Home Theater Forum and Systems banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My first post in the REW section at HTS. So hello to those I haven't run into before. I have access to the following equipment and am wondering if it's suitable for taking room measurements, both in the low freq and full range...
Preamp- phonic 740 power pod deluxe
- Focusrite Saffire LE
Mic- Sure sm57
- MXL v63m
Thanks for your interest and help
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,400 Posts
If you are on a PC then your Focusrite souncard should work just fine with REW .

> SAFFIRE LE, USER GUIDE

> The rest of your listed equipment isn't usable ( or needed > such as your Phonic 740 ) .

> You'll need a calibrated test mic . Your existing mics are either unworkable or unsuitable for testing by REW .

> I recommend this mic ;



If your computer platform is Macintosh :rolleyesno: , then you'll need to buy a new USB based , 2-channel soundcard that has mic pre-amps ( as well as 48 volts phantom power for the test mic ) .

> M-Audio makes a couple of USB based models that are limited to 2 channels ( which is critical when using a Mac with REW ) .

Since your Canadian , check out something like this ;



> Make sure you can return any soundcard that you buy, in case it doesn't play nice with REW on your computer .

<>:sn:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Thanks for the input. I am using a PC, so the Saffire should work as you say. And as far as a mic is concerned, if I have to buy one I might as well get the ever popular ECM model recommended in the REW forum pages. Hopefully that will do sub testing as well as full range.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:
It will. :T

Regards,
Wayne
Is it recommended to use the mic that came with my Denon 1911? Plugged into my soundcard, seems to work, I just do not know if this iis recommended.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
459 Posts
Did some research last night and it seems the Dayton EMM 6 is the mic to buy...as advised in a former comment. Cheaper and comes with its own cal file? Seems like a logical choice. Thanks for the help folks.
Is a Calibrated Dayton EMM6 superior to a Calibrated Behringer ECM8000 in some way?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I don't have hands on experience but from what I've read the EMM comes with a cal file unique to itself which makes me think each one is tested individually. I don't think that's the case with the ECM. Someone else who really knows could weigh in on this, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
459 Posts
I don't have hands on experience but from what I've read the EMM comes with a cal file unique to itself which makes me think each one is tested individually. I don't think that's the case with the ECM. Someone else who really knows could weigh in on this, though.
Key word is "calibrated". Stock mics from either manufacturer do not come with cal files, although I think you can download someone else's cal file for one (or both?) of these from somewhere on this site... which may or may not fit the one you buy reasonably well. (supposedly these are pretty consistent, so someone else's cal file may very well provide "good enough" correction for this sort of casual home measurement use)

A calibrated mic from either will come with a custom calibration file created just for that mic. Here's one source:

http://www.cross-spectrum.com/measurement/calibrated_behringer.html

http://www.cross-spectrum.com/measurement/calibrated_dayton.html

Once you're looking at calibrated versions of each, I don't know which is the better mic... that's why I was wondering why you had chosen the particular one you did. :) Hopefully someone who knows better can chime in. :huh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
395 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Don't take this as argumentative KalaniP, but as I read it on the parts express web site in the details area of the EMM 6, it says one can download a cal file according to serial # for the mic. If it said product # I would think its a generic file, however because it says serial #, I'm led to believe that each file is unique to each mic. I do agree that I'm making an assumption though. Someone who knows should give their two bits. As for making a choice between the two? A few reviews I read on that same page were very favorable, and it's cheaper. In my house this mic will only get used for calibration and once that's set up, I guess the mic goes in the closet to rest...? So I want to spend as little as I need to without being "cheap"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
459 Posts
Don't take this as argumentative KalaniP, but as I read it on the parts express web site in the details area of the EMM 6, it says one can download a cal file according to serial # for the mic. If it said product # I would think its a generic file, however because it says serial #, I'm led to believe that each file is unique to each mic. I do agree that I'm making an assumption though. Someone who knows should give their two bits. As for making a choice between the two? A few reviews I read on that same page were very favorable, and it's cheaper. In my house this mic will only get used for calibration and once that's set up, I guess the mic goes in the closet to rest...? So I want to spend as little as I need to without being "cheap"
Not argumentative at all, I'm totally with you. I would like to know the answer, as well. The Dayton is a little cheaper (like $5-10, not lots), but I would very much like to know (a) if either is at all superior in any way to the other, and (b) if the cal file from the manuf. that you refer to is comparable to, or inferior to, the "calibrated" version of the mic, as sold by Cross Spectrum, for instance.

I bought the calibrated Behringer, but had I noticed the Dayton was cheaper (or seen the blurb about individual calibration files) I might have sprung that way instead. Now I'm just curious. :sn:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Not argumentative at all, I'm totally with you. I would like to know the answer, as well. The Dayton is a little cheaper (like $5-10, not lots), but I would very much like to know (a) if either is at all superior in any way to the other, and (b) if the cal file from the manuf. that you refer to is comparable to, or inferior to, the "calibrated" version of the mic, as sold by Cross Spectrum, for instance.

I bought the calibrated Behringer, but had I noticed the Dayton was cheaper (or seen the blurb about individual calibration files) I might have sprung that way instead. Now I'm just curious. :sn:
Short answers:
(a) yes, the EMM-6 is better
(b) the CSL correction file will be more accurate

Explanation:

The gentleman from Cross-Spectrum Labs, who does the third-party "calibrations" has stated the EMM-6 is a better microphone due to more robust mounting of the microphone capsule and it not having some connection problems with its case/circuitry, and this is also readily seen from the spread of the "correction curves from many mics" (which I unfortunately can't seem to find at the moment). He has also stated he thinks an EMM-6 without his calibration service (with the cal file from the Dayton factory) is the best value. However it's almost certain that his correction files are more accurate than the Dayton-provided one, not to mention that for only a little more money you can get data in several different orientations which technically makes the mic more accurate for different kinds of measurements once you get more advanced - and if you are one to probe the depths you can request correction data down to 10 Hz (Dayton provides data to 20 Hz). However it's also been seen that the correction factors for many mics are pitifully small at VLF; way smaller than the contributions of any room not designed by Philip Newell (or, to be fair, any number of other notable studio designers).

Personally, I bought an EMM-6 from Dayton. However I am thinking that I may buy one from CSL also. I don't see that it makes sense to send mine in for cal as the price for the cal and the price for the mic aren't really all that different as I recall (though I might change my mind there once I verified the costs).

Don't think that your Behringer purchase is really significantly worse than an EMM-6 purchase would have been, though. I think he said the contact problems for the Behringer mic were during a small period of time, and you shouldn't have problems with the capsule as long as you don't drop the mic or treat it roughly - after which one should normally get another calibration anyway if that's important. We are talking about small judgment call type differences - what you got will serve you just fine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Don't take this as argumentative KalaniP, but as I read it on the parts express web site in the details area of the EMM 6, it says one can download a cal file according to serial # for the mic. If it said product # I would think its a generic file, however because it says serial #, I'm led to believe that each file is unique to each mic. I do agree that I'm making an assumption though. Someone who knows should give their two bits. As for making a choice between the two? A few reviews I read on that same page were very favorable, and it's cheaper. In my house this mic will only get used for calibration and once that's set up, I guess the mic goes in the closet to rest...? So I want to spend as little as I need to without being "cheap"
The Dayton cal files, yes, are unique for each microphone.

Yes, in general the mic and other measuring gear goes into the closet until you (a) get the urge to upgrade (b) add and verify acoustic treatment (c) improve sound by tweaking speaker position (d) someone walking by bumps the gain knob on the subwoofer amp (e) you decide you want to measure the noise floor and estimate an NC rating for your theatre (f) you go DIY and build a DIY impedance/parameters tester or set up crossovers (g) you want to check out your sub's THD. I've also taken my gear to a friend's house to take measurements of his setup, and when one of my sub amps was returned from service still exhibiting the same problem it left with I used it with free recording software to make a high-quality recording of the problem. I wind up using the stuff at least monthly, and I probably own more value in DVDs that I have played once or no times. I think my measuring gear is the best investment in audio that I have ever made. I'm going to send John some beer money just as soon as I can manage to become gainfully employed. :rolleyesno:

To clarify my earlier statements a bit, the possible differences between the microphones are especially miniscule if you compare with each one CSL calibrated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
Let me also add that my outboard sound card/pre is beautiful-sounding, and I try to always use it when I am listening with headphones on a laptop. The sound is very obviously better than the laptop's sound even though it is claimed to be "HD audio". Maybe it's decent on something not as sensitive as my 'phones because I have to turn the volume down to about 10-15% when listening straight from the laptop. I'd actually like to buy another 2-ch pre just to use as a USB DAC as it sounds so good and cost.... probably 1/500th of what my "audiophile" buddy's USB DAC cost and I'd bet there's no difference in a blind test.

I also happened to use my outboard sound card in the recording "monitor" mode once to troubleshoot a noise issue in a system - which turned out to be coming from the cable box rather than the tivo/AVR/whatever else. Since I knew the sound card/pre has a very silent/clean output I knew for certain that any noise heard would be coming from the source. It worked out great!

So you may be surprised at the number of uses you find for your new toys. :unbelievable:
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top