I have an Oktava MK012 and a SM57 which I used to use for recording. I'm thinking that they would be better than a cheap computer mic for measuring SPL and freq response with speaker workshop. However, it would have to go through my Mackie mixer first... and the Wallin jig.
So, would having the mixer and either mic be better than a computer mic?
Which mic would be better? The MK012 has a flatter published freq response than the SM57, however the MK012 I have is also an omnidirectional. I have a -10dB cut for the MK012 which significantly reduces it's omni'ness though.
MK012 freq response.
http://www.oktava.be/en/products_mk012.htm
SM57 freq response.
http://www.shure.com/images/response/fsm57_large.gif
So, would having the mixer and either mic be better than a computer mic?
Which mic would be better? The MK012 has a flatter published freq response than the SM57, however the MK012 I have is also an omnidirectional. I have a -10dB cut for the MK012 which significantly reduces it's omni'ness though.
MK012 freq response.
http://www.oktava.be/en/products_mk012.htm
SM57 freq response.
http://www.shure.com/images/response/fsm57_large.gif
You should definitely go for an omnidirectional microphone.
All directed microphones suffer from the "proximity effect" which is a bass boost that occur when the microphone is placed near the source. This has to do with that directed microphones do not really measure sound pressure, but also the pressure gradient. The pressure gradient has this near-field bass boost. This basic acoustic effect cannot be compensated for by the microphone manufacturers since it depends on the source-mic distance, the best they can do is to specify a distance at which the microphone works the best. The proximity effect is rarely included in the graphs from the manufacturers and can be as much as +10-20 dB at 100 Hz depending on distance.
Omnidirectional microphones on the other hand has great opportunities to have a flat response, and you can find really cheap omni electret microphones that are amazingly good.
So, choosing between your two mics I'd go for the MK012 if it is the omni one.
An external mixer and sound card line input is often better than the mic input of most sound cards, at least in terms of noise. But, obviously you must make sure that the tone controls of the mixer are properly centered, or rather, disabled.
HTH
/Svante
All directed microphones suffer from the "proximity effect" which is a bass boost that occur when the microphone is placed near the source. This has to do with that directed microphones do not really measure sound pressure, but also the pressure gradient. The pressure gradient has this near-field bass boost. This basic acoustic effect cannot be compensated for by the microphone manufacturers since it depends on the source-mic distance, the best they can do is to specify a distance at which the microphone works the best. The proximity effect is rarely included in the graphs from the manufacturers and can be as much as +10-20 dB at 100 Hz depending on distance.
Omnidirectional microphones on the other hand has great opportunities to have a flat response, and you can find really cheap omni electret microphones that are amazingly good.
So, choosing between your two mics I'd go for the MK012 if it is the omni one.
An external mixer and sound card line input is often better than the mic input of most sound cards, at least in terms of noise. But, obviously you must make sure that the tone controls of the mixer are properly centered, or rather, disabled.
HTH
/Svante
to get valid results from your measurements just my 2 cents worth
cheers TC
- Status
- Not open for further replies.