R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!  (Read 26484 times)

David Bock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2011, 08:13:30 pm »

Quote:

I also agree with you that sometime, a X-formerless mic is preferable. But I want to ask : what are those applications to you?
So Far, Large D, inside a piano for fast passages of classical music. Small D on orchestra for fast passages. If there was a way to seamlessly fade between the xfmrd and xfrless mic that would be ideal.
I have not yet experimented with many instruments and applications for the xfmrless.

YZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 868
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #31 on: January 08, 2011, 02:28:00 pm »

dbock wrote on Fri, 07 January 2011 23:13

Quote:

I also agree with you that sometime, a X-formerless mic is preferable. But I want to ask : what are those applications to you?
So Far, Large D, inside a piano for fast passages of classical music. Small D on orchestra for fast passages. If there was a way to seamlessly fade between the xfmrd and xfrless mic that would be ideal.
I have not yet experimented with many instruments and applications for the xfmrless.


Hmmm... a single mic with two outputs, one with and one without trafo, both recorded in a DAW...  that may make the seamless xfade easier to happen.

Where do I go to copyright the product idea?...  Smile
Logged
regards,

YZ

Marik

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2011, 03:43:02 am »

dbock wrote on Sat, 08 January 2011 01:13



So Far, Large D, inside a piano for fast passages of classical music.



A microphone inside the piano for classical, let alone LDC?  Shocked

Sorry, for classical piano I am more used to distant miking with nice 1/2" omnies, MS ribbons, or SDC cardioids for live.

Best, M
Logged
Mark Fouxman
Samar Audio & Microphone Design
www.samaraudiodesign.com

Fletcher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3016
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2011, 04:27:34 pm »

Why not?  I've done several classical piano gigs with LDC mics inside the piano.  There are no rules other than "please the client".
Logged
CN Fletcher

mwagener wrote on Sat, 11 September 2004 14:33
We are selling emotions, there are no emotions in a grid


"Recording engineers are an arrogant bunch.  
If you've spent most of your life with a few thousand dollars worth of musicians in the studio, making a decision every second and a half... and you and  they are going to have to live with it for the rest of your lives, you'll get pretty arrogant too.  It takes a certain amount of balls to do that... something around three"
Malcolm Chisholm

Marik

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 215
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #34 on: January 09, 2011, 05:41:02 pm »

Fletcher wrote on Sun, 09 January 2011 21:27

Why not?  I've done several classical piano gigs with LDC mics inside the piano.  There are no rules other than "please the client".


Yeah, I know pop or jazz engineers do record classical that way, but the "client was happy" factor does not really mean that this is the best possible artistic solution.

Recording classical piano is just completely different aesthetics, where we really want to hear the piano in the hall, rather than stick our heads inside the instrument. I'd love to hear one single major commercial recording done that way!

In fact, from what I remember, besides the marketing issues, one of the reasons for Horowitz' break up with RCA was his displease with their "up-in-the-face" recorded sound, which was mainly due to their close up (note, not even inside the piano) miking.

Speaking of transformer vs. transformerless, usually, in the debates some start bringing points about "phase shift", "saturation", "coloration", etc.

First, do people really know what "phase shift' one could expect from a well designed transformer (let alone, what's the significance of that "phase shift", and in that term what happens to the source signal before it reaches the microphone diaphragm, to start with)? Care to give some numbers... like degree vs. frequency?
Second, anybody cares to give saturation points of a good sized transformer? What are we talking about?
And the last, third, may I suggest, some transformer coupled can be much more neutral than some transformerless. Some transformerless can saturate and distort much earlier than transformer (and BTW, those distortions subjectively are much nastier), etc. etc. etc.
It is not about topology, but all about implementation, design goals, and compromises chosen.

Best, M

P.S. For the record, I do not care if it is a transformer, or transformerless mic. In the end of the day indeed, it is all about "right tool for the right application".
Logged
Mark Fouxman
Samar Audio & Microphone Design
www.samaraudiodesign.com

wwittman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7712
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #35 on: January 09, 2011, 11:32:01 pm »

yes
and the right tool for music is a mic with a transformer


Logged
William Wittman
Producer/Engineer
(Cyndi Lauper, Joan Osborne, The Fixx, The Outfield, Hooters...)

meverylame

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 503
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2011, 12:26:24 am »

wwittman wrote on Sun, 09 January 2011 23:32

yes
and the right tool for music is a mic with a transformer


Where's the "like" button?

Oh, wrong site.
Logged
Cheers!
Jason Kingsland

http://www.jasonruinsrecords.com

Bubba#$%Kron

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 243
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2011, 01:19:56 am »

I have some good vintage stand alone trannys I'm gonna wire up in the next week, I also have an external phantom supply.  I'll do an AB test and post the results here .

Cheers

Fiasco wrote on Thu, 06 January 2011 13:10

Wireline wrote on Fri, 31 December 2010 10:24

I've never done this, but what would stop someone from putting a 600:600 transformer on the audio legs of the output, leaving the phantom power line untouched?

I've seen plenty of examples in which people wired in some sort of  1:1 transformers into their mixbuss for ITB projects with what they describe as noticeable success...

Jes asking



Any thoughts on this?

Logged
"When we make music we don't do it in order to reach a certain point, such as the end of the composition. If that were the purpose of music then obviously the fastest players would be the best. Also, when we are dancing we are not aiming to arrive at a particular place on the floor as in a journey. When we dance, the journey itself is the point, as when we play music the playing itself is the point."  -Alan Watts

ssltech

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4780
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2011, 08:30:58 am »

A 600-ohm transformer may well steal a noticeable amount of the low end... Even into a high-impedance preamp, the parallel inductance may not really be high enough,

-It won't do any harm however, so there's only one way to find out!


Keith
Logged
MDM (maxdimario) wrote on Fri, 16 November 2007 21:36

I have the feeling that I have more experience in my little finger than you do in your whole body about audio electronics..

LesW

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #39 on: February 03, 2011, 10:23:58 am »

Transformers can have advantage with phantom powered mics that use simple zener-type voltage regulation. They can drive lower impedances with more voltage swing.

This can be overcome with switched regulators of course.

Les
L M Watts Technology
Logged
Les Watts
L M Watts Technology

David Bock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #40 on: February 03, 2011, 12:30:23 pm »

true there is nothing as sweet as a switched regulator in a mic. Surprised  Sad  Laughing
just hooking up a 600:600 matching xfmr is not the same as a mic designed with a xfmr output. Depending upon the circuitry you could be adding unintended artifacts like ringing. That test only proves how adding a transformer to a particular mic not designed to have it changes it, not the difference between the general classification of transformered and transformerless mics.

LesW

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #41 on: February 03, 2011, 01:25:49 pm »

>true there is nothing as sweet as a switched regulator in a >mic.  
Well, David, I choose to use tansformers in my solid state phantom powered circuits. They are not as high ratio as some of the early deigns though.

Les
Logged
Les Watts
L M Watts Technology

Jim Williams

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1105
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #42 on: February 03, 2011, 01:27:13 pm »

I recently reworked a couple of transformerless mics with good results.

I rebuilt a quad set of Milab VIP-50 mics for the San Francisco Symphony last year for Jack Vad. In those I used a new super low noise jfet and bipolar transistors in the head amp and used the new BB OPA1642 dual fet input opamps with great results. The entire resistor matrix was redesigned and I used dale CMF50 precision metal film non ferris resistors. Output loading was reduced and output more than doubled as output impedance was also lowered for greater drive capability. The BB opamps are also rail to rail so this mic will swing 30 volts before clipping.
The self noise was reduced about 8 db, quite an improvement as slew rate and THD also improved. They sound wonderful for classical recording as they have no self body resonance and have excellent off axis response.

Another was a pair of CAD E-350 mics. That one is all opamp designed so I replaced the older noisy BurrBrown OPA2107 difet opamp and the MC33178 dual output opamp with a pair of BB OPA1642's. That reduced current consumption, increased slew rate, lowered THD and noise. Input bias current is much lower with the OPA1642. Since the input impedance is 2 gig ohms, that helps. Along with some quality caps that mic sounds wonderful, very real in a room.

These transformerless mics have a non-euphonic reality sound about them. Everything sounds natural and correctly placed in harmonic balance, at least if you compare to the natural pre-recorded sound.

I fully understand why some mostly pop oriented recordists don't like them. They reveal good AND bad. Since pop music is all about illusion, euphonic, colored mics are prefered.

In the realm of classical, folk, roots and world music, those euphonic qualities can get in the way. Sometimes the illusion you want to present is an illusion of being there live.
Logged
Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

Eric H.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #43 on: February 03, 2011, 01:49:47 pm »

Jim Williams wrote on Thu, 03 February 2011 18:27

I recently reworked a couple of transformerless mics with good results.

I rebuilt a quad set of Milab VIP-50 mics for the San Francisco Symphony last year for Jack Vad. In those I used a new super low noise jfet and bipolar transistors in the head amp and used the new BB OPA1642 dual fet input opamps with great results. The entire resistor matrix was redesigned and I used dale CMF50 precision metal film non ferris resistors. Output loading was reduced and output more than doubled as output impedance was also lowered for greater drive capability. The BB opamps are also rail to rail so this mic will swing 30 volts before clipping.
The self noise was reduced about 8 db, quite an improvement as slew rate and THD also improved. They sound wonderful for classical recording as they have no self body resonance and have excellent off axis response.

Another was a pair of CAD E-350 mics. That one is all opamp designed so I replaced the older noisy BurrBrown OPA2107 difet opamp and the MC33178 dual output opamp with a pair of BB OPA1642's. That reduced current consumption, increased slew rate, lowered THD and noise. Input bias current is much lower with the OPA1642. Since the input impedance is 2 gig ohms, that helps. Along with some quality caps that mic sounds wonderful, very real in a room.

These transformerless mics have a non-euphonic reality sound about them. Everything sounds natural and correctly placed in harmonic balance, at least if you compare to the natural pre-recorded sound.

I fully understand why some mostly pop oriented recordists don't like them. They reveal good AND bad. Since pop music is all about illusion, euphonic, colored mics are prefered.

In the realm of classical, folk, roots and world music, those euphonic qualities can get in the way. Sometimes the illusion you want to present is an illusion of being there live.


Jim, you are very right in the situation where the natural room sound is good. However, not many hall where classical concerts take places are that good, or music hall at all.
A lot of them, especially chamber music, take places in theaters, churches, and others newest auditoriums where the acoustical studies were kept at a minimum. In those case, I find that those pure transducer are often not good enough for the listener. That's where euphonic mic can help out the timbre.
Logged
eric harizanos

DarinK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
Re: Transformer vs. Transformerless Microphones !??!
« Reply #44 on: February 03, 2011, 02:40:33 pm »

Mixing up threads a bit here, but aren't the Milab DC 196 mics transformerless?  I haven't had a chance to try one yet, but all the recommendations & reviews suggest that it's more euphonic than just natural.  I'm planning to try one out one of these days, regardless.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  All   Go Up