. Can anyone enlighten me?
 
i don't know the ins and outs of this. someone else will answer in detail, i'm sure,

but what i do know is, it'd be worth posting up what microphones and preamps you are using.

for example, if you have a very low end preamp, there's a good chance that it's going to introduce audible noise long before a microphone will, so effectively, if you want to avoid hiss and noise, it wouldn't really matter what mic you're using.

dynamic mics often require more gain than condensers, so lower end preamp might not be the best choice, if it introduces noise at higher gain settings.

tell us watcha got :)
 
Thanks, that answers one part of my question, dynamics are less sensitive than condenser, but are they less sensitive than small electret condensers?
I know that condensers have a built-in pre amp, but do dynamics? When I'm talking about comparing the hiss of different mics I'm assuming they are all going into the same (very low-hiss) pre amp, so I'm asking which mics give more output for the same sound level. In other words (to be really pedantic about this) you've got a LDC with its inbuilt pre amp, an electret with its inbuilt pre amp, and a dynamic either with an inbuilt pre amp or feeding into a high qaulity very low noise pre amp. Which gives the best signal/hiss ratio?
 
It's not quite as simple as this.

The rule of thumb, yes, is that LDCs are quieter than SDCs; but some SDCs are quieter than LDCs.

The Sennheiser MKH 20/30/40 series, MKH 800 and MKH 8000 series are quieter than most LDCs (the are RF condensers, not the normal AF type).

There can be large variations in specifications, so it's always best to look at the manufacturers figures.

You can do easy and quick comparisons at Microphone Data, the independent site. There are also lots of useful articles on this site.
 
Harvey Gerst in his excellent threads says that large diaphragm condenser mics are quieter than small, but how do they compare with dynamic? Is a dynamic mic quieter (less pre amp hiss) than a LDC? I'm having problems comparing mic specs because some mics have a db figure (e.g. -65dB, relative to what?), and some give sensitivity as mV/Pa. What is Pa? How do I compare a mic which says -65dB with one which says 1.5mV/Pa? And some mics say 15dB self noise - what does that mean? I need to know which mic is giving the least hiss relative to the signal from a given sound level picked up by the mic. Can anyone enlighten me?

Noise comes from many sources: thermal noise, which is a physical property of anything with resistance, a few different types of what I'll call "active noise", which is not a real term, I just made it up for simplicity. Finally, microphones have another type of noise from random molecules bouncing off of their diaphragm, which is lumped in with their active noise in deriving a mic's self-noise spec.

Dynamic mics (most of them, anyway) have no active components (transistors, tubes), so they only have a small amount of thermal noise, which is small enough that we can ignore it. This is why you never see a self-noise spec on a dynamic mic.

For a dynamic mic, the limiting factor is always the preamp, due to their low sensitivity. On sensitivity, "Pa" is a Pascal, one of which equals 94dBSPL. Some mics are stated in dBV, some are stated in mV, but both measurements should be 1 Pa:

10mV/Pa = -40dBV @ 94dBSPL

20 * log (10mV/1V) = -40dBV

Personally I think that manufacturers that spec only mV and force customers to do the conversion should be flogged (they don't spec max SPL or self-noise in mV, do they? Huh? Huh? Huh?), but I am not in charge of international standards setting, so . . .

Back to dynamic mics, they have low sensitivity, let's use -50dBV/Pa which is actually high for a dynamic. You won't find too many preamps much quieter than -130dBV-A (A weighted, we'll call that "dBA"), so you can derive a signal-to-noise ratio of 80dB, which is equivalent to a self-noise rating of 14dBA (94dB - 80dB). That's about best-case scenario with a dynamic; an SM57 into a -125dBA preamp will be 10dB worse (24dBA).

So most LDCs will be quieter than just about any dynamic mic-preamp combo; many if not most SDCs will be too.

Electrets can be as sensitive as externally biased condensers; sensitivity is generally a design decision given that there is an amplifier inside every condenser mic (although LDCs will normally have higher output than SDCs). Since electrets are often smaller diaphragm than externally biased condensers they might be viewed as noisier, but that's not a rule, there are good quiet electrets (KSM32, KSM141, AT3035). The noisier electret mics will have a similar noise performance to a typical dynamic mic-preamp combo.

When you want to know which mic gives you the lowest possible hiss, select the mic with the lowest self-noise rating. For most condenser microphones preamp noise is not a major factor. For that to be true, the mic's noise floor needs to be well above the preamp's noise floor. Reversing the above calculations, let's say you have a -40dBV/Pa microphone with 8dBA self-noise. Its absolute noise is:

-40dBV/Pa - (94 - 8) = -126dBA

And let's say you have the preamp with the -130dBA rating. Those two noise sources will sum as follows (this is a bit complex*):

20 * log (((10 ^ (-126 / 20)) ^ 2 + (10 ^ (-130 / 20)) ^ 2) ^ .5) = -124.5dBA

So your preamp has degraded your noise performance by 1.5dB (-126 vs. -124.5).

What if you choose a more sensitive mic (let's say -35dBV/Pa) with the same self-noise rating?

20 * log (((10 ^ (-121 / 20)) ^ 2 + (10 ^ (-130 / 20)) ^ 2) ^ .5) = -120.5dBA

Now you've only lost 0.5dB compared with the mic's noise floor, which is a 1dB improvement over the less sensitive mic.

What about a noisier mic, say 14dBA (still -35dBV/Pa sensitivity):

20 * log (((10 ^ (-115 / 20)) ^ 2 + (10 ^ (-130 / 20)) ^ 2) ^ .5) = -114.9dBA

Only a 0.1dB loss, pretty much negligible.

From that we can prove our rule-of-thumb which is you can ignore a noise source if it is about 10dB quieter than your other noise source. If the noise sources are the same, total noise will increase by 3dB.

In conclusion, you will experience the lowest total noise by using a reasonably sensitive mic (>-40dBV/Pa) with a low self-noise rating (<12dBA is good for most people) into a preamp with a reasonably low "equivalent input noise" (the figure I was using above) specification, which should be -125dBA or less.


* and note that I have ignored the effect of noise spectrum by treating all A-weighted noise as the same. There are long and mostly uninteresting arguments about whether or not A-weighting in appropriate, but this post is long enough as it is . . .
 
It's not quite as simple as this.

The rule of thumb, yes, is that LDCs are quieter than SDCs; but some SDCs are quieter than LDCs.

The Sennheiser MKH 20/30/40 series, MKH 800 and MKH 8000 series are quieter than most LDCs (the are RF condensers, not the normal AF type).

There can be large variations in specifications, so it's always best to look at the manufacturers figures.

You can do easy and quick comparisons at Microphone Data, the independent site. There are also lots of useful articles on this site.

That's useful
 
You can do easy and quick comparisons at Microphone Data, the independent site. There are also lots of useful articles on this site.

Not quite quick and easy if you have to register and login just to search by manufacturer. Although there does appear to be some useful links on the library page without registration.
 
Noise comes from many sources: thermal noise, which is a physical property of anything with resistance, a few different types of what I'll call "active noise", which is not a real term, I just made it up for simplicity. Finally, microphones have another type of noise from random molecules bouncing off of their diaphragm, which is lumped in with their active noise in deriving a mic's self-noise spec.

Dynamic mics (most of them, anyway) have no active components (transistors, tubes), so they only have a small amount of thermal noise, which is small enough that we can ignore it. This is why you never see a self-noise spec on a dynamic mic.

For a dynamic mic, the limiting factor is always the preamp, due to their low sensitivity. On sensitivity, "Pa" is a Pascal, one of which equals 94dBSPL. Some mics are stated in dBV, some are stated in mV, but both measurements should be 1 Pa:

10mV/Pa = -40dBV @ 94dBSPL

20 * log (10mV/1V) = -40dBV

Personally I think that manufacturers that spec only mV and force customers to do the conversion should be flogged (they don't spec max SPL or self-noise in mV, do they? Huh? Huh? Huh?), but I am not in charge of international standards setting, so . . .

Back to dynamic mics, they have low sensitivity, let's use -50dBV/Pa which is actually high for a dynamic. You won't find too many preamps much quieter than -130dBV-A (A weighted, we'll call that "dBA"), so you can derive a signal-to-noise ratio of 80dB, which is equivalent to a self-noise rating of 14dBA (94dB - 80dB). That's about best-case scenario with a dynamic; an SM57 into a -125dBA preamp will be 10dB worse (24dBA).

So most LDCs will be quieter than just about any dynamic mic-preamp combo; many if not most SDCs will be too.

Electrets can be as sensitive as externally biased condensers; sensitivity is generally a design decision given that there is an amplifier inside every condenser mic (although LDCs will normally have higher output than SDCs). Since electrets are often smaller diaphragm than externally biased condensers they might be viewed as noisier, but that's not a rule, there are good quiet electrets (KSM32, KSM141, AT3035). The noisier electret mics will have a similar noise performance to a typical dynamic mic-preamp combo.

When you want to know which mic gives you the lowest possible hiss, select the mic with the lowest self-noise rating. For most condenser microphones preamp noise is not a major factor. For that to be true, the mic's noise floor needs to be well above the preamp's noise floor. Reversing the above calculations, let's say you have a -40dBV/Pa microphone with 8dBA self-noise. Its absolute noise is:

-40dBV/Pa - (94 - 8) = -126dBA

And let's say you have the preamp with the -130dBA rating. Those two noise sources will sum as follows (this is a bit complex*):

20 * log (((10 ^ (-126 / 20)) ^ 2 + (10 ^ (-130 / 20)) ^ 2) ^ .5) = -124.5dBA

So your preamp has degraded your noise performance by 1.5dB (-126 vs. -124.5).

What if you choose a more sensitive mic (let's say -35dBV/Pa) with the same self-noise rating?

20 * log (((10 ^ (-121 / 20)) ^ 2 + (10 ^ (-130 / 20)) ^ 2) ^ .5) = -120.5dBA

Now you've only lost 0.5dB compared with the mic's noise floor, which is a 1dB improvement over the less sensitive mic.

What about a noisier mic, say 14dBA (still -35dBV/Pa sensitivity):

20 * log (((10 ^ (-115 / 20)) ^ 2 + (10 ^ (-130 / 20)) ^ 2) ^ .5) = -114.9dBA

Only a 0.1dB loss, pretty much negligible.

From that we can prove our rule-of-thumb which is you can ignore a noise source if it is about 10dB quieter than your other noise source. If the noise sources are the same, total noise will increase by 3dB.

In conclusion, you will experience the lowest total noise by using a reasonably sensitive mic (>-40dBV/Pa) with a low self-noise rating (<12dBA is good for most people) into a preamp with a reasonably low "equivalent input noise" (the figure I was using above) specification, which should be -125dBA or less.


* and note that I have ignored the effect of noise spectrum by treating all A-weighted noise as the same. There are long and mostly uninteresting arguments about whether or not A-weighting in appropriate, but this post is long enough as it is . . .


Thats just the sort of detailed technical explanation I was looking for.
So to summarise (just to check I've got this right)

to know the signal/noise ratio of a mic you need to know both the sensitivity and the self noise

sig/noise = sensitivity - preamp noise

self noise = 94 - sig/noise

self noise = 94 - sensitivity + preamp noise

sensitivity = 94 + preamp noise - self noise

sig/noise = 94 + preamp noise - self noise - preamp noise

sig/noise = 94 - self noise

am I right?
 
Thats just the sort of detailed technical explanation I was looking for.
So to summarise (just to check I've got this right)

to know the signal/noise ratio of a mic you need to know both the sensitivity and the self noise

sig/noise = sensitivity - preamp noise

self noise = 94 - sig/noise

self noise = 94 - sensitivity + preamp noise

sensitivity = 94 + preamp noise - self noise

sig/noise = 94 + preamp noise - self noise - preamp noise

sig/noise = 94 - self noise

am I right?

Almost; the self-noise rating is independent of preamp noise. Self-noise just the noise of the mic's capsule + the mic's internal amplifier. So replace the word "preamp" with "mic" above, and you're OK.

The preamp's noise *adds* to the mic's noise, but you don't just sum the two noise figures, you have to add the noise powers together which is that complex formula in my post . . . so once you calculate the mic's noise, you want to select a preamp with equivalent input noise << than the mic's noise.
 
Almost; the self-noise rating is independent of preamp noise. Self-noise just the noise of the mic's capsule + the mic's internal amplifier. So replace the word "preamp" with "mic" above, and you're OK.

The preamp's noise *adds* to the mic's noise, but you don't just sum the two noise figures, you have to add the noise powers together which is that complex formula in my post . . . so once you calculate the mic's noise, you want to select a preamp with equivalent input noise << than the mic's noise.

Yes, by preamp I meant the mics internal amp etc. I know any subsequent noise is added as the rms sum.
Incidentaly I am one of those DIY nuts so instead of paying £$£$£$ for a preamp I made one for next to nothing simply using 5534 chips which are pretty quiet.
 
5534s are fine for any condenser mic; for dynamics you might try a 1:4 transformer in front of the opamp. That should be as low noise as you'd ever need. But if you're already happy with the transformerless noise performance, don't bother.
 
5534s are fine for any condenser mic; for dynamics you might try a 1:4 transformer in front of the opamp. That should be as low noise as you'd ever need. But if you're already happy with the transformerless noise performance, don't bother.

Thats a clever idea. I'll remember that
 
Just a quick double check - to know signal/noise ratio for a condenser mic (ignoring the pre amp it is plugged into) self-noise is all you need to know, sensitivity is irrelevant, right?

When self noise is specified in CCIR as for the Sennheiser ME80 in microphone-data.com, how do you convert that to DIN/IEC?
 
Just a quick double check - to know signal/noise ratio for a condenser mic (ignoring the pre amp it is plugged into) self-noise is all you need to know, sensitivity is irrelevant, right?

Sensitivity is not relevant other than a low sensitivity condenser into a noisy preamp will result in a degradation of system noise. But strictly from the mic's point of view, sensitivity does not matter.

When self noise is specified in CCIR as for the Sennheiser ME80 in microphone-data.com, how do you convert that to DIN/IEC?

No easy answer; CCIR uses a very different weighting than A-weighting, such that the effect depends on each mic's noise spectrum. But the general answer would be "about 11dB", probably +/-2dB or so.

CCIR is supposed to provide a better relative measure vs. ambient noise (that is, if room noise is 30dBSPL and CCIR rating is 32dB, the mic's noise will be intrusive), but for me it doesn't really work better than A-weights strictly as a comparative measure between microphones. This is partially because 6kHz is masked for me by tinnitus, so the more broadband emphasis of A-weighting is closer to how I experience noise. But ultimately both systems emphasize the same basic range; CCIR has much larger positive weights in that range.
 
That's near enough for me, thanks. Sorry to hear you have tinnitus. My brother-in-law has it and he says he would LOVE to be able to hear a bit of tape hiss!
 
That's near enough for me, thanks. Sorry to hear you have tinnitus. My brother-in-law has it and he says he would LOVE to be able to hear a bit of tape hiss!

It's not too bad for me, a couple of unrelated tones in the 6kHz-8kHz area, mostly in my right ear. It does limit my hearing in that ear to 10kHz, but I still have 17kHz in my left ear. So I always test microphones using the left channel ;)

Doesn't really bother me, kind of my own internal head music :drunk:
 
I can't help feeling tinnitus is the sort of thing they might find a cure for in the not too distant future? I'm sure you know this, but apparantly (I read somewhere) the human ear achieves its high sensitivity by positive feedback, and tinnitus is when the feedback is a little too high causing oscillation. If they could find a drug to desensitise the nerves a little to reduce the feedback it would be the answer!?
 
Not quite quick and easy if you have to register and login just to search by manufacturer. Although there does appear to be some useful links on the library page without registration.

It's all free, so you only have to register once - then it's as easy as this forum.
 
Back
Top