Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: Arni99 on April 05, 2007, 03:10:55 AM
-
http://www.file-upload.net/download-240165/R09-MIC-IN-bbox-HLSC-mics-sample-2min.mp3.html
Guysonic said(measured), it´s almost impossible to overload the MIC-In =>so I did a test at my 1st show with the R09.
here a 3min sample of my recording:
Sennheiser MM-HLSC-1 cardioids
9V battery box plugged to MIC-IN(plugin power OFF)
manual level at 11/30
MIC-SENS: low
LOW-CUT: off
AGC: off
EXT.MIC Type: stereo
I know we all were used to LINE-in recording in the past with MD recorders and other devices, but this MIC-in really can handle high SPL.
;)
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Using mic-in needs no post-editing such as amplification or normalising.
Of course I could use my external preamp instead of my bbox to avoid noise added by the internal r09-gain-stage, but I prefer taking my little bbox with me instead of my larger preamp.
;)
Maybe all R09 users could upload 2min samples of their recordings here with detailed info on recording settings etc. ;).
I´ll record over line-in tomorrow evening and will post the results(2min sample) here.
-
Using mic-in needs no post-editing such as amplification or normalising.
Huh? What does *that* have to do with using the Mic-in?
-
Using mic-in needs no post-editing such as amplification or normalising.
Huh? What does *that* have to do with using the Mic-in?
You simply get a "stronger signal" on your tape ;) than using line-in and as there are also silent parts in the shows I prefer mic-in. :laugh:
Taping metal shows or really loud amplified shows..... line-in would be the better choice.
Needless to say "loud" is subjective for human beings BUT not for your equipment ;).
So we can only learn by experience what settings are best for a certain venue or sound pressure.
I know I can´t compare the Sony MZ-RH1´s mic-in with the Edirol´s r-09 mic-in....sold my RH1 2 days ago.
From using MD we all learned: use your mic-in for silent to moderately loud shows and a bbox + line in for loud amplfied shows.....otherwise your md-preamp will kick the bucket and get heavily overloaded ;).
that´s my own kind of display-off-mod ;):
(http://www.pictransfer.de/thumbs/CIMG06660b0dcd4bJPG.jpg) (http://www.pictransfer.de/?img=CIMG06660b0dcd4bJPG.jpg)
-
http://www.file-upload.net/download-240165/R09-MIC-IN-bbox-HLSC-mics-sample-2min.mp3.html
Guysonic said(measured), it´s almost impossible to overload the MIC-In =>so I did a test at my 1st show with the R09.
here a 3min sample of my recording:
Sennheiser MM-HLSC-1 cardioids
9V battery box plugged to MIC-IN(plugin power OFF)
manual level at 11/30
MIC-SENS: low
LOW-CUT: off
AGC: off
EXT.MIC Type: stereo
I know we all were used to LINE-in recording in the past with MD recorders and other devices, but this MIC-in really can handle high SPL.
Is the input level you used 11 out of 30? If not, what did you have the input level set at? Was the source set at a typical concert level? Ray
-
Is the input level you used 11 out of 30? If not, what did you have the input level set at? Was the source set at a typical concert level? Ray
yes i started at 25 but went down to 11 as i had clipping at 25.
-
Is the input level you used 11 out of 30? If not, what did you have the input level set at? Was the source set at a typical concert level? Ray
yes i started at 25 but went down to 11 as i had clipping at 25.
It seems that a mic setting of 11 might equate to the full 30 of the line input. I am also trying to predict which would be better for a particular event. Who wants to fumble around when it's dark? I did some tests with my stereo which I thought I had on quite loud but then at the venue, the music swamped the recorder at my predetermined level. I am using similar equipment.
-
Using mic-in needs no post-editing such as amplification or normalising.
Huh? What does *that* have to do with using the Mic-in?
You simply get a "stronger signal" on your tape ;) than using line-in and as there are also silent parts in the shows I prefer mic-in. :laugh:
0dBFS is 0dBFS.
If you really need mic-in to reach 0dBFS use it. If you can use line-in do so instead.
I guess that is the general rule.
Less amplification is better.
-
Tonight I will try the internal mics at a small club jazz-rock-fusion concert in Vienna(Austria).
I think they should get 1 chance at least to proof their quality in field ;).
Will use Mic-sens: LOW, Low Cut: ON and AGC:On....the 1st and maybe last time in my life.. ::)..... and put my R-09 in my left frontpocket with mics+display aiming towards the stage...so left and right channel will be vice versa.
So it´s a "1,2 go setup" without any external mics or preamps or battery boxes. I will really enjoy NOT wearing a jacket at room temperature as usually when I´m in "stealth-mode" HAHA.
Nevertheless I need to work on my summer-concert-outfit. ;)
Did some really loud homestereo tests and the internal mics sound better than my HLSC on line-in(very metal sounding on mic+line in) at home at least ;).
If the recording gets distorted....I don´t mind ;), it´s just a testrun ;).
Will post the results after the show with soundclips if the sound won´t kill your ears because of distortion.... ;D.
-
just returned from the show in vienna ;)...well during the show i thought it MUST distort somehow, because it was extreme loud and the acuoustics were not the best at this place.
BUT listen to the 2min sample....
http://www.file-upload.net/download-241572/R09-internal-mic_mic-sens-LOW_AGC-on_LOW-CUT-on.mp3.html
used the R09´s internal mics
MIC SENS low
AGC on
LOW CUT on
-
just returned from the show in vienna ;)...well during the show i thought it MUST distort somehow, because it was extreme loud and the acuoustics were not the best at this place.
BUT listen to the 2min sample....
http://www.file-upload.net/download-241572/R09-internal-mic_mic-sens-LOW_AGC-on_LOW-CUT-on.mp3.html
used the R09´s internal mics
MIC SENS low
AGC on
LOW CUT on
Almost makes me wonder if it's worth recommending to people that they should buy entry level mics anymore...just buy an R-09 and that's all! Good job, this sounds nice!
-
post on this file: "normalising" with audacity and nothing else.
-
Wow. I'm very impressed and surprised by that recording with the internal mics. When I first got my R09 I tried using the internal mic to record a band, but the acoustics in the room and the PA were terrible so that hurt the recording -- but it was still very listenable. Since then I haven't tried the internal mics again. Looks like maybe I should give 'em another shot, just out of curiosity.
-
That's Landau Playing......
-
post on this file: "normalising" with audacity and nothing else.
Why normalise?
Raisthe noisefloor digitally instead of by analog means?
Record hot enough (close to 0dBFS) to start with.
-
post on this file: "normalising" with audacity and nothing else.
Why normalise?
Raisthe noisefloor digitally instead of by analog means?
Record hot enough (close to 0dBFS) to start with.
I said I used AGC the 1st time on this recording ;).
-
One good reason I have for using mic-in over line-in is that, on my Edirol at least, the line-in plug seems especially touchy. I have yet to make a recording with line-in that wasn't affected at some point by "static" - i.e., the noise you get when plugging a live guitar cable into a powered amp.
Granted, I'm not the nicest of tapers - I tend to keep the unit in a breast pocket, and I do occasionally move about. However, even the one time I had the unit "at rest", I was left with an incredible amount of noise (note - I don't mean "line-noise", or "hiss"). It was an unamplified classical quartet, hardly the loudest band I've recorded.
Even once when going from a matrix feed, I still ended up with static.
Mic-in, on the other hand, works fine.. though most louder shows end up a little muddy, even with the low-cut on.
And, btw, it's pretty easy to overload the on-board mics... just record any act that even approaches metal. ;) I have a recording I made with the input level at 1 that's still on the brink of distortion. Can't remember if I used the low-cut, tho...
I'll upload a few samples later tonight, or tomorrow afternoon - right now I'm on my way to a show.
-
I've had good luck with mic-in, low-sens.
I record 16/44.1k. Anything up to #25 gain will not add (preamp) noise. Noise is at the 16th bit, approx -90dB down. Going up to #30 adds a bit of self noise.
Also, the numbers count up by dB, just to give you an idea. I usually end up somewhere between #10 and #25 depending on mic sensitivity and sound level.
Note that there is a big difference between different mics. AT853 and similar (with three wire battery box) are pretty good, AT822 is a bit less senstive. I've also used my CK91/CK93 "homebrew" actives directly to mic-in with great results. But I've sold these now, so I'm looking for something else...
Oh yeah, recording with lower sensitivity mics or acoustic music, you should probably use an external preamp. I just built a 15dB fixed-gain preamp/battery box that I use as a front end if needed.
I really like the convenience and sound of the R09. It is just too bad that the mic pre is a bit noisier than my HiMD minidisc. In fact, if I want the most compact setup, I just plug some mics directly into my miniidisc (plug in power) and go with that. This is only for mics that work with low voltage (2.5V) plug-in-power though.
Richard
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Because your line-in jack is busted.
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Because your line-in jack is busted.
QFT. Been there, still am there, and don't even have the t-shirt yet. :)
My own home testing has found that the mic-in runs 8dB hotter than the line-in. The same signal fed into each input required a level of 18 on line-in to peak the same as a level of 10 on mic-in.
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Because your line-in jack is busted.
QFT. Been there, still am there, and don't even have the t-shirt yet. :)
My own home testing has found that the mic-in runs 8dB hotter than the line-in. The same signal fed into each input required a level of 18 on line-in to peak the same as a level of 10 on mic-in.
I am kind of curious about the differences from line-in to mic-in on the R09s. Now that I am a new member of the
R09 with broken line-in jack team. >:(
So the only difference is the amount of gain needed? They are sonically the same?
I always run a pre in front of mine so I guess i shouldn't have any problems using mic-in, once the sweet spot is found again.
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Maybe to reduce the amount of gear needed? Just mics and R09 make for a really compact set-up...
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Maybe to reduce the amount of gear needed? Just mics and R09 make for a really compact set-up...
You should always use a battery-box(or a preamp) when using mic-in or line-in with edirol r09.
It provides only 2.5V on mic-in(plug-in power) which is definitely not sufficient for a good sounding amplified concert recording. There are several DPA 40xx recordings on dime without a bbox /preamp and it sounds strange and crappy.
5V(as Chris Church measured) are the minimum in order to achieve extended SPL-capability and dynamic range.
A small 9V/12V bbox is easy to hide ;).
I taped with my dpa 4061 and a 12V bbox on mic-in andn teh result was great, on line-in MY dpa´s output was too weak, even at gain 30/30...there for you need high-sensitive mics or a preamp.
-
my question is: Whats the point?
If it is loud line-in works great. Why would you use mic in instead? Just because you can?
Maybe to reduce the amount of gear needed? Just mics and R09 make for a really compact set-up...
You should always use a battery-box(or a preamp) when using mic-in or line-in with edirol r09.
It provides only 2.5V on mic-in(plug-in power) which is definitely not sufficient for a good sounding amplified concert recording. There are several DPA 40xx recordings on dime without a bbox /preamp and it sounds strange and crappy.
5V(as Chris Church measured) are the minimum in order to achieve extended SPL-capability and dynamic range.
A small 9V/12V bbox is easy to hide ;).
I taped with my dpa 4061 and a 12V bbox on mic-in andn teh result was great, on line-in MY dpa´s output was too weak, even at gain 30/30...there for you need high-sensitive mics or a preamp.
Oh well, it was just a thought! Still pretty compact (pocket-sized) WITH a battery box/pre-amp...
-
I am kind of curious about the differences from line-in to mic-in on the R09s. Now that I am a new member of the
R09 with broken line-in jack team. >:(
So the only difference is the amount of gain needed? They are sonically the same?
I always run a pre in front of mine so I guess i shouldn't have any problems using mic-in, once the sweet spot is found again.
No problems here. I run 4060>MMA6k>R09. When my line in broke early on I started using the mic-in on the low gain switch setting of course, with no appreciable sound difference just some additional gain (actually it sounded better but for other reasons, see below). I ran it that way for around 8 months before I had time to send it to Roland for repair. I've run line-in again since them.
Interestingly, I found my gain sweet spot after doing this. 1-1/2 yrs ago we were a bit up in the air as to the gain structure of the R-09. Until my line jack broke, I had been running the R-09's line-in gain around 10, essentially making all needed gain with the MMA6000. My reasoning was that the DPA preamp is cleaner, quieter and more capable than the R09's. However, the the 4060's are sensitive mics (4060 sensitivity = 20 mV/Pa; -34 dB re. 1 V/Pa; 4061 sensitivity = 6 mV/Pa; -44.5 dB re. 1 V/Pa) so their signal is pretty hot to begin with. There were a few times when I clipped the preamp, and more times where I could have used a little more headroom in the preamp stage. However, there is no clipping indicator on the MMA6000 so it took me a while to realize what was going on. When I switched to using the mic-in I left the gain on the R09 around 10 and turned the MMA600 down 2-3 clicks (It's gain adjustment is notched, 2.5 dB per click). That left more headroom in the preamp stage and improved the sound subtly. So in my case I got better results after switching to the mic-in jack, but only because I was pushing my preamp a bit too hard before.
When I got the R09 back from Roland I epoxied the jacks to the board and went back to running line in, but at a typical line-in gain setting of around 13-18, which seems to match well with my mics & preamp for most of the music I record.
-
I am kind of curious about the differences from line-in to mic-in on the R09s. Now that I am a new member of the
R09 with broken line-in jack team. >:(
So the only difference is the amount of gain needed? They are sonically the same?
I always run a pre in front of mine so I guess i shouldn't have any problems using mic-in, once the sweet spot is found again.
No problems here. I run 4060>MMA6k>R09. When my line in broke early on I started using the mic-in on the low gain switch setting of course, with no appreciable sound difference just some additional gain (actually it sounded better but for other reasons, see below). I ran it that way for around 8 months before I had time to send it to Roland for repair. I've run line-in again since them.
Interestingly, I found my gain sweet spot after doing this. 1-1/2 yrs ago we were a bit up in the air as to the gain structure of the R-09. Until my line jack broke, I had been running the R-09's line-in gain around 10, essentially making all needed gain with the MMA6000. My reasoning was that the DPA preamp is cleaner, quieter and more capable than the R09's. However, the the 4060's are sensitive mics (4060 sensitivity = 20 mV/Pa; -34 dB re. 1 V/Pa; 4061 sensitivity = 6 mV/Pa; -44.5 dB re. 1 V/Pa) so their signal is pretty hot to begin with. There were a few times when I clipped the preamp, and more times where I could have used a little more headroom in the preamp stage. However, there is no clipping indicator on the MMA6000 so it took me a while to realize what was going on. When I switched to using the mic-in I left the gain on the R09 around 10 and turned the MMA600 down 2-3 clicks (It's gain adjustment is notched, 2.5 dB per click). That left more headroom in the preamp stage and improved the sound subtly. So in my case I got better results after switching to the mic-in jack, but only because I was pushing my preamp a bit too hard before.
When I got the R09 back from Roland I epoxied the jacks to the board and went back to running line in, but at a typical line-in gain setting of around 13-18, which seems to match well with my mics & preamp for most of the music I record.
+T for the feedback, I'm also running 4060>mmk6000 in front of mine. Like you, I recently (before the jack broke) started to run the r09 at or about 15 on the gain. It just seemed to give a better sound overall.
Was your r09 fixed in or out of warranty? Mine is two months out of warranty. I tried to fix it, but just couldn't get it soldered with what was left. :(
-
They did fix mine out of warranty free of charge (shipping cost to them only), but I didn't mess with trying my own fix after opening it up and taking a look. More on my experience here (http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,71160.msg1139094.html#msg1139094). I've heard others report them fixing theirs out of warranty as well.