Topic: Mic2496 V2 - first sighting

[sunjan]

Core Sound has updated the old Mic2496, shipping now!
I haven't seen any posts about it yet, so here we go:
http://www.core-sound.com/Mic2496/1.php

"The new V2 adds zero-latency headphone monitoring, more low-noise gain (up to 60 dB), a true 10 mA of 48V phantom power per channel, more level indicator LEDs, and selection of all sample rates (32 to 192 KS/s) from the external sample rate switches (rather than internal jumpers). All of the toggle switches have been replaced by low profile slide switches. It sounds wonderful!"




I vaguely recall the old 2496 to be overpriced and slightly flaky. What do you guys think about the improvements?

[muj]

where's the report?

[sunjan]

where's the report?

Sorry man, wrong choice of words. "First sighting" more like it... I haven't picked it up (yet).

[Kyle]

This seems like it could be most useful - wonder how the sound, and dare I say it 'support' is...

Looks promising

+t for bringing to my attention - I rarely drop by core-sound....


edited for grammar

[live2496]

I have a Live2496 customer who is trying out a MIC2496/V2 with Core Sound HEB's. I'm looking into getting permission to make some sample recordings available. I should be back with some links soon.

Gordon

[jerryfreak]

this would be a nice match for schoeps ccms if the phantom power is a true 10ma per channel.

its not too big, its pretty similar to the first 2496, the only things i think i wouldnt like are the funky gain knobs, and i think a $399 or $499 would sell a lot more.

better metering, real monitoring, and the actually usable phantom powering are huge additions.

I do think calling it a 'V2' is a horrible name. too confusing for tapers who like to abbreviate

[surf1div1]

Hi Gordon, if you could compare the old vs new in terms of the sonic quality- is there an improvement?

I have a Live2496 customer who is trying out a MIC2496/V2 with Core Sound HEB's. I'm looking into getting permission to make some sample recordings available. I should be back with some links soon.

Gordon

[live2496]

Arnold,
I haven't had any opportunity to compare them side by side. To do so I think I would need to make a recording of the same thing using identical mics also. I just don't have access to one, though I suppose I could probably get a loaner. 

However, the original MIC2496 did sound really good to me. One thing I noticed though is that if you crank the volume on it there is some broadband noise. Of course you can't hear the noise at all at any reasonably moderate setting.

I think that Len may have addressed any audible nose level in the new MIC2496/V2....

more low-noise gain (up to 60 dB)

I read this to mean that it is quieter when cranking the level. (?)

For recordings where you have lots of sound, the MIC2496 is fine as is. I have made some great recordings with one. I think though that people recording birds and nature have to record at a higher level because of the distance they may be from the source. The MIC2496/V2 sounds like it would be better suited to those situations. But it would also mean that the noise level is lower at moderate settings too. So in that respect I suppose it must be better as the website indicates.

In my mind, the features that were much needed were the better metering and the hardware monitoring circuit. These are very helpful for pocket pc recording.

[surf1div1]

Thanks for the info mshilarious-
If my experience with the older unit draws any insight, I  know that using no phantom power on the MIC2496 (used a battery box with CS HEB) and using standard 9 volt coppertops, I would get about 90 minutes on average and up to two hours max- but would NEVER count on anything other then 90 minutes standard. CS at the time would recommend a sled that I'm sure was really helpful, but that for me kind of defeated the purpose IF I was taping in stealth mode which is about 95% of the timel. What has changed in the electronics to give you a decent recording time with the new unit PLUS be able to power mic's with 10MA draw? I know that I'm a relative neophte on the whole taping thing in many ways, but that said, wouldn't you divide up the total storage capacity of the battery by the total current draw (mics and MIC2496V2?
 

Whenever I read somebody say they want 48V/10mA phantom power from a battery powered unit, I think, do you really want 48V/10mA phantom power from a battery powered unit?  Because it's so expensive in terms of battery life.  48V * 10mA is about 0.5W, or 1W for two channels.  And you need to use a DC converter to get there, and those aren't anywhere close to 100% efficient.  Figure 80% if you're really lucky.  Now you're up to 1.25W.  That gives you about 5 hours on a 9V battery, just for the phantom power!

Reading the specs of this unit, "typical" phantom power consumes 35mA, presumably at the 7.4V of the internal battery.  That's only .26W, so we know that's not a 48V/10mA draw.  If you ask me what typical phantom power is, I'd say 2-3mA per mic, and that's consist with the specification.  But if you really want 10mA, then you are looking at 170mA plus the rest of the circuit at 110mA, that's 280mA and now you are down to something like 2 hours on the internal battery pack and an hour on a 9V (I don't quite get the battery life spec, seems like it should be longer).

Hey man, I'm as guilty as the next guy, I actually built a mic that needed 48V/10mA  So be careful what you wish for . . .


Also, that noise spec is quoted strangely.  It shouldn't be the noise level at a given point in the frequency spectrum, it's the integrated noise across the entire bandwidth.  It's late, but if I've done the math right, the difference between the two figures from 20Hz-20kHz is about 42dB, and A-weighted would be around 39dB higher . . . that's 98dB unweighted or 101dBA dynamic range, not 140dB.  There is a 120dB figure elsewhere on the site.  I'm confused.

[jerryfreak]

its def a hog. ive ruined several recordings by having serious voltage drop near the end of the set.

the denecke ad20, which appears to be the inspiration for this unit, runs for like 20 hrs.

not sure what uses so much power in the mic2496

Thanks for the info mshilarious-
If my experience with the older unit draws any insight, I  know that using no phantom power on the MIC2496 (used a battery box with CS HEB) and using standard 9 volt coppertops, I would get about 90 minutes on average and up to two hours max- but would NEVER count on anything other then 90 minutes standard. CS at the time would recommend a sled that I'm sure was really helpful, but that for me kind of defeated the purpose IF I was taping in stealth mode which is about 95% of the timel. What has changed in the electronics to give you a decent recording time with the new unit PLUS be able to power mic's with 10MA draw? I know that I'm a relative neophte on the whole taping thing in many ways, but that said, wouldn't you divide up the total storage capacity of the battery by the total current draw (mics and MIC2496V2?
 

Whenever I read somebody say they want 48V/10mA phantom power from a battery powered unit, I think, do you really want 48V/10mA phantom power from a battery powered unit?  Because it's so expensive in terms of battery life.  48V * 10mA is about 0.5W, or 1W for two channels.  And you need to use a DC converter to get there, and those aren't anywhere close to 100% efficient.  Figure 80% if you're really lucky.  Now you're up to 1.25W.  That gives you about 5 hours on a 9V battery, just for the phantom power!

Reading the specs of this unit, "typical" phantom power consumes 35mA, presumably at the 7.4V of the internal battery.  That's only .26W, so we know that's not a 48V/10mA draw.  If you ask me what typical phantom power is, I'd say 2-3mA per mic, and that's consist with the specification.  But if you really want 10mA, then you are looking at 170mA plus the rest of the circuit at 110mA, that's 280mA and now you are down to something like 2 hours on the internal battery pack and an hour on a 9V (I don't quite get the battery life spec, seems like it should be longer).

Hey man, I'm as guilty as the next guy, I actually built a mic that needed 48V/10mA  So be careful what you wish for . . .


Also, that noise spec is quoted strangely.  It shouldn't be the noise level at a given point in the frequency spectrum, it's the integrated noise across the entire bandwidth.  It's late, but if I've done the math right, the difference between the two figures from 20Hz-20kHz is about 42dB, and A-weighted would be around 39dB higher . . . that's 98dB unweighted or 101dBA dynamic range, not 140dB.  There is a 120dB figure elsewhere on the site.  I'm confused.

[live2496]

There is a graph on the web page that shows noise level from 10Hz to 20kHz. I'm not clear about whether this is the MIC2496 or the MIC2496 V2. But it shows the noise level to be -130 or better with a -20 test signal.

One of my customers had a Sanken mic and he was recording one channel dialog for movie sound. He said that a 9v battery lasted only 30 min. It really depends upon the mics. Personally I would not expect the Mic2496 to carry the load if I had a mic that needed that much power. I would use some phantom power setup for that.

I think it can power the HEB's for about 2 hours or more. It depends upon the gain setting and also on the new model the monitoring circuit takes some extra power. But you can turn that down or off with the volume switch.

[live2496]

I have some sample recordings of the MIC2496 V2 made with the HEB's (DPA 4060 capsules) ...

http://live2496.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=280#280

Recordings courtesy of Dale Carter.

I converted the larger ones to mp3's but if you wish to download the original unresampled/wav versions, just change the link to .wav instead of .mp3

Gordon

[scb]

its def a hog. ive ruined several recordings by having serious voltage drop near the end of the set.
the denecke ad20, which appears to be the inspiration for this unit, runs for like 20 hrs.
not sure what uses so much power in the mic2496

isn't the ad20 just a pre/ad with NO phantom?

[Colin Liston]

isn't the ad20 just a pre/ad with NO phantom?

Yes.

[jerryfreak]

its def a hog. ive ruined several recordings by having serious voltage drop near the end of the set.
the denecke ad20, which appears to be the inspiration for this unit, runs for like 20 hrs.
not sure what uses so much power in the mic2496

isn't the ad20 just a pre/ad with NO phantom?

yes but the 2496 is still a hog even without phantom.

the original one, the current was so low, it was useless for phantom anyway

[DSatz]

mshilarious, two things.

> Stick with 2 or 3mA, and you should be OK.

No, you shouldn't. There are good microphones from AKG, Neumann, Schoeps, Shure, CAD, Earthworks and other manufacturers that won't run, or won't run correctly, within that limitation. If you're looking for a compromise, I'd propose 5.5 mA per mike. That will exclude some CAD and Earthworks models but it should cover all the rest.

At 7 mA you reach a break-even point--drawing more current than that means dropping so much voltage across the 6.8 kOhm phantom feed resistors that less power is actually available to the microphone, the more current it draws beyond that point. In my universe the manufacturers would be reasonable and stop there--but "I only work here."

The other point (I won't quote you back) is about the noise level of the phantom supply. This is largely an unwarranted concern, and the "specifications" being offered have little bearing on reality. It's admirable to build a quiet DC supply, and all other things being equal, I'd try to build a quiet supply also, just as a matter of personal pride. But the phantom powering method (as contrasted with "modulation lead" or "T" powering) is inherently immune to supply noise, because the circuit guarantees that it will occur in equal amounts on both signal lines at the same time. Thus any hash or ripple or other gunk in the phantom supply is a "common mode signal" and is suppressed just like any other common mode signal at the input to the preamp or recorder.

This is why professional audio uses balanced connections in the first place! For professional-quality studio microphones and preamps, common mode suppression can amount to 70 - 80 dB under good conditions. Even under bad conditions (e.g. long cable with unequal resistance in its two modulation leads) you'd probably still get 50 dB of common mode immunity. It's not that hard to build a phantom power supply in which the noise from the supply itself would be, say, 10 dB below the noise level of the microphone at all frequencies.

--best regards

[DSatz]

mshilarious, now that I re-read your posting I see that you were indeed talking about the preamp noise and not the phantom supply noise. Sorry. It's the manufacturer, not you, who's been touting an absurdly low noise spec for a phantom power supply, without any hint of awareness that past a certain point, it will do no further good.

And agreed, a single 9-Volt battery isn't enough to power a pair of modern, transformerless condenser microphones for long. But a pair of 9-Volt batteries will pretty much cover you even for a long concert, I think. Normally I don't choose microphones just to go with a particular power supply; I choose a power supply to suit the microphones I intend to use. Again, it's a matter of priorities. Using a single 9-Volt battery rather than a pair of them isn't the most important thing to me.

--best regards

[surf1div1]

Thanks for the feedback DSatz- this is why this website is so invaluable for those considering purchasing from anyone. It's also how I found out about Chris Church's equipment and also confirms that I'm not the only sucker that purchased from Core. As I stated earlier in this thread, I have a battery supply for my mics, and would not trust the power supply of the MIC 2496 past 90 Minutes. I've also had too many recordings wasted by trying more without a battery sled. Which kind of defeats the whole idea of going 'stealth' as the promo on Core site suggests it being the smallest etc. out there. When you add all that other bulk, what are you really getting? It kind of defeat's for me the utility- and were only talking battery supply.

mshilarious, now that I re-read your posting I see that you were indeed talking about the preamp noise and not the phantom supply noise. Sorry. It's the manufacturer, not you, who's been touting an absurdly low noise spec for a phantom power supply, without any hint of awareness that past a certain point, it will do no further good.
And agreed, a single 9-Volt battery isn't enough to power a pair of modern, transformerless condenser microphones for long. But a pair of 9-Volt batteries will pretty much cover you even for a long concert, I think. Normally I don't choose microphones just to go with a particular power supply; I choose a power supply to suit the microphones I intend to use. Again, it's a matter of priorities. Using a single 9-Volt battery rather than a pair of them isn't the most important thing to me.

--best regards

[Len Moskowitz (Core Sound)]

And agreed, a single 9-Volt battery isn't enough to power a pair of modern, transformerless condenser microphones for long. But a pair of 9-Volt batteries will pretty much cover you even for a long concert, I think.

And a small external battery pack will power it for a entire festival.

Mic2496 V2 uses a P48 circuit very similar to the very efficient circuitry in our 2Phant.  It's completely different than the original Mic2496 (V1) circuit.

V2 also offers a LiPo rechargable battery option that last two to three times longer than a 9 Volt alkaline battery.