Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Some mic measurements, now with graphs  (Read 16561 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Some mic measurements, now with graphs
« on: March 09, 2010, 07:31:44 PM »
I just finished performing measurements on most of my microphones, and I thought y’all might be interested on what I found.  I was surprised by some of the results.

First of all a disclaimer:  Since in most cases I only had one mic to measure, my sample size is far too small to be statistically significant.  So it is not possible to say that all mics of that model behave the same as my one sample

I measured these mics by comparing them to a mic with a “known” flat response.  In fact I used the average of 4 mics: the front and back capsules of two Sennheiser MKH800 Twin mics.  These were my standard mics because bought these mics new, their published frequency response is quite flat from 20 to 20kHz, and each capsule comes with its own frequency response measurement.  After analyzing the measurements I made on the MKH800 mics I became even more confident that they are a good standard.

Each mic I tested was 1m from the right speaker in my listening room, set on axis with the tweeter (which happened to be 1.16m high).  I fed pink noise to the speaker, and measured the response of each mic.  I averaged the response of the 4 MKH800 Twin capsules, and subtracted this average from the measured response of each mic resulting in the mic’s approximate frequency response.  My listening room is about 7m x 4m x 2.2m and it is somewhat dead acoustically but certainly not anechoic.  I have treated it to reduce its most egregious acoustical problems.  I used a Rane MS 1 pre-amp and a Cakewalk UA-1G USB audio interface.  The measurements were done by TrueRTA software running on my laptop.

Here are the mics I tested:
Condensers:
2 each Sennheiser MKH800 Twin
1 Sennheiser MKH800, set to cardioid
2 each Milab DC-196, set to cardioid
1 Beyerdynamic MC740, set to cardioid
1 Beyerdynamic MC742 stereo mic, tested both upper and lower mics, set to cardioid
1 Sennheiser MKH835T cardioid
1 Nakamichi CM300 cardioid (CP-1)
1 Nakamichi CM300 omni (CP-2)
4 each Milab LSR2000 cardioid
4 each MXL603S cardioid, modified by Michael Joly
1 MXL991 cardioid unmodified
2 each Busman SDC cardioid
2 each Behringer ECM8000 omni measurement mics

Ribbons:
1 Busman Stereo ribbon, (Blumlein) tested both upper and lower
1 Beyerdynamic M160 hyper-cardioid
3 each Beyerdynamic M130 figure-8
1 Peluso R14 figure-8

Dynamics:
1 Beyerdynamic M101 omni
2 each Beyerdynamic M201 hyper-cardioid

My comments will be in the next post.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2010, 09:18:16 AM by notlance »

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2010, 07:38:53 PM »
Mic measurement comments, Condensers.

Others have said it before, but now I understand better why some mics are so bloody expensive and why others are not.  For example, the Sennheiser MKH800 mics are in the neighborhood of $3000 each.  So what do you get for that kinda money?  For one thing, consistency.  The MKH800 Twin mics are not factory matched, nor are they consecutive serial numbers (10016 and 10138), but any one of the four capsules (front and back on each mic) are within +- 1dB of any other capsule from 20 to 20kHz, and within +- 0.5 dB from 70 to 20kHz.  These kinds of differences could easily be the result of my measurement errors rather than the mic themselves, so for all intents and purposes these mics are perfectly matched.  The MKH800 also matches closely to either of the MKH800 Twin mics.  The Milab DC-196 mics are a close match.  (My frequency response measurement of the Milab DC-196 mics agrees with the measurements supplied by the factory, so that give me assurance than my measurement results are reasonably accurate.)  The upper and lower capsules of the Beyerdynamic MC742 are almost identical.  Even the 4 Milab LSR2000s (which are used vocal performance mics) are very close to each other.

With the Chinese mics it’s a different story.  For example, out of the 4 MXL603S mics, two of them are close enough to each other that I would consider using them as a stereo pair.  The Busman SDC mics are well matched, however.

On an absolute basis the European mics again have an advantage.  Their responses are smoother and more extended than any of the Chinese mics I measured.  I’d even have no problems recording with the Milab LSR2000, which as I said, is a vocal performance mic.

As for the Chinese mics, the MXL991 was particularly bad.  No low end, a peak at 4 kHz, a dip at 6 kHz, and another peak at 9 kHz.  However, my sample size was just one, so maybe I got a bad mic.  Good thing it was free.

I would recommend the Michael Joly mod that he does to the MXL603S, MXL991 and other similar Chinese SDCs.  His mod lowers the 5 kHz bump these mics almost always have, and turns a barely useable mic into something pretty good.  His mod does not change the low end response, which varies quite a bit for these Chinese SDCs, so if you’re going to spend the money to get mic modded, pick one with a good low end.

I tested the Behringer ECM8000 measurement mics just to make sure they close enough to flat to be considered a measurement mic.  I’m happy to say that they both measured flat enough to be useable as a measurement mic.  One was better than the other, but both were acceptable.  I’d never use them for recording since they are too noisy, but not bad for $50.

Next I’ll comment on the ribbons and the dynamics, but it might be a while before I get it posted.

Offline Roger Gustavsson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2010, 11:22:02 AM »
Will you show us any measurements?

Roger

Offline boojum

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2010, 01:43:28 PM »
NL -  great work!  I would sure like to see the details of what you have done.  Even though it is only your mics it would be very inteteresting to see your figures.

Cheers
Nov schmoz kapop.

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #4 on: March 12, 2010, 08:34:48 AM »
I just finished performing measurements on most of my microphones, and I thought y’all might be interested on what I found.  I was surprised by some of the results.

First of all a disclaimer:  Since in most cases I only had one mic to measure, my sample size is far too small to be statistically significant.  So it is not possible to say that all mics of that model behave the same as my one sample

I measured these mics by comparing them to a mic with a “known” flat response.  In fact I used the average of 4 mics: the front and back capsules of two Sennheiser MKH800 Twin mics.  These were my standard mics because bought these mics new, their published frequency response is quite flat from 20 to 20kHz, and each capsule comes with its own frequency response measurement.  After analyzing the measurements I made on the MKH800 mics I became even more confident that they are a good standard.

Each mic I tested was 1m from the right speaker in my listening room, set on axis with the tweeter (which happened to be 1.16m high).  I fed pink noise to the speaker, and measured the response of each mic.  I averaged the response of the 4 MKH800 Twin capsules, and subtracted this average from the measured response of each mic resulting in the mic’s approximate frequency response.  My listening room is about 7m x 4m x 2.2m and it is somewhat dead acoustically but certainly not anechoic.  I have treated it to reduce its most egregious acoustical problems.  I used a Rane MS 1 pre-amp and a Cakewalk UA-1G USB audio interface.  The measurements were done by TrueRTA software running on my laptop.

Here are the mics I tested:
Condensers:
2 each Sennheiser MKH800 Twin
1 Sennheiser MKH800, set to cardioid
2 each Milab DC-196, set to cardioid
1 Beyerdynamic MC740, set to cardioid
1 Beyerdynamic MC742 stereo mic, tested both upper and lower mics, set to cardioid
1 Sennheiser MKH835T cardioid
1 Nakamichi CM300 cardioid (CP-1)
1 Nakamichi CM300 omni (CP-2)
4 each Milab LSR2000 cardioid
4 each MXL603S cardioid, modified by Michael Joly
1 MXL991 cardioid unmodified
2 each Busman SDC cardioid
2 each Behringer ECM8000 omni measurement mics

Ribbons:
1 Busman Stereo ribbon, (Blumlein) tested both upper and lower
1 Beyerdynamic M160 hyper-cardioid
3 each Beyerdynamic M130 figure-8
1 Peluso R14 figure-8

Dynamics:
1 Beyerdynamic M101 omni
2 each Beyerdynamic M201 hyper-cardioid

My comments will be in the next post.

What are you using as a reference microphone?

Chris
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline flipp

  • resident curmudgeon
  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #5 on: March 12, 2010, 09:10:46 AM »
I just finished performing measurements on most of my microphones, and I thought y’all might be interested on what I found.  I was surprised by some of the results.

First of all a disclaimer:  Since in most cases I only had one mic to measure, my sample size is far too small to be statistically significant.  So it is not possible to say that all mics of that model behave the same as my one sample

I measured these mics by comparing them to a mic with a “known” flat response.  In fact I used the average of 4 mics: the front and back capsules of two Sennheiser MKH800 Twin mics.  These were my standard mics because bought these mics new, their published frequency response is quite flat from 20 to 20kHz, and each capsule comes with its own frequency response measurement.  After analyzing the measurements I made on the MKH800 mics I became even more confident that they are a good standard.

Each mic I tested was 1m from the right speaker in my listening room, set on axis with the tweeter (which happened to be 1.16m high).  I fed pink noise to the speaker, and measured the response of each mic.  I averaged the response of the 4 MKH800 Twin capsules, and subtracted this average from the measured response of each mic resulting in the mic’s approximate frequency response.  My listening room is about 7m x 4m x 2.2m and it is somewhat dead acoustically but certainly not anechoic.  I have treated it to reduce its most egregious acoustical problems.  I used a Rane MS 1 pre-amp and a Cakewalk UA-1G USB audio interface.  The measurements were done by TrueRTA software running on my laptop.

Here are the mics I tested:
Condensers:
2 each Sennheiser MKH800 Twin
1 Sennheiser MKH800, set to cardioid
2 each Milab DC-196, set to cardioid
1 Beyerdynamic MC740, set to cardioid
1 Beyerdynamic MC742 stereo mic, tested both upper and lower mics, set to cardioid
1 Sennheiser MKH835T cardioid
1 Nakamichi CM300 cardioid (CP-1)
1 Nakamichi CM300 omni (CP-2)
4 each Milab LSR2000 cardioid
4 each MXL603S cardioid, modified by Michael Joly
1 MXL991 cardioid unmodified
2 each Busman SDC cardioid
2 each Behringer ECM8000 omni measurement mics

Ribbons:
1 Busman Stereo ribbon, (Blumlein) tested both upper and lower
1 Beyerdynamic M160 hyper-cardioid
3 each Beyerdynamic M130 figure-8
1 Peluso R14 figure-8

Dynamics:
1 Beyerdynamic M101 omni
2 each Beyerdynamic M201 hyper-cardioid

My comments will be in the next post.

What are you using as a reference microphone?

Chris


pretty sure he used what I bolded for his reference mics

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #6 on: March 12, 2010, 07:59:12 PM »
Yes, as I said in my original post and was pointed out by flipp, I used 2 Sennheiser MKH800 Twin mics as my reference mics.

I will try to post my measurement results but I'll have to figure out how to do it.  Stay tuned.

Offline illconditioned

  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2997
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #7 on: March 12, 2010, 09:11:41 PM »
Checking in to thread... waiting for the figures/graphs...

  Richard
Please DO NOT mail me with tech questions.  I will try to answer in the forums when I get a chance.  Thanks.

Sample recordings at: http://www.soundmann.com.

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #8 on: March 13, 2010, 12:23:10 AM »
OK, here is a test to see if I can get this graph to display.

This first graph is the difference between the front capsules of my two MKH800 Twin mics that I used as reference.  Since these mics are my reference mics, I cannot display an "absolute" frequency response for them.  But this graph shows how consistent these mics are, and it shows my test method is reasonable since two mics that should have about the same response do have the same response.  These mics have SN 10016 and 10138 and are “unmatched”.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2010, 01:37:53 AM by notlance »

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #9 on: March 13, 2010, 12:56:32 AM »
That seemed to work OK.

Here is the data for two Milab DC-196 mics, set to cardioid.
First graph:      Milab DC-196 SN 33468
Second graph: Milab DC-196 SN 33469
Third graph:     Difference between the two Milab mics

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #10 on: March 13, 2010, 01:23:26 AM »
One more set then I'm going to bed.

Graph 1: Beyerdynamic MC740, set to cardioid

Note that the Beyerdynamic MC742 is a stereo mic.
Graph 2: Beyerdynamic MC742 upper capsule, set to cardioid
Graph 3: Beyerdynamic MC742 lower capsule, set to cardioid
Graph 4: Difference between MC742 upper and lower capsules

More tomorrow.

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #11 on: March 13, 2010, 08:09:27 AM »
More mics.  Note: For mics that don't have a serial number, I give them a color code.  For example the mics below are coded "red" and "black".

Graph 1: Behringer ECM8000 measurement mic "red"
Graph 2: Behringer ECM8000 measurement mic "black"

These are omnidirectional mics
« Last Edit: March 13, 2010, 08:19:18 AM by notlance »

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #12 on: March 13, 2010, 08:23:43 AM »
Graph 1: Sennheiser MKH435T (cardioid)
Graph 2: Nakamichi CM300 CP-1 (cardioid)
Graph 2: Nakamichi CM300 CP-2 (omni)

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements
« Reply #13 on: March 13, 2010, 09:03:15 AM »
This next group are all cheap Chinese SDC cardioids.  The first 4 are MXL603S that have been modified by Michael Joly, the 5th one is a stock MXL991.  The MXL603S and MXL991 are basically the same mic.

Graph 1: MXL603S Joly mod "black"
Graph 2: MXL603S Joly mod "blue"
Graph 3: MXL603S Joly mod "green"
Graph 4: MXL603S Joly mod "red"
Graph 5: MXL991

I do have data on the unmodified MXL603S mics, but it was taken using a different test setup.  I think there are enough variables between the tests performed on the unmodded mics and the modded mics that I do not feel comfortable publishing the unmodded mic data.

Offline notlance

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Gender: Male
Re: Some mic measurements, now with graphs
« Reply #14 on: March 13, 2010, 09:27:19 AM »
Graph1: Busman SDC 041 cardioid
Graph2: Busman SDC 042 cardioid

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.076 seconds with 40 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF