Topic: AT-853's>UA5 question

[The Other Chris]

Thinking of running my SP-CMC4's (853's)>UA5.  Want to know if I should run the battery box in front of the UA5 or if the power from the battery powering the pre will be enough.   So, I guess the line would be:
853's>Batt Box>UA5>R09.
Just looking to clean the signal up some but trying to find out if it's even worth it. 
Thanks.

[jeromejello]

you need to have adapters in between your mics and a p48 source or you will fry them.

if you are asking about running 853>battery box> u-5 [with p48 OFF] that might work, but you will be introducing a second level of A/D D/A conversion in the signal.

personally, i would run a different pre in between the mics and r-09 (i use a mp-2) or skip it and just use the battery box.

[The Other Chris]

Glad I asked!   I'll just keep it simple & stick w/ the batt box & no pre, still sounds fine to me & easier than lugging naks/cp4's, pre, cables, bag, etc....
Thanks for the info.

[sunjan]

you need to have adapters in between your mics and a p48 source or you will fry them.

if you are asking about running 853>battery box> u-5 [with p48 OFF] that might work, but you will be introducing a second level of A/D D/A conversion in the signal.

Jeromejello is right.
To make the most of your UA-5 and avoid the AD>DA step, you should get yourself another recorder with digi-in. The MTII would fit the bill, and gives you 24bit.

The best way to run 853's in front of the UA-5 is with phantom adapters, benefitting from P48. They even came in a hardwired version (AT853Rx), or pick them up separately (look at Samson, Naiant for third party options). Not sure how your Sound Pro mics are terminated though, they should be three-wire and preferably mini-XLR to match most of the phantom adapters.

[yousef]

The best way to run 853's in front of the UA-5 is with phantom adapters, benefitting from P48.

I think this would only make sense if running from an AC supply. If not, you'd be stepping up the 9v battery to 48v only to have the phantom adaptors step it back down to 9v. In which case it would seem more logical to run a 9v battery box into the UA5.

[newplanet7]

Talk to seth, runrunrun.
He has this set-up into a iriver I do believe.
http://taperssection.com/index.php?action=profile;u=8336

[SmokinJoe]

Yeah, Seth has some homemade mics made from Panasonic capsules, which goes into a 9V battery box, and then into the front of the UA-5.  He then records onto an H120, but an R09 is fine too.  He mainly uses this for rainy days at festivals, or places where the crowd is really out of control and doesn't want to risk his regular mics.

It's sounds like you've got all these pieces and want to try them together, and you can certainly do that. The battery box powers the mics, you don't want phantom power engaged. You just need an appropriate cable to go from the battery box, probably splitting into two 1/4" plugs to go into the front of the UA5.

I think what some people are getting at is that this would not generally be considered the ideal rig, if you had nothing and were starting out to buy from scratch they would suggest different.  But there is absolutely nothing wrong with running AT's > battbox > UA5 > R09.

As someone pointed out by running the R09 behind the UA-5 there is an extra Analog->Digital, Digital->analog step in there, and it would not normally be considered ideal, but I've done it myself, and it works fine.  I did A/B testing between UA-5 > H120 and UA-5 > R09 and I couldn't hear any difference.  The only awkward thing about doing it that way is that you have 3 sets of gain knobs... the L/R pair on the UA5, the headphone gain on the UA5, and the gain on the R09.  If you max one and min the other it can sound like crap, but get the right amount of gain at each stage and you are good.

Just my 2 cents worth.

If you run this, and like it, Naiant had a special cable which would plug into the phantom powered preamp (your UA5) and had a minijack input with 9V plug in power.  This could be used in place of the battery box.  It shouldn't effect the sound any, just clean up your gear bag a bit.  I have one of these I will give you, although one side is broken and we would have to send it to Naiant for repair.

[run_run_run]

with a stock UA-5 just go battery box out to dual 1/4 monos into the front. It can work out great.

[spyder9]

AT853RX > Edirol UA5 

Phantom is king! 

http://www.archive.org/details/raq2005-08-20.spyder9.flac16
 

[run_run_run]

AT853RX > Edirol UA5 

Phantom is king! 

http://www.archive.org/details/raq2005-08-20.spyder9.flac16

That's what I do

[sunjan]

The only awkward thing about doing it that way is that you have 3 sets of gain knobs... the L/R pair on the UA5, the headphone gain on the UA5, and the gain on the R09.  If you max one and min the other it can sound like crap, but get the right amount of gain at each stage and you are good.

IIRC, the FAQ says that you should never touch the headphone gain. Monitoring should be switched off, because it can introduce a second layer of sound - some kind of flaw in the design of the UA-5.
I'd engage the L/R gain on the UA-5 only and run line-in (unity) to the R09.
At least modded versions of the UA-5 should have much cleaner gain than the R09, the golden rule is to amplify the signal as early as possible in the chain. Unless you're taping very quite sources there's no need to add R09 gain downstream. YMMV.

[moooose]

mumble mumble....
I always connect my 853 directly to a phantom power source (in my case a SD MixPre). They never fried and deliver good results indeed.

[yousef]

mumble mumble....
I always connect my 853 directly to a phantom power source (in my case a SD MixPre). They never fried and deliver good results indeed.

I don't think I quite believe you...

How are your 853s terminated? I'd be willing to bet that they have great big phantom adaptors on the end of them that step the p48 down to 9v.

As I understand it, AT-853s run on 9v. You can use them with 48v phantom power with appropriate adaptors to change the voltage down to the appropriate level but there is absolutely no advantage to doing this.

The only conceivable advantage I can see is that in using a phantom adaptor you would probably have to have the mics wired in the 3-wire configuration which allows for more headroom. But 3-wire directly from a 9v supply would yield precisely the same results.

[ashevillain]

The only conceivable advantage I can see is that in using a phantom adaptor you would probably have to have the mics wired in the 3-wire configuration which allows for more headroom. But 3-wire directly from a 9v supply would yield precisely the same results*.

*except for the added sonic signature of the preamp if such a device is being used.

[yousef]

The only conceivable advantage I can see is that in using a phantom adaptor you would probably have to have the mics wired in the 3-wire configuration which allows for more headroom. But 3-wire directly from a 9v supply would yield precisely the same results*.

*except for the added sonic signature of the preamp if such a device is being used.

Slightly odd comment there; I wasn't suggesting that a preamp would necessarily be in the chain... but that does remind me: I'm pretty sure that the AT phantom adaptors have a HPF built in. Not sure if the same goes for the Samson etc ones but I certainly wouldn't want to be running cards with an undefeatable bass cut.