Would you consider buying a used microphone post COVID?

LazerBeakShiek said:
I was told that Microphone Response and Spectrum Output are 2 different things. Boost the EQ at 5k is not the same as a response curve with a 5k peak. It colors the end result, not how it responds to the sound.
Click to expand...

You were told wrong. 5 dB is 5dB. Just because it goes through a transformer doesn't make it magically become 10 dB. Beside, the measurements for microphones are at the pin outs, not before the transformer. You do understand that condenser mics by nature have peaky response curves, that are compensated for through an equalization circuit in the mic itself.

What you might not be able to do with an EQ knob is to match exactly the same broad curve unless you have a way of measuring it and compensating in very precise bands. That's EXACTLY what modeling microphones and monitor/headphone EQ systems do.
 
Last edited:
Somebody better contact Townsend Labs and tell them to refund everyone's money. Also, Slate Digital. And Antelope Audio.
 
They know. I tried the VF-1 mic simulator. It offers a few options , LDCs , distancing, social distancing...

It sounds bad. Does it make a LDC out of an SM58 , no. There is no sensitivity when recording it. That sensitivity is what I use to find a nice spot to record. I dont find a nice spot and alter it to something else. That has never been the way to great sound. Adding more artificial crap in front..
 
Oh man, I could have just converted my SM58 to a 421..with this $100 box.. I wasted $241..

If my 421 comes tomorrow i will make a couple comparison clips.

20201229_180059.jpg
 
Comparing the VF1 to the Townsend or Slate is a bit like comparing a Behringer Vamp to a Kemper or AxeFX. There's a bit more sophistication to the emulation.
 
Never bought any of those. Never even thought about buying other guitar gear since about 1990. ADA is/was the best.

20200115_093612.jpgScreenshot 2020-12-29 192916.png

Have you purchased a bunch of modelers? Somebody i jammed with left a Line6 Toneport here. That has tons of bass and guitar models and effects. Lots in that box. It might even be usable live through the PA . Not for me. Latency on an analog instrument sucks no matter what amount. Latency Sucks.

My electronica is all Roland. V-bass, V-guitar VG-99, Fantom X, VP-9000 sampler...Sits in a corner with dust collecting.

Still executing riffs on my ADA gear almost daily.
 
Have you seen the VG-99? V guitar or V bass?

I made the jump to the Hexa pickup world in the end of the 90's. Just for digital recording. I used 2x Alesis Adats for 16 tracks. For this medium , I switched to Roland digital modeler/samplers. The V-bass and V-guitar has a graphic interface to build and customize virtual guitars. Each string has its own velocity, tune, and instrument . Not to mention it merges the worlds allowing triggering of samples.

Each string with its on tuning. Instant Open C, Drop D, you can assign the LFO on the G string and make it Bitch bender. Can only do that with Hexapickups.

The amp models and guitars kinda sound right.

They are the most powerful instrument synths ever made.

But a mic modeler? I cannot see working very well.
 
Being sensible here, I really have to disagree. The modellers in my Line 6 - the only thing I can use as a comparison as I have them, are really, really good. I bought them on the recommendation of Sound on Sound Magazine - the only mag I trust to be accurate and honest, and having SM58s and Sennheiser '35 and '45 mics I know how they sound very well, and if I change one Line 6 to the 58 and one to the Sennheiser, it's easy to tell which one is which - I'm absolutely convinced their modelling is spot on. As I said, what it cannot model is the polar pattern - because that is a physical thing and depends on the mechanical construction of the capsule with the vents and paths inside. So the modelled mic sounds the same, but where you can predict is a safe place for a monitor wedge with say the 58, is NOT the same on the Line 6. This, I have lived with happily.

I have a guitar synth - a Roland, and I have a line 6 system with a line 6 guitar that again has great modelling. However, we are talking about EQ replicating the frequency response curve of a microphone, and I think it can do it. I rather think my line 6 guitar can indeed sound like the guitars it models, but the pickups of course aren't there - so any weirdness you create with audio feedback will be different.

Oh - and this stuff about transformers - they are passive devices so do not interpret anything. They don't even decode anything - other windings can be used by further circuitry to do interesting stuff, but transformers do nothing at all apart from couple one coil to another, or more than one. The exhibit inductance, resistance and capacitance. They have voltage limits and they can be saturated - but they are just wire on formers, and nothing more clever than that. We think distortion can be nice sometimes, and transformers change the signal as it passes. Audio folk often believe this change is magical. I'd rather circuits were transparent personally, so I can change things!
 
rob aylestone said:
. They don't even decode anything - other windings can be used by further circuitry to do interesting stuff, but transformers do nothing at all


. We think distortion can be nice sometimes, and transformers change the signal as it passes.
Click to expand...

No man they change the sound in a subtle way. Transformers do something. A signal is input and output. 'Decoded' as it changed it.

You contradicted yourself there. Choose a side and perish. Rob, just likes fighting with words.

Yall i dont care about spelling in my threads. i am no Harry Potter. The screen I type on is broken/shattered. expect missing letters. Missing caps. etc.


edit- there was even a guy who sold microphone kits. Ribbon microphones. There were different ones. I think the only diffference in his ribbon kits wasthe transformer.
 
Last edited:
Decoded does NOT mean changed. Decoding is an active process. Transformers have as I said Inductance, resistance and capacitance - so can change tone and levels, like I said. Plenty of people have been using transformer mic splits for years and there is a subtle tonal change - and you tweak the EQ a touch to sort it. I see no contradiction - but maybe you're using the wrong terms - that's not spelling. You can use a transformer to help you decode M/S for example, but the transformer doesn't actually do it, the circuit does. By swapping the polarity around. Jensen and Sowter (who were about 40 miles from here) were the leaders in audio transformers, and they have plenty of detail on the net.

Don't get the ribbon mic thing - transformers have been a talking point in mics for years AKG 414s for example - transformers in some and electronics in others. The transformer versions sound different. Same in AKG 451s - the different versions over the years have had different transformers.

I totally understand why transformers change the sound. My confusion is just over the magical way you described them - but the words made me think you were on a different way of thinking. Spelling, punctuation and grammar get people hot under the collar, but in a technical world, you can't just use random words - sorry mate, but it's pretty important.

Transformer change the sound that go through them. It's like tube/valve designs. You can love it, or be totally unmoved. I'm unmoved. if it needs a bit of HF, turn the knob!
 
rob aylestone said:
. Spelling, punctuation and grammar get people hot under the collar, but in a technical world, you can't just use random words - sorry mate, but it's pretty important.

T!
Click to expand...

Its noise. Words typed or spoken.. It doesnt bother me. Do the best you can or are willing to. There is no value or currency to it. Show you are trying . I will listen. Respond.

Too many other things to fight about..Yall stayed in schools too long and gots' sick with the 'spelling'.
 
The world is not a civilized place, but a SAVAGE one.

Even the magistrate uses force to maintain dominance. Initiating the fight , locking you into endless combat as a child. They only have till your 16 y/o or soph year. then you can give that institution the finger forever. Fuck school.

Spelling and words are nothing.
 
rob aylestone said:
Being sensible here, I really have to disagree.
Click to expand...

Think of it like this microphones and cameras..I will be using abstract definitions.

The response curve at sensitivty is the same as frame rate in a camera. The microphone responds like high frame rate and lets you " hear the warts" or low frame rate and becomes 'flattering'.

A sensitive microphone picks up the sound information at 60 FPS say. Captures the attack of the sound at 60 fps.

A not sensitive microphone might only go 30 FPS. It will miss some of the sound in the attack.

So you take the not sensitive microphone and EQ it to simulate the sensitive microphone. The frame rate does not change. The missed information in the attack cant be recovered. The EQ changes the color palette of the camera not the framerate.

Ok , I have no idea what I m talkin about...Think I just spun myself up a little ..Where was I? Does any of that work for you?
 
I would disagree with your comparisons. Frame rate has no real correlation to a frequency response. A blurry camera with poor color reproduction which is running at 100fps won't show any "warts" more clearly than a camera at 20fps.

The response curve would be more akin to the color space that the camera can capture. How much variation is there from the original color, and how consistently are the various colors reproduced. If you take a picture of a neutral grey board, does the resulting picture come out blue in shade, red in shade, even grey? A "warm" camera will emphasize the red spectrum, a "cool" camera will emphasize the blue spectrum. These are very common terms used in photography and color printing. Adding EQ adjusts the "color", much as Kodak did to make a film that could correctly render colors when they were illuminated by incandescent light bulbs. Likewise, I had filters to adjust when shooting in fluorescent light. Recording Infrared or ultraviolet light would be like recording below 20Hz or above 20kHz.

Sensitivity of a microphone would be how effectively it can record in low light. Its dynamic range would be like how well it could record from lowest light to brightest.

Sample rate would be akin to frame rate and pixel depth in the digital realm. How small and fast are the slices that you capture? It really doesn't have a comparable property in an analog microphone. Maybe transient response....
 
TalismanRich said:
I would disagree with your comparisons.




Sample rate would be akin to frame rate and pixel depth in the digital realm. How small and fast are the slices that you capture? It really doesn't have a comparable property in an analog microphone. .
Click to expand...

How about ,microphones and trees?

Paul mcCartney say he talks to George through a tree. What type of specs come from a tree?

Screenshot 2020-12-30 152633.png
 
So I tried the MD421 . It is very tasty on the bass cabinet. I would recommend it to another as a solid bass instrument mic. A keeper to say the least. Rep well deserved. Has that 'something else'.

20201230_185358.jpg
 
LazerBeakShiek said:
Think of it like this microphones and cameras..I will be using abstract definitions.

The response curve at sensitivty is the same as frame rate in a camera. The microphone responds like high frame rate and lets you " hear the warts" or low frame rate and becomes 'flattering'.

A sensitive microphone picks up the sound information at 60 FPS say. Captures the attack of the sound at 60 fps.

A not sensitive microphone might only go 30 FPS. It will miss some of the sound in the attack.

So you take the not sensitive microphone and EQ it to simulate the sensitive microphone. The frame rate does not change. The missed information in the attack cant be recovered. The EQ changes the color palette of the camera not the framerate.

Ok , I have no idea what I m talkin about...Think I just spun myself up a little ..Where was I? Does any of that work for you?
Click to expand...
This is up there with your other "I read some stuff on the internet and now I have made up some facts to fit in my noggin" stuff. Seriously.

Most of us have a tendency to justify what we have paid money for, just like folks that pay $100 or more for bottles of wine. Your ears are better, their palates are more refined. Whatever.

But, the ability of a microphone to pick up transients (the word you were looking for) is much more a factor of construction and diaphragm (or ribbon) size and material, while sensitivity is a side effect of the microphone type and usually passive electronics. Ribbon mics, for instance, are very good with transients, but a passive ribbon has very low sensitivity. The same mic in an "active" form has sensitivity like a condenser. Same transient response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top