Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: willndmb on March 09, 2007, 01:49:07 PM
-
the orignal thread was 26 pages and dropped to page 3
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,59577.0.html
so i started a new one instead of topping it
just wondering if anyone has made and progress or has any updates
thanks
-
Let me be real open and honest about what happened to this project.
Several different camps decided to tackle this task. NO ONE who is attempting to fabricate and design was willing to share any information, parts, resources at all. Several people stepped up to help as well as contribute some JK Labs gear and cash as long as the project was open and free to everyone. Good souls. Then there are a couple of people who are working on this still (I think) who are solely in it for profit. So that killed the good people who were willing to donate gear to check out and examine.
So there you have it. I am not holding my breath anymore to actually see an active product come out. The bad thing is that its not based on it being "possible" because I know it is but about people wanted to make big bucks instead.
-
wow. i completely missed that trainwreck.
-
Let me be real open and honest about what happened to this project.
Several different camps decided to tackle this task. NO ONE who is attempting to fabricate and design was willing to share any information, parts, resources at all. Several people stepped up to help as well as contribute some JK Labs gear and cash as long as the project was open and free to everyone. Good souls. Then there are a couple of people who are working on this still (I think) who are solely in it for profit. So that killed the good people who were willing to donate gear to check out and examine.
So there you have it. I am not holding my breath anymore to actually see an active product come out. The bad thing is that its not based on it being "possible" because I know it is but about people wanted to make big bucks instead.
I was wondering if you can explain what it is you were trying to do with the AKG mics?
-
separate the caps from the bodies w/ active cables or devise a box that acts as the bodies w/ actives inbetween.
-
separate the caps from the bodies w/ active cables or devise a box that acts as the bodies w/ actives inbetween.
Do you want to be able to re attach the mic capsule to the body? if so thats complicated. But if you dont have to have the mic capsule reattach its easy.. I would simply use the mic body preamp and mount that in a metal project box. Use some nice connectors on the capsules and some nice mogami cable. I could do that in an afternoon.
I would do it for free just to show how it can be done. If anyone is interested. I am not interested in doing it for money. It would just be a side project for me.
But someone would have to pay me for the parts and return shipping.
-
NO ONE who is attempting to fabricate and design was willing to share any information, parts, resources at all.
Agreed... With one big exception (I am aware of) and that was Richard, aka poorlyconditioned. He posted a couple of very useful schematics.
I wanted to do some prototyping with his schematics and play around but never got around to ordering the bits. The thing about protoyping is you really need to stock up on components.. Otherwise you're constantly going out for parts. And most of us don't have local stores that sell what we need so it comes down to ordering.
I think it might be very useful to put together a group order of those components (and some extras) as an 'active experiment kit'.. But Spring will soon be in the air so I imagine that will put a damper on things.
Chris, a buffer circuit is needed between the body and cap because caps can't drive the cable load. Power needs to be supplied to that buffer circuit.
-
separate the caps from the bodies w/ active cables or devise a box that acts as the bodies w/ actives inbetween.
Do you want to be able to re attach the mic capsule to the body? if so thats complicated. But if you dont have to have the mic capsule reattach its easy.. I would simply use the mic body preamp and mount that in a metal project box. Use some nice connectors on the capsules and some nice mogami cable. I could do that in an afternoon.
I would do it for free just to show how it can be done. If anyone is interested. I am not interested in doing it for money. It would just be a side project for me.
But someone would have to pay me for the parts and return shipping.
then, what are you waiting for? kidding. seriously, read the other thread for clarification. it would suit me fine to have the caps>actives>bodies>xlr interconnects>pre/recorder.
-
NO ONE who is attempting to fabricate and design was willing to share any information, parts, resources at all.
Agreed... With one big exception (I am aware of) and that was Richard, aka poorlyconditioned. He posted a couple of very useful schematics.
I wanted to do some prototyping with his schematics and play around but never got around to ordering the bits. The thing about protoyping is you really need to stock up on components.. Otherwise you're constantly going out for parts. And most of us don't have local stores that sell what we need so it comes down to ordering.
I think it might be very useful to put together a group order of those components (and some extras) as an 'active experiment kit'.. But Spring will soon be in the air so I imagine that will put a damper on things.
Chris, a buffer circuit is needed between the body and cap because caps can't drive the cable load. Power needs to be supplied to that buffer circuit.
Thats easy use a simple Fet and use a phantom voltage to feed it. Its just a matter of finding a good fet I like the Fairchild J202 with a 1 gigaohm resistor and 10 volts going to it.
-
The rub is.. a lot of folks don't want bodies due to the extra cost, space and the need for 48v.
Also.. and this is a biggie.. packaging all that crap into a collette and dealing with the capsule connections and threads is a fair bit of R&D. If you are willing to just solder to the caps, it gets a whole lot easier. The actual cost to have the collettes banged out on an auto-chucking cnc lathe is fairly minimal.
There are two basic approaches.. Use a body or build something like an RMod/Nbox. The latter supply the capsule with 60v.
Ultimately, I think the devil is in all of the details and the time to make it work Really Well. Then there are the support issues and being there for your customers.. Nick supports his Nbox customers very well. The JK labs guy apparently got sick of dealing with it and gave up..
-
NO ONE who is attempting to fabricate and design was willing to share any information, parts, resources at all.
Agreed... With one big exception (I am aware of) and that was Richard, aka poorlyconditioned. He posted a couple of very useful schematics.
I wanted to do some prototyping with his schematics and play around but never got around to ordering the bits. The thing about protoyping is you really need to stock up on components.. Otherwise you're constantly going out for parts. And most of us don't have local stores that sell what we need so it comes down to ordering.
I think it might be very useful to put together a group order of those components (and some extras) as an 'active experiment kit'.. But Spring will soon be in the air so I imagine that will put a damper on things.
Chris, a buffer circuit is needed between the body and cap because caps can't drive the cable load. Power needs to be supplied to that buffer circuit.
Thats easy use a simple Fet and use a phantom voltage to feed it. Its just a matter of finding a good fet I like the Fairchild J201 with a 1 gigaohm resistor and 10 volts going to it.
That is as far as I got. I ordered some J201 fets and 1G resistors. I ordered two CK63 caps. I built a prototype, with aligator clips and a bunch of 9V batteries in series to generate the (60V) polarization voltage. I even had collettes machined here, but they did not work well becuase I had no nice way to connect to the middle pin (besides, they were aluminum, they should be brass instead). This is all in the previous thread, including photos and schematics.
I bailed out for two reasons. The first was stress/burnout. I wanted to get on with recording, and have been using CK91/93 with a simple battery box instead. (Hey, at least I didn't make promises or take money or gear before I went AWOL like some others here!) The second reason was I could not find a nice *mechanical* system to connect reliably to the capsules. Oh yeah, finally, I did not want to get in the business of building for others. I just wanted to provide information.
I'm hoping someone else takes what information I gave and runs with it. I, and many others would pay a reasonble price for this provided whoever makes it provides open information (schematics, etc) so DIY types can build as well. I think this forum/community can have both DIY and pre built units existing together.
Oh yeah, I spoke to ScheopsNbox (Nick) by Email and he provided *some* information. Apparantly he buys collettes (with FET) directly from Scheops and builds a box himself. But he did not provide much information about what was inside, aside from the fact that a bunch of alkaline batteries are used to provide the 60V polarization voltage. So, much like my ideas. Oh yeah, his box, with collettes, is more than $1000. I was hoping for a cheaper solution for the AKG.
Richard
PS: I should mention, that as Chris said, this is not mysterious at all. I got my ideas form studying the AKG service manuals (C451, C480). It is just a matter of putting it together and providing customer service, two things I'm not very good at...
-
There is two things I can say about Richard
#1 he is not in it for the money.
#2 he has always been about sharing his ideas and helping others around here.
Its not fair the lump him in with anyone just looking to make a buck.
-
ofotd thanks for the honest reply
its to bad that it couldn't have worked out better
poor has always been a sharing person, thanks for that as well
church has also been a great person and someone to be helpful with knowledge and gear
heres to hoping it gets of the ground again and can be a win win situation for everyone involved :suds:
-
ofotd thanks for the honest reply
its to bad that it couldn't have worked out better
poor has always been a sharing person, thanks for that as well
church has also been a great person and someone to be helpful with knowledge and gear
heres to hoping it gets of the ground again and can be a win win situation for everyone involved :suds:
QFT in every way.
-
i, for one, appreciate ANY effort towards this. if i wouldve finished electronics school, id prolly be all over this buil-wise. i LOVEd building radio's snd stuff. point-to-point wiring is fun :)
i do hope this gets off the ground someday sooner than later. us 480 users always bring the heat and deserve actives finally ;D
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
#3 is save money. Caps only are something like $400/pair, mics with bodies are something like $1200 a pair. I bought just the caps, optimistic (?) that I could get something running...
Richard
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
usually is to get mics smaller so they would be mot seen ( in film business as i work and use schoepses with colet )
or could be placed in places where the long body cant sit at all like on the boom when you work with very low ceilings , then you place the capsule only inside small suspention and get that extra 10 cm you dont have .
never thought about running directly to preamp with 60 v but of course it is a good point for saving money .
just a tought, did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
#3 is save money. Caps only are something like $400/pair, mics with bodies are something like $1200 a pair. I bought just the caps, optimistic (?) that I could get something running...
Richard
I see there are a few preamps out there made by ACO pacific that are pretty cheap that will put out 60 volts polarization voltage they might be able to work with these caps. Do you have an AKG schematic of this mic body?
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
#3 is save money. Caps only are something like $400/pair, mics with bodies are something like $1200 a pair. I bought just the caps, optimistic (?) that I could get something running...
Richard
I see there are a few preamps out there made by ACO pacific that are pretty cheap that will put out 60 volts polarization voltage they might be able to work with these caps. Do you have an AKG schematic of this mic body?
Go to AKG tech support. They have all service documentation online. Look for C480 and C451.
Richard
-
I for one, want to keep the bodies in the equation.
-
sorry to sound stupid but whats QFT mean?
-
it would save lots of room and weight on large mic trees to only have a small bar mount and capsules. that is why i want em, and low visibility. at moe in mobile dre and myself ran two sets of full body akg's (with full metal SSm mounts) and one set of LD adk's. if we had actives the weight would have been more manageable.
-
sorry to sound stupid but whats QFT mean?
I believe it's
"Quite F-ing True"
-
sorry to sound stupid but whats QFT mean?
I believe it's
"Quite F-ing True"
or Quoted For Truth.
-
thanks for the qft info guys
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
some people might want to see it a reality for stealthing :-*
-
did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
I think this would be the easiest solution, but I can't figure out how the swivel comes apart and I don't want to rip up my pair unless I know I can get it re-assembled in case it doesn't work out.
-
did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
I think this would be the easiest solution, but I can't figure out how the swivel comes apart and I don't want to rip up my pair unless I know I can get it re-assembled in case it doesn't work out.
Take the label off the side and it will reveal a screw. It's just a thin metal plate with adhesive on it.
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
size of rig and ease of set up and break down; when I am taping with my 480s next to a taper using caps and active cables I am always envious, since their rig is so small and can be assembled in just a minute or two; I am a true fan of the AKG in your face sound, but I'd love to tape without the bodies, and I'm not the only 460/480 taper who feels that way, not by a long shot
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
size of rig and ease of set up and break down; when I am taping with my 480s next to a taper using caps and active cables I am always envious, since their rig is so small and can be assembled in just a minute or two; I am a true fan of the AKG in your face sound, but I'd love to tape without the bodies, and I'm not the only 460/480 taper who feels that way, not by a long shot
that pretty much sums it up for me. i would like to have the freedom to run ck63/61 > actives > pre of choice > 671 (or just ck63/61 > actives > ACM mod 671 even if it means keeping the bodies in the equation). the ease of setup and reduction of weight/size is what i am looking for. i would LOVE to ditch the shure vert bar and AT shocks for a kwon bar and one neumann style shock, while still preserving the 480 63/61 sound.
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
size of rig and ease of set up and break down; when I am taping with my 480s next to a taper using caps and active cables I am always envious, since their rig is so small and can be assembled in just a minute or two; I am a true fan of the AKG in your face sound, but I'd love to tape without the bodies, and I'm not the only 460/480 taper who feels that way, not by a long shot
that pretty much sums it up for me. i would like to have the freedom to run ck63/61 > actives > pre of choice > 671 (or just ck63/61 > actives > ACM mod 671 even if it means keeping the bodies in the equation). the ease of setup and reduction of weight/size is what i am looking for. i would LOVE to ditch the shure vert bar and AT shocks for a kwon bar and one neumann style shock, while still preserving the 480 63/61 sound.
like you guys said too
size
ever been to a show where someone complains your mics are blocking their view? happened to me twice
once security was cool and told them to bad, once they made me take down my gear till i could find someone to trade seats with me
not that with actives that couldn't still happen but the chances are less
-
Ok help me understand the objective of removing the mic capsule from the body of the mic. Why do you guys want to do this so badly? I can think of a few reasons 1-sound the mic body will effect the sound of the mic. 2- Mic techniques that can be employed if the mics were smaller.. Am I missing anything else? if so please tell me what.
size of rig and ease of set up and break down; when I am taping with my 480s next to a taper using caps and active cables I am always envious, since their rig is so small and can be assembled in just a minute or two; I am a true fan of the AKG in your face sound, but I'd love to tape without the bodies, and I'm not the only 460/480 taper who feels that way, not by a long shot
that pretty much sums it up for me. i would like to have the freedom to run ck63/61 > actives > pre of choice > 671 (or just ck63/61 > actives > ACM mod 671 even if it means keeping the bodies in the equation). the ease of setup and reduction of weight/size is what i am looking for. i would LOVE to ditch the shure vert bar and AT shocks for a kwon bar and one neumann style shock, while still preserving the 480 63/61 sound.
like you guys said too
size
ever been to a show where someone complains your mics are blocking their view? happened to me twice
once security was cool and told them to bad, once they made me take down my gear till i could find someone to trade seats with me
not that with actives that couldn't still happen but the chances are less
true indeed, not long ago Shawn Smith and I taped a Stanton Moore Trio show in a small supper club, where we got delegated to the middle of the room instead of the normal front row in this venue; it would have been impossible to run his 460s, ADKtl's, or my 480s, from that location, but fortunately we had my 460 active set up, which was so small that we were able to tape it from that location without interfering too much with the sight of the table behind us, were it not for those mics we would have not been able to tape it at all
-
Guys let me remind alot of you of a couple things from the previous discussion. Let's say that we can make this happen and actives can be made ala JKLabs or nbox. You are cutting out the meat of the AKG sound, the bodies. While you certainly get the sound the caps deliver you may forget how big of an influence the bodies have. Especially the 480 bodies. I think alot of you would be very disappointed with the sound you would get without the bodies. I know I would.
If your reasoning is ONLY that you want to be low-pro keep in mind that comes at a price. That price is the distinct AKG sound.
I had very high hopes for this project. The sheer greediness of people (those offering to develop this project) amazed me. As was previously mentioned before Richard (poorlyconditioned) was very helpful on a very early schematic. His involvement though at the time was limited because he had other projects going on as well.
As it stands I know of two groups or individuals working on an active project. One group is affiliated with ts.com and they seem to have either stopped development or don't have a passion for this project and its now slow going. The other group that contacted me (non-ts.com'ers) are working solely on an active setup keeping the bodies in the mix. They are making progress but still have a way to go.
Lastly let's think about economics. Right now I can't see a successful project like this costing any less than $1000 to start. That's without caps or bodies.
So there is more to this that someone just 'figuring it out'. Also I can't see Chris making this happen since it seems like he has several other projects on his plate it seems.
EDIT: Removed a sentence so Chris Church feels better.
-
So there is more to this that someone just 'figuring it out'. Also I can't see Chris making this happen since it seems like he has several other projects on his plate it seems. This does not appear to be a weekend project.
I am offended by your comments what are you saying I am not capable of doing this??? You dont know me from Adam. I was asking questions and getting some answers. I dont see this as a viable project my self but its not because its not a week end project... Its because its silly to want to spend $1000 on a new preamp and cables just to make the mic bodies disappear. That's my opinion. I have come up with a few methods of doing this with off the shelf components if anyone is interested. But you sir do not know me well enough to comment on me like that. But you and I have had a long standing personal problem right? Anyway I dont think this is a viable project because it will cost more money then the person will gain in function. This is the real reason why no one wants to do this.
PS.. How do you know I have several projects on my plate???? Give me a break trust me if I wanted to make this happen it would happen but I dont see a future for it and the amount of time it would take to make it happen would be intense. But I forgot your 100% against someone making a profit from there hard work right. Yes everything should be free right? no one should get paid for there work... And besides I am an VENDOR!!! look out kids run for your lives a vendor is posting! Give me a break. You know you criticize me when I post and try to sell something fair enough. Then you come and criticize me when I want to do something for free. Man I guess there's just no pleasing you? Not that I give a shit. You know its funny a vendor like me spends time on here trying to help people and all you can be towards me is an asshole at every opportunity.
-
So there is more to this that someone just 'figuring it out'. Also I can't see Chris making this happen since it seems like he has several other projects on his plate it seems. This does not appear to be a weekend project.
I am offended by your comments what are you saying I am not capable of doing this??? You dont know me from Adam. I was asking questions and getting some answers. I dont see this as a viable project my self but its not because its not a week end project... Its because its silly to want to spend $1000 on a new preamp and cables just to make the mic bodies disappear. That's my opinion. I have come up with a few methods of doing this with off the shelf components if anyone is interested. But you sir do not know me well enough to comment on me like that. But you and I have had a long standing personal problem right? Anyway I dont think this is a viable project because it will cost more money then the person will gain in function. This is the real reason why no one wants to do this.
PS.. How do you know I have several projects on my plate???? Give me a break trust me if I wanted to make this happen it would happen but I dont see a future for it and the amount of time it would take to make it happen would be intense. But I forgot your 100% against someone making a profit from there hard work right. Yes everything should be free right? no one should get paid for there work... And besides I am an VENDOR!!! look out kids run for your lives a vendor is posting! Give me a break. You know you criticize me when I post and try to sell something fair enough. Then you come and criticize me when I want to do something for free. Man I guess there's just no pleasing you? Not that I give a shit. You know its funny a vendor like me spends time on here trying to help people and all you can be towards me is an asshole at every opportunity.
Totally taken the wrong way. I do not doubt you could figure it out. I was referring to more of a time thing since you are developing a preamp as well. Absolutely no doubt about your ability at all. I have no beef with you at all. Never did. Don't want to get into an argument at all. Not my intentions then or now.
EDIT TO ADD: Where did I criticize you in my above post?
-
So there is more to this that someone just 'figuring it out'. Also I can't see Chris making this happen since it seems like he has several other projects on his plate it seems. This does not appear to be a weekend project.
I am offended by your comments what are you saying I am not capable of doing this??? You dont know me from Adam. I was asking questions and getting some answers. I dont see this as a viable project my self but its not because its not a week end project... Its because its silly to want to spend $1000 on a new preamp and cables just to make the mic bodies disappear. That's my opinion. I have come up with a few methods of doing this with off the shelf components if anyone is interested. But you sir do not know me well enough to comment on me like that. But you and I have had a long standing personal problem right? Anyway I dont think this is a viable project because it will cost more money then the person will gain in function. This is the real reason why no one wants to do this.
PS.. How do you know I have several projects on my plate???? Give me a break trust me if I wanted to make this happen it would happen but I dont see a future for it and the amount of time it would take to make it happen would be intense. But I forgot your 100% against someone making a profit from there hard work right. Yes everything should be free right? no one should get paid for there work... And besides I am an VENDOR!!! look out kids run for your lives a vendor is posting! Give me a break. You know you criticize me when I post and try to sell something fair enough. Then you come and criticize me when I want to do something for free. Man I guess there's just no pleasing you? Not that I give a shit. You know its funny a vendor like me spends time on here trying to help people and all you can be towards me is an asshole at every opportunity.
Totally taken the wrong way. I do not doubt you could figure it out. I was referring to more of a time thing since you are developing a preamp as well. Absolutely no doubt about your ability at all. I have no beef with you at all. Never did. Don't want to get into an argument at all. Not my intentions then or now.
EDIT TO ADD: Where did I criticize you in my above post?
Ok I dont want to ruin this thread with bullshit. But your comments "this does not appear to be a week end project" were offensive. And I dont know anyone who runs a business and takes audio seriously who would not be offended by your comments. I am not a weekend warrior I do this 7 days a week. I dont have weekend projects unless you include staining the deck. That's why I got offended your comments make it seem like I am only interested in doing "extra" stuff on week ends, when the simple truth of the matter is how do you know how much time I have spent on this? and if you don't know how much time I have spent on it how can you make the above comment?
-
So there is more to this that someone just 'figuring it out'. Also I can't see Chris making this happen since it seems like he has several other projects on his plate it seems. This does not appear to be a weekend project.
I am offended by your comments what are you saying I am not capable of doing this??? You dont know me from Adam. I was asking questions and getting some answers. I dont see this as a viable project my self but its not because its not a week end project... Its because its silly to want to spend $1000 on a new preamp and cables just to make the mic bodies disappear. That's my opinion. I have come up with a few methods of doing this with off the shelf components if anyone is interested. But you sir do not know me well enough to comment on me like that. But you and I have had a long standing personal problem right? Anyway I dont think this is a viable project because it will cost more money then the person will gain in function. This is the real reason why no one wants to do this.
PS.. How do you know I have several projects on my plate???? Give me a break trust me if I wanted to make this happen it would happen but I dont see a future for it and the amount of time it would take to make it happen would be intense. But I forgot your 100% against someone making a profit from there hard work right. Yes everything should be free right? no one should get paid for there work... And besides I am an VENDOR!!! look out kids run for your lives a vendor is posting! Give me a break. You know you criticize me when I post and try to sell something fair enough. Then you come and criticize me when I want to do something for free. Man I guess there's just no pleasing you? Not that I give a shit. You know its funny a vendor like me spends time on here trying to help people and all you can be towards me is an asshole at every opportunity.
Totally taken the wrong way. I do not doubt you could figure it out. I was referring to more of a time thing since you are developing a preamp as well. Absolutely no doubt about your ability at all. I have no beef with you at all. Never did. Don't want to get into an argument at all. Not my intentions then or now.
EDIT TO ADD: Where did I criticize you in my above post?
Ok I dont want to ruin this thread with bullshit. But your comments "this does not appear to be a week end project" were offensive. And I dont know anyone who runs a business and takes audio seriously who would not be offended by your comments. I am not a weekend warrior I do this 7 days a week. I dont have weekend projects unless you include staining the deck. That's why I got offended your comments make it seem like I am only interested in doing "extra" stuff on week ends, when the simple truth of the matter is how do you know how much time I have spent on this? and if you don't know how much time I have spent on it how can you make the above comment?
Alright I will take out a sentence that was not referring to you in any way shape or form to make you happy. Are you alright now? Does that make you happy?
-
So there is more to this that someone just 'figuring it out'. Also I can't see Chris making this happen since it seems like he has several other projects on his plate it seems. This does not appear to be a weekend project.
I am offended by your comments what are you saying I am not capable of doing this??? You dont know me from Adam. I was asking questions and getting some answers. I dont see this as a viable project my self but its not because its not a week end project... Its because its silly to want to spend $1000 on a new preamp and cables just to make the mic bodies disappear. That's my opinion. I have come up with a few methods of doing this with off the shelf components if anyone is interested. But you sir do not know me well enough to comment on me like that. But you and I have had a long standing personal problem right? Anyway I dont think this is a viable project because it will cost more money then the person will gain in function. This is the real reason why no one wants to do this.
PS.. How do you know I have several projects on my plate???? Give me a break trust me if I wanted to make this happen it would happen but I dont see a future for it and the amount of time it would take to make it happen would be intense. But I forgot your 100% against someone making a profit from there hard work right. Yes everything should be free right? no one should get paid for there work... And besides I am an VENDOR!!! look out kids run for your lives a vendor is posting! Give me a break. You know you criticize me when I post and try to sell something fair enough. Then you come and criticize me when I want to do something for free. Man I guess there's just no pleasing you? Not that I give a shit. You know its funny a vendor like me spends time on here trying to help people and all you can be towards me is an asshole at every opportunity.
Totally taken the wrong way. I do not doubt you could figure it out. I was referring to more of a time thing since you are developing a preamp as well. Absolutely no doubt about your ability at all. I have no beef with you at all. Never did. Don't want to get into an argument at all. Not my intentions then or now.
EDIT TO ADD: Where did I criticize you in my above post?
Ok I dont want to ruin this thread with bullshit. But your comments "this does not appear to be a week end project" were offensive. And I dont know anyone who runs a business and takes audio seriously who would not be offended by your comments. I am not a weekend warrior I do this 7 days a week. I dont have weekend projects unless you include staining the deck. That's why I got offended your comments make it seem like I am only interested in doing "extra" stuff on week ends, when the simple truth of the matter is how do you know how much time I have spent on this? and if you don't know how much time I have spent on it how can you make the above comment?
thicker skin.. remember?
-
chris - you, your skills, and products are fine.
[smart-assery]
no need to be so defensive. i want to buy your products eventually, but not if you are going to be a cry baby when somebody questions you. I only buy gear from manly men.
[/smart-assery]
;)
seriously though.....no need to be so defensive all the time.
-
sorry to sound stupid but whats QFT mean?
I believe it's
"Quite F-ing True"
or Quoted For Truth.
Not to jack the thread but,
a) thanks for clearing that up
and
b) I like my interpretation better, although both fit nicely and the real one is classier. ;)
Edit to add on-topic content:
How significant of an audio difference will separating the caps & bodies with an active cable create?
As I understand it, the physical bodies themselves, not just the electronics, are part of the sound of a microphone. I know people don't seem to run around complaining over a difference between schoeps actives + bodies vs non-active setups but, well, given this talk about the "AKG sound" isn't that worth a consideration?
-
chris - you, your skills, and products are fine.
[smart-assery]
no need to be so defensive. i want to buy your products eventually, but not if you are going to be a cry baby when somebody questions you. I only buy gear from manly men.
[/smart-assery]
;)
seriously though.....no need to be so defensive all the time.
Ok fine I get your point. I will be a manly man from now on. If you buy something from me. LOL if not I am going back to being a crybaby.... I think people would buy stuff from me just to shut me up.... :) I guess in the end if I have to be a man to make more sales so be it. :-X
-
does anyone have any JK-labs/480 or 460 comps?
i've heard only a few JK labs tapes and thought they sounded pretty good - i'd be curious to hear a direct comp if anyone has one
-
does anyone have any JK-labs/480 or 460 comps?
i've heard only a few JK labs tapes and thought they sounded pretty good - i'd be curious to hear a direct comp if anyone has one
yes, two members here use them, Ice8888 and songsoffreedom (I think)
-
does anyone have any JK-labs/480 or 460 comps?
i've heard only a few JK labs tapes and thought they sounded pretty good - i'd be curious to hear a direct comp if anyone has one
yes, two members here use them, Ice8888 and songsoffreedom (I think)
are the comps posted anywhere? if someone gets a copy to me I can throw them up on tapers.org publicly if not
-
How significant of an audio difference will separating the caps & bodies with an active cable create?
As I understand it, the physical bodies themselves, not just the electronics, are part of the sound of a microphone. I know people don't seem to run around complaining over a difference between schoeps actives + bodies vs non-active setups but, well, given this talk about the "AKG sound" isn't that worth a consideration?
i have heard JKLabs ck61 and 63 sources
i like them
they do have a different sound then full body 48x sources but its not bad or good just different
i think keeping the bodies around is a plus though vs having a box to replace them
-
does anyone have any JK-labs/480 or 460 comps?
i've heard only a few JK labs tapes and thought they sounded pretty good - i'd be curious to hear a direct comp if anyone has one
yes, two members here use them, Ice8888 and songsoffreedom (I think)
are the comps posted anywhere? if someone gets a copy to me I can throw them up on tapers.org publicly if not
not a comp......but I'm pretty sure my Galactic is still running on etree. (sorry I can't post a link from work)
I absoultely LOVE the JKLabs box!!!
-
Keep in mind that those like schoepsnbox who are developing a box are spending their own free time to do this. I see nothing wrong with him not openly sharing his design. Nobody so far has demanded he provide schematics of the nbox, and similarly you don't see people demanding doug oade share his mod secrets.
Richard is fantastic for sharing his thoughts and diagrams with us. I know he has helped me greatly with at mic mods and such. Chris church is also great to share his thoughts on mods. In the end however most advances in technology or any other field would not occur without a profit motive, and frankly if they want to keep their design a secret fine. I have faith that when they do make a box/actives that they will be affordable within reason.
What it seems to me is that whats happening is alot of people here who have no technical expertise to contribute to this project are complaining that they have no access to the process.
-
Keep in mind that those like schoepsnbox who are developing a box are spending their own free time to do this. I see nothing wrong with him not openly sharing his design. Nobody so far has demanded he provide schematics of the nbox, and similarly you don't see people demanding doug oade share his mod secrets.
Well in the case of Doug I don't know if anyone simply has asked. Now him telling is a whole different story. ;D
Different people have worked on different aspects of this project. Sharing of information could only benefit others I would think. One of the things that we tried to accomplish was to take all the available information from various people and put it all together so that this could actually see the light of day. Also we ran into a situation where everyone contacted that had a JL Labs AKG box wanted and quite frankly were adamnet that the information culled from their boxes was to be shared openly for their participation
Richard is fantastic for sharing his thoughts and diagrams with us. I know he has helped me greatly with at mic mods and such. Chris church is also great to share his thoughts on mods. In the end however most advances in technology or any other field would not occur without a profit motive, and frankly if they want to keep their design a secret fine. I have faith that when they do make a box/actives that they will be affordable within reason.
Well that's the hope that it will be affordable. <Hypothetical statement coming> But who's to say that Richard couldn't have figured it out and had a product out in the market if some others had also shared their information by now?
What it seems to me is that whats happening is alot of people here who have no technical expertise to contribute to this project are complaining that they have no access to the process.
I agree partially with this. The way I see it is that for years and years people (myslef included) have talked about wanting an AKG active setup with no result. I think that people with or without technical expertise just want to move this thing forward. Several years later we seem to be only minimally a step forward. If schoepsinbox does not have the time, the will or whatever then I would implore him to share so that this can happen.
Back to affordable price now. What is considered affordable? I for one see the market bearing around $1000 per set up. What are the nboxes and JKLabs boxes going for now?
The biggest problem it seems to me is finding someone with the time to see this thing through and having knowledge is the one of the keys to that.
-
The biggest problem it seems to me is finding someone with the time to see this thing through and having knowledge is the one of the keys to that.
EXACTLY. The reason we don't have JK labs around and a few others is because of burnout. It is very very stressful to build these things for other people.
As for affordable I don't see why they couldn't be around the same price as the Nbox is which is I believe ~1100, and a big part of his cost is the collettes from schoeps.
And to clear up this wasn't an attack on you or anything, I love open source things as much as anyone, I just think that this is such a huge undertaking that without a profit motive it will get lost in the frey.
As far as the open source project, the hardest part has been done! Richard had success with his setup, detailed in the schematic. Now all you all need to do is figure out how to get a center contact pin and the FET inside a collette. Also possibly research a way to get 60v powering without a brick of 9v's. The hardest part (electronically) has been done. Now someone with a watchmakers hand and machine shop skills can take it and run with it.
-
Keep in mind that those like schoepsnbox who are developing a box are spending their own free time to do this. I see nothing wrong with him not openly sharing his design. Nobody so far has demanded he provide schematics of the nbox, and similarly you don't see people demanding doug oade share his mod secrets.
Well in the case of Doug I don't know if anyone simply has asked. Now him telling is a whole different story. ;D
Different people have worked on different aspects of this project. Sharing of information could only benefit others I would think. One of the things that we tried to accomplish was to take all the available information from various people and put it all together so that this could actually see the light of day. Also we ran into a situation where everyone contacted that had a JL Labs AKG box wanted and quite frankly were adamnet that the information culled from their boxes was to be shared openly for their participation
Richard is fantastic for sharing his thoughts and diagrams with us. I know he has helped me greatly with at mic mods and such. Chris church is also great to share his thoughts on mods. In the end however most advances in technology or any other field would not occur without a profit motive, and frankly if they want to keep their design a secret fine. I have faith that when they do make a box/actives that they will be affordable within reason.
Well that's the hope that it will be affordable. <Hypothetical statement coming> But who's to say that Richard couldn't have figured it out and had a product out in the market if some others had also shared their information by now?
What it seems to me is that whats happening is alot of people here who have no technical expertise to contribute to this project are complaining that they have no access to the process.
I agree partially with this. The way I see it is that for years and years people (myslef included) have talked about wanting an AKG active setup with no result. I think that people with or without technical expertise just want to move this thing forward. Several years later we seem to be only minimally a step forward. If schoepsinbox does not have the time, the will or whatever then I would implore him to share so that this can happen.
Back to affordable price now. What is considered affordable? I for one see the market bearing around $1000 per set up. What are the nboxes and JKLabs boxes going for now?
The biggest problem it seems to me is finding someone with the time to see this thing through and having knowledge is the one of the keys to that.
I think its very unfair for you to think someone like my self is going to share information so someone else can come along and build it and profit from it I would not want any part in that and I am pretty sure I can speak for Richard as well. No designer is going to want to share so others can make a profit. I was willing to share not so someone else could build them and sell them, but so one of you DIY guys could figure it out and build one for them selves. This thread will never move forward. If this is the attitude that we should just give it up so someone else can make money. Not cool, I would gladly give up what ever information I have to help a person and help them do it for them selves but the minute I see my ideas copied and resold I am gone.
This is actually not about making money its about a FREE exchange of ideas so that maybe all of us together could come up with a solution and maybe build a few. But the cost is still going to be stupid expensive not to mention the time it takes to "whip this up" I think that's the thing that gets missed here it takes 1000's of hours to design something like this so it works and does not degrade the sound. From machining to fabrication to etching the circuit building the circuit doing the artwork for the circuit your talking a huge amount of hours. I think the best solutions are the simple ones. I would say one of the best ways to do this is make a screw on adaptor that uses the mic body and transfers all of the voltage from the mic body to the mic capsule via a multiconductor wire to a connector that is mounted on the mic body and the mic capsule. Its a simple yet effective idea that does not involve reinventing the wheel and would seem to me to be the most achievable way of doing this.
-
Chris you should probably go read the original thread so you are up to speed. Many of the points you bring up have been covered.
-
I would be willing to pay 1000 to 1500 to keep my entire rig and separate the mic bodies (and put them in a Pelican case in my gear bag) from the mic caps via an active cable, I really like the 480s but as many of us agree the bodies can be a pain in the ass sometimes, and Chris if anything I think most of us would eagerly welcome your participation in doing so, for profit or not, on your terms
-
Chris you should probably go read the original thread so you are up to speed. Many of the points you bring up have been covered.
I am sorry Brad I thought I had read the whole entire thread. I guess I missed a few things I did come into this very late in the game. And I am not sure how much help I can be, But I will try. So what am I missing?
-
Chris just so you know I was not suggesting one bit you contribute your time and ideas for someone else to make a profit. I was saying if you or in fact anyone else out there develops a box/actives that they should be entitled to keep it a secret because its your hard work who did it.
Either way here's to hoping one comes about.
-
I am sorry Brad I thought I had read the whole entire thread. I guess I missed a few things I did come into this very late in the game. And I am not sure how much help I can be, But I will try. So what am I missing?
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,59577.0.html
This is the original thread, lots of stuff in it.
-
Chris you should probably go read the original thread so you are up to speed. Many of the points you bring up have been covered.
I am sorry Brad I thought I had read the whole entire thread. I guess I missed a few things I did come into this very late in the game. And I am not sure how much help I can be, But I will try. So what am I missing?
what has been envisioned by some of us is the active set up like the ck1x>mk46>460 set up that some of us have, but for the 480 microphones, never has AKG made an active set up for the 480 mics so we are stalled
-
Chris just so you know I was not suggesting one bit you contribute your time and ideas for someone else to make a profit. I was saying if you or in fact anyone else out there develops a box/actives that they should be entitled to keep it a secret because its your hard work who did it.
Either way here's to hoping one comes about.
Oh I know that. ;) I dont see any profit in this to be honest I dont think it will sell that well and as a result the time and energy it takes to do this would be wasted if profit was a goal. Instead I would rather share my ideas and see if someone can use them so that a freely available schematic and blueprint for machining could be done. So that no one can make a profit from this free exchange of ideas. I really dont think its worth it to spend $1000 bucks on a active system but that's just me. I dont see any sonic advantage just a physical one and wow $1000 bucks so you can mount your mics in a different way seems pretty crazy to me. But again I am willing to help in any way I can 100% FREE OF CHARGE. I really think you guys should look at aco pacific they make a great little box that could power your mics and provide a gain stage for them. But I am unsure of the price and of course collets would still have to be made and a fet would still have to be installed. This company ACO makes some very high end preamps and capsules like Bruel and Kjear I think it would be worth a call to them to find out what the price of there dual preamp is that can provide 60 volts of polarization voltage for your capsules.
-
Ok, a number of random thoughts on Pt 2, if only so I can keep track of it better. :P
Profit -- I don't find it a problem at all that people want to make a profit off this. As Chris mentioned, it will take a lot of time to make this happen. For most people, time is a precious commodity and the ability to make money off one's efforts can entice otherwise too-busy people. I guess it would've been nice if this could've come together as a type of ts.com community project, but after all this time it doesn't look like it will.
I guess related to that, Chris, I didn't take the weekend project comment at being some kind of slam. It just seems that with the time you are already investing in running your business, making your current products, and designing new products like your preamp, it doesn't seem like you'd have too much time left for this actives project save the weekends. I guess I'm assuming that for all the desire to have this product available, with no offering on the horizon, it appears to be a fairly significant development process. Someone, presumably a vendor, will need to decide if the potential market for this justifies the development effort.
On the market: Chris, you might think the $1000 price tag isn't justified in terms of added functionality, but us tapers are a loony bunch. ;D I loved having my jklabs AKG actives, and when I sold the jklabs system (about $900-950 not including ck61 caps and accessories I guess if I had to split out the cost), I had at least a half-dozen offers within minutes. Caps only for having the option for AKG stealth recordings, smaller profile for not quite sanctioned FOB recording, faster set-up/break-down, ability to have many active mic pairs on one stand, ability to use smaller rig bag/smaller stand, etc -- lots of reasons why people want an active capsule set up. It may seem crazy, but I think there is a decent market for this type of setup, at least within the taper community.
On the market, II: As to price, from what the jklabs sold for and compared to other active setups, I'd venture that the active active system if it replaced the mic bodies could probably sell in the $800-1000 range, if the system would still rely on the 480 bodies, probably more like $400-500.
On the market, III: I don't think there'll be consensus on a box to replace the bodies vs. keeping the bodies but developing active cables to go with the 480's, at least from what I saw in the first thread. Personally, I loved the jklabs box that replaced the 480 bodies. As to sound, the ck6x + jklabs setup sounded very much like the 480/ck61, but not exactly the same. Again, personally, I liked the jklabs sound better to my ears. But being different shouldn't mean it is pointless since you are throwing out the AKG sound. The sound is still going to be very similar due to the caps. Also, lots of people like the JWilliams modded 460s, which is also essentially throwing out the (exact) AKG sound.
On the development: It seems like with the information that has already been shared, the general schematic for the electronics is known. What seems to be needed is working on the mechanics, colletts, integration, testing.
Next steps: Is it time to give up on the AKG actives as a community project? I really don't know who the active people on this are, so I don't know, but from reading the threads it seems that way. If it is going to be done by a vendor-type, including people like the n-box folks, do they need any help or do we just need to sit tight and wait until it's ready?
Also, as I mentioned the JWilliams 460 upgrades, it makes me wonder if it is worth getting in touch with Jim to try to prod him into trying to make an offering. I'm sure he has the ability, if he thought the market justified it. I guess though this probably depends on whether our "own" folks like Chris Church or schoepsnbox don't think they'll be making a system available.
Wow -- too many thoughts. I guess that's what happens when you are away from ts.com for 10 days. :P
-
I really dont think its worth it to spend $1000 bucks on a active system but that's just me. I dont see any sonic advantage just a physical one and wow $1000 bucks so you can mount your mics in a different way seems pretty crazy to me.
Well, to defend myself since I did spend this amount: :P that is $1000 and no need for 480 bodies, which on the used market are probably like $600. So it really is spending $400 to gain those physical/form factor benefits, not $1000.
It really depends on what you tape, how you tape, and what is important to you. For me, having a smaller form factor so I can set-up in 1-2 minutes and break-down in 1-2 minutes is a big benefit -- my non-taping friends don't need to come into the club way early, and I'm ready to go show is over right away so they're not hanging around waiting for me. The small size lets me get to the show later and just clamp on another tapers stand (for section taping) is also a benefit. The small size that lets me run in un-sanctioned FOB locations more discretely and lets me throw up mics as soon as the house lights go down is a benefit. The ability to run my nice caps (formerly AKG ck6x, now Milab VM44) in stealth situations is a benefit. The very small size of mics that are mounted to a stand, which allows me to carry a smaller/lighter t-bar and smaller/lighter stand is a benefit. For instance, bar hopping after a show carrying only my 21" long APIC stand versus carrying a beefy 42" long Bogen stand is _way_ nicer.
OK, I guess I'm just trying to sell you on the notion so you might jump in with both feet. :)
-
Thanks for contributing Todd! +T
As you can all see there is no simple solution here. Truly.
I tend to think that many folks just "want it done" and haven't thought out the whole process of things. We had a debate about bodies or no bodies. Well half the people wanted no bodies because they just wanted the thing. The other half want to keep the bodies in the mix but realize that is a big hurdle.
Someone making money off of something like this is absolutely not the problem. If John Doe can make this happen and make some money more power to him. I think we as a collective group wanted to first see if this was even possible to do other than what Jon had done with his JKLabs box. I believe that Richard sure set of a firestorm because he provided some technical thoughts to add to the mix. By spreading different aspects of this project around we had hoped to spread out the time commitment as well as the financial burden to others.
-
The biggest problem it seems to me is finding someone with the time to see this thing through and having knowledge is the one of the keys to that.
EXACTLY. The reason we don't have JK labs around and a few others is because of burnout. It is very very stressful to build these things for other people.
Yes, that is why both of us stopped building battery boxes. Fortunately Chris and other people have taken up the slack.
And to clear up this wasn't an attack on you or anything, I love open source things as much as anyone, I just think that this is such a huge undertaking that without a profit motive it will get lost in the frey.
As far as the open source project, the hardest part has been done! Richard had success with his setup, detailed in the schematic. Now all you all need to do is figure out how to get a center contact pin and the FET inside a collette. Also possibly research a way to get 60v powering without a brick of 9v's. The hardest part (electronically) has been done. Now someone with a watchmakers hand and machine shop skills can take it and run with it.
I've said before, and I'll say again. There is room for both DIY and for-profit in this forum. Everyone knows how to make battery boxes and preamps, but Chris is still making a good business selling them (for a great price). I'm hoping the same happens for any other mods.
Oh yeah, about the sound. Has anyone heard my CK91/93 "actives"? I think they sound pretty good, and I have no reason to believe the AKG will be different. I think the sound, if any, might be coming from any preamps in the N/JKboxes. If the box is just a power supply for the mics, that would be simplest, cheapest, and most likely preserve whatever sound the capsules have.
OK, I'm hoping Chris or someone else gets something. Maybe they will even give me a discount if they use any of my info. A little "profit" motive for myself :).
Richard
-
Oh yeah, about the sound. Has anyone heard my CK91/93 "actives"? I think they sound pretty good, and I have no reason to believe the AKG will be different. I think the sound, if any, might be coming from any preamps in the N/JKboxes. If the box is just a power supply for the mics, that would be simplest, cheapest, and most likely preserve whatever sound the capsules have.
I think any differences whatsoever in the electronics changes the sound to some extent. Thus you have Neumann saying the km140 and the km184 are the same and yet people find a sound difference between them (I know I did, and I ran km184>v3 in parallel with km140>v3 to test it for myself).
I think the difference is inherent to changing the electronics around, not just the preamps. I specifically got the jklabs ECMS system that incorporates no preamp (that I'm aware of) rather than the jklabs DVC system that incorporates a preamp, since I didn't want to change the sound of my 480/ck61>V3 setup. Yet the ECMS/ck61 sound was noticeably different than the 480/ck61 sound (though subtle), even with no preamp built into the ECMS system.
-
On the development: It seems like with the information that has already been shared, the general schematic for the electronics is known. What seems to be needed is working on the mechanics, colletts, integration, testing.
todd hit it on the head with the statement above. the development of the collettes at this point is a major factor in the delay on our part. the electronics are known. mechanics and integration are the hurdles :-\
as i posted in the original thread, we are working on the collettes. its not as easy as simply screwing the cap to the collette threads. there is that darn center pin on the capsule to contend with, and let me tell you that darn center pin is a harder challenge that first anticipated. then there is the overall depth to make sure all the components and wiring fits and seats into the collette properly. then there is the matching of the collette "neck" so that it matches and is compatible with schoeps clips and bars (which was the easiest to tackle). etc. etc. but, on a bright side, the list is getting shorter :)
keep in mind, every time there is a design change and we need a few new collettes to be run off, it costs money and not to mention the time of the machinist who at this point is basically doing us a favor. compound that with our full time "non-taping&recording" jobs, our families (including young children), and our propensity to actually see live shows in our limited remaining free time and maybe you will realize it is not an overnite endeavor. :P
i want to see the final product as much as the next guy whether our solution or someone elses, but ask yourself...would you rather have a quality final design (ala the nbox for instance), or ..... ???
patience IS a virtue ;D
-
On the development: It seems like with the information that has already been shared, the general schematic for the electronics is known. What seems to be needed is working on the mechanics, colletts, integration, testing.
todd hit it on the head with the statement above. the development of the collettes at this point is a major factor in the delay on our part. the electronics are known. mechanics and integration are the hurdles :-\
as i posted in the original thread, we are working on the collettes. its not as easy as simply screwing the cap to the collette threads. there is that darn center pin on the capsule to contend with, and let me tell you that darn center pin is a harder challenge that first anticipated. then there is the overall depth to make sure all the components and wiring fits and seats into the collette properly. then there is the matching of the collette "neck" so that it matches and is compatible with schoeps clips and bars (which was the easiest to tackle). etc. etc. but, on a bright side, the list is getting shorter :)
keep in mind, every time there is a design change and we need a few new collettes to be run off, it costs money and not to mention the time of the machinist who at this point is basically doing us a favor. compound that with our full time "non-taping&recording" jobs, our families (including young children), and our propensity to actually see live shows in our limited remaining free time and maybe you will realize it is not an overnite endeavor. :P
i want to see the final product as much as the next guy whether our solution or someone elses, but ask yourself...would you rather have a quality final design (ala the nbox for instance), or ..... ???
patience IS a virtue ;D
well said
i am just glad its still in the works
i wish i had the knowledge to lend a hand in it all :-\
-
Thanks for the update, Chris.
Also, I don't know if it was mentioned in the original thread, but it would be excellent if you could design the "tail" section of the colletts so they were the exact same diameter as the tail of the schoeps active caps. That would allow folks to use the "schoeps" kwonbars. The diameter of the jklabs colletts were just a tiny bit smaller than schoeps, so they were a bit loose in the schoeps kwonbar -- workable, but not ideal.
-
did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
I think this would be the easiest solution, but I can't figure out how the swivel comes apart and I don't want to rip up my pair unless I know I can get it re-assembled in case it doesn't work out.
Take the label off the side and it will reveal a screw. It's just a thin metal plate with adhesive on it.
Have you done this? I would really like to see what they look like on the inside without screwing my pair up. From what you saw, would it be possible to separate the two sockets on the A61 by a wire to make an active cable?
-
did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
I think this would be the easiest solution, but I can't figure out how the swivel comes apart and I don't want to rip up my pair unless I know I can get it re-assembled in case it doesn't work out.
Take the label off the side and it will reveal a screw. It's just a thin metal plate with adhesive on it.
Have you done this? I would really like to see what they look like on the inside without screwing my pair up. From what you saw, would it be possible to separate the two sockets on the A61 by a wire to make an active cable?
I have, but it doesn't really show you anything. You'd have to take the whole swivel apart and even then, there's no telling what's inside the swivel joint itself. I had an A51 where the metal decal label fell off, that's how I know that. I didn't take it apart completely though.
-
did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
I think this would be the easiest solution, but I can't figure out how the swivel comes apart and I don't want to rip up my pair unless I know I can get it re-assembled in case it doesn't work out.
Take the label off the side and it will reveal a screw. It's just a thin metal plate with adhesive on it.
Have you done this? I would really like to see what they look like on the inside without screwing my pair up. From what you saw, would it be possible to separate the two sockets on the A61 by a wire to make an active cable?
I have, but it doesn't really show you anything. You'd have to take the whole swivel apart and even then, there's no telling what's inside the swivel joint itself. I had an A51 where the metal decal label fell off, that's how I know that. I didn't take it apart completely though.
I doubt there is anything inside the swivel joint. It is short enough to go through to the FET in the mic body.
However, the swivel might be useful as a way to join the capsules to some homebrew active circuit.
Well, I'm back in the game (I think). I've finally decided that the CK91 (blueline caps) are not good enough. My ears just got more expensive, lol. So I guess I got to start working on CK6x actives again. My plan is to just hardwire the capsule though. I'll report back if anything works...
Richard
-
did someone tried to take apart the swivel joints and make these as connectors ?
I think this would be the easiest solution, but I can't figure out how the swivel comes apart and I don't want to rip up my pair unless I know I can get it re-assembled in case it doesn't work out.
Take the label off the side and it will reveal a screw. It's just a thin metal plate with adhesive on it.
Have you done this? I would really like to see what they look like on the inside without screwing my pair up. From what you saw, would it be possible to separate the two sockets on the A61 by a wire to make an active cable?
I have, but it doesn't really show you anything. You'd have to take the whole swivel apart and even then, there's no telling what's inside the swivel joint itself. I had an A51 where the metal decal label fell off, that's how I know that. I didn't take it apart completely though.
I doubt there is anything inside the swivel joint. It is short enough to go through to the FET in the mic body.
However, the swivel might be useful as a way to join the capsules to some homebrew active circuit.
Well, I'm back in the game (I think). I've finally decided that the CK91 (blueline caps) are not good enough. My ears just got more expensive, lol. So I guess I got to start working on CK6x actives again. My plan is to just hardwire the capsule though. I'll report back if anything works...
Richard
So you think no electronics built into the A61 because of the short distance? What about this:
(http://www.akg.com/mediendatenbank2/pspic/image/9/image1079364670_vr614055cc3e8f44e.jpg)
This would actually be ideal to mod into active connectors, but unfortunately there isn't a service document on the AKG site for this (or the A61 or VR62). But yeah, I want to take apart the A61 and use the connectors to make active cables. They are just too expensive to sacrifice for a project nobody seems to think would work (including AKG). Rambling...
-
But yeah, I want to take apart the A61 and use the connectors to make active cables. They are just too expensive to sacrifice for a project nobody seems to think would work (including AKG). Rambling...
i would be down to throw down $10-15 towards the one for sale in the yardsale if we had someone willing to/capable of taking it apart and trying to add a cable as long is the knowledge is shared, if the project is indeed feasible (poorlyconditioned?)
-
But yeah, I want to take apart the A61 and use the connectors to make active cables. They are just too expensive to sacrifice for a project nobody seems to think would work (including AKG). Rambling...
i would be down to throw down $10-15 towards the one for sale in the yardsale if we had someone willing to/capable of taking it apart and trying to add a cable as long is the knowledge is shared, if the project is indeed feasible (poorlyconditioned?)
I'll attempt mods (but with no promises, either on gear recovery or success) if anyone wants to send me stuff! PM if you're willing.
I just don't want to get in any deeper (financially) than I am now. I've already bought two CK63 caps which have not (yet) been out taping!
Before this though, I would ask on the AKG tech-support forum if anyone has tech docs for the swivel, or better yet, that gooseneck thing. I have received extra docs from Karl @ AKG support (pinouts for the CK91 that I used for my actives), so it doesn't hurt to ask first.
Richard
-
But yeah, I want to take apart the A61 and use the connectors to make active cables. They are just too expensive to sacrifice for a project nobody seems to think would work (including AKG). Rambling...
i would be down to throw down $10-15 towards the one for sale in the yardsale if we had someone willing to/capable of taking it apart and trying to add a cable as long is the knowledge is shared, if the project is indeed feasible (poorlyconditioned?)
same here - just need about 10 more people to chip in. I'll post something on the support forum.
-
again, i am not much help
but i think this new idea has promise
the extension arm seems like it is basically an "active" cable separating the bodies from the caps just like people are trying to do
now someone with cable skills could prob make whatever lenght was needed in between
+ts around
-
http://www.akg.com/site/powerslave,id,39,nodeid,39,board,2,_language,EN.html (http://www.akg.com/site/powerslave,id,39,nodeid,39,board,2,_language,EN.html)
In case someone has the service documents
-
http://www.akg.com/site/powerslave,id,39,nodeid,39,board,2,_language,EN.html (http://www.akg.com/site/powerslave,id,39,nodeid,39,board,2,_language,EN.html)
In case someone has the service documents
the vr91/92 is up for DL at akg
i know the caps connect differently, but it shows the wires inside which is what i think someone would need to know in this case
-
Deja vu to the previous AKG active thread ;)
Yup!
-
Deja vu to the previous AKG active thread ;)
Yup!
I was thinking the same thing..
-
Didn't someone try this once before with less than optimal results? I had a pair of the VR1 tubes for my 451's and I couldn't figure out how to open then up without destroying them. I contacted AKG about perhaps modifying the tube to be flexible instead of solid, and was told it wasn't possible to turn these into cables. They did not give me any explanation though.
AKG has not been helpful in aiding any kind of R&D on this up to this point and are actively discouraging the effort when asked for information. If you really want actives, why not just buy a second set of mics with actives?
-
Didn't someone try this once before with less than optimal results?
Yes. Someone did
basically the tube acts as the ground, and a short length is all the distance apparently can support without creating a buzzing noise.
I believe it was the member Jah who did just as you are describing.
-
Didn't someone try this once before with less than optimal results?
Yes. Someone did
basically the tube acts as the ground, and a short length is all the distance apparently can support without creating a buzzing noise.
I believe it was the member Jah who did just as you are describing.
Not sure about Jah, but someone at Sonic Sense tried hacking one and got a buzzing sound which I presume was probably due to lack of grounding. AKG has said before that the idea won't work but gives very few details. The VR62 is a 3ft extension tube so there must be a way to separate the caps from the bodies by at least 3 feet. 3 feet of wire would be decent for stealth purposes and would still allow for Low-pro use on a stand by using a clamp to attach the bodies 3 feet down the stand from the T-bar. I personally don't have enough money for a set of actives in addition to my AKG mics. Otherwise I'd definitely pick up some Schoeps, DPAs or Neumanns.
The VR91/92 uses the Blueline caps which are electret based and don't really require the body as the "preamp" is essentially built into the cap. I would imagine that the tubes are pretty different from the VR61/62 since they don't even require "active cables" just a passive cable with a special bayonet connector.
-
Good discussion like the last thread. One thing i'd like to remind people of is you have to decide what your final goal/hope is here. Do you just want to use the caps with something else (jklabs box, nbox) or do you want to keep the bodies in the mix?
Figure out what the goal is first and then work under those plans. Richard is now devoting his time to a solution and it sounds like he is thinking of the caps being hard wired. That may or may not be of help to most of you in your goals/hopes for AKG actives while is sounds perfect for what Richard wants.
Whoever stated this version of the thread should start a poll on what people want as an end product. With or without bodies to start.
Also I know some people sound down on AKG for their standoffish attitude towards releasing information. Maybe if any of those people even thought this was remotely attainable they may change their mind. Maybe this is the holy grail of DIY AKG modding. Its possible that the AKG folks may have tried to make actives at some point and failed. I guess having a positive end result to this project will be all the sweeter then.
my $.02
-
i am in either camp. i would be very reluctant and squeamish about someone hacking up my 463's for a beta version, but i could possibly be convinced if there was a viable plan. also, getting me liquored up would help.
-
Not sure about Jah, but someone at Sonic Sense tried hacking one and got a buzzing sound which I presume was probably due to lack of grounding.
If I recall correctly he did it with a Schoeps gooseneck though, didn't he? Although I suppose the overall concept is pretty much the same...
-
Not sure about Jah, but someone at Sonic Sense tried hacking one and got a buzzing sound which I presume was probably due to lack of grounding.
If I recall correctly he did it with a Schoeps gooseneck though, didn't he? Although I suppose the overall concept is pretty much the same...
It was definitely a VR61. I emailed him about it and got a response. I was hoping he would still have it around so I could play around with it, but he got rid of it years ago. I believe JAH machined connectors and got cables made, but never got the electronics to work.
-
Yeah I can't find much info on it, but it didn't get off the ground. Just was trying to say its been done before.
-
Not sure about Jah, but someone at Sonic Sense tried hacking one and got a buzzing sound which I presume was probably due to lack of grounding.
If I recall correctly he did it with a Schoeps gooseneck though, didn't he? Although I suppose the overall concept is pretty much the same...
It was definitely a VR61. I emailed him about it and got a response. I was hoping he would still have it around so I could play around with it, but he got rid of it years ago. I believe JAH machined connectors and got cables made, but never got the electronics to work.
yeah...I've emailed JAH previously as well...here is his quite vague response from last year:
Hey christian, I have not done anything with these for a long while. I have
everything I need to do the design but time. I just went through some
drastic life changes and work has me working on time that I am suppose to
take off. I will take most of Dec off and hope to spend some time it, as I
really want to get this project completed. However, I have house projects
that are in need of completion too. ;-)
I do plan on seeing some shows as I have only seen about 3 this year. ;-(
So much to do, so little time.
peace
jah
-
Well, I took apart my A61 swivel. All it is, is a small wire connecting the male center pin to the female center socket. Nothing magical. The outside casing is the ground. There are 2 retaining clips, 1 on each end that hold the guts in. The female end has what looks to be a crcuit board from the outside, but it isnt. It just mounts the female socket. Its actually amazing that the wire doesnt break with the adjustment of the angle.
-
pics while you have it apart?
-
I knew someone was going to ask :)....... wait one second
-
Here you go
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0424.jpg)
The 2 screws hold the end to the center swivel part.
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0427.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0430.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0429.jpg)
There are two screws on this end also. You see part of them. They are covered by a gasket.
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0428.jpg)
I didnt take the center swivel part apart. I assume the wire just passes through and is all mechanical.
-
Here yoy go
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0424.jpg)
The 2 screws hold the end to the center swivel part.
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0427.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0430.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0429.jpg)
There are two screws on this end also. You see part of them. They are covered by a gasket.
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0428.jpg)
I didnt take the center swivel part apart. I assume the wire just passes through and is all mechanical.
Nice job! Perhaps we can get some clues how to connect to the "center pin" of the capsule now. I wonder what that connector is on the small circuit board.
Richard
-
+T
So it is possible to separate the capsule from the body by at least 2-3cm using only a wire and grounding the other 2 connectors. Wonder what the maximum distance is? Thanks for doing this!
-
Nice job! Perhaps we can get some clues how to connect to the "center pin" of the capsule now. I wonder what that connector is on the small circuit board.
Richard
The connector in the third picture is the female socket, where the pin from the capsule goes. The metal ring on the underside looks like it is some type grounding spacer.
-
BTW - how did you disassemble the ends?
-
BTW - how did you disassemble the ends?
There is a retaining wire clip/spring that holds the two inserts in. I removed the wire clip and the "guts" slide out.
BE VERY CAREFUL - I broke the wire while pulling out the male end, but was able to solder it back on.
If there is resistance while sliding out the ends, it is due to the wire not giving and it will break. The wire is very thin.
I would also make sure the swivel is straight, not angled so the wire that connects the two ends together can slide easier.
I could not remove the side metal stickers to expose the screw that is suppose to disassemble the hinge.
-
+T
So it is possible to separate the capsule from the body by at least 2-3cm using only a wire and grounding the other 2 connectors. Wonder what the maximum distance is? Thanks for doing this!
yes big +t
john the vr62 is 3 ft so we know at least that far, assuming it is basically the same guts
do you think it is?
-
+T
So it is possible to separate the capsule from the body by at least 2-3cm using only a wire and grounding the other 2 connectors. Wonder what the maximum distance is? Thanks for doing this!
yes big +t
john the vr62 is 3 ft so we know at least that far, assuming it is basically the same guts
do you think it is?
So what does three feet get you though? Can you really see taping your bodies to a stand because you only have 3 feet to play with?
Remember eye on the prize here. It seems to me that many generations of tapers have tried knocking down the door of the extension cables. Maybe we need to focus on other means.
Again I continue to go back to the thought that you need to figure out your goal and work back from that.
-
+T
So it is possible to separate the capsule from the body by at least 2-3cm using only a wire and grounding the other 2 connectors. Wonder what the maximum distance is? Thanks for doing this!
yes big +t
john the vr62 is 3 ft so we know at least that far, assuming it is basically the same guts
do you think it is?
So what does three feet get you though? Can you really see taping your bodies to a stand because you only have 3 feet to play with?
Remember eye on the prize here. It seems to me that many generations of tapers have tried knocking down the door of the extension cables. Maybe we need to focus on other means.
Again I continue to go back to the thought that you need to figure out your goal and work back from that.
Actually yes 3 feet would be fantastic. Maybe not perfect but I could definitely stealth under a hat with 3 feet of separation. And my 9ft APIC stand is pretty top heavy with the bodies on the Tbar. Moving the bodies down 3 feet and keeping only the caps up top on a Vark bar or a modified Kwon would make my stand more stable and also lower profile. These two benefits would be worth a couple hundred dollars to me.
I have no idea whether the VR62 has the same basic design or not, that's why I want the service documents. I wouldn't have expected any electronics in the A61 but could see where something would be needed for a longer separation. I think the next step here is to take apart an A61 and re-connect the 3 solder points on each end using increasing lengths of wires while measuring the output and checking to see if movement of the wires introduces noise. It sounds like the cable ends have already been machined by several people and what is needed is the "guts" from one of these A61s for the center pin and female receptacle.
EDIT: My goal is an extension cable. I don't want to replace my bodies with another box to carry around. That said, if extension cables truly are impossible to make, then I would happy to add another flavor to the AKG sound (assuming I could afford an NBox setup).
-
+T
So it is possible to separate the capsule from the body by at least 2-3cm using only a wire and grounding the other 2 connectors. Wonder what the maximum distance is? Thanks for doing this!
yes big +t
john the vr62 is 3 ft so we know at least that far, assuming it is basically the same guts
do you think it is?
So what does three feet get you though? Can you really see taping your bodies to a stand because you only have 3 feet to play with?
Remember eye on the prize here. It seems to me that many generations of tapers have tried knocking down the door of the extension cables. Maybe we need to focus on other means.
Again I continue to go back to the thought that you need to figure out your goal and work back from that.
Actually yes 3 feet would be fantastic. Maybe not perfect but I could definitely stealth under a hat with 3 feet of separation. And my 9ft APIC stand is pretty top heavy with the bodies on the Tbar. Moving the bodies down 3 feet and keeping only the caps up top on a Vark bar or a modified Kwon would make my stand more stable and also lower profile. These two benefits would be worth a couple hundred dollars to me.
I have no idea whether the VR62 has the same basic design or not, that's why I want the service documents. I wouldn't have expected any electronics in the A61 but could see where something would be needed for a longer separation. I think the next step here is to take apart an A61 and re-connect the 3 solder points on each end using increasing lengths of wires while measuring the output and checking to see if movement of the wires introduces noise. It sounds like the cable ends have already been machined by several people and what is needed is the "guts" from one of these A61s for the center pin and female receptacle.
I think the "guts" from the A61 could be used with Richard's design to provide the cap > active > batt box type of setup. That could be interesting. What's the going rate for swivels and how hard are they to find?
-
I think the "guts" from the A61 could be used with Richard's design to provide the cap > active > batt box type of setup. That could be interesting. What's the going rate for swivels and how hard are they to find?
swivels from boxy run about $350 a set. Typical boxy shipping times.
-
Swivels are about $175 from Boxy and there is a single one for sale in the yard sale right now. Assuming no real electronic design is needed, just machining parts, basic soldering and hacking 2 A61s, I think people would gladly pay $4-500 for a pair of cables. Also, there's a chance that the parts needed from the A61 could be ordered individually if a service document ever turns up.
Again, my offer stands to chip in on a single A61 to use for parts for a prototype cable. Maybe Richard would consider incorporating a hacked A61 into his design so the capsule doesn't have to be hardwired?
-
Swivels are about $175 from Boxy and there is a single one for sale in the yard sale right now. Assuming no real electronic design is needed, just machining parts, basic soldering and hacking 2 A61s, I think people would gladly pay $4-500 for a pair of cables. Also, there's a chance that the parts needed from the A61 could be ordered individually if a service document ever turns up.
Again, my offer stands to chip in on a single A61 to use for parts for a prototype cable. Maybe Richard would consider incorporating a hacked A61 into his design so the capsule doesn't have to be hardwired?
I'll chip in for this too. That's a good idea.
-
Found some parts that might work well for the pin contact problem.. I wish my lathe wasn't in storage..
The MG2000 body doesn't use a socket, it uses a spring loaded contact pad. The pad contacts just the rounded tip of the capsule pin. Maybe something like this:
http://www.mill-max.com/pin_rec_catalog/productInfo.cfm?webpartnumber=0907&start=1&leaddiameterrange=&pin_or_rec=pin&Part_Description=Spring%2DLoaded%20Pin&taildiameter=&tailtype=&mountingfeature=&mountinghole=&bodylength=&search=&pr=pin
Though I'm wondering if the signal path is via the spring or via a sliding contact? I'd really want to solder directly to the socket and not have the path via the spring, etc.
For sockets, maybe:
http://www.mill-max.com/pin_rec_catalog/productInfo.cfm?webpartnumber=0490&start=1&leaddiameterrange=%2E065%2D%2E082&pin_or_rec=rec&Part_Description=Receptacle%20with%20a%20Standard%20Tail&taildiameter=showall&tailtype=Soldertail&mountingfeature=&mountinghole=&bodylength=&search=&pr=rec
I like the idea of tip contact over a socket. Seems like less wear and tear on the pin. But I guess it depends on how tight the socket is.
-
Found some parts that might work well for the pin contact problem.. I wish my lathe wasn't in storage..
The MG2000 body doesn't use a socket, it uses a spring loaded contact pad. The pad contacts just the rounded tip of the capsule pin. Maybe something like this:
http://www.mill-max.com/pin_rec_catalog/productInfo.cfm?webpartnumber=0907&start=1&leaddiameterrange=&pin_or_rec=pin&Part_Description=Spring%2DLoaded%20Pin&taildiameter=&tailtype=&mountingfeature=&mountinghole=&bodylength=&search=&pr=pin
Though I'm wondering if the signal path is via the spring or via a sliding contact? I'd really want to solder directly to the socket and not have the path via the spring, etc.
For sockets, maybe:
http://www.mill-max.com/pin_rec_catalog/productInfo.cfm?webpartnumber=0490&start=1&leaddiameterrange=%2E065%2D%2E082&pin_or_rec=rec&Part_Description=Receptacle%20with%20a%20Standard%20Tail&taildiameter=showall&tailtype=Soldertail&mountingfeature=&mountinghole=&bodylength=&search=&pr=rec
I like the idea of tip contact over a socket. Seems like less wear and tear on the pin. But I guess it depends on how tight the socket is.
Nice, I like where this is going... Richard, what do you think?
-
Found some parts that might work well for the pin contact problem.. I wish my lathe wasn't in storage..
The MG2000 body doesn't use a socket, it uses a spring loaded contact pad. The pad contacts just the rounded tip of the capsule pin. Maybe something like this:
http://www.mill-max.com/pin_rec_catalog/productInfo.cfm?webpartnumber=0907&start=1&leaddiameterrange=&pin_or_rec=pin&Part_Description=Spring%2DLoaded%20Pin&taildiameter=&tailtype=&mountingfeature=&mountinghole=&bodylength=&search=&pr=pin
Though I'm wondering if the signal path is via the spring or via a sliding contact? I'd really want to solder directly to the socket and not have the path via the spring, etc.
For sockets, maybe:
http://www.mill-max.com/pin_rec_catalog/productInfo.cfm?webpartnumber=0490&start=1&leaddiameterrange=%2E065%2D%2E082&pin_or_rec=rec&Part_Description=Receptacle%20with%20a%20Standard%20Tail&taildiameter=showall&tailtype=Soldertail&mountingfeature=&mountinghole=&bodylength=&search=&pr=rec
I like the idea of tip contact over a socket. Seems like less wear and tear on the pin. But I guess it depends on how tight the socket is.
Nice, I like where this is going... Richard, what do you think?
Good research!
The second one (socket) looks better. That center pin is pretty thin. I don't want anything just pushing up against it. It could bend or just make poor contact.
I notice that the A61 has a socket with flexible diameter (slots going down). I think that is what you need. If you look at any commercial connectors (XLR, banana plugs, whatever), you either have an expandable socket and a fixed pin, or a squeezable pin and a fixed socket. So, we need a socket that is just a bit too small, but expands just a bit when the pin is inserted.
Richard
-
More brainstorming, and running with freelunch's idea
I dont know if these DIP sockets come in different size socket openings.
The socket can be at some determined height/depth in the collette and you would just screw the capsule down until it reaches the socket and bottoms out making a tight connection between the capsule pin and socket.
In these pictures the single DIP socket is just resting on top of the capsule pin. The socket I had isnt big enough to push over the pin.
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0440.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0449.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0442.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0443.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0444.jpg)
(http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b30/free2707/IMG_0446.jpg)
-
The second one (socket) looks better. That center pin is pretty thin. I don't want anything just pushing up against it. It could bend or just make poor contact.
My feeling on the sprung pad is that the pin clearance would be setup so contact is not even made until the cap is screwed on 80-90% of the way. That is another way in which rotational friction and wear and tear is reduced. So I don't think there would be much chance of misalignment..
I notice that the A61 has a socket with flexible diameter (slots going down). I think that is what you need.
I think that is what this is.. The one I linked has 4 contact fingers; others have 6. It looks like the contact fingers press into the socket. I saw an insertion force spec for one and two insertions but no data on 10, 40, 100.. That's where a sprung contact pad would likely excel over a socket.
It would be nice to get some samples for testing.. Some things just have to be tried... FWIW, the MG pin is .078" dia. They might be able to rec a better part or another mfg if they don't have a suitable off the shelf.
-
+T
So it is possible to separate the capsule from the body by at least 2-3cm using only a wire and grounding the other 2 connectors. Wonder what the maximum distance is? Thanks for doing this!
yes big +t
john the vr62 is 3 ft so we know at least that far, assuming it is basically the same guts
do you think it is?
So what does three feet get you though? Can you really see taping your bodies to a stand because you only have 3 feet to play with?
Remember eye on the prize here. It seems to me that many generations of tapers have tried knocking down the door of the extension cables. Maybe we need to focus on other means.
Again I continue to go back to the thought that you need to figure out your goal and work back from that.
sure 3 ft doesn't do anything for open taping but it does for stealth
really though i was just helping to answer his question
i agree though, the goal imo is for open taping and so i think you would want at least 10 ft, 15 would be sweeeeet
-
I would be willing to kick in some cash to help fund the research. What if everyone kicked in $20.00 or so? I know I can spend that in a bar in a few minutes, I don't think it is an unfair donation to help fund this? I would also easily pay $1000 or so to purchase this with or without the bodies. I would prefer to keep the bodies & just have cables but would take what I could get.
-
I would be willing to kick in some cash to help fund the research. What if everyone kicked in $20.00 or so? I know I can spend that in a bar in a few minutes, I don't think it is an unfair donation to help fund this? I would also easily pay $1000 or so to purchase this with or without the bodies. I would prefer to keep the bodies & just have cables but would take what I could get.
OK, let's get concrete here.
If someone would machine the collette (brass) and get a connecting center pin, then I will build one prototype (for myself only!) and disclose all plans to others.
So, for the cost/work/effort of solving the mechanical problems, I will help.
That said, my motivation for doing this has decreased substantially. I've been doing more and more binaural recording (various capsules) and digging that much more than other tapes.
So, any closet machinists out there? Show yourselves and let's get rolling!
Richard
-
these last two posts interest me. I am willing to kick in some money as well. I also have no mechanical expertise to do this project myself. where I commend richard for taking this on and sharing info, I have no way to take his knowledge and do it myself. if someone has the knowledge to take this public, I will donate (to Richard?) as well as for a final product.
I want to keep the bodies as well. I still want my sound that I have now.
-
Also willing to go in $20...
-
Also willing to go in $20...
See that is my thought, if everyone kicks in $20.00 & we deposit it into a paypal account as a slush fund it will add up quick. We can use the money to pay for the machining of the collettes or to buy an extension tube to experiment with?
-
I have a question... If you can buy extension arms for these mics I assume they are about 1.5 feet long. I wonder what the max distance a mic cable can be between the mic body and the mic capsule does anyone really know for sure?
Chris
-
My thought has always been why can't an extension tube be used but I know Marc Nutter tried it way back when & the outside of the tube is the ground. Why can't a wire be used as a ground instead of the tube & just lengthen the tube? Obviously there has to be more to it then that.
-
Did any of it work for Marc?
The schoeps extension tube has a buffer circuit, ala KC5 actives. The AKG extension does not (based on pics).
I'd say that either means the AKG cap does not need the buffer circuit (because the FET can drive that cable) or it means the akg tube is not sonically on-par with the normal cap+body. I think you'll need a buffer circuit to preserve fidelity.
Regardless, the circuit is the easy part. Everyone needs to repeat that a thousand times.. or re-read the previous thread ;)
Packaging all the guts into the machined collette and having it be servicable so the cable can be replaced is the hard part. There will need to be at least one manufactured insert for the collette guts and for cable strain relief and anchoring. I'd expect one base plate for cable retention, a circuit assembly and then another interface component for the capsule.
Schoeps mounts the smd circuit on a small board:
-
Did any of it work for Marc?
The schoeps extension tube has a buffer circuit, ala KC5 actives. The AKG extension does not (based on pics).
I'd say that either means the AKG cap does not need the buffer circuit (because the FET can drive that cable) or it means the akg tube is not sonically on-par with the normal cap+body. I think you'll need a buffer circuit to preserve fidelity.
Regardless, the circuit is the easy part. Everyone needs to repeat that a thousand times.. or re-read the previous thread ;)
Packaging all the guts into the machined collette and having it be servicable so the cable can be replaced is the hard part. There will need to be at least one manufactured insert for the collette guts and for cable strain relief and anchoring. I'd expect one base plate for cable retention, a circuit assembly and then another interface component for the capsule.
Schoeps mounts the smd circuit on a small board:
Here is a question...
Why not hack a extension tube apart and connect cables to it and experiment with different lengths and do a comparison with the same cap and body and have listening tests to see if anyone can hear the difference. I am sure one of the only things to happen with increasing distance would be increasing noise floor. But that's pretty easy to hear. So why not try a series of experiments? That way you guys can just by extension tubes and hack them. Hell I could do that very easily if I had a tube.
Chris
-
Set up the paypal account, I'm in for at least $20.
-
Did any of it work for Marc?
The schoeps extension tube has a buffer circuit, ala KC5 actives. The AKG extension does not (based on pics).
I'd say that either means the AKG cap does not need the buffer circuit (because the FET can drive that cable) or it means the akg tube is not sonically on-par with the normal cap+body. I think you'll need a buffer circuit to preserve fidelity.
Regardless, the circuit is the easy part. Everyone needs to repeat that a thousand times.. or re-read the previous thread ;)
The circuit was not the easy part (until I published my solution here, well that solution adapted from various AKG tech docs). We still have to test it too. Packaging is a mechanical problem, but we know what has to be inside the collette.
Richard
-
Did any of it work for Marc?
The schoeps extension tube has a buffer circuit, ala KC5 actives. The AKG extension does not (based on pics).
I'd say that either means the AKG cap does not need the buffer circuit (because the FET can drive that cable) or it means the akg tube is not sonically on-par with the normal cap+body. I think you'll need a buffer circuit to preserve fidelity.
Regardless, the circuit is the easy part. Everyone needs to repeat that a thousand times.. or re-read the previous thread ;)
Packaging all the guts into the machined collette and having it be servicable so the cable can be replaced is the hard part. There will need to be at least one manufactured insert for the collette guts and for cable strain relief and anchoring. I'd expect one base plate for cable retention, a circuit assembly and then another interface component for the capsule.
Schoeps mounts the smd circuit on a small board:
Here is a question...
Why not hack a extension tube apart and connect cables to it and experiment with different lengths and do a comparison with the same cap and body and have listening tests to see if anyone can hear the difference. I am sure one of the only things to happen with increasing distance would be increasing noise floor. But that's pretty easy to hear. So why not try a series of experiments? That way you guys can just by extension tubes and hack them. Hell I could do that very easily if I had a tube.
Chris
Chris - check out my post from page 7. This is the same point I brought up.
Here's the deal:
AKG offers 3 options to separate the capsule from the body:
A61 - an angle adapter that uses no circuit to make the separation. This is the least expensive ($175) and appears easy to disassemble. There are pictures of the disassembled parts on page 7. I would think it would be fairly easy to disassemble this, desolder the 3 solder points and use 3 wires of varying lengths to connect the capsule to the body via the hacked A61. If successful, an active cable could easily be made with a Dremel tool, heat-shrink tubing and wire.
VR61 - this is a 14 inch tube that is fairly pricy unless you get real lucky on Ebay. It is no longer in production AFAIK. Nobody has seen a disassembled one on this board and no technical service document has surfaced so it may contain a buffer/circuit. This is what Marc Nutter hacked and the result was a signal with lots of humming or buzzing that I would guess was a poor ground although this has never been established. This would be slight more ideal IMHO for use to hack into a cable as it already has straight tubing coming out of the connectors that could be cut to run wires through.
VR62 - this is a 3 foot tube that appears identical to the VR61 only longer and is also fairly pricy (>$500) and again nobody has seen the inside of this so we don't know if there is a buffer/circuit.
I wish I had the soldering skills to hack up my A61, but I don't want to run the risk of ruining one and can't afford to replace one now. Again, I could def throw in $20....
-
Did any of it work for Marc?
The schoeps extension tube has a buffer circuit, ala KC5 actives. The AKG extension does not (based on pics).
I'd say that either means the AKG cap does not need the buffer circuit (because the FET can drive that cable) or it means the akg tube is not sonically on-par with the normal cap+body. I think you'll need a buffer circuit to preserve fidelity.
Regardless, the circuit is the easy part. Everyone needs to repeat that a thousand times.. or re-read the previous thread ;)
Packaging all the guts into the machined collette and having it be servicable so the cable can be replaced is the hard part. There will need to be at least one manufactured insert for the collette guts and for cable strain relief and anchoring. I'd expect one base plate for cable retention, a circuit assembly and then another interface component for the capsule.
Schoeps mounts the smd circuit on a small board:
Here is a question...
Why not hack a extension tube apart and connect cables to it and experiment with different lengths and do a comparison with the same cap and body and have listening tests to see if anyone can hear the difference. I am sure one of the only things to happen with increasing distance would be increasing noise floor. But that's pretty easy to hear. So why not try a series of experiments? That way you guys can just by extension tubes and hack them. Hell I could do that very easily if I had a tube.
Chris
Chris - check out my post from page 7. This is the same point I brought up.
Here's the deal:
AKG offers 3 options to separate the capsule from the body:
A61 - an angle adapter that uses no circuit to make the separation. This is the least expensive ($175) and appears easy to disassemble. There are pictures of the disassembled parts on page 7. I would think it would be fairly easy to disassemble this, desolder the 3 solder points and use 3 wires of varying lengths to connect the capsule to the body via the hacked A61. If successful, an active cable could easily be made with a Dremel tool, heat-shrink tubing and wire.
VR61 - this is a 14 inch tube that is fairly pricy unless you get real lucky on Ebay. It is no longer in production AFAIK. Nobody has seen a disassembled one on this board and no technical service document has surfaced so it may contain a buffer/circuit. This is what Marc Nutter hacked and the result was a signal with lots of humming or buzzing that I would guess was a poor ground although this has never been established. This would be slight more ideal IMHO for use to hack into a cable as it already has straight tubing coming out of the connectors that could be cut to run wires through.
VR62 - this is a 3 foot tube that appears identical to the VR61 only longer and is also fairly pricy (>$500) and again nobody has seen the inside of this so we don't know if there is a buffer/circuit.
I wish I had the soldering skills to hack up my A61, but I don't want to run the risk of ruining one and can't afford to replace one now. Again, I could def throw in $20....
I suspect that the 3 foot tube does not have a buffer in it.. I think before you guys go building circuits try the cable if someone has a set of tubes I would be more then happy to hack them up and make the cables for you guys for FREE if someone will supply me with the cable you guys want to use..
Chris Church
-
Not sure why I didn't think of this earlier, but an easy way to test if a buffer is needed would be to use 3 wires with alligator clips on each end and connect them to the capsule and body similar to what poorlyconditioned did when he tested the capsule for his circuit.
EDIT: If that works, then we could talk about hacking the A61 or VR tubes to use for the connections.
-
Not sure why I didn't think of this earlier, but an easy way to test if a buffer is needed would be to use 3 wires with alligator clips on each end and connect them to the capsule and body similar to what poorlyconditioned did when he tested the capsule for his circuit.
EDIT: If that works, then we could talk about hacking the A61 or VR tubes to use for the connections.
You cant really do that because you need a shield in the back of that capsule so you can see if they are quiet. Also you have to watch the polarization voltage.... Its not a good idea to use alligator clips I think the best way is to hack a pair of wands.
-
I understand now - thanks. See my PM. I'm interested if you think it might work. Let me know.
-
I want to make it clear by doing this mod I am not looking to get into modding AKG mics for a living. I am doing this mod for free. And I will not be doing it for anyone else. I will however take pictures "if it works" and show you guys what I did and how I did it, so others can do it them selves. I want to help you guys 100% free of charge..
Chris
-
nice Chris
-
i thought the biggest challanges were the center pin
as well as fitting everything into the small space
taking the center pin out of the problem, how much room is needed to fit everything inside the collette?
couldn't the collette be longer, kinda a mini body?
i guess it depends how much needs to fit and how big the "typical" collette is in size
but if it had to be a little longer i don't see why that would be a big deal
-
i thought the biggest challanges were the center pin
as well as fitting everything into the small space
taking the center pin out of the problem, how much room is needed to fit everything inside the collette?
couldn't the collette be longer, kinda a mini body?
i guess it depends how much needs to fit and how big the "typical" collette is in size
but if it had to be a little longer i don't see why that would be a big deal
I think you have to figure out what the max distance is that you can run between the capsule and the mic body first. Then if you need a driver to drive the capsule you can look at what size you need the Collette to be. I think you might be able to get away with 3 feet between the mic body and the capsule but I will not know until I get the mic in my hands and try it... If that's the case making the Collette is easy and the center pin problem is very easy too.. Its a matter of a spring loaded contact. That's not a huge deal first thing is to figure out the max distance. I think 3 feet would be good for most users here? But I dont know.
Chris
-
I think 3 feet would be good for most users here? But I dont know.
Three does no one any good. Well maybe a small handful but not many. While it would be great to have an active cable most folks would want 6-10 feet. Remember that active caps are not just for stealthing they are also for open taping.
Thanks for the input Chris.
-
I think 3 feet would be good for most users here? But I dont know.
Three does no one any good. Well maybe a small handful but not many. While it would be great to have an active cable most folks would want 6-10 feet. Remember that active caps are not just for stealthing they are also for open taping.
Thanks for the input Chris.
the jklabs box I speced had 25' cables
-
I think 3 feet would be good for most users here? But I dont know.
Three does no one any good. Well maybe a small handful but not many. While it would be great to have an active cable most folks would want 6-10 feet. Remember that active caps are not just for stealthing they are also for open taping.
Thanks for the input Chris.
i would have to agree. while i'm sure 3 feet would be a huge accomplishment and a great step forward for this project, i don't see the use in an open taping situation. a three foot seperation b/w caps and bodies would not be beneficial. jk labs had 25 ft cables :o that's insane!
i do want to say again i am very appreciative for everyone who is contributing to this project. thanks to all and +T's all around. i would being willing to contribute some money into a paypal account for R&D.
-
I think 3 feet would be good for most users here? But I dont know.
Three does no one any good. Well maybe a small handful but not many. While it would be great to have an active cable most folks would want 6-10 feet. Remember that active caps are not just for stealthing they are also for open taping.
Thanks for the input Chris.
the jklabs box I speced had 25' cables
my cables are about 12' I think.....Todd made extension cables for them also.
-
Another idea would be to machine a brass tube that is 20cm long with threads to fit A61s on either end. Remove the boards from 2 480 bodies and mount them inside the tube with the cables soldered directly to the terminations on the board and exiting in the middle of the tube. Then the tube could be mounted similar to a Kwon bar or placed in a hat. Of course you'd have a fixed distance, but the angle could be varied with the A61s. Give me a minute and I'll post a photoshop mock up. Only problem is the inner diameter of the tube would have to accomodate both boards.
Sort of like this..
(http://www.posthorn.com/Images/Schoeps/S_mstc.jpg)
-
wow, that is really thinking outside the box. +T
i like it!
-
(http://locker.uky.edu/~jmwils1/photos/2.jpg)
Obviously several people have already determined the thread size since there are at least 2 machined cables out there, so it wouldn't seem like much more to make a tube and drill an exit for cabling.
-
(http://locker.uky.edu/~jmwils1/photos/2.jpg)
Obviously several people have already determined the thread size since there are at least 2 machined cables out there, so it wouldn't seem like much more to make a tube and drill an exit for cabling.
WTF is that? Who runs this & where do the bodies fit in?
-
The bodies are disassembled and the bare circuit boards are placed inside the tube. Then the XLRs are hard wired in. I think that's what he's saying.
In all honesty this doesn't seem a whole lot different than what's in your avatar though... Not by much at least.
-
I think it would be a huge improvement over what's in my avatar. It would be impossible to run a lower profile setup than this because this would be almost identical to a Kwon bar with two capsules and active cables. You could easily fit this whole thing in a single shock mount with just a single breakout cable coming out the back. It could potentially be placed inside a hat and you definitely can't do that with two full bodies. The only disadvantage would be the weight and fixed distance between capsules. For me the fixed distance wouldn't be that bad since I almost always run DINA regardless of capsule or location.
-
By the way, the official response from AKG is "Sorry to say, since the products are (were) not serviceable, we do not have any service papers". Not sure if this means that there aren't any servicable electronic parts though. It's interesting that the VR91 has a service document on AKG's site but it no electronic parts inside the extension tube...
Back to that mock up above, looking at the circuit board, I think it would be difficult to align the boards so that the attachments for the A61 adapters were on exact opposite ends of the tube. But who knows. Anyway, it's a different approach to the problem.
-
It's a limited approach though if you ever plan on running different configs or want to run split ck62's.
What schematics are you looking for? The A61's?
-
Agreed that it's limited.
I wanted the VR61 or VR62 schematics to see if there is a circuit or buffer anywhere. If there is not, then it proves that the capsule CAN be separated from the body and that an "active" cable SHOULD be possible even if it's only 3 feet (the length of the VR62). The A61 definitely does not have a circuit or buffer. All it does is to serve as a physical connection between the cap and body. In all probablility, there is some length between the capsule and body at which a buffer is needed, but it would be nice to know what this distance is.
-
i would personally LOVE that setup above. i ALWAYS run DIN/DINa/ORTF and the fixed distance isnt a big deal at all too me. i think angle is more important than distance anyway......
-
Who's setup is that anyway?
-
Who's setup is that anyway?
it's just a photo shop job. check out the capsule on the left... the letters AKG are backwards.
-
Who's setup is that anyway?
it's just a photo shop job. check out the capsule on the left... the letters AKG are backwards.
Gotcha. Thanks, I was way confused. :P
+T
-
still, a really, really good idea!!!!!
I'm soon to own some a61s, and you guys can be DAMN SURE that they will be cut, hacked, burnt, bruised, burried, reborn...whatever it takes to at least get a 3' active cable between the mic bodies and the caps.
the a61 seems to be the key here. If we can get longer runs, great..but I bet there is a limit since there is no "active" circuitry involved in the swivels to push the signal down a length of cable.
Being able to run a 3' extention cable for 480s would be HUGE !
hows this...building on both ideas.
gut the 480bodies.
mount both PCBs into one enclosure
use a single cable out of this (5pin or something) that forks out to the two individual a61 ends where the capsules go.
I'd be more than happy to velcro that shit to my stand, or run it in my pocket when low key.
for true stealth, a 3' cable is really all you need any way. no more lc3 belts!
-
still, a really, really good idea!!!!!
I'm soon to own some a61s, and you guys can be DAMN SURE that they will be cut, hacked, burnt, bruised, burried, reborn...whatever it takes to at least get a 3' active cable between the mic bodies and the caps.
the a61 seems to be the key here. If we can get longer runs, great..but I bet there is a limit since there is no "active" circuitry involved in the swivels to push the signal down a length of cable.
Being able to run a 3' extention cable for 480s would be HUGE !
hows this...building on both ideas.
gut the 480bodies.
mount both PCBs into one enclosure
use a single cable out of this (5pin or something) that forks out to the two individual a61 ends where the capsules go.
I'd be more than happy to velcro that shit to my stand, or run it in my pocket when low key.
for true stealth, a 3' cable is really all you need any way. no more lc3 belts!
Great idea.... ;)
-
came to me in a vision
-
came to me in a vision
Yes I have had a few of these. Let me know if you need help with "your" vision ok :P
-
never claimed it as my own. just an idea to present.
off the record, Chris and I discussed this privately this morning...trying to figure out what the best way to accomplish the separation of capsule and body.
now you understand the mild ball busting.
:-)
this will come to pass folks. it may not be perfect (active cables w/cap and no body, or body and 3m extension cable to caps)..but it'll be better than nothing
-
never claimed it as my own. just an idea to present.
off the record, Chris and I discussed this privately this morning...trying to figure out what the best way to accomplish the separation of capsule and body.
now you understand the mild ball busting.
:-)
this will come to pass folks. it may not be perfect (active cables w/cap and no body, or body and 3m extension cable to caps)..but it'll be better than nothing
Yeah my balls hurt lol.. I was kidding around with you.. :P
If Nick wants to do this, we will be taking pictures and sharing everything we did and how we did it so others can do the same...
Chris
-
we'll do it.
put some ice on those puppies before they look like this:
http://mattb.net/images/misc/cables/img_9842%20(3).jpg
-
we'll do it.
put some ice on those puppies before they look like this:
http://mattb.net/images/misc/cables/img_9842%20(3).jpg
Yeah I dont want to see more pictures of your balls and these cables ok.... ;D
-
agreed.
-
I"ve spoke w/that company you mentioned, (ACO) and told them of our goal. i thought this was informative.
**************************************
With the capsule you need to deal with very high impedances and low stray capacitance.Those are both hard to do.
To give you an idea
The CK series of capsules are about 30-50 pF in capacitance
The cable your using is probably not less than 30 pF/foot
So 1 foot of cable on the capsule drops the output in 1/2 (6 dB) and 3 feet 12 to 15 dB 1/4 to 1/5 the output
Plus it can become a mechanical noise source
************************************************
so cable is important, but I seldom see any capacitance ratings in the stuff I buy.
-
I"ve spoke w/that company you mentioned, (ACO) and told them of our goal. i thought this was informative.
**************************************
With the capsule you need to deal with very high impedances and low stray capacitance.Those are both hard to do.
To give you an idea
The CK series of capsules are about 30-50 pF in capacitance
The cable your using is probably not less than 30 pF/foot
So 1 foot of cable on the capsule drops the output in 1/2 (6 dB) and 3 feet 12 to 15 dB 1/4 to 1/5 the output
Plus it can become a mechanical noise source
************************************************
so cable is important, but I seldom see any capacitance ratings in the stuff I buy.
I think we just have to try different cables. We know three feet can be done, because of the extension wands that are available for these mics.. I think we need to try a few different cables.
-
again, that is assuming there is no circuitry involved w/the goose neck.
-
again, that is assuming there is no circuitry involved w/the goose neck.
If there is we can take a look at the design.. But I dont think there is anything inside the tube...
-
I've got a call into Marc Nutter, who tried this w/the extension once before. He'll tell me what he found inside there.
-
I haven't been following this thread, so this info may be old, if so please disregard. I haven't been on ts.com for a while, and at mule last friday someone mentioned to me that there were some folks on here working on this so i thought id check it out.
I run the blueline akgs (391) with the akg brand actives. I ordered them from musiciansgear.com in germany and the shipping took about 4 or 5 months. when they got here the package looked like it had been runover by a stampede of forklifts. but anyway before i ordered them i sent several emails back and forth with an akg us representative who seemed to know his stuff. he said that there was no active circuitry inside the "active cables", and that they were nothing more than connectors and high quality silver cable. the cables i ordered are 3meters and i beleive there was also a 9m version but i can't seem to find either one for sale on the site i ordered them from.
i don't know if this will help anyone out as far as this project goes but I sure hope so, a low profile akg setup would be awesome.
-
has anyone tried a prototype version of just cable between the caps and the bodies?
-
has anyone tried a prototype version of just cable between the caps and the bodies?
there are a few here who were able to create "active" systems for the 390 series
the goal of this project is to get them for the 460s/480
your question above has been address a few times, theres a lot of good info in the 1st thread you may want to read up on
-
Let me see if i have this right,
the schoeps cables have a buffer in the line to boost the signal to make up for the loss that the cable creates, while the akg actives that i have and all of the jklabs/nbox solutions use no circuitry in the line to boost the signal.
my cables use no extra circuitry whatsoever to form the bridge between cap and body, while jklabs/nbox contains some extra circuitry not present in the body that it is replacing.
It seems as though the 480s don't need any extra circuitry judging from what is inside the A61 swivel at least for a very short run, do we know if the goosenecks have any circuitry inside them?
-
Let me see if i have this right,
the schoeps cables have a buffer in the line to boost the signal to make up for the loss that the cable creates, while the akg actives that i have and all of the jklabs/nbox solutions use no circuitry in the line to boost the signal.
my cables use no extra circuitry whatsoever to form the bridge between cap and body, while jklabs/nbox contains some extra circuitry not present in the body that it is replacing.
It seems as though the 480s don't need any extra circuitry judging from what is inside the A61 swivel at least for a very short run, do we know if the goosenecks have any circuitry inside them?
Not quite -- the neumann km100 series (eg, km140s), the schoeps, and the jklabs "active" solution for the ck6x caps (480 caps) all use active electronics in the head of the active cables where the capsules attach to. The nbox solution, which uses the schoeps active cables, therefore also contains active electronics. The active electronics act as a buffer, but do not really "boost" the signal.
The jklabs box (as opposed to the jklabs active cables) and the nbox both include electronics that replace the electronics in the mic bodies.
Your "active" cables for the akg blueline series are not true active cables in the sense that they do not contain active electronics. These cables do not require active electronics because the blueline series are pre-polarized (aka electret) mics -- they are not true condensor mics that require external biasing.
The AKG gooseneck for the 460/480s, which doesn't contain active electronics, does not necessarily mean that you can have "active" cables without electronics since the distances involved are so short.
I think that summarizes everything.
-
Let me see if i have this right,
the schoeps cables have a buffer in the line to boost the signal to make up for the loss that the cable creates, while the akg actives that i have and all of the jklabs/nbox solutions use no circuitry in the line to boost the signal.
my cables use no extra circuitry whatsoever to form the bridge between cap and body, while jklabs/nbox contains some extra circuitry not present in the body that it is replacing.
It seems as though the 480s don't need any extra circuitry judging from what is inside the A61 swivel at least for a very short run, do we know if the goosenecks have any circuitry inside them?
Not quite -- the neumann km100 series (eg, km140s), the schoeps, and the jklabs "active" solution for the ck6x caps (480 caps) all use active electronics in the head of the active cables where the capsules attach to. The nbox solution, which uses the schoeps active cables, therefore also contains active electronics. The active electronics act as a buffer, but do not really "boost" the signal.
The jklabs box (as opposed to the jklabs active cables) and the nbox both include electronics that replace the electronics in the mic bodies.
Your "active" cables for the akg blueline series are not true active cables in the sense that they do not contain active electronics. These cables do not require active electronics because the blueline series are pre-polarized (aka electret) mics -- they are not true condensor mics that require external biasing.
The AKG gooseneck for the 460/480s, which doesn't contain active electronics, does not necessarily mean that you can have "active" cables without electronics since the distances involved are so short.
I think that summarizes everything.
The main stumbling block is the capacitance of the cable. It causes a capacitive load on the capsule that reduces its bass response and output and increases the noise floor. We need to find super high quality super low capacitance cable and then runs of up to 3 feet "might" be possible.. Even with good cable there might be some loss of low frequency and of output possibly resulting in a increased signal to noise ratio and loss of low end. But until someone sends me a microphone with a swivel I cant test my theory....
The reason why there is active circuitry is simple. They use a FET to isolate the capsule from the wire and eliminate the problems associated with directly loading a true capacitor microphone and reducing its performance. That's not to say it cant be done because we know AKG has made 3 foot extension wands with no circuitry in them, there is a huge possibility that it can be done.. I think it can be done but with out a mic to test and try I cant help you guys.. I have the test equipment to show if there are any differences between the cable and the direct mic/body mount.
Chris
-
i'll have those mics w/swivels come mid month. then we'll move forward
-
i'll have those mics w/swivels come mid month. then we'll move forward
Are you looking at building cables, or are you trying to immitate the schoeps ortf bar?
I think the ortf bar would be a much better option than building passive cables of a very short length. It wouldn't be too hard to mount the electronics from the inside of the 480s inside a tube, then wire the xlrs from the bodies to a 5 pin xlr socket.
As far as making active cables, does the buffer circuit function to keep the bias accross the cap at a constant value? and how do the other brands of active cables power this circuit?, do they pull power from the signal? every analog circuit we ever talked about in school had an external power supply.
-
i'll have those mics w/swivels come mid month. then we'll move forward
Are you looking at building cables, or are you trying to immitate the schoeps ortf bar?
I think the ortf bar would be a much better option than building passive cables of a very short length. It wouldn't be too hard to mount the electronics from the inside of the 480s inside a tube, then wire the xlrs from the bodies to a 5 pin xlr socket.
As far as making active cables, does the buffer circuit function to keep the bias accross the cap at a constant value? and how do the other brands of active cables power this circuit?, do they pull power from the signal? every analog circuit we ever talked about in school had an external power supply.
The "active" cables have a FET (field effect transistor) in the collette, right behind the capsule. This is necessary to buffer the *very* low current signal from the mic element. You may get a few feet without the FET, but it is then highly dependent of the extension cable.
So, the proper circuit will have a FET very close to the capsule. You will need two additional signals: a low voltage (eg., 5-10V) source to power the FET, and a high voltage (eg., 50-60V) to polarize the capsule. The polarization voltage is high, but very low current (theoretically zero current in fact). So you can make this out of a bunch of alkaline batteries in series. A voltage invertor could be used (that is what is in the 480 body), but is more complex and IMO not needed, at least in the first version.
I've built these circuits on my workbench (look for photos in the previous Actives thread), but have not yet built a prototype. The reason is a *mechanical* one. I need "collettes" to screw the capsules into, to connect to the center pin reliably, and to shield the small circuit (a FET and a few resistors).
My offer is the following: if someone is willing to send me (to keep!) a set of machined collettes, or a set of swivels, or anything else that will solve the mechanical problems, I will build a prototype and disclose all information I discover and allow anyone to copy/build/sell the design to others. If I succeed, I will keep the system. If I fail, I will return the parts to the donor. I have already bought the capsules (a pair of CK63) and they are sitting idle on my bench, so I have contributed enough money, I don't want to buy more parts.
In the meantime, I have since decided to buy a set of Beyerdynamic actives (see the Team Beyer thread), but I am still willing to contribute to this project *in exchange for gear*. If anyone wants to step up and donate their parts, the project will move forward. I am also happy to help anyone else who actually builds something on their own.
No offense to others, but we don't need any more questions about this topic. We need someone to either donate parts, or to build something.
Thanks for listening folks...
Richard
-
Thanks everyone for helping me out with the info, I know all of this stuff has already been discussed, and I am stumbling in here at the end of the conversation.
-
Thanks everyone for helping me out with the info, I know all of this stuff has already been discussed, and I am stumbling in here at the end of the conversation.
No worries. I'm just reminding people how we will make progress.
I think both Chris Church and I have offerred our services. But I don't think either of us will be spending (any more!) of our own money on this.
You may not be aware of it, but *someone* (besides myself) has actually machined collettes too. (Mine were aluminum, and I gave up partway though), I'm not sure their status, or whether they are willing to donate.
As I said, I'm willing to help with any aspect but buying more gear. I've hit my limit there...
Richard
-
Thanks everyone for helping me out with the info, I know all of this stuff has already been discussed, and I am stumbling in here at the end of the conversation.
No worries. I'm just reminding people how we will make progress.
I think both Chris Church and I have offerred our services. But I don't think either of us will be spending (any more!) of our own money on this.
You may not be aware of it, but *someone* (besides myself) has actually machined collettes too. (Mine were aluminum, and I gave up partway though), I'm not sure their status, or whether they are willing to donate.
As I said, I'm willing to help with any aspect but buying more gear. I've hit my limit there...
Richard
I did not spend any money/time on this not like Richard has... That's for sure.. I think Richard is right about the buffer you need a way to get over the cables capacitance. But the experimenter in me would still like to try 3 feet. I mean if the AKG wand was three feet the only difference is a 100% shield we can get dam close to that with a good braided shield/foil. I think like Spark'ie says if you can find some very high end Teflon wire that will give you the super low capacitance that is needed in order to MAYBE make this work with out a buffer. But I dont know.
Chris
-
my intentions are to dissect the swivels when they arrive and see whats what w/some simple experimentation of lengthening the distance via a better single conductor shielded cable between the assembly and the capsule.
I do want to keep and utilize the swivels for my own use, and am not ready to throw away a pair of them for research...but I'll pass them around for sure so people can poke around on them as well, should I fail.
I'm also not opposed to donating a single one for the greater good. I'd buy a replacement for myself.
we'll see.
fwiw, i'm not interested in an ortf bar for the capsules, so probably will not go very far w/that.
-
So, Nick, done dissecting? I'm not really interested per se, but this thread was always a fun read. I hoped that as a ts.com community everyone would bang their heads together and have some SKG 480 actives fall out. :P
-
funny this comes up.
I had my swivel on the bench the other day to see whats what inside.
now, i'm talking w/my cable sources to see if I can come up with a cable that is:
1 thin
2 sheilded
3 very low capasitence
once I get a hold of what I think will work, i'll try myself.
and if that doest' work, then I'll send a swivel to Chris or Richard.
If two swivels are needed...absolutely...
then I will offer up mine for the chopping block, and ask that the peeps involved with this thread and those w/any interest make a small paypal donation to me. After all...its $400 odd in parts. I think it will be fair if we can all work with the "greater good" in mind.
-
ok fellas...
how low is low enough? will 50ohm coax work?
http://tinyurl.com/2gyx43
or maybe these people can help: http://www.quabbin.com/tech_briefs/tech3.html
-
Hi Nick -
Count me in for $50 of the cost if you go this route. I'd love to go active with my 460's!!
Mike
-
I was thinking more like 10...but 50 is good.
:)
dont sweat it though, i'll let the group know when i'm ready to roll forward.
probably august as I have a bunch of shows right now, and like the swivels.
-
hello all, neil in san marcos here. i have inhouse CK8X's as well as CK1X's, CK63's, and CK61's. i have 451's 451E's and 451EB's as well as 460's. i ran the 460/CK8X combo after the dead's europe tour. jeez, was it that long ago??? anyway, the MK46 cable was always somewhat fragile - we were always careful to hold the MK46 and spin the 460 or the cap when attaching the parts. nevertheless, the cables became unreliable. so i rebuilt them with a heavier cable (i _may_ be able to find the spec sheet akg sent me on the original cable - will dig). i do remember searching hard for the same spec cable in terms of impedance as well as other factors. the mk46 cable is triaxial. my mk46 schematics show that the center cable is "hot", the inner cable is "ground" and the outer cable is "screen". if you meter the connections at the 460 body, the screen is common with the body which is common with XLR pin1. so the outer cable acts like the tube in the A15 to prevent inteference - rfi, emi, etc - getting into the signal... i still have original AKG cable as well as the replacement cable not used in the repair. likely i can find the cable info for the stuff i used as replacement. never noticed any degredation of SQ after replacement, btw... so maybe this will assist in providing a quiet link between the cap and body....
to poorlyconditioned... i have not looked at a schematic in many years for the CKxX caps. i assume that it is a fact that there is a FET in the cap? (can't remember from the previous thread and i have been absent from this forum for a few months, so please forgive the dumbness of my question). just thinking, cause there are only 2 connections for the CKx series and 3 for the CKxX series...
i think the idea of the A51 as a basis for investigating the soundness of seperating the cap from the body is a great idea. i really think the potential noise issue needs to be looked into very carefully.
as a side note, sent my 8x caps in as one diaphram is bad. akg did not even have ONE MK46 available to test my capsule with - i had to ship my eq to them. best part? they charged me boo-coo bucks and never even repaired them, then denied the claim when asked to warranty them.
neil in san marcos
glad to help in any way i can...
-
+t
-
hello all, neil in san marcos here. i have inhouse CK8X's as well as CK1X's, CK63's, and CK61's. i have 451's 451E's and 451EB's as well as 460's. i ran the 460/CK8X combo after the dead's europe tour. jeez, was it that long ago??? anyway, the MK46 cable was always somewhat fragile - we were always careful to hold the MK46 and spin the 460 or the cap when attaching the parts. nevertheless, the cables became unreliable. so i rebuilt them with a heavier cable (i _may_ be able to find the spec sheet akg sent me on the original cable - will dig). i do remember searching hard for the same spec cable in terms of impedance as well as other factors. the mk46 cable is triaxial. my mk46 schematics show that the center cable is "hot", the inner cable is "ground" and the outer cable is "screen". if you meter the connections at the 460 body, the screen is common with the body which is common with XLR pin1. so the outer cable acts like the tube in the A15 to prevent inteference - rfi, emi, etc - getting into the signal... i still have original AKG cable as well as the replacement cable not used in the repair. likely i can find the cable info for the stuff i used as replacement. never noticed any degredation of SQ after replacement, btw... so maybe this will assist in providing a quiet link between the cap and body....
to poorlyconditioned... i have not looked at a schematic in many years for the CKxX caps. i assume that it is a fact that there is a FET in the cap? (can't remember from the previous thread and i have been absent from this forum for a few months, so please forgive the dumbness of my question). just thinking, cause there are only 2 connections for the CKx series and 3 for the CKxX series...
i think the idea of the A51 as a basis for investigating the soundness of seperating the cap from the body is a great idea. i really think the potential noise issue needs to be looked into very carefully.
as a side note, sent my 8x caps in as one diaphram is bad. akg did not even have ONE MK46 available to test my capsule with - i had to ship my eq to them. best part? they charged me boo-coo bucks and never even repaired them, then denied the claim when asked to warranty them.
neil in san marcos
glad to help in any way i can...
That cable info would be great for those of us looking to jump into the AKG actives world... thanks for the info dude! +t!
-
will work on cable info. might take a day or two.
nick, neil here. long time no talk, eh! hey, send me an addy and i will send you some cable. oem akg as well as the replacement. please use nsturtevantATcox.net of course AT = @
neil in san marcos
-
Yo Neil...
I emailed you..and it bounced.
PM me ?
:)
-
oooops
nsturtevant1ATcox.net
forgot the 1
so sorry
neil
-
hey hey
if you all are still lookin for some funding for the project, i can chip in. the 460's i have i have a pair of ck1's for and thus use the adapter for the capsules to fit on the body...that can also be a nice little chamber to use for this type of project...it can also be used to encapsulate any active components that will allow for longer cable runs.
i can take pics if people want...
dan
-
I now have cable from a hacked MK46 "active" AKG cable from the 451s. I also have some other cable to try as well. I'll be getting my rig back from a friend tonight or next week...depending on what he has to record this weekend, if any.
then I'll dismantle my a51 swivel and see whats what.
hopefully, i can make something work...at least a 3' extension. my hopes are not up though...I must admit.
I believe one of the EE folks here would have a better chance of just making something "work"
-
Heh, I'll keep my fingers crossed for you (and us) Nick!!
-
Did anyone ever ask Jon of JKLabs? I read that he has surfaced recently.
-
I now have cable from a hacked MK46 "active" AKG cable from the 451s. I also have some other cable to try as well. I'll be getting my rig back from a friend tonight or next week...depending on what he has to record this weekend, if any.
Good to hear someone is making some progress.. any progress.. I was getting ready to suggest the thread name should be changed to the akg inactive project ;)
-
Did anyone ever ask Jon of JKLabs? I read that he has surfaced recently.
Remember though that Jon did not make an active cable for the 480/460 bodies he just make an active cable into his own box. Big difference.
-
i agree, it is big diff..
the DVC box i have has the heads he made. when i was origionaly ordering it from him back in 96 or 97 i asked if he makes just an active cable and said no, as noted before. But the head was made out of brass, which he had made at a mechine shop (used one of my ck61's as the thread reference). honestly, if anyone knows a mechinist what we need is somone that can make up the head out of what ever material we want, and do the threads...i still think brass will be the best, then get it powdercoated, and we can deal with the innards and what ever components we need to put in the two heads, the one on the mic, and the cap interfacing one.
A friend is doing the BCT right now, he is in the film industry and has a mechinist that makes custome housings for equipment he designs, ill see if i can get the guys info. my GF is an architect and there are copies of autocad on basicaly every computer at our house...so if we want i can get a quick CAD made up, and see about gettin this to the mechinist. BUT, somone has to figure out the innards of the two...
just stuff to think about...
dan
-
I meant to mention this site a while back but forgot, but there's a site called http://www.emachineshop.com/ that looks like they might be able to do what is needed. You download their CAD program (which can also be used for your own projects even if you don't have them make it :wink2: ) and they say if you can design it w/ the software they can build it. Gives you an instant price quote according to what material you choose, too. Probably a long shot but it might be worth looking into.
BTW, they have a sister site called http://www.pad2pad.com/ that does custom printed circuit boards, too. I have never used these sites and cannot vouch for their services.
-
Did anyone ever ask Jon of JKLabs? I read that he has surfaced recently.
Remember though that Jon did not make an active cable for the 480/460 bodies he just make an active cable into his own box. Big difference.
I'm not sure this is correct, I think raoulduke has an active cable system that connects his caps to his 480 bodies, I know he does not have the same dvc preamp and cable system that I do, and that there are at least two different systems for the 480 series engineered by JK Labs
-
Did anyone ever ask Jon of JKLabs? I read that he has surfaced recently.
Remember though that Jon did not make an active cable for the 480/460 bodies he just make an active cable into his own box. Big difference.
I'm not sure this is correct, I think raoulduke has an active cable system that connects his caps to his 480 bodies, I know he does not have the same dvc preamp and cable system that I do, and that there are at least two different systems for the 480 series engineered by JK Labs
I think Tim/Raoulduke had/has the jklabs ECMS system for the Gefell caps, not the AKG caps. I had the JKLabs ECMS system for the AKG ck6x caps, which I sold to Tommy. The ECMS system -- Extended Capsule Microphone System -- is what Jon at jklabs built for an active mic system. Active only that is -- the DVC allowed active/remote caps, but the DVC was also a built in mic preamp. The ECMS system is only an active mic system, no mic preamp functions. Mine worked off 9v, but others he built were powered from the 48v phantom coming from your mic preamp.
At any rate, the ECMS had the active cables for the caps, but it used a separate box to work as the mic "bodies". As far as I know though, Jon never made a system to connect "active" AKG caps to the 480 or 460 bodies -- he just had the ECMS system or the DVC system.
-
At any rate, the ECMS had the active cables for the caps, but it used a separate box to work as the mic "bodies". As far as I know though, Jon never made a system to connect "active" AKG caps to the 480 or 460 bodies -- he just had the ECMS system or the DVC system.
That is correct. To my knowledge there has never been a true "active" system that kept the 480 bodies in the equation. That is the big stumbling block. Some folks will argue that all they want is an active system for the ck6x capsules regardless if the bodies are in the loop or not.
For me the best way I can put it is look (or listen) to what a difference the same cap can have with stock 460/JW mod 460/480's. Noticable difference with each respective body. I think that alot of us would settle for a JKLabs device but ultimately many of us are really shooting for a true active cap > cable > body setup.
I really do believe that the different parties that have different stages of development done could have this project completed if they shared their information and resources with one another. But and a BIG but I also believe that most of those parties are looking to make money off of this (rightfully so or not) and because of that this project will not end up coming to completion. Because of that I picked up a Neumann active setup to compliment my 480's.
-
Did anyone ever ask Jon of JKLabs? I read that he has surfaced recently.
Remember though that Jon did not make an active cable for the 480/460 bodies he just make an active cable into his own box. Big difference.
I'm not sure this is correct, I think raoulduke has an active cable system that connects his caps to his 480 bodies, I know he does not have the same dvc preamp and cable system that I do, and that there are at least two different systems for the 480 series engineered by JK Labs
I think Tim/Raoulduke had/has the jklabs ECMS system for the Gefell caps, not the AKG caps. I had the JKLabs ECMS system for the AKG ck6x caps, which I sold to Tommy. The ECMS system -- Extended Capsule Microphone System -- is what Jon at jklabs built for an active mic system. Active only that is -- the DVC allowed active/remote caps, but the DVC was also a built in mic preamp. The ECMS system is only an active mic system, no mic preamp functions. Mine worked off 9v, but others he built were powered from the 48v phantom coming from your mic preamp.
At any rate, the ECMS had the active cables for the caps, but it used a separate box to work as the mic "bodies". As far as I know though, Jon never made a system to connect "active" AKG caps to the 480 or 460 bodies -- he just had the ECMS system or the DVC system.
the box i own is an "ecms-23" and it performs the same function as the two microphone preamps, aka bodies, that it's replacing in the gear chain. the ecms series (as well as the dvc boxes) can be used with microtech gefell m2x and akg ck6x caps if utilized with jk labs manufactured active cables and collettes. factory manufactured neumann akx>lc-3, mbho ka caps>active cables and schoeps collettes caps/cables can be used with the boxes as well, after modifying the cable terminations.
my ecms doesn't utilize a 9v battery for its powering, it needs to be supplied from a 48v phantom powered preamp (just as todd stated); my active cables plug into dual 4 pin inputs and the outputs are male xlr (the same config as the ecms-22).
there are two "non body" offerings from jon that i'm aware of:
1) dvc (direct access from cable to mic-pre)
2) no mic-pre alternatives to the dvc
2a) autonoumous 9v powered "ecms" unit with xlr or rca or other output (lee>toddr>tommy) aka the "ecms-22"
2b) p48 powered "ecms-23" with xlr outs (nic>myself)
my understanding is that each dvc box has it's own serial number based on build order, so no one person has the same number dvc, i.e dvc1, dvc2, dvc3, etc. the ecms series of boxes (ecms-22 and ecms-23) is actually the model number so theoretically more than one person could own an ecms-22 or 23. however, i think jon only built one of each of the ecms boxes and tommy owns the only "22" and i own the only "23".
here's some pics of various jk labs set ups. mine were posted at one point but they were erased when i reset my account; my 23 is similar in appearance to the ecms-22 except that mine doesn't have a power switch.
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,5086.0/all.html
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,18564.0/all.html
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,90125.0.html
-
I would settle for another ECMS style box that can be 48v phantom powered from the preamp's phantom :) After seeing Grider's DVC JK Labs box and how small it is, I think that would def be small enough, especially since the caps would still be 'remote placed' instead of attached to the 46/480 bodies. Thats active enough for em anyway :) Would be SLIGHTLY larger than 2 x 460/480 bodies anyway. I would rather use my own preamp anyway, and having just the ECMS-style version would have to cut down on size compared to the DVC boxes with preamps. Or so I would think..... Having someone who isnt going to just 'flake out' like Jon did would also be a HUGE comfort so if anything DID happen to your ECMS/DVC box, that it could be repaired in a TIMELY manner.
-
here is the link to his now old page...
this page has pics of the DVC he made for me, which had XLR' outs...
http://www.geocities.com/jk_labs/
i also found a set of pictures he sent me for the OLD OLD website i made up for him which has pics of an AKG system, a gefell system, the schoeps cables he made up for me for the DVC, and the patchbays he made, and the Sphere mic he made....ill try to scan these in if people are interested...
dan
ps, im already behind on gettin together the HOW-TOO file for making you own delrin ortf, nos, DIN bars, which im workin on....im just trying to be complete...
-
here is the link to his now old page...
this page has pics of the DVC he made for me, which had XLR' outs...
http://www.geocities.com/jk_labs/
i also found a set of pictures he sent me for the OLD OLD website i made up for him which has pics of an AKG system, a gefell system, the schoeps cables he made up for me for the DVC, and the patchbays he made, and the Sphere mic he made....ill try to scan these in if people are interested...
dan
ps, im already behind on gettin together the HOW-TOO file for making you own delrin ortf, nos, DIN bars, which im workin on....im just trying to be complete...
I have some glass-filled delrin rods ready to go :)
-
i'm everyone has already seen this
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,90763.0.html (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,90763.0.html)
whoever hets this one may be able to help, i hope
-
I'm working on it! I think Sanjay beat me though...
-
I'm working on it! I think Sanjay beat me though...
not a big deal, I probably sent my PM after you. If you don't get it, i'll take it, but don't let me take it from you. I was interested in buying it for specifically this purpose, of having someone dissect it for the common good (so long as it works after). I loaned out my schoeps to someone so I need something for those occasional shows.
-
I'm working on it! I think Sanjay beat me though...
not a big deal, I probably sent my PM after you. If you don't get it, i'll take it, but don't let me take it from you. I was interested in buying it for specifically this purpose, of having someone dissect it for the common good (so long as it works after). I loaned out my schoeps to someone so I need something for those occasional shows.
I took myself out. It would be great if you bought it and had it reverse engineered. I researched what it was worth and realized I can't spend that much money now. Good luck. I might want the caps, if you have to buy it as the complete package.
-
my maiden voyage with my JK rig was a fantastic taping experience, I took only my Sonicsense bag and nothing else, it had no DAP1 or external batteries or battery cables, and I took no stand, just my JK Labs preamp, SBM1, D8, a couple of clamps, and some clips and such, and that was it, so effortless and simple, ran omni's split about 8 feet last night from dead center, sounds nice
-
my maiden voyage with my JK rig was a fantastic taping experience, I took only my Sonicsense bag and nothing else, it had no DAP1 or external batteries or battery cables, and I took no stand, just my JK Labs preamp, SBM1, D8, a couple of clamps, and some clips and such, and that was it, so effortless and simple, ran omni's split about 8 feet last night from dead center, sounds nice
ditch the sbm1 and dats and go jk labs>acm671/busman660/modded fr2le and be done with it Chris :) if you want to stay in 16-bit land, get a busman 660 and sell those crappy dats :P :) if you want a warmer sound and want to go 24-bit, get a busman vintage or oade warm mod fr2-le :)
-
my maiden voyage with my JK rig was a fantastic taping experience, I took only my Sonicsense bag and nothing else, it had no DAP1 or external batteries or battery cables, and I took no stand, just my JK Labs preamp, SBM1, D8, a couple of clamps, and some clips and such, and that was it, so effortless and simple, ran omni's split about 8 feet last night from dead center, sounds nice
isn't it nice :) my setup and tear down time is about 1 minute. I LOVE it!
Tommy
-
I'm working on it! I think Sanjay beat me though...
not a big deal, I probably sent my PM after you. If you don't get it, i'll take it, but don't let me take it from you. I was interested in buying it for specifically this purpose, of having someone dissect it for the common good (so long as it works after). I loaned out my schoeps to someone so I need something for those occasional shows.
+T
-
Trippy. I noticed this on that geocities page...
The DVC can be used with commercially available active or passive cables (Neumann AK.. , Schoeps Collette, MBHO 603, Sennheiser, various AT, TOA KY, AKG BlueLine, ++) after a modification.
My buddy Jeff has a pair of the TOA KY's. In fact I'm gonna run a 4 mic mix for Skerik this weeknd with them. (hopefully ::) if he finds them) Great mics. Check the NW Phish 93's w/ the TOA K1's. The full bodied version of the KY's. They bring the heat.
here is the link to his now old page...
this page has pics of the DVC he made for me, which had XLR' outs...
http://www.geocities.com/jk_labs/
i also found a set of pictures he sent me for the OLD OLD website i made up for him which has pics of an AKG system, a gefell system, the schoeps cables he made up for me for the DVC, and the patchbays he made, and the Sphere mic he made....ill try to scan these in if people are interested...
dan
ps, im already behind on gettin together the HOW-TOO file for making you own delrin ortf, nos, DIN bars, which im workin on....im just trying to be complete...
-
Trippy. I noticed this on that geocities page...
Check the NW Phish 93's w/ the TOA K1's. The full bodied version of the KY's. They bring the heat.
i love those 93 fobs. they sound incredible
-
here is the link to his now old page...
this page has pics of the DVC he made for me, which had XLR' outs...
http://www.geocities.com/jk_labs/
i also found a set of pictures he sent me for the OLD OLD website i made up for him which has pics of an AKG system, a gefell system, the schoeps cables he made up for me for the DVC, and the patchbays he made, and the Sphere mic he made....ill try to scan these in if people are interested...
dan
ps, im already behind on gettin together the HOW-TOO file for making you own delrin ortf, nos, DIN bars, which im workin on....im just trying to be complete...
sorry, moved into new house and it has taken all my time as of late. i WILL get this up there soon, it is just low priority to dealing with a house, and normal work stuff...so eventually ill get it done and up for yall...
dan
-
about the MBHO into the DVC...
i forget if i mentioned this before, but i have a powerpoint that Jon from JK labs sent me that is a how to for making mbho cables for the DVC. loads of info, pin outs, and brief directions on how to make what you need to adapt the mics to the box...i can dig this up if anyone is interested...
dan
ps, does anyone know how you get just the actives for the mbho i guess is it 603a's? id just want the active heads and cable to try this out...late
-
ok...
I say we bring a ringer into this project.
in the form of Jerry from Aerco, who say on his site the he will entertain custom electronics projects.
since he already makes a bomb-ass preamp...seems like a good place to start hitting up.
Me...
I've got two a61 swivels and Neil has lent me a section of mk46 cable to see if that cable's properties will allow for an extended wire between the knuckles.
Just as soon as I finish w/the last of my tie-dye work, its next up on the bench.
-
fantastic idea nick.
pooling together some dough and picking up the jk labs setup in the ys and having him reverse engineer the design could work too.
-
im in for $50 if we get enough committed folks to drum up enough.
-
im in for $50 if we get enough committed folks to drum up enough.
i will contribute
-
ok, lets keep a tally running then ?
even if the the jk box slips, if this money could be setup and stashed...we'd be ready.
-
already said in the thread that i could contribute at least $50. i really want to see an active solution for my 63 and 61 caps, but lack the expertise to help advance this project. i can only offer monetary support in the hopes that a solution is achieved.
thanks again to all involved more than myself! +T's to the thread
-
im in for $50 if we get enough committed folks to drum up enough.
I"ll throw in $50 too. Let me know when and where
-
I'm in for this donation
-
ok...
I say we bring a ringer into this project.
in the form of Jerry from Aerco, who say on his site the he will entertain custom electronics projects.
since he already makes a bomb-ass preamp...seems like a good place to start hitting up.
Me...
I've got two a61 swivels and Neil has lent me a section of mk46 cable to see if that cable's properties will allow for an extended wire between the knuckles.
Just as soon as I finish w/the last of my tie-dye work, its next up on the bench.
Great idea! Count me in for $50 Nick.
Mike
-
Ok, I guess in the interest of avoiding the mountain of work I've got to do, I'll chime in here on this. Probably I'll just be muddying the waters and it definitely is coaching from the bench (since I'm personally not looking for AKG actives at the moment, just recently put those aside to try out the Milabs). Bottom line, take this all with a grain of salt and perhaps a means of get folks to re-focus and re-define what the hope is. :)
1) on the open nature of the project: I think the open exchange of ideas on this has been great, but I expect that to really make it happen, it'll need to proceed as a private, for-profit venture. As Freelunch said in another thread, this still is a big undertaking (with another chunk of time needed in the future for product support). If it was going to be completed to fruition as some kind of grassroots, ground up effort, it probably would have happened by now. A lot of time and effort is probably required to do this, and people will be more interested in investing that time if they can reap some benefits to their efforts. I'd imagine that would apply to Jerry of Aerco or whoever else took this on.
2) As to expected price, Freelunch had mentioned $1500, and that ballpark might be a pretty reasonable amount for a 2ch pair, including ck61 caps, active cables, and active system/box/mic bodies. Maybe the system could be as low as $1000, but with AKG ck6x cap pairs at about $350, that only allows $650 for the customized active system, which might not be that much (compare to somewhat custom Aerco preamps, jklabs boxes, nbox, etc). Certainly, I wouldn't expect it to be cheap, though it could be a lower cost alternative to even used Neumann, DPA, or schoeps systems.
3) On the reverse engineering thing: I wouldn't think it would be necessary. Plenty of good information has already been exchanged here, plus there is plenty information available online on mic systems and electronics. Plus Jerry at Aerco is pretty clearly a bright guy -- so what's to be gained from reverse engineering? Really, I think most of the knowledge on how to do this is out there, just need to figure out the mechanics, product packaging, design testing and debugging, etc.
4) The circuit-type people need to chime in here, but I suspect that it won't be possible to just make active cables and use the existing 480 bodies. (If nothing else, if it were this easy, AKG would probably have already done it.) Based on the architecture of my Milab actives, my old Neumann km140 actives, and what I've seen of schoeps actives, the system needs more than just a signal(+phantom) and ground connection that the 480s have (ie, two conductor connection). The other actives mentioned have a 4 conductor connection (for audio signal, ~60v bias, ~9v, and ground -- really guessing here, but it is something like this).
If this is the case, you'll need active electronics at the mic capsule end and also additional active electronics at the mic body end -- all of which can (will) color the sound to some extent. Adding the necessary electronics at the mic body side and still keeping the mic bodies to me in no ways insures that the signature sound of the AKG system will remain the same, perhaps no moreso than just replacing the 480 bodies with the necessary system you need for the active architecture. I guess what I'm saying here is I think a jklabs type box is the easier (and perhaps better) solution, and it doesn't mean that it will change the nature of the AKG sound any more than adding the necessary electronics to the 480 bodies will.
5) My out there idea: maybe someone who has a good relationship with Jon at jklabs can convince him to go into business with Jerry at Aerco or Chris Church to market these. Jon provides the R&D and engineering design, Jerry/Chris supplies the manufacturing and business/marketing. (Perhaps this is where the argument for reverse engr comes in, but I don't really like the idea, plus I don't think it will be enough to get the project done.) I do believe most of the knowledge is out there for making these systems, but that still means there will need to be a lot of product development which Jon has already done. IIRC, the ECMS-22 jklabs system I had was so numbered, since it was the 22nd system Jon built, with the first 21 designs having some type of flaws that needed to be corrected.
Anyway, there's the large ramble. By no means meant to deflate anyone's hopes -- I really hope my points might somewhat re-invigorate people's thinking on this so that the active system will actually get built. (Ok, perhaps just a bit of regret for selling my system to Tommy. :P )
-
Great points Todd.
Just thought i'd throw it out there that not only is Jerry very eclectic but runs on his own time. If it takes him two months to make a product that is his primary product then I can only imagine the time needed to work on an AKG box.
Again though I always come back to "What are you looking for out of this project?"
Actives of the JK Labs type boxes or actives that INCLUDE the bodies? Do we want actives because it really sounds good to people's ears or because it would "just be cool to have AKG actives?"
-
Alright, I've been staying out of the discussion, but I talked to Jerry about this over a year ago. We discussed building extension cables for the 460 bodies that would work with the ck6x caps. He is capable of doing it, however, he runs on his own time & dances to a the beat of a different drummer than most. He assured me a rudimentary version could be made, but he doesn't have the desire or means to produce the machined collettes, etc. Time frame is an unknown. He has a lot of irons in the fire & just picked up a new 9-5 job earlier this year, so his free time has been reduced drastically.
FWIW, I tried to get a pair of collettes from Nick (Nbox fame) and his team, but they never came through. My talks with Jerry were specific to modifying the mk46 cables on the cap end to mate with the ck6x caps. If I could have gotten my hands on the collettes, I think it would have been a done deal.
Jerry may be interested in helping out now, and no one knows till they ask. Just be prepared to wait or be told he's not interested.
-
IMO, it would be far cheaper and less "geek intensive" to build a true active cable and utilized the 4x0 bodies. Much less involved.
a little FET up top, some sort of buffer down bottom, viola.
;)
there are so many machine shops around here in the backwoods of southern Maine....do I fool myself in thinking it wouldnt be all the difficult to walk in w/a ck61 cap and say "can you make a female jack for this, w/this much depth..etc.
as for coloration ...that is where the chip guys need to chime in and say "model xxx98999 will be far faster and cleaner sounding than xx8883333"...
keep it as straight (or warm...as that seems a good flavor w/anything AKG related)...and see whats happening.
-
(Perhaps this is where the argument for reverse engr comes in, but I don't really like the idea, plus I don't think it will be enough to get the project done.)
Agreed.... The opportunity to copy someone else's design is NOT what is holding this up. I believe it all comes down to lack of motivation. Everyone here seems to want this done for them but nobody feels strongly enough about it to do it. Those who are motivated already go buy DPAs, an nbox, ccm, used JK, kc5, etc..
Richard has already posted some schematics that will allow anyone here *with a little motivation* to prototype. That nobody has bothered to spend the time speaks volumes about the motivation of the group. The "I don't understand electronics" is not an excuse for anyone. If you don't understand something learn it.
The old adage "if you teach a person to fish..." applies here but nobody seems to want to learn to fish ;)
Responding a bit to OFTOD's point on whether akg actives will sound good, etc.. The really important use of actives is getting CLOSE. Some capsules are better suited to running very up front and some further back. Brighter capsules don't tend to work as well up close (we're not talking on-stage/stage lip, that's a different situation) but do tend to balance out back in the section. I've never run AKGs but they've always seemed kinda bright and less suited to way up front. Also, hat spacing tends to be kinda close and that tends to make capsules more bright and reduce bass vs. proper spacing. So would the akg caps even work very well in this application?
Yeah, I think it is just a matter of motivation. What we need is someone (Chris Church, hint, hint!) to champion this project. Someone who can do a good build *and* service what he sells. Anyone is welcome to use the design I posted, guilt free. Make money, or whatever, I don't care.
As for myself, I've pretty much moved to the Beyerdynamic. I'll probably get a set of Beyer actives if I can find them. I still have a set of (slightly hacked) CK63s that I'll keep and maybe someday hook up. If I do it, it will be: 1) hard connected (solder, hot melt glue, gaffers tape), 2) for me only.
Oh yeah, if someone wants to get me to do this sooner, send me either a set of 460 bodies, or a set of A61 "knuckles" and I could probably mess with it. In exchange I could post detailed photos/schematics, but I don't want to do mods for others. Either the 460 bodies or the knuckles have the necessary physical hardware to connect to the capsule reliably. That is what held me up last time...
Richard
-
well Richard...iv'e got said knuckles.
my 460s are going to be sold, i hope. but the knuckles i'm going to hang on to for a while to play around.
I dont see how they could help w/an active cable though. a passive short run..if possible, but thats it.
and thats what i've got going on right now in fact.
dissected knuckle in front of me.
:)
-
well Richard...iv'e got said knuckles.
my 460s are going to be sold, i hope. but the knuckles i'm going to hang on to for a while to play around.
I dont see how they could help w/an active cable though. a passive short run..if possible, but thats it.
and thats what i've got going on right now in fact.
dissected knuckle in front of me.
:)
the a61 swivels would be of value since one end fits perfectly and is tooled to screw onto the end of the ck6x cap and the other is fitted the same way but for the 480 body, and its inexpensive, and it would have the hardware to receive and pass along the audio signal, between which a cable could be attached, thus completing the first ever active cable for AKG 480's
-
i by no means have knowledge like many here, but i personally feel that some people want to make money (which is fine) and are not sharing everything they know
i feel if everyone worked together there would be an answer - so i commend people like richard who has always shared info on projects
i personally don't want a 480 active just to have it, if it doesn't have the akg sound then its a waste imo
i don't think most want it just to have it, if that were the case we could buy nuemanns or something else
-
the "guts" , which make the cable active, have no place to go w/just either half of the swivel.
so, no help really on the active part. you need to have something made.
so to reverse this, we just need the JKL actives and not the box ?
would that allow for just an active extension cable (if re terminated)
-
the "guts" , which make the cable active, have no place to go w/just either half of the swivel.
so, no help really on the active part. you need to have something made.
so to reverse this, we just need the JKL actives and not the box ?
would that allow for just an active extension cable (if re terminated)
I can (and have built) the circuit itself. Very simple. The problem I ran into was getting a nice reliable contact to the mic capsule. If you got *anything* the holds the capsule (knuckle, extension tube, broken 460/480, or ?) you can use that to make a solid connection. Who knows, maybe you can even by 480 parts from AKG, but I have not tried. The rest is easy. I've posted schematics in the past, so anyone is welcome to step up and build with whatever economic model works for them. Remember, those schematics are public so any DIY types can come along later and build their own too.
This is not rocket science, folks. I would have done it already if I had not: 1) bought a set of Beyers, 2) already spent too much money on taping stuff (including a set of ck63 caps), 3) oh, yeah, out taping shows two nights a week already, lol.
Richard
-
care to point me to the schematics Richard?
I went through the "part 1", 1/2 of part 2 and I dont recall it in this thread either.
-
in my first little test...
I took the bottom part of the knuckle apart so the capsule screwed onto its half like normal. I then extended wire leading down to the plastic piece w/the male end on it which fits nicely in the 460 body.
grounded the mic body and the knuckle.
got A LOT of noise.
the cable is a 28awg coax, silver clad. not sure of its ohms. didn't work.
I"m going to try cutting it in 1/2 and seeing how that works.
then its on to different cable.
the stock wire in there is multi-strand, looks like 32awg. like tonearm wire.
-
care to point me to the schematics Richard?
I went through the "part 1", 1/2 of part 2 and I dont recall it in this thread either.
Schematic:
(http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~mannr/AKG/ck63_schematic.jpg)
Prototype (on bench):
(http://www.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~mannr/AKG/ck63_prototype.jpg)
Richard
-
exactly what I was hoping for.
thanks Richard.
Now...., I am self teaching myself how to read schematics. I've got several good books (one of them is from some EE curriculum) and am getting there. SmokinJoe has an EE degree from about 100 years ago, so he can help me out w/the parts I can't understand. But I think I have it.
would it be wiser to start this project from one direction ? from power to capsule, or from the top down? I assume that in the end, it doesn't matter.
nobody should ever call me a slacker!
I want to see someone else who actually knows what they are doing have some motivation w/me on this.
I dont mind bucking up for parts, assembly..etc. I just need a little help.
Richard...you da man.
:)
-
I emailed JK himself last week, to see if he would be interested in manufacturing custom made cables for me for use with the ck6x series of cap and the 480 bodies; interestingly, he did indeed respond, and advised me that it can't be done, which is why he has gone other routes like the DVc preamp box and the ECMS phantom power box; I'm not an engineer or electrician, but I really see no reason why such cables could not be engineered and manufactured, though his reponse is disappointing
-
good, just because one engineer can't do it does not mean others with more determination or skill can't either or at least won't try
-
its almost a matter of ...
"if you want active AKGs....buy schoeps"
-
its almost a matter of ...
"if you want active AKGs....buy schoeps"
or a JK Labs DVC :), and actually DPA's would be closer in sound to AKG's than would Schoeps, in which case buy DPA's
-
ok, here's my $0.02...
the CKxX caps are really CKx caps with a different rear piece installed that allows the addition of a FET. THAT piece can be made easily enuf. but what most people want/need is the ability to use THEIR CK6x caps (which are larger in size) with THEIR 460 bodies. to me, this presents a problem. namely the internal parts required to create a long term reliable connection that are needed inside the cable ends. the machining in low quantity of the metal ends to screw onto the 460 as well as the caps is not difficult, just overly expensive for the low quantities required.
-
ooops, hit the tab button
to continue... i see the active setup as clunky - remember i ran 460>mk46>ck8x for a long time. and it required care to set-up/tear down and usually a recabling after 2-3 years.
i think it makes the most sense to create the capsule adapter and then "duplicate" the 460 bodies in a small metal box. (personally i am a fan of the preamps that can accept the MK46 cable directly.) i can have the schematic over to a buddy who will do the layout and ness computer modeling for noise issues etc (this guy has been designing audio circuit boards for _many_ years). having short runs of circuit boards done here in the US is now very inexpensive as compared to the old days.
the A61's could become the source of the metal for the ends, but i do not believe they contain the needed bias ring. i think the machining can be done in this country at a resonable price as compared to using A61's. but i am a little concerned that the contacts might be difficult to replicate here in the usa at a reasonable price. however i have a Chinese friend who just happens to be a manufacturer of audio in china (ever hear of ARC Audio??) who might be able to help us out on the metal end including the innards... i will try this week to contact him and get his opinion. also, i will speak to my machinist here in town and get his thoughts on dup'ing the ends, contacts included. delrin is a very machineable plastic.... and maybe there is something in the auto electronics rebuilder's world that comes close to the bias ring... i will ask my buddy who owns a shop rebuilding alternators etc.
neil in san marcos
-
Neil - have you been able to find the schematics for the mk45 cables?
mine are overdue for re-cabling
-
ooops, hit the tab button
to continue... i see the active setup as clunky - remember i ran 460>mk46>ck8x for a long time. and it required care to set-up/tear down and usually a recabling after 2-3 years.
i think it makes the most sense to create the capsule adapter and then "duplicate" the 460 bodies in a small metal box. (personally i am a fan of the preamps that can accept the MK46 cable directly.) i can have the schematic over to a buddy who will do the layout and ness computer modeling for noise issues etc (this guy has been designing audio circuit boards for _many_ years). having short runs of circuit boards done here in the US is now very inexpensive as compared to the old days.
the A61's could become the source of the metal for the ends, but i do not believe they contain the needed bias ring. i think the machining can be done in this country at a resonable price as compared to using A61's. but i am a little concerned that the contacts might be difficult to replicate here in the usa at a reasonable price. however i have a Chinese friend who just happens to be a manufacturer of audio in china (ever hear of ARC Audio??) who might be able to help us out on the metal end including the innards... i will try this week to contact him and get his opinion. also, i will speak to my machinist here in town and get his thoughts on dup'ing the ends, contacts included. delrin is a very machineable plastic.... and maybe there is something in the auto electronics rebuilder's world that comes close to the bias ring... i will ask my buddy who owns a shop rebuilding alternators etc.
neil in san marcos
If someone machines a set of ends (both inner and outer connector), and if they send them to me, I'll build this gear and post my results and all building details. As I've said numerous times in the past, it is the mechanical issues that stump me, not the electrical ones.
Richard
-
i have schematics for the MK46 cable. can do the recabling if requested. let me find the AKG sheet and scan it.
will speak to my machinist tomorrow. will talk to my rebuilder tomorrow night about the ring contact. will dig up an addy for my asian friend and ping him tomorrow.
neil
can i assume finding CK3 capsules is harder than finding CK63's???
-
can i assume finding CK3 capsules is harder than finding CK63's???
oh yeah, much harder as the ck3's are no longer manufactured.
-
its almost a matter of ...
"if you want active AKGs....buy schoeps"
or MBHO's. I think they sound ALOT closer to AKG's than Schoeps or even DPA's :) Theyre basically Schoeps without a bloated low-end ;D
-
just got back from my machinist. for a run of 50 pieces, $10 per metal end + cost of materials. roughly the same price for the plastic insert for the capsule end and i think i can draw up a shape for preamp end that will meet his requirements and allow him to manufacture that insert as well. there should be room for the FET in the capsule end.
i think i have a solution for the center pin and socket, am working on the contact for the FET bias ring with nothing satisfactory found yet...
might go talk to a plastics molding guy i sorta know tomorrow.
so:
2x metal ends $20 total
2x plastic insert $20 total
center pin $0.25
socket $0.25
FET ??
cable $0.50/ft ??
bias ring contact ??
this would give you a cable that would allow you to remote any CKxx capsule from a 460 body. it would also do the same for any CKx capsule if you have an A60M...
neil in san marcos
-
sweet. +t
-
esteyes PM sent
-
so these would essentially be a new run of mk46 style cables?
-
yes
-
down for sure ;D
and if you are interested i'd still like to get the originals rebuilt
are you going to the Belly Up on Friday for Railroad Earth and Hot Buttered Rum?
-
+T
how would this be for 480? the same or different
-
+T
how would this be for 480? the same or different
This particular solution will not work with the 480 bodies.
-
+T
how would this be for 480? the same or different
This particular solution will not work with the 480 bodies.
If the other poster makes the cables, it is a simple matter to build an "active battery box" to connect to the other end. In fact, this is the ideal situation, since one can choose either the 460 bodies (if you're not a hacker), or the battery box design, if you are.
By the way, why is it that so many people want actives? Is it to stealth, or just for a convenient low pro setup? I've been using my BeyerDynamic MC930, loving the sound (more than AKG!!!), and figure I can wait for the actives. My main motivation originally was the *low cost* of just buying the capsules. If I bought CK61 and CK63 I could have two sets of mics, maybe both running at the same time at different venues, lol.
Richard
-
Richard I think there are several camps re: actives.
For me personally I love the low-pro setup of my Neumann actives. Setup time is another factor. With my Neumann's I have them already attached to a Kwon bar and mount. All I do is get my stand set, attach the shockmount and i'm ready to roll. Less than a minute. No large shockmounts. No full bodies getting in people's view. No need for external xlr cables. This is a HUGE advantage when running FOB where size/footprint does matter as well as for taper friendly artists who have non taper friendly crowds who upon the sight of full bodies start complaining before a show even starts.
I find myself running my 480's next to (or rather below) my Neumann actives. Mostly because I still dig the sound of the 480 bodies/ck6x caps. I wish I had actives to run them both discreetly together.
-
This is looking/sounding great. I'm in on this so please let us know the final details/plan.
Todd
-
why actives for the 480's? once you have run caps and active cables, running full bodies is extremely unappealing, the actives are very low profile and set up and break down time is very short, my current set up time is about a minute or so
-
It would be killer if someone could built the active electronics into something like an SD 7xx unit.. just running caps > cables > 7xx... wow. I know that's dreaming though.
-
It would be killer if someone could built the active electronics into something like an SD 7xx unit.. just running caps > cables > 7xx... wow. I know that's dreaming though.
:cough: DPA ;D
-
It would be killer if someone could built the active electronics into something like an SD 7xx unit.. just running caps > cables > 7xx... wow. I know that's dreaming though.
:cough: DPA ;D
Hah, I was waiting to see who the first one to say that would be... you take the prize my friend!
-
It would be killer if someone could built the active electronics into something like an SD 7xx unit.. just running caps > cables > 7xx... wow. I know that's dreaming though.
:cough: DPA ;D
Hah, I was waiting to see who the first one to say that would be... you take the prize my friend!
after running the ccm4vs a few times its amazing that even an active setup can seem cumbersome, though it takes a lot of adjustment to the sound.
running some DPAs this week to see how i like them, im kinda scared that i will ;D
-
I've got some a61 swivels that I can donate to the project..., sort of.
Richard, I know you've asked for these in general, but i'm not really willing to part w/the $300 investment to just give them away for the most part....
but, i'll give them to anyone for research / development into this project just as long as they come back in usable fashion.
cosmetics, not an issue.
-
running some DPAs this week to see how i like them, im kinda scared that i will ;D
You're screwed, Mikey! Be prepared to sell some gear & slut it up. ;D
-
I've got some a61 swivels that I can donate to the project..., sort of.
Richard, I know you've asked for these in general, but i'm not really willing to part w/the $300 investment to just give them away for the most part....
but, i'll give them to anyone for research / development into this project just as long as they come back in usable fashion.
cosmetics, not an issue.
OK. I'm going to hold tight with my Beyer setup (and various omni "hat" mics). I've basically decided, for better or worse, that I'm not going to put any more of my money into this. I *may* end up buying a set of 460 bodies (to go with my current ck63 caps) but I'll still need some way to hook up the capsules, either the fabricated cables, swivels, or anything else to get the job done. But if anyone else does this in the meantime, more power to them.
Richard
-
at this point i do not see the value of potentially destroying nick's A61's. my machinist has indicated the only crappy part (aside from the low volume and consequent low $$) is the plastic piece in the end for the body.
i like the "battery box" as an option very much. it would make the cables simpler as only one end - the capsule end - would need to be fabricated. the other end could be terminated with a lemo or mini switchcraft xlr. the "battery box" option also allows 480 owners to run their caps.
however, that means two versions of the cable. that matters only to me in what i have to ask the machinist to do in terms of quantity.
the KILLER solution would be to fit the battery box into an extended XLR body - ala Sennheiser as when you wish to run the MExx caps w/o the K3U body - and use 48phantom to power the bias circuit as well as the cap. sennheiser sells a long xlr connector that has a circuit board inside to convert the 48phantom into the 9v dc required by the electret caps. might have circuit diagram somewhere.
comments anyone?? illconditioned, feel free to pm me.
neil in san marcos
-
i like the "battery box" as an option very much. it would make the cables simpler as only one end - the capsule end - would need to be fabricated. the other end could be terminated with a lemo or mini switchcraft xlr. the "battery box" option also allows 480 owners to run their caps.
however, that means two versions of the cable. that matters only to me in what i have to ask the machinist to do in terms of quantity.
why would you need 2 different cables for a battery box option?
and again, thanks for the work
-
I have often wondered if it would be possible to run one manufacturers capsules with another manufacturers bodies. With the right connector ends on an adaptor or cable, would it be possible to run Neumann caps with a Scheops body? This could make for some good experimentation, if possible.
-
at this point i do not see the value of potentially destroying nick's A61's. my machinist has indicated the only crappy part (aside from the low volume and consequent low $$) is the plastic piece in the end for the body.
i like the "battery box" as an option very much. it would make the cables simpler as only one end - the capsule end - would need to be fabricated. the other end could be terminated with a lemo or mini switchcraft xlr. the "battery box" option also allows 480 owners to run their caps.
however, that means two versions of the cable. that matters only to me in what i have to ask the machinist to do in terms of quantity.
the KILLER solution would be to fit the battery box into an extended XLR body - ala Sennheiser as when you wish to run the MExx caps w/o the K3U body - and use 48phantom to power the bias circuit as well as the cap. sennheiser sells a long xlr connector that has a circuit board inside to convert the 48phantom into the 9v dc required by the electret caps. might have circuit diagram somewhere.
comments anyone?? illconditioned, feel free to pm me.
neil in san marcos
This might be something Jon from Naiant may be able to do ??? He's pretty good at stuffing a lot of stuff into small enclosures.
-
I have often wondered if it would be possible to run one manufacturers capsules with another manufacturers bodies. With the right connector ends on an adaptor or cable, would it be possible to run Neumann caps with a Scheops body? This could make for some good experimentation, if possible.
There was an adaptor on ebay that a guy was selling that allowed you to run all the older neumann caps on a AKG 450 body. I think Dirk (TNJazz) had some for awhile.
-
at this point i do not see the value of potentially destroying nick's A61's. my machinist has indicated the only crappy part (aside from the low volume and consequent low $$) is the plastic piece in the end for the body.
i like the "battery box" as an option very much. it would make the cables simpler as only one end - the capsule end - would need to be fabricated. the other end could be terminated with a lemo or mini switchcraft xlr. the "battery box" option also allows 480 owners to run their caps.
however, that means two versions of the cable. that matters only to me in what i have to ask the machinist to do in terms of quantity.
the KILLER solution would be to fit the battery box into an extended XLR body - ala Sennheiser as when you wish to run the MExx caps w/o the K3U body - and use 48phantom to power the bias circuit as well as the cap. sennheiser sells a long xlr connector that has a circuit board inside to convert the 48phantom into the 9v dc required by the electret caps. might have circuit diagram somewhere.
comments anyone?? illconditioned, feel free to pm me.
neil in san marcos
This might be something Jon from Naiant may be able to do ??? He's pretty good at stuffing a lot of stuff into small enclosures.
:lol:
couldn't let this one get lost in the serious discussion of the thread :lol:
-
at this point i do not see the value of potentially destroying nick's A61's. my machinist has indicated the only crappy part (aside from the low volume and consequent low $$) is the plastic piece in the end for the body.
i like the "battery box" as an option very much. it would make the cables simpler as only one end - the capsule end - would need to be fabricated. the other end could be terminated with a lemo or mini switchcraft xlr. the "battery box" option also allows 480 owners to run their caps.
however, that means two versions of the cable. that matters only to me in what i have to ask the machinist to do in terms of quantity.
the KILLER solution would be to fit the battery box into an extended XLR body - ala Sennheiser as when you wish to run the MExx caps w/o the K3U body - and use 48phantom to power the bias circuit as well as the cap. sennheiser sells a long xlr connector that has a circuit board inside to convert the 48phantom into the 9v dc required by the electret caps. might have circuit diagram somewhere.
comments anyone?? illconditioned, feel free to pm me.
neil in san marcos
This might be something Jon from Naiant may be able to do ??? He's pretty good at stuffing a lot of stuff into small enclosures.
:lol:
couldn't let this one get lost in the serious discussion of the thread :lol:
Yeah, I realized what I wrote after I posted and was too lazy to edit...
-
nice!
-
careful this thread doesn't get nuked now
;)
-
on the assumtion that illconditioned is bowing out :( i am going to continue with this project.
question was posed "why two cables"
well, if you choose to keep the 460 connected to the capsule, you need a cable with two ends. end #1 - AKG cap to cable. end #2 - cable to AKG body
if you chose to run a battery box, then you need end #1. but end number two won't connect to the battery box very well. a LEMO or SWITCHCRAFT mini XLR would work much better and would cost $5 instead of $40.
i am going to build this the third way. cable end #1 to connect the cap to the cable and then cable connecting to the long body XLR with all electronics stuffed inside. that way 480 owners can participate as well as 460 owners. so essentially, you will have a cable with an XLR on one end to plug into your deck and at the other end will be a connector to screw your CKxx cap onto. unfortunately, i do not have a source yet for the long XLR body (senn charges $45 for the adapter and i doubt they have 50+ still in inventory. plus, this year they officially discontinued support for the K3x mics.) so they may have to be machined... then i can use Neutrik parts with the new body to make service easy and parts easy to find.
additionally, if you own an A60x to use CKx cap (originally for the 451) with your 460, then you could use the CKx capsules with this cable setup. which then leads us to the fact that CKx owners could use this version of the cable as well... hell anyone that owns a CKx or CKxx capsule only could use this.
this all leads to one more issue: shockmounts, or more specifically clips for end #1 to allow mounting in shockmounts. here is what AKG provided to CKxX owners. i need comments on this please. NOTE, the knurled "nut" is 5/16-18 female thread. remove the nut and post and it screws directly on a 5/16 stand adapter.
(http://members.cox.net/esteyes/100_2578.JPG)
FWIW, i do plan to investigate the machining of an adapter ala the A60x - akg made two versions btw. one metal and one plastic...
lastly, in all honesty, as it appears i am coordinating all the resources it will be a for profit affair. no rape and pillage, but there is a lot of legwork and time that will take away from other projects i have going on. i am_hoping_to do this for ~$150 a cable. this will be no kludgey project. all electronics will be best quality appropriate, boards will be made in the USA and designed by an audio engineer with 20+ yrs laying out boards, and as with anything i build and offer for sale it will be guaranteed for as long as i am alive - well everthing but the cable itself and that will be just cost of cable + $25 or so repair fee.
please lmk if this is evil in some way or violates TS written or unwritten rules.
neil in san marcos
-
Neil, pm sent about schematics for mk46 cables. Would appreciate any info you have as I need to re wire my pair.
Thanks, ts
-
Neil, pm sent about schematics for mk46 cables. Would appreciate any info you have as I need to re wire my pair.
Thanks, ts
I'd like to see that schematic myself.
-
i will try to dig it up.
nism
-
when looking at the lemo connector from the outside <<front>> and with the raised portion at the bottom, PIN 1 is at the top left, PIN 2 is to the top right, and PIN 3 is at the bottom.
PIN 1 is AUDIO +. it is cable center conductor and connects to the center pin of the 460 connector
PIN 2 is AUDIO -. it is the cable inner shield and connects to the offcenter pin in the 460 connector
PIN 3 is ground. it is the cable outer shield and connects to the grounding screw on the 460 cable connector
hope this helps
nism
-
further investigation has shown that neutrik has the parts for the long body XLR. i have requested samples or at least direction to a vendor who can supply some samples.
not many recent posts. hope i haven't pissed people off.
neil
-
further investigation has shown that neutrik has the parts for the long body XLR. i have requested samples or at least direction to a vendor who can supply some samples.
not many recent posts. hope i haven't pissed people off.
neil
Not me. I'm still with you.
-
on the assumtion that illconditioned is bowing out :( i am going to continue with this project.
Yes, I'm out. Please take over this project and get things moving. It sounds like you're off to a great start!
Richard
-
not many recent posts. hope i haven't pissed people off.
In the immortal words of David Gilmour, et al (and even Mike Gordon)...run run run run run run run run run run run run
-
further investigation has shown that neutrik has the parts for the long body XLR. i have requested samples or at least direction to a vendor who can supply some samples.
not many recent posts. hope i haven't pissed people off.
neil
i'm with ya
i just wish i had more to add but i am not the guy for this type of project
-
i'm still here :)
-
i feel better about the "for profit" portion of my post. i will guarantee TS members will be the first to benefit from this project at the best minimal cost i can do this for. i think i will also do the 460 body to cap umbilical cable as well. seems to me that 50% really want to keep their bodies and the sonic signature that goes with it.
so, to make it fair to all, esp those who laid the groundwork... when i first offer a completed saleable product (understand that some proto's at NoCost will be offered to TS for sharing/swapping/evaluation before a sale occurs), i will make the first offering at d*mn near cost. resonders via e-mail will be able to make a one time order at the first offering price even if they take years to come up with the cash. they just gotta drop me an email with their order quantity when the first offering occurs. i will trust TS members not to wait 5 yrs and then "transfer" it to others when they sell their rig. the overall community here deserves that kind of deal.
if i cannot bring this project to fruition, i will publish all artwork for boards, all sources for parts, and all research for the community members to use at their discretion completely unencumbered by $$ i've spent. hard parts will go for cost, ie machined parts, etc...
should this work out well, i will consider manufacture of parts to crossbreed brands of caps and mics. again first offering will be to TS members at the same deal. hopefully i can make this work in the audio world outside of TS - i could really use the $$ and that's where the big bucks reside.
nism
PS: if i screw up somewhere, i know you guys will call me on it. no offense taken, i _like_ tequila, sometimes it talks for me ;)
i hope this is a fair deal for a really good community of tapers. remember i started in 1973, so it's nice to see the eager "faces" <<not feces ;D >> continuing most of the traditions i was brought up with... altho' you guys gotta remember it's all about getting the stands in the right place... get'em up there and worry about where to put your gear last.
-
i'm still here :)
me too... :cheers:
-
further investigation has shown that neutrik has the parts for the long body XLR. i have requested samples or at least direction to a vendor who can supply some samples.
not many recent posts. hope i haven't pissed people off.
neil
Pissed? I'm actually very appreciative! Way to go man!
-
Thanks for taking up the challenge, esteyes!
-
hell yeah! i'm in. looks like everything is coming together nicely.
-
hell yeah! i'm in. looks like everything is coming together nicely.
ditto
-
sounds great, cant wait
-
sounds great, sorry skipped away from TS for the last four days. hope this comes together....I'm in!
Todd
-
awesome news my man ;D
-
a cable like the mk46 for my 460 bodies and ck1 caps is exactly what i would want. good job on the effort so far!!
-
Glad to see you taking this in hand Neil! I'm definitely interested if you come up with a battery box/active cable option to run the vintage ck_ capsules.
-
While I already a couple of active setups right now, I'd be interested in seeing how this develops.. props on the hard work and taking initiative here.. and cheers to all who have offered schematics and contributed already.. especially Richard!
-
Outstanding if this happens I won't want to sell them.
-
a cable like the mk46 for my 460 bodies and ck1 caps is exactly what i would want. good job on the effort so far!!
the only problem is finding ck1 or ck3 caps.
-
a cable like the mk46 for my 460 bodies and ck1 caps is exactly what i would want. good job on the effort so far!!
the only problem is finding ck1 or ck3 caps.
I have a single ck3x for sale. PM me.
In other news, Sennheiser has a new active mic system. Google MKH8000 for info.
MSRP will be $1299/ea, plus active cable cost. 10m lengths, omni, hyper, and card caps.
They sounded absolulty awesome for the 20 seconds that I heard of them.
-
In other news, Sennheiser has a new active mic system. Google MKH8000 for info.
MSRP will be $1299/ea, plus active cable cost. 10m lengths, omni, hyper, and card caps.
They sounded absolulty awesome for the 20 seconds that I heard of them.
I can't wait for you to order a pair so I can test them out >:D
-
I dont care so much for an active cable for the 480 bodies ala the mk46 actives for the 460's, but I would want another JK-Labs style setup that just supplies 48v phantom to the ck6x caps. I would like to run ck61/3>active cables>JKLabs style box that supplies 48v to the ck6x caps. That would be 100% AOK with me. As long as I can get the ck6x capsules on the stand with a KwonBar-style mic bar WITHOUT the bodies up there, I will be one happy tapir :)
ck61/3>actives>48v phantom box to take the place of the 480 bodies(as long as the sonics are VERY similar, if not identical)>722 is EXACTLY what Im looking for. I mean, I def WOULD NOT bitch if a true active cable could be constructed to run ck61/3>actives>480's>722, but I just want the option of running JUST the ck6x capsules on the mic stand, and dont care how I would have to do it wether a jklabs style 48v phantom(ECMS) or jklabs DVC style preamp is used, or an active cable to screw directly into the 480 bodies, and all would be OK in the messed up world we live in. Then if you could make a fig-8 capsule for the 460's/480's for your next project, that would be cool too ;D 8) Just kidding of course!
I am def psyched that this may actually come into fruition before I cant stand up anymore or have the power to carry a mic stand+gear bag any longer(which wont be until Im prolly 80 years old ;D )If this could happen before the end of 2008, then that nwould be one hell of a beautiful thing for sure :) I just got sick of waiting for an active system for the 480's since Jon went MIA, and couldnt pass up the MBHO deal I got. I would still hold onto the MBHO's if this happened within the next few years because I love their sound, but I would LOVE having 2 diff sounding active setups ;D
To tell yinz the truth, I have been LOVING the sound of the Schoeps>V2/3>7xx recordings I have heard lately because they have the lowend I am mostly looking for, especially recording in the dives I often do around Pittsburgh. I have def been contemplating selling everything but the 722 and going Schoeps mk41/mk4>v2>722. Yes I said it, I have been considering Schoeps. What is this world coming to ??? ;D If all of their capsules/accessories werent so damned expensive, Id prolly already ahve done that. The Schoeps>V2>7xx tapes are damn near perfect when that lowend is bloated. The v2 brings out the FINE detail that the Schoeps have and the v2 also keeps in lowend in check and not-so-bloated 9 out of 10 times, while the 722 perfectly accents the lowend/detail of the v2/Schoeps. They def compliment each other VERY WELL. I would/could be happy running Schoeps>722, but the lowend of that combo can def be a bit much at times. I would not get thats etup unless I had the v2 first and foremost tho :)
Lets see, 1k for the 480's and 1300 for the MBHO's, pluss all of m,y accessories(Vert Bar/Shocks/cables/etc) could get me an extra 400-500 dollars, so thats around 3k I guess with my 480's/MBHO/accessories. That would only get me Schoeps mk41's+actives+MAYBE a DINa bar and THATS it tho. A good taper HAS TO have a pair of cards, even if he doesnt use them but once a year. Id have to come up with anotehr 1k for the mk4's and another 800 for a v2. Just too damne xpensive for my blood when its said and done, and not worth it in the long run when I would put my 483>722 and MBHO>722 recordings up against ANY SChoeps recordings IMO :)
Well, once again, theyre just not worth the extra $$ I would have to put into it. I think MBHO's sounds dman near Schoeps without the somehwat big/bloated bottom end :) MBHO got it right the first time I guess ;D and 483>722 is DEF the most consistent and best sounding combo I have EVER had the pleasure of running. I would put a few of my 483>722 recordings EASILY up against some sachoeps>any combo recorings. I wish I coudl get Kyle at another show with me so we could comp his Schoeps>PSP2/V2>AD2k against my 483>722 or MBHO>722 recordings :) All I need is a PSP2 and I think my rig would be damn near unbeatable :) Just ask Mikey Jonesy( aka terrapinj). he runs JW Mod 461/3>PSP2>722 and his recordings are easily soem of the ebst I have ever heard, at least in a LONG TIME anyway :) They really have that nice transformer sound that no other preamp has for the size/price :) I def want to get a transformer preamp to use with the MBHO's in the shittier dives I record in in PBurgh because the MBHO Hypers>722 can be just a TAD too thin at times, but thats what Wavelab's MultiBand Compressor is for ;D
Dopne rambling and sorry for highjacking this beautiful thread!
Thanks again for everyones hard work in trying to get this AKG Actives project off the ground. I wish you all the best and hope it works out, not only for us tapers to use the AKG Actives, but also for the one/ones that can possibly FINALLY get it right to reap the benefits and make some decent money as well :)
I hope Chris Church's transformer preamp comes into play sooner than later, because as much a s I fluff the 722's preamps on their own, I would like a nice, phat sounding transformer external preamp after recording in a SHITTY sounding warehouse this past saturday and the mix just soundig 'off' becasue I needed a transformer preamp in teh chain to phatten up the sound overall.
**********end rambling***********
-
Spell check and punctuation are your friend, as would be a quick edit to keep your post more on topic. Now where is that "block emoticon" button?
-
:)
;D 8)
;D :) ;D
??? ;D :)
:)
:) ;D :) :) :) :) ;D
:)
QFT!
i feel the same way about schoeps>v2>722 recordings as well. ;D
-
I dont care so much for an active cable for the 480 bodies ala the mk46 actives for the 460's, but I would want another JK-Labs style setup that just supplies 48v phantom to the ck6x caps. I would like to run ck61/3>active cables>JKLabs style box that supplies 48v to the ck6x caps. That would be 100% AOK with me. As long as I can get the ck6x capsules on the stand with a KwonBar-style mic bar WITHOUT the bodies up there, I will be one happy tapir :)
ck61/3>actives>48v phantom box to take the place of the 480 bodies(as long as the sonics are VERY similar, if not identical)>722 is EXACTLY what Im looking for. I mean, I def WOULD NOT bitch if a true active cable could be constructed to run ck61/3>actives>480's>722, but I just want the option of running JUST the ck6x capsules on the mic stand, and dont care how I would have to do it wether a jklabs style 48v phantom(ECMS) or jklabs DVC style preamp is used, or an active cable to screw directly into the 480 bodies, and all would be OK in the messed up world we live in. Then if you could make a fig-8 capsule for the 460's/480's for your next project, that would be cool too ;D 8) Just kidding of course!
my personal pref order would be
caps > cable > bodies
for the "true" akg sound and not much (interconnects) as extra gear
caps > cable > preamp
(if it sounded close to the akg sound) as a replacement to my ua-5
caps > cable > 48v
could live with it but wouldn't care for it as much because now i have extra gear to carry around in my already packed bag
i know depending on what gear you own it could be different as to size wise and stuff
-
I'm confused Bean. Why would you want a DVC box instead of a cable that connects directly to the body? In this case you have an outboard pre (V2 or 722 pre) so that in and of itself provides you 48v power. Secondly stashing a pair of bodies in your bag takes up as much if not less room than a DVC box would.
I think its pretty clear with the JKLabs boxes out there that while good sounding it is not a true representation of the 480 sound.
If all you want is actives without regard to getting that true AKG sound then go with the MBHO's, Neumann's or Schoeps. If a cable can be fashioned to KEEP the body the mix then that to me would keep us closer to THAT sound that we all know and love.
my personal pref order would be
caps > cable > bodies
for the "true" akg sound and not much (interconnects) as extra gear
caps > cable > preamp
(if it sounded close to the akg sound) as a replacement to my ua-5
caps > cable > 48v
could live with it but wouldn't care for it as much because now i have extra gear to carry around in my already packed bag
This would be my preference as well.
-
Great job looking forward to more progress. ;) +T
-
Spell check and punctuation are your friend, as would be a quick edit to keep your post more on topic. Now where is that "block emoticon" button?
wow, thanks for the informative post :P
-
I'm confused Bean. Why would you want a DVC box instead of a cable that connects directly to the body? In this case you have an outboard pre (V2 or 722 pre) so that in and of itself provides you 48v power. Secondly stashing a pair of bodies in your bag takes up as much if not less room than a DVC box would.
I think its pretty clear with the JKLabs boxes out there that while good sounding it is not a true representation of the 480 sound.
If all you want is actives without regard to getting that true AKG sound then go with the MBHO's, Neumann's or Schoeps. If a cable can be fashioned to KEEP the body the mix then that to me would keep us closer to THAT sound that we all know and love.
Not trying to be a naysayer, but I don't really agree with the premise that active cables attaching the capsules to the bodies will give a true representation of the 480 sound. It might be a truer representation than a jklabs style ECMS box, but I would expect it too will sound different from 480 bodies, though perhaps not too different.
The active cables will use active electronics in the path, and these can change the sound of the system. As far as I'm concerned, any change whatsoever can and probably will change the sound of the system. Neumann bills the 140s as being the same as the 184s, but I've done side by side tests of the 184s vs the 140s and I could hear a difference between them.
I don't say this to rain on the parade here. I'd love to see some AKG actives get made. And I do think my AKG ck6x caps> JKLabs active cables> JKLabs ECMS box sounded much more like AKG 480s than they did like Neumanns, Schoeps, etc. I'm just not convinced that any system no matter what the configuration (cables to bodies or cables to separate box) will sound exactly like the ck6x>480 bodies do.
-
Not trying to be a naysayer, but I don't really agree with the premise that active cables attaching the capsules to the bodies will give a true representation of the 480 sound. It might be a truer representation than a jklabs style ECMS box, but I would expect it too will sound different from 480 bodies, though perhaps not too different.
Totally agree with you. I was trying to get my point across in as few words as possible and should have elaborated more. Maybe the phrase "truer representation" instead of "true representation"
The obvious best path is caps on body. With a cable in between there are sure to be differences. Are those differences greater than cap to jklabs style box? I would think not. So I guess to get the truest AKG 480 sound the path would go like this (in this order):
1. cap > body
2. cap > cable > body
3. cap > cable > 48v box <or> cap > cable > outboard pre
-
Right on. Sorry, wasn't trying to call you out in particular. It just seemed to me there was this notion being kicked around the thread that option 2 of cap>cable>body was somehow more pristine and guaranteed to sound just like the current 480 setup, with the corallary that any system that wasn't the above was out since it lost the AKG "sound".
Also, probably worth noting for everyone reading that Option 2 of Caps>cable>480 body is actually caps> {active cable with additional electronics on the capsule side and potentially additional electronics on the 480 body side} > 480 body. What we're talking about in terms of potential of coloring the sound is not just a cable like a different mic cable might color the sound, but rather the mic signal will be passing thru a variety of electronics that it currently does not when it is just caps>480 mic body.
At any rate, Neil's efforts are excellent! Already starting to dream of active AKG ck62 for 2ch omni and Milab VM44 actives for 2ch of cards. Only downside of this effort is I might need to scrap the 722 and get a 744. :P
-
Only downside of this effort is I might need to scrap the 722 and get a 744. :P
Eat hotdogs for several years and it becomes an upside!
-
Right on. Sorry, wasn't trying to call you out in particular. It just seemed to me there was this notion being kicked around the thread that option 2 of cap>cable>body was somehow more pristine and guaranteed to sound just like the current 480 setup, with the corallary that any system that wasn't the above was out since it lost the AKG "sound".
Also, probably worth noting for everyone reading that Option 2 of Caps>cable>480 body is actually caps> {active cable with additional electronics on the capsule side and potentially additional electronics on the 480 body side} > 480 body. What we're talking about in terms of potential of coloring the sound is not just a cable like a different mic cable might color the sound, but rather the mic signal will be passing thru a variety of electronics that it currently does not when it is just caps>480 mic body.
At any rate, Neil's efforts are excellent! Already starting to dream of active AKG ck62 for 2ch omni and Milab VM44 actives for 2ch of cards. Only downside of this effort is I might need to scrap the 722 and get a 744. :P
744 only has 2 preamps tho :P I know you have the v3 but just saying ;)
I would run:
AKG>744(7xx preamps)
AND
Milab>V3>744
THAT my friend would be, as we say, BUTTA ;D
-
I saw those. They look very nice. Cool accessories as well. Swivels! :o
http://www.sennheiser.com/sennheiser/icm_eng.nsf/root/500966#
a cable like the mk46 for my 460 bodies and ck1 caps is exactly what i would want. good job on the effort so far!!
the only problem is finding ck1 or ck3 caps.
I have a single ck3x for sale. PM me.
In other news, Sennheiser has a new active mic system. Google MKH8000 for info.
MSRP will be $1299/ea, plus active cable cost. 10m lengths, omni, hyper, and card caps.
They sounded absolulty awesome for the 20 seconds that I heard of them.
-
I think its pretty clear with the JKLabs boxes out there that while good sounding it is not a true representation of the 480 sound.
true...I think the JKLabs box makes things a little more detailed.
-
I think its pretty clear with the JKLabs boxes out there that while good sounding it is not a true representation of the 480 sound.
true...I think the JKLabs box makes things a little more detailed.
so more along the lines of a grace preamp ??? Im sure the grace preamps are prolly a bit more detailed/transient, but I never knew that, as I havent heard many ck6x>jk labs recordings so thats prolly why I didnt know that ;)
I bet that is a sweet combo you have there Tommy. The fast/transient/detailed response of the ck6x>jk labs paired with the warmer, more analog-ish sound of the ACM 671/722 has got to sound sweet as all hell :)
Tommy, do you have any recordings you'd consider GREAT/KILLER of your jk labs>acm 671 combo on the LMA that would be geared towards my musical tastes ala moe/Lotus/STS9/Biscuits/etc ??? Thanks in advance bud!
Bean
And folks, dont get me wrong, obviously, the best route for actives for the ck6x series would be: caps>actives>480 bodies, but just having the capsules ONLY on the stand is a big enough benefit/advantage for me to be happy as all hell :) What would be IDEAL for me anyway would be the option to have caps>actives>480 bodies or the option to go caps>jk labs with diff flavors ala the warm mod/t mod/p mod/etc. I think ck6x caps>a warmer flavored jk labs would be IDEAL for the ck6x capsules IMO, but thats asking for the egg before the chicken at this point in time. especially when we could obviously tailor that warm mod sound to the many external preamps/combos out there, but just a thought at this point in time ;) The possibilities are def endless if the actives for the 480 bodies ever do come about :) maybe at the barrell/collette end of the actives could be a mini-xlr connector so we could customize the cabling itself to use belden 1804a or the like as long as its a smaller diameter like the belden 1804a silver-clad active cables ala the MBHO actives line :) That way as long as the barrells/collettes are machined properly, it would def make it somewhat easier on Neil or whoever ends up manufacturing these. That way if there was ever a cable problem, Neil or whomever wouldnt have to have such a workload to replace/repair the cables themselves, as many more folks could easily switch out the cabling itself for repairs or upgrades. I mean look at the situation on the mk46 cables for the 460 bodies. Theyre literally just falling apart after so many years of use/abuse. And what if Neil isnt around to do the repairs or upgrades of the cabling ??? In the future, if mini-xlr's were used somehow into the design of the active cables(like on each end of the barrell/collette after the screw part on the barrell)
anyway, just rambling at this point I guess.......
-
anyway, just rambling at this point I guess.......
yeah, you are
:P
-
after using the a61 swivels for a while...
actives shmactives
-
I mean look at the situation on the mk46 cables for the 460 bodies. Theyre literally just falling apart after so many years of use/abuse.
Just curious how you arrived at this sweeping statement? I havent seen an epidemic of problems with the cable, and since I own them I do pay attention when I see MK46 in a title. And curious if you have actually examined an MK46 cable, held it and looked at it? They arent all that fragile, they are very similar in cabling to every other active system Ive ever used. Really similar to MBHO in particular, since there is a mini-connector (in the AKG case a Lemo connector) at the capsule end. the biggest difference is they aren't made anymore.
-
I mean look at the situation on the mk46 cables for the 460 bodies. Theyre literally just falling apart after so many years of use/abuse.
Just curious how you arrived at this sweeping statement? I havent seen an epidemic of problems with the cable, and since I own them I do pay attention when I see MK46 in a title. And curious if you have actually examined an MK46 cable, held it and looked at it? They arent all that fragile, they are very similar in cabling to every other active system Ive ever used. Really similar to MBHO in particular, since there is a mini-connector (in the AKG case a Lemo connector) at the capsule end. the biggest difference is they aren't made anymore.
gotta agree with Brad here, the mk46 cables I owned until recently, now used by Aberg, were probably twenty years old and had no appearance of wear or damage, and they certainly were not falling apart, and I think Rokpunk who bought them and sold them to Aberg would both agree, its all solidly made gear
-
I mean look at the situation on the mk46 cables for the 460 bodies. Theyre literally just falling apart after so many years of use/abuse.
Just curious how you arrived at this sweeping statement? I havent seen an epidemic of problems with the cable, and since I own them I do pay attention when I see MK46 in a title. And curious if you have actually examined an MK46 cable, held it and looked at it? They arent all that fragile, they are very similar in cabling to every other active system Ive ever used. Really similar to MBHO in particular, since there is a mini-connector (in the AKG case a Lemo connector) at the capsule end. the biggest difference is they aren't made anymore.
gotta agree with Brad here, the mk46 cables I owned until recently, now used by Aberg, were probably twenty years old and had no appearance of wear or damage, and they certainly were not falling apart, and I think Rokpunk who bought them and sold them to Aberg would both agree, its all solidly made gear
I sent my Mk46 cables out to busman. He's going to re cable them with some Belden 1804a. My cables have become stiff and don't coil easily. I have also been experiencing some issues with what I think is in the lemo end. Getting spikes in the levels while handling the cable and sometimes no signal at all. Probably just a bad connection in the lemo but beyond my capability for repair. Also looking into some new lemo ends.
Which leads me to the question of cell noise. Could this be picked up thru a bad lemo/cable or something else?
-
Which leads me to the question of cell noise. Could this be picked up thru a bad lemo/cable or something else?
Don't really know, Ive never experienced cell phone noise with my MK46 cables. If your bodies arent plugged straight into your pre, you could also be getting the RF interference through your interconnects if they arent shielded well.
-
I'm really surprised we don't get more reports of RF/cell interferance on TS. For a while it seemed like most of the few reports we were getting involved the Marantz 660. Not sure if it was that recorder or the combo of gear typically used with it....
I've long wondered whether quad cable would provide better rejection than single pair... But the problem has been surprisingly minor enough that nobody seems to have bothered doing testing.
-
Which leads me to the question of cell noise. Could this be picked up thru a bad lemo/cable or something else?
Don't really know, Ive never experienced cell phone noise with my MK46 cables. If your bodies arent plugged straight into your pre, you could also be getting the RF interference through your interconnects if they arent shielded well.
No, my bodies are not plugged into pre. Never tried that as it makes for to large a gear bag. I'm using the shorty ra xlr interconnects on the pre side that most use, but have also used regular ra xlr's. However I don't recall if I got the noise with both. I'll have to try a test.
-
Im using interconnects too, but they are well shielded. The cable brand I used to build them escapes me at the moment, but no problems in the several months Ive been using them both.
-
I'm really surprised we don't get more reports of RF/cell interferance on TS. For a while it seemed like most of the few reports we were getting involved the Marantz 660. Not sure if it was that recorder or the combo of gear typically used with it....
I've long wondered whether quad cable would provide better rejection than single pair... But the problem has been surprisingly minor enough that nobody seems to have bothered doing testing.
My cell noise experiences have been MK46 cables>460 bodies>interconnect(silver clad stuff)>722. When I use the V3 and no MK46 cable, ie: 461's>silver clad mic cables>V3(analog out)>722, I get no cell noise.
-
I bet that is a sweet combo you have there Tommy. The fast/transient/detailed response of the ck6x>jk labs paired with the warmer, more analog-ish sound of the ACM 671/722 has got to sound sweet as all hell :)
Tommy, do you have any recordings you'd consider GREAT/KILLER of your jk labs>acm 671 combo on the LMA that would be geared towards my musical tastes ala moe/Lotus/STS9/Biscuits/etc ??? Thanks in advance bud!
Bean
I'll be recording the Disco Biscuits 10/17. I'll let you know when I get it done.
In the meantime....I have this Booker T and the MG's (http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=8b05f549c0c3e277ab1eab3e9fa335cadcf4316cb6b6d335 ) that was recorded from the 4th row (stealth in hat) ck61 > JKLabs > h120
-
I bet that is a sweet combo you have there Tommy. The fast/transient/detailed response of the ck6x>jk labs paired with the warmer, more analog-ish sound of the ACM 671/722 has got to sound sweet as all hell :)
Tommy, do you have any recordings you'd consider GREAT/KILLER of your jk labs>acm 671 combo on the LMA that would be geared towards my musical tastes ala moe/Lotus/STS9/Biscuits/etc ??? Thanks in advance bud!
Bean
I'll be recording the Disco Biscuits 10/17. I'll let you know when I get it done.
In the meantime....I have this Booker T and the MG's (http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=8b05f549c0c3e277ab1eab3e9fa335cadcf4316cb6b6d335 ) that was recorded from the 4th row (stealth in hat) ck61 > JKLabs > h120
yeah that Booker T sucks :P
-
744 only has 2 preamps tho :P I know you have the v3 but just saying ;)
I would run:
AKG>744(7xx preamps)
AND
Milab>V3>744
THAT my friend would be, as we say, BUTTA ;D
Do we have a Homer salivating emoticon? Mmm, donuts. Err, uh, I mean mmm, 744. ;D
-
744 only has 2 preamps tho :P I know you have the v3 but just saying ;)
I would run:
AKG>744(7xx preamps)
AND
Milab>V3>744
THAT my friend would be, as we say, BUTTA ;D
Do we have a Homer salivating emoticon? Mmm, donuts. Err, uh, I mean mmm, 744. ;D
We need one brotha ;D
+T
-
greetings all.
as far as induced RF noise, AKG used a triaxial cable for the MK46's. if you lost the shield, you would definately be able to introduce noise into the system. as far as wear and tear, i found that the method of assembly of the body>cable and cable>cap increases or minimizes damage to the cable. i hold the cable end and spin the body /cap onto the cable end. also, i would be leery of using anything
the 451 & 480 series of mics are the most difficult to seperate as they have no bias ring in the bodies. for those series of mics, my first plan is to investigate the cap>umbilical>xlr to deck/pre option first. that is why i indicated that samples would be built first so that they could be passed around and we can discuss sonic issues. also, as a byproduct of this portion of the project, the bias circuitry needed for the caps might get fitted to the body end of the 480 umbilical so we can test sonics of that as well.
hope this helps
neil
-
I'm really surprised we don't get more reports of RF/cell interferance on TS. For a while it seemed like most of the few reports we were getting involved the Marantz 660. Not sure if it was that recorder or the combo of gear typically used with it....
I've long wondered whether quad cable would provide better rejection than single pair... But the problem has been surprisingly minor enough that nobody seems to have bothered doing testing.
My cell noise experiences have been MK46 cables>460 bodies>interconnect(silver clad stuff)>722. When I use the V3 and no MK46 cable, ie: 461's>silver clad mic cables>V3(analog out)>722, I get no cell noise.
same here - i use the same interconnects and have no issues when not running the mk46 cables - and although i don't get interference all the time it definitely seems to happen more often than not
-
if you cut up one of the mk46 cables you will see that the shield is not like what you are used to seeing when you work with most star quad or other cables used for XLR cable making. it is not the typical braided shield. it is a single direction wrap. i could see how EMI or RF energy could possibly get thru the shield if their proximity were close enuff.
also, even tho members state their cables are "fine", maybe the presence of RF noise is an indicator that the shield strands are breaking and in reality the cable is showing its age....
food for thought, maybe
neil
-
also, even tho members state their cables are "fine", maybe the presence of RF noise is an indicator that the shield strands are breaking and in reality the cable is showing its age....
sounds like a reasonable and logical explanation to me! Damn its nice having an EE person who seems to know their SHIT WELL on the boards :) I really hope the AKG 480 Actives becomes a reality sooner than later and that technology-wise, a solution can be found for it/them :) Keep up the great work Neil :)
Bean
-
just a thought.........
3 pole female EMC-XLR cable connector
The EMC-XLR Series is a specifically designed version of the XX series to give enhanced RF screening for critical applications in live performance and recording where there are particular problems with radio transmission or mobile phones. The design guarantees a continuous RF shield connection from the cable to the chassis connector housing via a circular capacitor around the cable shield. An EMI suppression ferrite bead between pin 1 and the cable screen provides a low-pass filter for improved RF rejection.
Features & Benefits
3 pole male and female XLR cable connector with integrated capacitive shield to shell connection
Circular capacitor around the cable shield enables low-inductive shield connection to connector housing
Female connector with circumferential ground spring providing an accurate connection to the mating shell
Cable shield - Pin 1 connection includes EMI suppression bead to block high frequencies
Avoid ground loops as there is no LF-shield connection to ground
Rugged zinc diecast shell, long lasting and durable
Chuck type strain relief system for secure clamping of cables
Boot with rubber gland gives high protection against bending stresses
(http://www.fullcompass.com/common/products/lg/41815.jpg)
-
Nice find. Now I'm wondering if these "chopped" right angle XLR's, that so many of us use with the 722's, are part of the RF problem. Wonder if that Neutrik comes in a right angle.
-
Nice find. Now I'm wondering if these "chopped" right angle XLR's, that so many of us use with the 722's, are part of the RF problem. Wonder if that Neutrik comes in a right angle.
Been using those the whole time Ive had my MK46's, no RF problems.
-
What RF problem?
Fwiw, the stubbies are definitely a high risk of RF because the back side is completely open. I've thought about covering it with a metal disk but haven't noticed a problem...
Of course we could have subtle rf problems that don't manifest with big spikes, etc.
-
Nice find. Now I'm wondering if these "chopped" right angle XLR's, that so many of us use with the 722's, are part of the RF problem. Wonder if that Neutrik comes in a right angle.
never used those before and i still have problems - ive had them on multiple sets of interconnects that don't give me issues otherwise. problem is definitely either the mk46 cables or the ckXx caps
-
As Neil described, the mk46 cables are a wrap shield. That type of shield can be very good but it is the wrong choice for active cable. It is NOT designed for rough handling. So it isn't surprising that folks are having trouble with it as it ages.
-
i don't know if its related or what kind of cable is used for the 39x actives
but the few people i know who had those ran into trouble after a while too
not so much rf but more skips and just not getting s signal - prob from wrapping them up and whatnot
-
As Neil described, the mk46 cables are a wrap shield. That type of shield can be very good but it is the wrong choice for active cable. It is NOT designed for rough handling. So it isn't surprising that folks are having trouble with it as it ages.
ignorant question here - can the shielding be improved by changing the type of cable or is it dependent on the connections on each end of the cable?
-
Todd.....can the cable that you used to make these extensions not work?
-
Changing the cable should fix it unless there is an issue with the ends. The signal on the active cable is unbalanced so it is even more susceptible to noise than a balanced mic. Schoeps uses Very heavy shielding on their active cable that is heavier than most mic cable. The shielding in 1804a is very light but it is braided.
-
Todd.....can the cable that you used to make these extensions not work?
??? Sorry Tommy, I'm not understanding the question.
-
Todd.....can the cable that you used to make these extensions not work?
??? Sorry Tommy, I'm not understanding the question.
what are the cables made of that you used to make the extension cables for the JKLabs cables? Can that same type of cable not be used for this project?
-
Nice find. Now I'm wondering if these "chopped" right angle XLR's, that so many of us use with the 722's, are part of the RF problem. Wonder if that Neutrik comes in a right angle.
FWIW, I ran the AKG actives for year or so and never had any issues with the stubby RA's & 722. I don't think that is the cause. IMO, Neil's comments regarding the one direction wrapped shield is probably the culprit.
-
first, the EMC XLR is cool, but probably overkill in this arena. offstage environment is much less RF rich than onstage/sidestage what with all the wireless stuff going on these days. not to poo-poo it, the cost up is probably minimal and does provide extra insurance and it just might be very well worth it.
however, i bet that the people most likely to experience RF issues are those folks running something like the MK46 system. as correctly said by Freelunch, the signal travelling down the MK46 is unbalanced, something no good FOH or monitor engineer or recording engineer likes to see. at to that the fact that the signal, despite the FET boost, is still pretty small in magnitude. when you add in the non-optimum shielding provided by the original cable and add to that the possibility that some of that shielding may be compromised - read broken strands - then one can see why the umbilical system is more suseptible to interference. my 2 cents anyway.
one of the issues with replacement cable is the very low capacitance of the original cable. increased capacitance and long runs can work just like a low cut filter - something we all want to avoid. resistance is also an issue when replacing this application's cable. i looked long and hard when i searched for a more durable cable when i did the original replacement on my MK46's. i think i will look into other styles of cable during the course of this project. HOWEVER i believe the triaxial design is the best for this project as my current understanding extends. i think we just may have to accept the wear and tear issue here and plan for periodic cable replacement. this might give a push to the lemo terminated cable and adapters for the caps and bodies as previously proposed, but i do not believe any product i build will be assembled in a way that would preclude an end user w/ decent soldering skills from repairing their own cables. i have no desire to build something so proprietary that only i can fix it.
i know that many of you tape more than i do, maybe MUCH more these days, but i typically build all new XLR cables every two years. most sound companies do the same even tho the cable(s) may or may not exhibit any problems.... everything has a finite life and they cannot chance failures. how many of you do the same? so, from the industry standpoint, they would already have replacement schedules drawn up for the MK46's.
also, i believe the original purpose of the MK46 system was for permanent install situations like stage or orchestral with the benefit of the smaller profile of the CKxX caps only visible. in that scenario, the cables would likely remain "undisturbed" as compared to our setup/teardown, etc, etc and the possible wear issues we are discussing might never surface for users like that.
anyway, i will query a cable manufacturer at some point for the real engineering answers on the triax cable/shielding/durability/etc issues.
neil
-
first, the EMC XLR is cool, but probably overkill in this arena. offstage environment is much less RF rich than onstage/sidestage what with all the wireless stuff going on these days. not to poo-poo it, the cost up is probably minimal and does provide extra insurance and it just might be very well worth it.
however, i bet that the people most likely to experience RF issues are those folks running something like the MK46 system. as correctly said by Freelunch, the signal travelling down the MK46 is unbalanced, something no good FOH or monitor engineer or recording engineer likes to see. at to that the fact that the signal, despite the FET boost, is still pretty small in magnitude. when you add in the non-optimum shielding provided by the original cable and add to that the possibility that some of that shielding may be compromised - read broken strands - then one can see why the umbilical system is more suseptible to interference. my 2 cents anyway.
one of the issues with replacement cable is the very low capacitance of the original cable. increased capacitance and long runs can work just like a low cut filter - something we all want to avoid. resistance is also an issue when replacing this application's cable. i looked long and hard when i searched for a more durable cable when i did the original replacement on my MK46's. i think i will look into other styles of cable during the course of this project. HOWEVER i believe the triaxial design is the best for this project as my current understanding extends. i think we just may have to accept the wear and tear issue here and plan for periodic cable replacement. this might give a push to the lemo terminated cable and adapters for the caps and bodies as previously proposed, but i do not believe any product i build will be assembled in a way that would preclude an end user w/ decent soldering skills from repairing their own cables. i have no desire to build something so proprietary that only i can fix it.
i know that many of you tape more than i do, maybe MUCH more these days, but i typically build all new XLR cables every two years. most sound companies do the same even tho the cable(s) may or may not exhibit any problems.... everything has a finite life and they cannot chance failures. how many of you do the same? so, from the industry standpoint, they would already have replacement schedules drawn up for the MK46's.
also, i believe the original purpose of the MK46 system was for permanent install situations like stage or orchestral with the benefit of the smaller profile of the CKxX caps only visible. in that scenario, the cables would likely remain "undisturbed" as compared to our setup/teardown, etc, etc and the possible wear issues we are discussing might never surface for users like that.
anyway, i will query a cable manufacturer at some point for the real engineering answers on the triax cable/shielding/durability/etc issues.
neil
I don't think cable length/capacitance is a big issue here. It is similar to running any mic cable, eg., AT853 run 50' (unbalanced) from mic to XLR phantom adapter.
The problem is the cable itself, and the foil shielding. It should be braided (or lightly twisted, forget the name), as lavalier cable is. So, any triaxial (or more conductor) lav type cable should work. How about using star-quad even. That Belden 1804a is pretty much indestructable.
Anyway, my best wishes for you on this project. Even though I'm moving on to other mics (Beyerdynamic, etc), I'm excited to see this project move forward.
Richard
-
Todd.....can the cable that you used to make these extensions not work?
??? Sorry Tommy, I'm not understanding the question.
Ok, got you now. I had forgot I had made those extension cables. They used a 4-conductor (+sheild) mil-spec silver cable. They could certainly work, but they are pretty thick and stiff compared to active cables (and white).
I built myself a couple sets of low profile mic cables using Canare L2B2AT cable, which is a small diameter 2-cond cable. It is very thin and very flexible and uses some type of 100% shielding foil shield with drain wire. I don't know if foil shields are usually shunned for our applications, but this wire is quite flexible and has been working great so far for me. Then again, I don't know whether Canare makes a similar cable with more conductors or not.
I'm not sure about the shielding aspect, but the Belden 1804a is a nice cable for active cables. Both my jklabs active cables and my current Milab active cables use the 1804a for their cable stock.
-
At AES last week, I spoke with the AKG national something-or-another (sales) and expressed a desire for an AKG cable to make the 460's/480's remoteable. He knew exactly what I was after, gave me his card, and told me to email about it. Not to say that AKG will actually produce this cable, but maybe this guy can plant a seed in R&D.
-
hell, AKG USA repair does not even own their own set of MK46 cables to test and repair their own product...
neil
-
hell, AKG USA repair does not even own their own set of MK46 cables to test and repair their own product...
neil
Yeah, I'm sure it they were interested in developing a product, it would have been here by now...and of course it would be $1500.
Go Neil Go!
-
Nice find. Now I'm wondering if these "chopped" right angle XLR's, that so many of us use with the 722's, are part of the RF problem. Wonder if that Neutrik comes in a right angle.
FWIW, I ran the AKG actives for year or so and never had any issues with the stubby RA's & 722. I don't think that is the cause. IMO, Neil's comments regarding the one direction wrapped shield is probably the culprit.
Well, busman has my mk46 cables and a spool of 1804a. I'm hoping this solves the RF problem. I would also like to get the lemos replaced. Is that possible?
-
Nice find. Now I'm wondering if these "chopped" right angle XLR's, that so many of us use with the 722's, are part of the RF problem. Wonder if that Neutrik comes in a right angle.
FWIW, I ran the AKG actives for year or so and never had any issues with the stubby RA's & 722. I don't think that is the cause. IMO, Neil's comments regarding the one direction wrapped shield is probably the culprit.
Well, busman has my mk46 cables and a spool of 1804a. I'm hoping this solves the RF problem. I would also like to get the lemos replaced. Is that possible?
Yup, definitely. I found a set of the lemos used on the cables. They're about $20 apeice but not too hard to track down.
-
Bump, checking in....
-
Todd
-
Someone start a new thread.
-
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,93559.0.html