Pity if people think they can't do useful R&D just using their laptop mikes.
Here I compare (1) an EMM (from Parts Express) a nice looking condenser mic used by many DIYaudio members that needs a phantom power source; it comes with a calibration, (2) an IMM which is an inexpensive 4-conductor quarter-inch electret mic (comes with a calibration), and (3) the mic(s) stuffed in my old MacBook Air.
First, the calibration does so little you might as well not fuss about having one or not. Picture one compares REW curves for the EMM with and without the calibration cooked-in. This an other curves have 1/12 smoothing.
Next, the bargain IMM is compared to the EMM when located close together; I've matched for level by eye.
Finally, I put the IMM next to the left side of the MacBook Air. again with levels matched.
B.
Here I compare (1) an EMM (from Parts Express) a nice looking condenser mic used by many DIYaudio members that needs a phantom power source; it comes with a calibration, (2) an IMM which is an inexpensive 4-conductor quarter-inch electret mic (comes with a calibration), and (3) the mic(s) stuffed in my old MacBook Air.
First, the calibration does so little you might as well not fuss about having one or not. Picture one compares REW curves for the EMM with and without the calibration cooked-in. This an other curves have 1/12 smoothing.
Next, the bargain IMM is compared to the EMM when located close together; I've matched for level by eye.
Finally, I put the IMM next to the left side of the MacBook Air. again with levels matched.
B.
Attachments
Last edited:
Unless I've made some gaff, the curves show the correction provided by the calibration is trivial. Hence, if you find a condenser mic at the Salvation Army store with no calibration, buy it and use it.
B.
You seem to have a lot of trouble believing me when I tell you the individual calibration correction supplied by PE with this mic is trivial in size. C'mon fella.
"Useless" is a pretty strong judgment. The point of this thread is that even a laptop mic can be immensely useful.
You seem not to understand that a lot of measurement is relative - like doing EQ iteratively.
And anybody with acoustic measurement experience would know that the wild bumps and dips in the curves are not shortcomings of the mikes.
B.
Last edited:
No, please bring 'em to the Toronto gathering tomorrow.
Hope I haven't been unCanadian rude.
B.
As I've mentioned before, laptop mics can vary WILDLY in response. I've done comparisons with at least 4 laptops and only one was suitable for measurement purposes. I certainly wouldn't trust an unknown mic.
Also the soundcards in laptops can be TERRIBLE so make sure that's calibrated as well.
Also the soundcards in laptops can be TERRIBLE so make sure that's calibrated as well.
Could still be useful for basic crossover design/testing if the midband is flat ish.
Not for a high end project but could easily show peaks/dips at cover frequency.
Also I feel like a laptop mic may be heavily influenced by the big flat screen around it if you move the laptop between measurements?
Considering an ECM8000 used is not expensive, not sure if it's worth not using a 'known' mic.
Not for a high end project but could easily show peaks/dips at cover frequency.
Also I feel like a laptop mic may be heavily influenced by the big flat screen around it if you move the laptop between measurements?
Considering an ECM8000 used is not expensive, not sure if it's worth not using a 'known' mic.
All good thoughts.
My purpose is to help all those folks who do no measurements to see that it is easy and cheap.
Ultimately, it is how your music sounds that matters. For now, measurements can't substitute for perception in establishing a system that sounds right to you, even if you had Toole's resources. But enormously helpful to track your system step by step with stable measurements as you iteratively bring your system closer to your liking.
While repeatability (based on using good lab technique) matters a lot, absolute accuracy doesn't matter much when you are using FR, distortion, waterfall, and other curves from REW in that way.
B.
Last edited:
Hi Ben,
Actually, Mr. Toole managed to corroborate measurements to what was reported by trained listeners. We can predict, through measurements, what the bulk of listeners will report hearing. The same thing holds true when amplifiers are measured!
Of course this applies to equipment that operates well and sounds at least good. I'm not sure how a trainwreck of a speaker or amplifier would test and be reported. I think there is still correlation between measurements and reported impressions.
One brand of speaker that used the NRC in Ottawa under Dr. Toole achieved very good response from the public using that research. That would be PSB. There are others of course.
Why do you think Harmon hired Dr. Toole away from the NRC if it weren't for his success?
-Chris
Actually, Mr. Toole managed to corroborate measurements to what was reported by trained listeners. We can predict, through measurements, what the bulk of listeners will report hearing. The same thing holds true when amplifiers are measured!
Of course this applies to equipment that operates well and sounds at least good. I'm not sure how a trainwreck of a speaker or amplifier would test and be reported. I think there is still correlation between measurements and reported impressions.
One brand of speaker that used the NRC in Ottawa under Dr. Toole achieved very good response from the public using that research. That would be PSB. There are others of course.
Why do you think Harmon hired Dr. Toole away from the NRC if it weren't for his success?
-Chris
OK, but there is always some sort of reference of expensive to compare with. A calibrated USB measurement mic is cheap compared to the professional analog ones. A laptop with a (webcam?) mic that you have is indeed free, but it's function is not comparable to the professional mic. Simply its size and shape force a different use and result.
Closer would be an app on a popular model of smartphone. A phone is small and can be positioned, reflections minimized and the app can be adjusted (probably is) to hardware and OS idiosyncracies.
That said, playing with a laptop and getting a taste is never bad.
Hi Ivo,
I think your suggestion of using a USB mic is the way to go. It performs very well and won't "lie" to people like a smart phone or laptop mic most definitely will. The USB calibrated mics come with the specs, a correction file (usually) and instructions for proper use. It covers every detail the OP needs to know. They cost a fraction of what a professional, calibrated measurement mic costs.
-Chris
I think your suggestion of using a USB mic is the way to go. It performs very well and won't "lie" to people like a smart phone or laptop mic most definitely will. The USB calibrated mics come with the specs, a correction file (usually) and instructions for proper use. It covers every detail the OP needs to know. They cost a fraction of what a professional, calibrated measurement mic costs.
-Chris
Hi Ben,
Well, yes. And so does recognising the limitations of the equipment you are trying to use. There are times when you really have to go get something more suitable to use. This would be one of those times.
The less familiar one is in experimental methods and assessing limitations of equipment, the more important it is to use equipment that does what you assume it does.
-Chris
Well, yes. And so does recognising the limitations of the equipment you are trying to use. There are times when you really have to go get something more suitable to use. This would be one of those times.
The less familiar one is in experimental methods and assessing limitations of equipment, the more important it is to use equipment that does what you assume it does.
-Chris
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.