I am revamping my measurement setup. As part of that I am wondering if it might be better to get the ECM8000 calibrated or just buy a brand new EMM-6 that supposedly comes with its individual calib file. The ecm was bought atleast 5 years ago and was never calibrated (I just used a generic calib file with the general/average curve of a typical ecm8000).
I do distortion measurements as well. So if the sensitivity or noise floor or thd/imd of these mics differ in a consequential way then please advise.
Thanks.
I do distortion measurements as well. So if the sensitivity or noise floor or thd/imd of these mics differ in a consequential way then please advise.
Thanks.
How much does calibration cost and what do you get. The Dayton cal file is basic from 20 to 20. Do you need polars or noise floor etc.
On the other hand, buying the Dayton would leave you with 2 mics. You could even calibrate the ecm8000 crudely using the emm6. Then have 2 mics. Or sell the Behringer.
On the other hand, buying the Dayton would leave you with 2 mics. You could even calibrate the ecm8000 crudely using the emm6. Then have 2 mics. Or sell the Behringer.
Calibration costs about the same as a new emm6 - ~$40. No dont need polar pattern or anything but would be nice to know the sensitiviy and noise floor. and dont need two mics either.
Dave, thats very interesting. Although it is not the first time I have heard that about the Dayton mic especially early serial#s. Please do check and let me know. That could make or break this matter. I believe the way to get your file is that you go to the partsexpress website and enter your mic's serial# and get the file for it.
Dave, thats very interesting. Although it is not the first time I have heard that about the Dayton mic especially early serial#s. Please do check and let me know. That could make or break this matter. I believe the way to get your file is that you go to the partsexpress website and enter your mic's serial# and get the file for it.
I'm in a similar situation - get my ECM8000 calibrated, or get a better microphone. (with included individual calibration file)
One thing making me lean towards getting the existing microphone calibrated is that I have years worth of saved measurements made with that same microphone which would then be more accurate with the new calibration file loaded, (assuming the microphone hasn't changed over time) whereas simply getting a new microphone would leave all those older measurements forever in doubt. (some of which can never be repeated with drivers I no longer have, or measurements made before permanently tweaking drivers etc)
The way some software like ARTA works, using multiple microphones each with their own calibration file is also a chore - you have to manually keep note of which measurements were made with which microphone so that you can apply the correct microphone calibration profile when later reloading and viewing the results - it isn't done automatically in some software.
I think I'll just get mine calibrated. The biggest difference between something like an ECM8000 and a more expensive mic (at least ones with the same size capsule) is simply the more accurate calibration profile...
One thing making me lean towards getting the existing microphone calibrated is that I have years worth of saved measurements made with that same microphone which would then be more accurate with the new calibration file loaded, (assuming the microphone hasn't changed over time) whereas simply getting a new microphone would leave all those older measurements forever in doubt. (some of which can never be repeated with drivers I no longer have, or measurements made before permanently tweaking drivers etc)
The way some software like ARTA works, using multiple microphones each with their own calibration file is also a chore - you have to manually keep note of which measurements were made with which microphone so that you can apply the correct microphone calibration profile when later reloading and viewing the results - it isn't done automatically in some software.
I think I'll just get mine calibrated. The biggest difference between something like an ECM8000 and a more expensive mic (at least ones with the same size capsule) is simply the more accurate calibration profile...
Last edited:
I compared my ECM8k to a calibrated mitey mike so I have a rough calibration above 1kHz. Mine is pretty flat (an older one).
I think the EMM-6 calibrations got better when people complained about them not matching Herb's results. I don't think they are necessarily better in any way wrt specs vs. the ECM's, but I haven't done a detailed comparison.
I bought mine on Jan 2, 2004
My cal file is attached. you could subtract whatever the magnitude at ~1000 Hz is to get a normalized file.
Roughly +1 at ~10k and -2 at 20k.
By the way, for quiet mic capsules look for threads on the Primo EM172 and EM158
Percy, if you come to the ASM meeting tomorrow PM, bring your mic (with a label on it) and I'll take it home and compare it to mine. Give me your phone# and I'll get in touch so we can get it back to you. I'm planning on putting together a chamber for LF calibrations by this weekend, as well.
Percy, if you come to the ASM meeting tomorrow PM, bring your mic (with a label on it) and I'll take it home and compare it to mine. Give me your phone# and I'll get in touch so we can get it back to you. I'm planning on putting together a chamber for LF calibrations by this weekend, as well.
Hi Ron, that would be great! I didn't have the meeting on my calendar but I think I can make it. I will send you an email anyway along with my contact details as well.
Good find those Primo mics. Another project to add to the never ending list.
EMC8k - I dont remember exactly when I bought the mic perhaps the serial# might reveal when it was manufactured but I'd definitely say that even without calibration the responses of known drivers were quite close to what others had measured or the manufacturer's spec so I always looked at it as a pretty flat mic.
For a short while I used the curve here in black based on a wild guess. I have been using the red curve, partially fabricated after some research, using a conservative viewpoint (I've noticed I like my top end rolled off a little, but more so than the curve), compared to yours in blue.
Attachments
I see I gave out the unsmoothed data - it would be best to smooth all that "grass" out before you use it
-
Ron
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.