R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: B&K 4006 noise problem
« Last post by afterlifestudios on Today at 12:04:41 pm »
Thanks Jim.  Isn't the 4003 the 130v version?  (4006 is 48v phantom powered).
But if you wouldn't mind sharing the drawings for the 4003 it might be interesting and helpful.

2
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: B&K 4006 noise problem
« Last post by Jim Williams on Today at 11:03:44 am »
I have 4003 prints here. Those mics are similar except the 4006 has an output transformer, the 4003 does not, it's a single ended output into their external preamp box.

You have a 300 pf glass capacitor feeding a old National NF5102 jfet. That is fed current through a PNP U13106 and a NPN 2N5550. Another PNP U13106 is a current booster. If any of those parts are bad you will hear noise. One can determine that by disconnecting the capsule and shorting the glass capacitor to ground. There is also a 5.6 gig leak resistor to ground, if that part is off it will generate noise.

Yes, there are improved jfets and bipolar transistors that can lower the self noise. The LS170 jfet and 2SC3329 NPN and 2SA1084 PNP are good choices.
3
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: B&K 4006 noise problem
« Last post by afterlifestudios on Yesterday at 08:47:25 pm »
Thank you Kai.  I will be careful.  I've never dealt with a "permanent" pre polarized capsule before.  And I'm pretty sure I could make it less permanent rather easily... 
I'm not having any luck finding drawings of the amplifier circuit out there.  Do they exist?
Thanks again,
John

4
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: B&K 4006 noise problem
« Last post by Kai on Yesterday at 06:01:05 pm »
However, suddenly one of them now intermittently outputs a constant ďstormĒ of noise...
...The wind-like noise is similar to when one of my pair of brass capsule ck12 414ebís was acting up a few years ago.  Against all better judgment, I I eventually EXTREMELY gently cleaned some debris from the edges of that capsule with distilled water and a camel hair brush working with magnifying glasses and the mic above me so as to have gravity in my favour.  Itís been working great ever since.

Before I go attempt something equally foolish on this one, does anyone know of any common faults in these 4006ís as they age other than capsule contamination?  I feel like I used up all my luck on the ck12. 

I suppose I better at least transplant the other capsule into it to confirm if itís the amplifier or not.  But Iíve never opened up a 4006. 
Don't ever mess with the capsule, the microphone will never be the same again. Anyway it's a back electret type that does not need strong isolation or such on the accessible parts of the construction, the diaphrag is connected to ground level.

What you have is a common fault of a capacitor inside the amplifier.  I had to change several of those already.
Accessing the microphone amplifier is simple, there is a securing ring on the XLR connector insert, if you remove the ring you can pull out the amplifier.

I am not in my studio right now so I cannot look inside one of those, but as I remember it's quite obvious which cap is the candidate for being replaced.
 If I remember correctly it is an electrolytic or tantal type.

Be careful not to touch the top part of the amplifier with your fingers, remains will kill the very high isolation that is needed in this area of the pc-board.
Wearing disposable medical rubber gloves is a good idea for this job, they cost a penny.

Unlike B&K's measurement equipment no schematic seems to be published, at least I could not find any.
5
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: B&K 4006 noise problem
« Last post by afterlifestudios on Yesterday at 12:48:34 am »
OK  Investigating further...  From the DPA literature:

* The microphone cartridge is tightly secured to the main body housing,
and no attempt should be made to remove it. If a replacement cartridge
is required, contact your local DPA Microphones representative.

and,

* Over time a visible dust layer can build up on the
diaphragm. Since the mass added is extremely small and the influence
on the frequency response is negligible, the dust will not change the
characteristics of the microphone. Therefore cleaning the diaphragm is
not necessary and must not be done.

6
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / B&K 4006 noise problem
« Last post by afterlifestudios on September 19, 2018, 09:53:32 pm »
I recently acquired a pair of b&k 4006 omnis.  They have a beautiful, detailed sound. (As long as the details youíre recording are beautiful!)
However, suddenly one of them now intermittently outputs a constant ďstormĒ of noise. 
Iíve isolated it to the mic (swapped pres, cables, converter channels, everything in the chain. And since I have two 4006ís, Iíve swapped the mics out on the floor and the problem follows the mic.  Iíve cleaned the xlr pins and checked that the mic pres are outputting a solid 48v phantom. 

The wind-like noise is similar to when one of my pair of brass capsule ck12 414ebís was acting up a few years ago.  Against all better judgment, I I eventually EXTREMELY gently cleaned some debris from the edges of that capsule with distilled water and a camel hair brush working with magnifying glasses and the mic above me so as to have gravity in my favour.  Itís been working great ever since.

Before I go attempt something equally foolish on this one, does anyone know of any common faults in these 4006ís as they age other than capsule contamination?  I feel like I used up all my luck on the ck12. 

I suppose I better at least transplant the other capsule into it to confirm if itís the amplifier or not.  But Iíve never opened up a 4006.  Iím comfortable inside my u67 and 87ís and schoeps m221ís etc, but if any of you have any tips on disassembly etc would be appreciated.

Thanks for listening to me thinking out loud... ;)

7
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: Neumann U67 Reissue: Complete Tear Down and Analysis
« Last post by Jim Williams on September 06, 2018, 11:42:52 am »
I have done some tests that exposed the reflection effects. It was so audible the capsule had to be raised up 5 mm to overcome it. It was on a Rode NT-2 that I designed for Rode back in the mid 1990's.

No, I didn't bother with frequency sweeps as I don't have the anechoic room to do that here.
8
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: Neumann U67 Reissue: Complete Tear Down and Analysis
« Last post by klaus on September 05, 2018, 05:38:47 pm »
That (shape of mounting base) will affect the response.
Whether or not, or if, how much the shape of the base affects the sound of the mic is probably hard, if not impossible, to listeners. Unless all that is done, the statement is speculation.

Quote
I noticed in similar mics with a domed mount that the shape does create reflections, resonances and some nulls too.
Again, speculation, unless proven. I could as well argue (and probably trace) the exact opposite: parallel surfaces - here, a flat base plate, flat capsule sides, flat top of basket- may create standing waves of a higher audible magnitude than the somewhat random reflections off a curved surface (as with the old base).

But the reason I mentioned only the capsule-height differences in my review, and not any acoustical effects of the U87Ai base used in the Reissue vs. the old U67/87 curved one: I did not hear any. And what I heard was the focus of my review.
Quote
Mounting the capsule a few mm higher can overcome some of those reflections
How would you know? It might as easily affect just the wavelength of the reflection, with little decrease in its volume, or may result in nothing audible at all. For me, it was the latter. So I left it out of the review.
Quote
A complete frequency response plot with the differences would also be informative but that isn't likely to happen here.
No, indeed, "here" we listen to detect subtly of sounds, rather than running test tones or protocols.

9
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: Neumann U67 Reissue: Complete Tear Down and Analysis
« Last post by Jim Williams on September 05, 2018, 11:22:43 am »
That will affect the response. I noticed in similar mics with a domed mount that the shape does create reflections, resonances and some nulls too.

Mounting the capsule a few mm higher can overcome some of those reflections. A complete frequency response plot with the differences would also be informative but that isn't likely to happen here.
10
Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab / Re: Neumann U67 Reissue: Complete Tear Down and Analysis
« Last post by RuudNL on September 04, 2018, 01:30:30 pm »
I was a bit surprised that I didn't read a word about the change in shape of the base below the microphone capsule.
In the 'old' U67 there was a dome shaped piece just below the capsule itself.
In the 'new' U67 the capsule sits higher in the headbasket, but the base where the capsule is mounted on, is flat.
IMHO this could influence the sound. Any opinions?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10