Topic: Choice to be made : AT853>pre>iHP-120

[Semayat]

Hi,

Here we are, a year later (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,88790.15.html
) and i have some questions :

I've bought some AT853's mics terminated into a mini 1/8' for a d*** low price.
I want to modify them into mini xlr in order to give them phantom power. Here are my questions :

- how could i modify my mics?
- Instead of a PS-2/ad20 combo, i am thinking of buying a SD mixpre/SD MP2/Shure FP24 = these are mini xlr inputs/outputs, right???
- What cable should i use between Pre>cable>iHP-120

Thanks in advance for your response

[OOK]

Hi,

Here we are, a year later (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,88790.15.html
) and i have some questions :

I've bought some AT853's mics terminated into a mini 1/8' for a d*** low price.
I want to modify them into mini xlr in order to give them phantom power. Here are my questions :

- how could i modify my mics?
- Instead of a PS-2/ad20 combo, i am thinking of buying a SD mixpre/SD MP2/Shure FP24 = these are mini xlr inputs/outputs, right???
- What cable should i use between Pre>cable>iHP-120

Thanks in advance for your response

SD mixpre/SD MP2/Shure FP24 = They have standard XLR in and outs.............

[nameloc01]

Phantom adaptors. You're gonna need em' anyhow.

[Semayat]

Yes, indeed.
But i am little bit concerned with XLR ... what would I used between pre > ? > iHP-120 then??

Maybe a PS-2>iHP-120 (using internal preamp) combo (=> I've seen some people running that rig with pretty good results) in order to keep mini XLR.

I do not know, that's why i need explanations

[nameloc01]

You will need to bring the mini XLRs on the mics to full size XLRs for the power source (which also will step the voltage down) then from either the PS2 or preamp,if you're gonna use one,..a dual full size XLR> male 1/8" mini plug cable. (The 120 has a mini in,right?) Or if you're just gonna run mics> PS2>recorder...the PS2 can be ordered with a hardwire 2' male mini plug cable (out) instead of the (stock) dual full size XLRs. Which is nice, as it eliminates the bulky (dual xlr>male mini plug) extra cable.

[Will_S]

Wow, I (largely) agree with nameloc01 for once!

If you want to run a MixPre, by all means get the AT853s re-terminated to miniXLRs, and then get phantom adapters.  If you are handy with a soldering iron, you should be able to do this yourself, a quick search here will turn up the appropriate wiring diagrams.  But the wires inside an AT853 mic cable are tiny, and there's not a lot of room to work inside a mini-XLR connector, so it might be better to leave that to someone experienced if you are not.

I would not recommend PS-2>iRiver unless you exclusively record really loud material.  It will work, but you will have to add a lot of gain with the iRiver's built-in preamp if recording quieter material.  That will be noisy, a lot more so than if you use a mixpre or even a much cheaper Church Audio preamp.

Also a PS-2 has XLR inputs, not mini-XLR.  You'd still need to get phantom adapters to use it.

Alternately, get a 3 wire battery box or preamp with mini-XLR inputs.  A lot less bulk than the phantom solutions, but you still get locking inputs and 3 wire power, which is all the phantom adapters ultimately provide to the mics.

Or (cue angry response from nameloc01) you can get a 4.7k mod done and get a CA-9100 preamp with a miniplug input.  It will sound better than phantom adapters>PS-2 using the internal preamp of the iRiver, but probably not as good as a MixPre.  PS-2>AD-20>iRiver would sound better than PS-2>iRiver because you get to use the better preamp and A/D in the AD20, AD20 vs CA9100 is probably just a matter of taste.

[nameloc01]

Nice Will...glad to see you're finally comin' around

Nah, no angry response lined up...at least not yet.

[nameloc01]

FYI,"junkyardt" was telling me the other day he might be selling his AD-20...so if you end up going that route, if may be beneficial to get ahold of him before buying new.

[Will_S]

Nice Will...glad to see you're finally comin' around

I wouldn't say coming around...I'd never argue that you should expect a $140 preamp (Church Audio) to perform better than a $660 one (the Mixpre).  And if you're going to use a preamp/mixer with phantom power and XLR inputs, by all means use phantom adapters...I've always said that makes sense.

[nameloc01]

Well, without getting into some debate, as far as I know, from what I have read the 853s get the absolute max SPL handling ability via 3 wire phantom. (Whether it be a PS2 or mixer or whatever). Now, while the "mod" definitely makes the setup much smaller, it doesn't allow for the same exact SPL handling ability, and when the sensitivity is lowered the "noise" is not lowered in relation to the gain, so theorectically you have more noise in the recording, although ultimately its probably irrelevant. Personally, from everything I've heard the 853s sound better when ran off of phantom.
Fact is, the mics were designed to be "hanging/choir mics" which were meant to ran off of a mixing board (phantom) power (or AT phantom belt pack..although I might add these don't sound nearly as good as a Denecke)
The real only "drawback" to the Denecke is that the signal isn't completely balanced..but that's easily rectified.

[Church-Audio]

Well, without getting into some debate, as far as I know, from what I have read the 853s get the absolute max SPL handling ability via 3 wire phantom. (Whether it be a PS2 or mixer or whatever). Now, while the "mod" definitely makes the setup much smaller, it doesn't allow for the same exact SPL handling ability, and when the sensitivity is lowered the "noise" is not lowered in relation to the gain, so theorectically you have more noise in the recording, although ultimately its probably irrelevant. Personally, from everything I've heard the 853s sound better when ran off of phantom.
Fact is, the mics were designed to be "hanging/choir mics" which were meant to ran off of a mixing board (phantom) power (or AT phantom belt pack..although I might add these don't sound nearly as good as a Denecke)
The real only "drawback" to the Denecke is that the signal isn't completely balanced..but that's easily rectified.

No offence but there is only about a 1.5 db reduction in sensitivity over three wire with my mod And the MAX spl is absolutely the same or better with my mod vs three wire. lets get our facts straight. There is no more self noise with my mod then there is with three wire......
PS.... There is no sonic difference between three wire and my mod ether other then the fact you might be able to use a very expensive high end preamp over my 9100 No other differences between the two methods. If you can show me a difference please go ahead and where exactly are you getting your facts from? 
Chris

[Church-Audio]

Nice Will...glad to see you're finally comin' around

I wouldn't say coming around...I'd never argue that you should expect a $140 preamp (Church Audio) to perform better than a $660 one (the Mixpre).  And if you're going to use a preamp/mixer with phantom power and XLR inputs, by all means use phantom adapters...I've always said that makes sense.

Other then gain there should be no major difference between my preamp and a mixpre. My preamp sonically sounds very good but you only get 23db of gain with my preamp but for most shows that is plenty. 

[nameloc01]

Well, as I was told by an AT Dealer..the "noise" is not lowered in conjuction and relation to the gain. Now, I'm not saying that its an important issue, I'm just saying that's what I'm told. You are saying different. What your spec on the SPLs with the mod? Listen, I'm not dogging you, so please don't get your panties bunched up, I actually blame SP for all this debate, as if they were not to have sold the AT mics terminated together 2wire,thus resulting in all of the clipping problems, we probably wouldn't even be talking about this now. My only point ever was/is...if you run them phantom 3wire, they basically will not clip and there's no need for the mod...*unless* you feel the size reduction issue is relevant (I personally do not) or cost is a determining factor.

[Will_S]

Nice Will...glad to see you're finally comin' around

I wouldn't say coming around...I'd never argue that you should expect a $140 preamp (Church Audio) to perform better than a $660 one (the Mixpre).  And if you're going to use a preamp/mixer with phantom power and XLR inputs, by all means use phantom adapters...I've always said that makes sense.

Other then gain there should be no major difference between my preamp and a mixpre. My preamp sonically sounds very good but you only get 23db of gain with my preamp but for most shows that is plenty. 

No doubt, you make a nice preamp and it might be just what the original poster needs.  I find I need a bit more gain than that at a lot of the shows I go to, but I'm more into "amplified acoustic" than rock. 

The MixPre is also nice and future-proof in that it will work with true phantom powered condensers in the future, and can be run with a recorder with balanced ins.  But if the OP is going to be taping loud shows only, and plans to stick with the AT853s for a long time, I don't think I'd recommend running a preamp that costs 2x what the mics do.

[Church-Audio]

Well, as I was told by an AT Dealer..the "noise" is not lowered in conjuction and relation to the gain. Now, I'm not saying that its an important issue, I'm just saying that's what I'm told. You are saying different. What your spec on the SPLs with the mod? Listen, I'm not dogging you, so please don't get your panties bunched up, I actually blame SP for all this debate, as if they were not to have sold the AT mics terminated together 2wire,thus resulting in all of the clipping problems, we probably wouldn't even be talking about this now. My only point ever was/is...if you run them phantom 3wire, they basically will not clip and there's no need for the mod...*unless* you feel the size reduction issue is relevant (I personally do not) or cost is a determining factor.

The limit to my measurement is 114 db at 1k I measured the distortion at 0.5% at 114 db at 1k. Now the measurements they are making at AT I have no idea how they are getting them to be honest. But both three wire and my mod measure exactly the same when the mod is done. So I have so assume that the distortion value will not change much at higher SPL but again I doubt most of you would want to be in a concert that was much louder then 114db. The noise floor is not any different because both use a resistor in the bias path the difference between the two is in the location of the resistor. So both methods do no harm to increasing self noise one over the other.



Chris