| Author |
Message |
Len Moskowitz
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:32 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
Mr.T <MrT@home> wrote:
| Quote: | Not really. They are roughly comparable *IF* you are consistent re:
bandwidth and weighting curve, if used.
You are just confusing the requirements for comparison.
|
Ever listen to the difference in noise characteristics between two mics
that have the same self-noise spec?
Try it sometime -- it might change your mind.
--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.core-sound.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
moskowit@core-sound.com
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Len Moskowitz
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:37 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
Arny Krueger <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Fast forward to today, where we are comparing equipment
with -95 dB noise versus say, -105 dB noise. With reasonably
careful use, either device is so much quieter than its
operational environment that the 10 dB difference has
questionable value, even if all other things are equal.
|
Try comparing how self-noise sounds for a few microphones from different
manufacturers that have similar single-number noise specs. It's a
relatively easy test and will probably surprise you.
By your standards those self-noise numbers (typically 5 to 15 dB) should
reflect noise levels way down in the mud, but in real-life recording
situations they're not -- they're audible. And the noise
characteristics are very, very different.
The noise spec doesn't give any insight into those differences.
--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.core-sound.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
moskowit@core-sound.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arny Krueger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:27 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dinc70$eui$1@reader2.panix.com
| Quote: | Mr.T <MrT@home> wrote:
No. It's a fallacy to compare a 1Hz BW with a full band
spec. It's probably about 18 bits I'll bet.
If when listening to the device you could hear a signal
that's 22 bits below 0 dBFS, would you say that's an
18-bit device or a 22?
|
This would be a trick question. There is no single-number
relationship between bits and audibility.
| Quote: | The 20 Hz to 22 KHz single-number noise spec doesn't give
the whole picture.
|
To say the least.
| Quote: | The way we determine noise specs is lacking.
|
Not necessarily. The purpose of specs for most consumers is
to predict how the specified equipment will perform in
actual use.
When noise specs were used to characterize the difference
beween one machine with -55 dB noise and another with 65 dB
noise, then there was probably (almost certainly in critical
applications!) some difference in noise performance that
would be noticable in actual use.
Ironically, specs being what they were in the days of -55 dB
noise, the noticable difference was not absolutely certain,
and the difference observed in actual use might not even
follow the same ordering as the specs.
OTOH, if you compared two devices with equal headroom and 55
dB versus 65 dB A-weighted noise, the device with the better
A-weighted noise would probably be perceptibly less noisy in
many circumstances.
Of course if one device was specified in terms of 20-20 KHz
noise with flat weighting, and the other was specified in
terms of A-weighted noise, then predicting real world
performance could be tricky.
Fast forward to today, where we are comparing equipment
with -95 dB noise versus say, -105 dB noise. With reasonably
careful use, either device is so much quieter than its
operational environment that the 10 dB difference has
questionable value, even if all other things are equal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
frz-man
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 17, 2005 4:42 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
The microtrak has less noise than the Marantz 670 that I tested at the
same time. That is noise I can hear before and after recording. I
believe that 670 has as much noise as tape hiss from the Nagra IV & I
don't think that the headphones had anything to do with the noise.
After "normalizing" the sound - the noise- almost disappears with the
free software from M-Audio (Audacity)
Frz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Harrington
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 17, 2005 11:06 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
--
"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:div228$k1r$1@reader2.panix.com...
| Quote: |
Martin Harrington <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
What you say may be all well and good, BUT, there is a standard for
specifications, one that we all understand and adhere to.
Changing the goalposts doesn't help anybody but the manufacturers.
Bad standards should be changed. I'm surprised that you'd want a bad
standard to be continued.
|
In your opinion, and why do you feel that you have the right to change those
standards?
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
| Quote: |
In this case, the bad specification procedure helps the manufacturers
and hurts the consumer. Using that single number spec lets
manufacturers tailor their design to give a good test number, and it
doesn't tell us what the real noise performance is.
If manufacturer's would post noise level versus frequency graphs for a
few standard condition, we'd all be better off.
--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.core-sound.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
moskowit@core-sound.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arny Krueger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Oct 17, 2005 5:54 pm Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:div2q3$a53$1@reader2.panix.com
| Quote: | Arny Krueger <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
Fast forward to today, where we are comparing equipment
with -95 dB noise versus say, -105 dB noise. With
reasonably careful use, either device is so much quieter
than its operational environment that the 10 dB
difference has questionable value, even if all other
things are equal.
Try comparing how self-noise sounds for a few microphones
from different manufacturers that have similar
single-number noise specs. It's a relatively easy test
and will probably surprise you.
|
Been there, done that. What's your point Len other than
taking advantage of the situation to characterize me as
being inexperienced?
| Quote: | By your standards those self-noise numbers (typically 5
to 15 dB) should reflect noise levels way down in the
mud, but in real-life recording situations they're not --
they're audible. And the noise characteristics are very,
very different.
|
I didn't say that at all, Len. What's your point Len other
than taking advantage of the situation to misrepresent what
I said?
| Quote: | The noise spec doesn't give any insight into those
differences.
|
I said that as well Len but you deleted it. What's your
point Len other than taking advantage of the situation to
twist what I said into something dumb? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Martin Harrington
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:25 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
I think Len Moskowit and Glenn Sanders should get together...they certainly
seem to have a lot in common.
--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:4tCdnYIZLuwTA87eRVn-tQ@comcast.com...
| Quote: | "Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:div2q3$a53$1@reader2.panix.com
Arny Krueger <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
Fast forward to today, where we are comparing equipment
with -95 dB noise versus say, -105 dB noise. With
reasonably careful use, either device is so much quieter
than its operational environment that the 10 dB
difference has questionable value, even if all other
things are equal.
Try comparing how self-noise sounds for a few microphones
from different manufacturers that have similar
single-number noise specs. It's a relatively easy test
and will probably surprise you.
Been there, done that. What's your point Len other than taking advantage
of the situation to characterize me as being inexperienced?
By your standards those self-noise numbers (typically 5
to 15 dB) should reflect noise levels way down in the
mud, but in real-life recording situations they're not --
they're audible. And the noise characteristics are very,
very different.
I didn't say that at all, Len. What's your point Len other than taking
advantage of the situation to misrepresent what I said?
The noise spec doesn't give any insight into those differences.
I said that as well Len but you deleted it. What's your point Len other
than taking advantage of the situation to twist what I said into something
dumb?
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr.T
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 18, 2005 2:41 pm Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:div2f5$b3$1@reader2.panix.com...
| Quote: | Not really. They are roughly comparable *IF* you are consistent re:
bandwidth and weighting curve, if used.
You are just confusing the requirements for comparison.
Ever listen to the difference in noise characteristics between two mics
that have the same self-noise spec?
Try it sometime -- it might change your mind.
|
We all know advertised specs are not necessarily accurate, and very often
provide no mention of test conditions at all.
However that is a *different* argument entirely.
MrT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R¤ _€b€rt°•
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Oct 18, 2005 4:48 pm Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:25:24 GMT, "Martin Harrington"
<lendan@bigpond.net.au> schreef:
| Quote: | I think Len Moskowit and Glenn Sanders should get together...they certainly
seem to have a lot in common.
|
Hahahahahha !
R
--
Http://www.xs4all.nl/~tuig/index.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:41 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
Jonny Durango wrote:
| Quote: | I see your point, and for most people I think the "photographer
method" would work. But how then, would you record a 5 hour
NON-STOP symphony
|
Same procedure as with any other uninteruptible recording: two
recorders.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Oleg Kaizerman
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:42 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
much simpler is to bring better recorder that not stop , not to mention
you can run dissent mikes straight in :-)
12 gb cf card of course
--
Oleg Kaizerman (gebe) Hollyland
"Peter Larsen" <SPAMSHIELD_plarsen@mail.tele.dk> wrote in message
news:4357F2E4.10668C6C@mail.tele.dk...
| Quote: | Jonny Durango wrote:
I see your point, and for most people I think the "photographer
method" would work. But how then, would you record a 5 hour
NON-STOP symphony
Same procedure as with any other uninteruptible recording: two
recorders.
Jonny Durango
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:47 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
Lorin David Schultz wrote:
| Quote: | If you record with condenser mics, the Microtrack is probably
not a good choice.
|
External mic pre? - my DAT recently lost the last third of a very good
Brahms Requiem due to a flake from the name brand computer backup tape.
Fortunately it was not the only recording device, a FR2 was also
present. I can see the Microtrack being quite relevant for me as
secondary recording device. And the phantom voltage issue isn't one with
my AKG's anyway, at least not at the SPL I prefer to record.
| Quote: | - Lorin David Schultz
|
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:48 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
Martin Harrington wrote:
| Quote: | You're loosing the plot.
this group, (R.A.M.P.S), is predominantly a professional location recording
forum...using mixing equipment every day.
|
..pro and .tech are also present in this thread.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:51 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
"R¤ €b€rt°•" wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 10:50:44 GMT, "Lorin David Schultz"
Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> schreef:
I'm saying that the MT is not really all that useful to an audio pro as
it presently stands, but that it could be handy in certain circumstances
if it worked well without peripherals.
This is the same sort of gear that likes to flirt with the
''professional'' market as FCP, or a Edirol 4 track.
|
From the preliminary noises from an owner that I have heard it is better
than you think.
| Quote: | Great for Budget Bob & Discountboy, but from what i read in various
forums, more buggy then Windows ME.
|
Hmmm ... I had better read on in this thread .... thanks.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Oct 21, 2005 12:57 am Post subject:
Re: M-Audio Microtrack 2496 recordings |
|
|
Scott Dorsey wrote:
| Quote: | In article <mYG0f.7565$U51.2808@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
Martin Harrington <lendan@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
You see, that's the difference between RAMPS members, (location recordists),
and the other groups.
We are often in situations where we are likely to have the recorder and/or
mixer fall and be dangling by the cables, or worse.
Of course. That's why the Tuchel connectors on my Nagra lock into place
with a screw-down ring.
|
I will rather have the plug pulled out than the equipment damaged or the
"displaced person" falling in the mic cable because it did not get
pulled out get hurt by falling.
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in