Simple Idea of "Fully" Digital Microphone and Guitar - Page 3

StevenStanleyBayes · 24th January 2012, 11:20 PM

The point is these microphones are not available and the quality is not known. They may be just for talking with a bandwith similar to the telephones. Just a quick fix, so the kids plug them to USB and no other reaosn. To plug a few and have fun. Have you ever seen professional ones which are digital? Have you ever seen any big rock bad using them? Write this instead of garbage.

Yes. The issues have been documented. Yes, digital has improved (at least to some extend). Where are the microphones. Not the karaoke ones, the real ones.

Send a link. Send the names of rock bands who use them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bear

There are already mics with USB connection out the back...

What is your point?

The issues with digital are well known and documented.
No doubt digital is getting better, but it's been like 30 years or more since RedBook appeared, so it darn well should be "better"...

If you come up with a way to take sound and directly convert to digital, either as a microphone or speaker, call me... ok?

_-_-bear

bear · 11:30 PM

Ur kidding right?

Well Parts Express sells a mic for measurement that has the USB interface.

No one is going to make a professional mic with a USB out unless there is a NEED.
That means that it provides a BENEFIT.

Tell us the benefit, then we will all start to make them and get rich!

_-_-bear

PS. check B&H, Sweetwater, etc. to see if there are recording mics with USB out, I think I have seen them...

StevenStanleyBayes · 24th January 2012, 11:26 PM

As long as the device's name doesn't sound like Bell Canada To, everything else is OK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wavebourn

I once designed a device called Bi-El-Contour. I.e. double electronic contour voice processor. Sounds like Belkanto.

StevenStanleyBayes · 24th January 2012, 11:30 PM

The need is the benefit. Benefits have been outlined by Charles Babbage more than 30 years ago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bear

Ur kidding right?

Well Parts Express sells a mic for measurement that has the USB interface.

No one is going to make a professional mic with a USB out unless there is a NEED.
That means that it provides a BENEFIT.

Tell us the benefit, then we will all start to make them and get rich!

_-_-bear

bear · 24th January 2012, 11:54 PM

Right, zero "need".

Possible S/N improvement. Maybe.

Hope ur using a Class D amplifier?
Class D preamp?

Nevermind...

_-_-bear

StevenStanleyBayes · 25th January 2012, 12:04 AM

No difference what class amplifier you use, as long as the amplifier is analogue, the amplifier is useless. The same applies for any kind of equipment even the microphone.

StevenStanleyBayes · 25th January 2012, 12:05 AM

A good benefit is there will not be any noise after the microphone and the guitar. There would be noise between the microphone and the amplifier as well as in the amplifier with analogue microphones, even with built in preamplifiers being wireless or wirefull. The coaxial cable is not perfectly immuned to noise.

Also, there will not be anything analogue in a recording studio. In a concert, the digital to analogue conversion would take place at the very last stage. Less noise.

The common idea is to digitise as close to the source as possible to reduce the noise. Then one can process the numbers as they want and, when necessary, put a DAC and analogue electronics where impossible without this.

Simple example: recording voice to CD. Voice is input. CD is output. From after the digital microphone to the end product (the CD) one gets 0 noise (except the "noise" caused by the error of digitisation, this is the limited number of levels per sample: in case of 24 bit sound, one would get a recovery of the signal with a maximum error of 1 step of digitisation (1/(2^24))). Yes, there will be some noise in the analogue electronics inside the microphone. Hopefully, much less than otherwise. Yes, there will be noise at the ADC (sample and holders for example). Yes, there will be noise when mixing digital and analogue.

Possible, also, is to power the microphone by a battery. Thus, there will not be any power supply noise. Whoever wants to power the analogue and the digital electronics from separate batteries is very welcome.

Possible is to disconnect the microphone after the digitisation takes place from the digital equipment and any other equipment entirely by opto couplers. No noise comming from the rest of the equipment.

The microphone becomes a totally isolated device. The only possible noise is from the inside. No noise after digitisation.

Obviously, other noise, such as mechanical vibrations, strong electromagnetic interference, so strong the membrane gets moved from the outside, etcetera are there.

There is a great deal of a need IN CASE the digital microphone is made to put less noise into the system than the analogue. In studios and in concerts where there is gigawats of all kinda equipment, for example the lights of the stage.

As a gross generalisation, again: The idea of any analogue and digital equipment is to digitise as close to the sourse as possible to reduce noise. Another idea is to totally galvanically disconnect analogue from digital.

StevenStanleyBayes · 25th January 2012, 12:14 AM

I don't want to become dirty but have a look at the Gibson (the link was posted up by Wavebourn). The dirty play would be to say this: "This is the first commercially available digital guitar with digitisation right after the source (the hum bucker). If there is no need and no benefit why has Gibson do this. Why for $4000?"

You may find an answer to this BUT you cannot find an answer to the quality of digitisation right after the source. This has just been done long ago.

The only thing you can answer in the same dirty fashion is: "Digital has been good for a long period. Why have they not done this?" I cannot answer this question. Digital microphone would have been better long ago. Perhaps someone else would be able to answer our question, so we don't start the Third Digital Versus Analogue War.

cyclecamper · 25th January 2012, 12:19 AM

The A/D has to placed in the circuit AFTER you have a high-quality analog signal with enough output to drive the A/D. The signal-to-noise ratio required to do justice to live music is really a lot. I detest the terrible job digital signal processing does compared to what I can achieve tweeking my pickups and amps; the digital emulation is just a poor simulation.

If you LIKE digital processing or a really clean unprocessed sound, you can get away with just a few clean stages of pre-amp and an A/D. But even 'clean' sound is usually highly "processed"...believe it or not. That's why elecrtic guitar does not sound like acoustic guitar.

StevenStanleyBayes · 25th January 2012, 12:26 AM

The pre amplifier has to be there. This was said in the first post. In the last post was suggested to even have separate power supply (battery). In case there was a way to get rid of the pre amplifier I would have gotten rid of the pre amplifier too. As far as I know there isn't. In case anyone makes microphones to give huge enough signals, at least an analogue buffer would be nice and, I think, necessary. In case anyone makes a microphone with a huge signal and infinite current source output impedance or zero voltage source output impedance, then I would get rid even of the pre amplifier.

24th January 2012, 11:26 PM	#22
bear expert in tautology diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: New York State USA	Ur kidding right? Well Parts Express sells a mic for measurement that has the USB interface. No one is going to make a professional mic with a USB out unless there is a NEED. That means that it provides a BENEFIT. Tell us the benefit, then we will all start to make them and get rich! _-_-bear PS. check B&H, Sweetwater, etc. to see if there are recording mics with USB out, I think I have seen them... __________________ _-_-bear http://www.bearlabs.com [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ] -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI -- Last edited by bear; 24th January 2012 at 11:30 PM.

24th January 2012, 11:54 PM	#25
bear expert in tautology diyAudio Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: New York State USA	Right, zero "need". Possible S/N improvement. Maybe. Hope ur using a Class D amplifier? Class D preamp? Nevermind... _-_-bear __________________ _-_-bear http://www.bearlabs.com [...2SJ74 Toshiba bogus asian parts - beware! ] -- Btw, I don't actually know anything, FYI --

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
CMRR and "Fully balanced designs"	philmagnotta	Solid State	33	7th January 2011 12:27 AM
15" "SonoSub" idea. Comments appreciated!	odysseybmx414	Subwoofers	7	16th October 2010 05:32 PM
NP:"Simple Sounds Better" TGY:"Simple Food Better"	Gyuri	The Lounge	10	19th December 2009 09:03 PM
Here"s a Simple 14w-32w Guitar amp I designed....	Minion	Instruments and Amps	5	15th June 2008 02:51 PM
My "Digital" Preamp idea	kinser	Digital Source	4	28th December 2004 12:27 PM

New To Site?	Need Help?
Register to Participate Search Privacy Statement Contact Us	Frequently Asked Questions Did you forget your password? Mark Forums Read


	Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you. Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving

25th January 2012, 12:04 AM	#26
StevenStanleyBayes diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Toronto	No difference what class amplifier you use, as long as the amplifier is analogue, the amplifier is useless. The same applies for any kind of equipment even the microphone.

25th January 2012, 12:05 AM	#27
StevenStanleyBayes diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Toronto	A good benefit is there will not be any noise after the microphone and the guitar. There would be noise between the microphone and the amplifier as well as in the amplifier with analogue microphones, even with built in preamplifiers being wireless or wirefull. The coaxial cable is not perfectly immuned to noise. Also, there will not be anything analogue in a recording studio. In a concert, the digital to analogue conversion would take place at the very last stage. Less noise. The common idea is to digitise as close to the source as possible to reduce the noise. Then one can process the numbers as they want and, when necessary, put a DAC and analogue electronics where impossible without this. Simple example: recording voice to CD. Voice is input. CD is output. From after the digital microphone to the end product (the CD) one gets 0 noise (except the "noise" caused by the error of digitisation, this is the limited number of levels per sample: in case of 24 bit sound, one would get a recovery of the signal with a maximum error of 1 step of digitisation (1/(2^24))). Yes, there will be some noise in the analogue electronics inside the microphone. Hopefully, much less than otherwise. Yes, there will be noise at the ADC (sample and holders for example). Yes, there will be noise when mixing digital and analogue. Possible, also, is to power the microphone by a battery. Thus, there will not be any power supply noise. Whoever wants to power the analogue and the digital electronics from separate batteries is very welcome. Possible is to disconnect the microphone after the digitisation takes place from the digital equipment and any other equipment entirely by opto couplers. No noise comming from the rest of the equipment. The microphone becomes a totally isolated device. The only possible noise is from the inside. No noise after digitisation. Obviously, other noise, such as mechanical vibrations, strong electromagnetic interference, so strong the membrane gets moved from the outside, etcetera are there. There is a great deal of a need IN CASE the digital microphone is made to put less noise into the system than the analogue. In studios and in concerts where there is gigawats of all kinda equipment, for example the lights of the stage. As a gross generalisation, again: The idea of any analogue and digital equipment is to digitise as close to the sourse as possible to reduce noise. Another idea is to totally galvanically disconnect analogue from digital.

25th January 2012, 12:14 AM	#28
StevenStanleyBayes diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Toronto	I don't want to become dirty but have a look at the Gibson (the link was posted up by Wavebourn). The dirty play would be to say this: "This is the first commercially available digital guitar with digitisation right after the source (the hum bucker). If there is no need and no benefit why has Gibson do this. Why for $4000?" You may find an answer to this BUT you cannot find an answer to the quality of digitisation right after the source. This has just been done long ago. The only thing you can answer in the same dirty fashion is: "Digital has been good for a long period. Why have they not done this?" I cannot answer this question. Digital microphone would have been better long ago. Perhaps someone else would be able to answer our question, so we don't start the Third Digital Versus Analogue War.

25th January 2012, 12:19 AM	#29
cyclecamper diyAudio Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: was Chicago IL, now Long Beach CA	The A/D has to placed in the circuit AFTER you have a high-quality analog signal with enough output to drive the A/D. The signal-to-noise ratio required to do justice to live music is really a lot. I detest the terrible job digital signal processing does compared to what I can achieve tweeking my pickups and amps; the digital emulation is just a poor simulation. If you LIKE digital processing or a really clean unprocessed sound, you can get away with just a few clean stages of pre-amp and an A/D. But even 'clean' sound is usually highly "processed"...believe it or not. That's why elecrtic guitar does not sound like acoustic guitar.

25th January 2012, 12:26 AM	#30
StevenStanleyBayes diyAudio Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Toronto	The pre amplifier has to be there. This was said in the first post. In the last post was suggested to even have separate power supply (battery). In case there was a way to get rid of the pre amplifier I would have gotten rid of the pre amplifier too. As far as I know there isn't. In case anyone makes microphones to give huge enough signals, at least an analogue buffer would be nice and, I think, necessary. In case anyone makes a microphone with a huge signal and infinite current source output impedance or zero voltage source output impedance, then I would get rid even of the pre amplifier.