Telefunken / Neumann U47
Reply
Category Archives: Microphones
Making a Yamaha SKRM-100 subkick
A few years ago I made another Sub-Kick. I used all Yamaha Parts… so I guess it’s a Yamaha Sub Kick
Drilling the XLR into the side:
Pulling the driver from its box:
I built some Brackets and drilled the holes to line up with the existing lug hardware:
Mesh head:
Filled the lining of the shell with acoustic foam and put another mesh head on the back:
Finished:
Audio Technica microphone wardrobe
This was brought into me to sell
Never seen anything like it
RCA 77DX quick fix
In a pinch today I learned that thumb nuts from a Shure SM7B can replace the missing nut of an RCA 77DX.
I’m looking into a replacement for the missing 77 nut this week… not going to pay the 110$ AEA wants… 12-40 thread I think…
Bil Whitlock Mic Splitter white paper
a good read: http://www.jensen-transformers.com/an/an005.pdf
Lav Mic Positioning
I was looking through the Sennheiser MKE-2 mics and found these great charts
441
Such a smart design
Down the drain!
Image
I’ve warned many guest to watch the pack when they go to the washroom. And, they giggle.
Today a colleague showed me this. It must have been REALLY in there for the wire to snap… and once it snapped it must have been awkward fishing it out.
Pissed off and pissed on…
2006 – Microphone Case
Les Fabian and I designed this case for a store front and his brother Don built it for us, I wonder what happened to it when Larry and Moe bought it…
BBC studios 1932 – via http://www.orbem.co.uk/
Image
High Quality Recording and Reproducing of Music and Speech – 1926
From: http://www.charm.rhul.ac.uk/history/p20_4_1_3.html
High Quality Recording and Reproducing of Music and Speech
By J P Maxfield and H C Harrison (Bell Telephone Laboratories 1926). Introductory paragraphs by Roger Beardsley.
The age of electrical recording
In this time of incredible technical achievements in every field of scientific endeavour, it is perhaps hard to imagine the effect that Maxfield and Harrison’s work had on the recording industry. Nothing has matched it since. The change from LP to CD was marked by longer playing times and a reduction in already low ambient noise levels. Sound quality was much as before (or worse according to some). The change from 78 rpm discs to LP again brought playing time and noise benefits, but in terms of quality of reproduction, the change over to microgroove was often very marginal, and sometimes showed a loss.
However, the change from mechanical (acoustic) recording to electrical recording was very different. The new system compared to the old, really was a chalk and cheese affair. Not just a wider frequency range, and frequencies in correct and designed proportion, but for the first time, the whole ambience and feel of a performance and its surroundings was reproduced. The nearest analogy is that of hearing a performance of say an orchestra though a closed door and down a corridor, and then being brought into a box at the venue. Admittedly perhaps not at the front of the box, but the difference was astounding. Listen to the examples in “A brief history of recording” to hear what I mean.
Maxfield and Harrison came from a telephone engineering background – then the height of technology. Their work on equalisers and line transmission systems, together with additional work with high power audio amplifiers all came together by one of those happy chances. For the first time, recording (and reproduction) was subjected to a proper system of scientific research, as against the largely empirical developments of the mechanical recording system. The resulting Western Electric recording system was an elegant solution to the deficiencies of mechanical recording. And it worked, again and again.
High Quality Recording and Reproducing of Music and Speech
By J P Maxfield and H C Harrison (Bell Telephone Laboratories 1926).
Two Notes Torpedo Live – now in a new home!
Image
Finally got it in a rack! Two Notes Torpedo amplifier load box with cabinate / microphone simulation
Jack added a speaker input on the producers desk for easy connection
I said when I first heard about it that “This piece is basically an Iso Booth in one rack space.” and in a small to mid sized studio without a booth or collection of amps it’s a huge asset! 
downside: I wanted to put the line in and line out on the Patchbay in addition to the speaker in and through-put on the panel (everything hooked up all the time). When you have a jack in the “line in” it overrides the speaker “load box”
Worth a Listen
I admire this man. And I must say: SM58
From http://www.coutant.org/allmics/index.html
Here is the sound file of many of the microphones on this site. This provides a means of comparing them. To keep the comparison equitable, no processing was used during recordings nor in post. Audio console EQ settings were centered.
Please bear in mind that these samples were recorded over a three-year period in various acoustic environments, most of them favorable. There are a couple of samples that contain echoes. One sample includes the sound of a fan in the background. At least two samples contain small amounts of AC hum. Apologies are offered.
Finally, some listeners will argue correctly that MPEGs are not the best format for evaluating the quality of a sound. This was done to conserve loading time. One could just as easily argue that unless all mics are recorded in the same acoustic environment, the comparison is invalid. Again I concur. Perhaps we can agree that this sampling at least proves that not all microphones sound alike.
Thank you for your interest. From the beginning this web site has been, and continues to be, an interesting undertaking.
—Prof. S. O. Coutant, retired
Great Snare Drum Microphone Placement comparison
Image
A good listen to the affects of the positioning on a snare
I also love the sound of the UFIPs
NOTHING sounds as good a centrifugaly forged casting