Testing audiophile claims and myths
May 11, 2015 at 8:07 PM Post #5,656 of 17,336
For U87's I would want a matched pair. They have been making them for something like 30 years at least. Two random ones could very a large amount. 


The studios I use provide them. I don't have mikes of my own. They probably buy matched pairs, maybe even matched sets for each studio.
 
May 12, 2015 at 2:40 AM Post #5,658 of 17,336
 
I have always A-B'd microphones in recording to select which will work best, then make finer adjustments on the ones I select. Often I am surprised at the ones I chose. I few times I ended with ones I would have never picked. But in that certain room they worked really well. 
 
Some recording microphones have a boost starting around 10kHz. above 8kHz the sound pressure losses can start to be a problem even in a small concert hall. 22C air at 15% RH has a 1dB loss at only 4kHz at 10 meters.  4k is .105 dB/m 20k is .333 dB/m 30k is close to a half a dB per meter at .450 dB/m. At 10k with microphones only 10 meters away you are already down 2.5dB and 3.3dB at 20kHz. This does not count the reduced reverb time in the higher frequencies.

A great post. By someone who obviously actually has practical experience with recording. I have not gone to the lengths of  temperature and RH ( sometimes, we are forced to record in unheated remote churches, even during winter, close to 0C air - or even below,  because of their good acoustic properties and  location away from the road or railroad; the practical PITA is how to wind the cables that get very hard in so low temperatures, apply some reasonable "internal heating", etc - despite wearing the clothes and shoes fit for mountaineering ... ) - in described conditions, it is keeping the morale up that comes first. But your figures are absolutely correct.
Keep up the good work ! 
beerchug.gif
 
 
May 12, 2015 at 2:56 AM Post #5,659 of 17,336
I have other extreme 22C would mean we cooled the room all day. It will be in 40-45 range in a few weeks. Hopefully you don't have to record in churches with domes. There has been times I would swear there was violins 20 meters in the air behind me, domes are always a battle
 
May 12, 2015 at 7:08 AM Post #5,661 of 17,336
Could you possibly explain what you mean by it's ground loop and optical can solve that?

I presume the other USB to Coaxial output that is selling for crazy amounts is purely snakeoil?

A ground loop can form when a device gets ground through an input be it a USB or line input as well as the powerline and or via its output. This causes varying current to flow between the devices and causes noise. An optical connection does not use electricity to convey the signal thus there is no ground connection on that path to potentially form a loop with that path. There are also USB isolators that use optical coupling that can possibly help, I've recommended this to someone in the past and it worked. If one has a ground loop there are other simpler things to try before getting more stuff.
 
May 12, 2015 at 7:39 AM Post #5,662 of 17,336
On the other hand, coaxial (rather than optical) S/PDIF is not isolated, and is therefore not protected from ground loops. The expensive USB to coaxial S/PDIF converters claim to reduce jitter, and may or may not implement isolation as well. In other words, they are indeed likely to be snake oil, as jitter is not normally audible with a DAC of any reasonable quality. Optical S/PDIF may have higher - but still inaudible - jitter than coaxial, that is why the converters use the latter, as the people buying them tend to worry more about jitter than ground loops.
 
May 12, 2015 at 7:46 AM Post #5,663 of 17,336
Originally Posted by uchihaitachi /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
Basically, I managed to get hold of a Benchmark DAC1 (classic the one without USB) at a crazy low price.
 
So I am trying to figure out a way to get my laptop to have a coaxial output. I would like an option that wouldn't damage fidelity in anyway. Would be grateful for further feedback!

 
Your laptop may already have optical S/PDIF output. It is just often shared with one of the 1/8" TRS connectors to save space.
 
May 12, 2015 at 8:14 AM Post #5,664 of 17,336
Unfortunately it doesnt :frowning2:

If you were in my position, use a benchmark dac1 with a converter or get the benchmark dac1 usb for a slight premium 150USD more, what would you go for?
 
May 12, 2015 at 8:51 AM Post #5,665 of 17,336
Unfortunately it doesnt
frown.gif


If you were in my position, use a benchmark dac1 with a converter or get the benchmark dac1 usb for a slight premium 150USD more, what would you go for?

You might want to look into a Schiit Bifrost Uber USB DAC. It has all 3 inputs, sounds great and costs less.
 
May 12, 2015 at 10:10 AM Post #5,666 of 17,336
Unfortunately it doesnt
frown.gif


If you were in my position, use a benchmark dac1 with a converter or get the benchmark dac1 usb for a slight premium 150USD more, what would you go for?

 
If you are set on getting the DAC1, get the version with the USB.  This device would certainly be the end game for almost everyone, so you may as well future-proof it by getting one with the most options available.  It will also make it easier to sell once you come to your senses and use a $50 DAC later. 
biggrin.gif
 
 
May 12, 2015 at 11:05 AM Post #5,667 of 17,336
May 12, 2015 at 11:14 AM Post #5,669 of 17,336
   
No you can't, by definition, hear ultrasonics.

Sorry, i cannot, i can hear what is considered ultrasonics by some engineering books.. they consider that 16-20Khz is ultrasonics, for some reason. 
 
This explains loud noises i hear sometimes in carrefour, near some devices for checking prices. it is quite disturbing.,
 
May 12, 2015 at 11:22 AM Post #5,670 of 17,336
  Sorry, i cannot, i can hear what is considered ultrasonics by some engineering books.. they consider that 16-20Khz is ultrasonics, for some reason. 
 
This explains loud noises i hear sometimes in carrefour, near some devices for checking prices. it is quite disturbing.,

If you consider audible sounds as sonic as in something a human can hear, what would you think that ultrasonic means?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top