SP1, NT2-a and TLM 103 mic files on line
Ty Ford
I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1.
The files are now loading into my On Line Archive into a folder called
TLM 103 NT2a SP1.
Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several hours ago.
Enjoy
Ty Ford
--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU
Steve King
news:pf-dnTDEL5Iunm7Y...@comcast.com...
Can't seem to locate the files. Are they in: Gear Reviews Mics, Gear
Reviews Other, or ??
Steve King
Ty Ford
(in article <EvmdnVhM7OUHiG7Y...@comcast.com>):
Top Level Steve.
> The files are now loading into my On Line Archive into a folder called
>> TLM 103 NT2a SP1.
Ty
Steve King
> On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 15:31:33 -0500, Steve King wrote
> (in article <EvmdnVhM7OUHiG7Y...@comcast.com>):
>
> Top Level Steve.
>
>
>> The files are now loading into my On Line Archive into a folder called
>>> TLM 103 NT2a SP1.
Well, that's a very interesting comparison ... the TLM103 vs. the SP1. On
first listening the Neumann sounded a little brighter that the SP1, but
otherwise very similar. Then I added about 5db Low Q boost centered around
2.5kHz to the SP1 and it became hard for these old ears to tell the
difference. Let's see. The TLM103 at about $800 is 20x the cost of the SP1
at $39. I'm not thowing away my good mics, but I am relieved that I wasn't
crazy recently to pick the SP1 for a Spanish language narrator with a bit of
edge to his voice ;-)
Steve King
Mike Rivers
> Thanks to Hank Alrich for sending me an MCA SP1.
> I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
> TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1
What's an SP1? Is that the cheap mic that Jim Williams mentions every
time someone mentions a more expensive cheap mic?
So, putting on my producer's hat, what did YOU think? I don't have the
patience to download the files and get them to someplace where I can
listen to them over something more useful for comparison than Minimus
7 speakers on my "good" computer.
hank alrich
> Thanks to Hank Alrich for sending me an MCA SP1.
> I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
> TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1.
>
> The files are now loading into my On Line Archive into a folder called
> TLM 103 NT2a SP1.
>
> Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several hours ago.
Whew, that's a relief, considering my investment in that sucker! Hope
you had some fun. I'll get those files and give a listen.
--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
hank alrich
> "Ty Ford" wrote...
> > Thanks to Hank Alrich for sending me an MCA SP1.
> > I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
> > TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1.
> > The files are now loading into my On Line Archive into a folder called
> > TLM 103 NT2a SP1.
> > Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several hours ago.
> Can't seem to locate the files. Are they in: Gear Reviews Mics, Gear
> Reviews Other, or ??
>
> Steve King
Heh, ain't it somethin' the way he dillys us 'round like that? You'd
think "he'll post the link", but you'd be wrong. <g>
hank alrich
> Ty Ford wrote:
> > Thanks to Hank Alrich for sending me an MCA SP1.
> > I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
> > TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1
> What's an SP1? Is that the cheap mic that Jim Williams mentions every
> time someone mentions a more expensive cheap mic?
Yes, it's that one. I finally succumbed to curiousity and spent about
$94 on a pair of them, including shipping and CA state sales tax. Ever
since, I've been seeking shock mounts that don't cost more than the
mics. <g> I think I've found 'em at BSW, from On Stage, about $25 each.
> So, putting on my producer's hat, what did YOU think? I don't have the
> patience to download the files and get them to someplace where I can
> listen to them over something more useful for comparison than Minimus
> 7 speakers on my "good" computer.
I think it's sort of stupidly good for the money, and actually not bad
regardless of cost. i wanted to hate it but the times I've put it up the
tracks were entirely usable. I look forward to either modding it myself,
if I can figure out what to put where and where to get the what to put
there, or sending it to Jim for the mods.
I think one of the reasons it sounds decent is that it's
transformerless, using a clone of the Schoeps circuitry. I still hear a
little edge that I don't hear in some much more expensive LDC's (this
has a 20 mm. diaphgram, sort of a smal LDC), and I wonder if the mods
will reduce that. But seriously, for what it sounds like and what it
cost, I can't see paying one cent more for a Chinese cardioid LDC. I've
heard several that cost many multiples of forty bucks that don't sound
as good.
The construction is not on a par with some famous name brands, the
cicuit board being mounted on some leftover Erector Set parts. When
reassembling it one must be careful not to try to tighten the body
solidly, because it will never feel solid in the way a U87 does, and if
one keeps twisting I'm pretty sure the Erector Set parts will give up
the cheese ghost in this particular machine.
-zero
"hank alrich" <walk...@nv.net> wrote in message
news:1hurzsa.1aj2c27dhwahvN%walk...@nv.net...
> Ty Ford <tyre...@comedycast.net> wrote:
>
>> Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several hours ago.
>
> Whew, that's a relief, considering my investment in that sucker! Hope
> you had some fun. I'll get those files and give a listen.
Hank,
Was this the one back from Jim Williams?
-zero
BEN
Geoff
> solidly, because it will never feel solid in the way a U87 does,
Must be pretty flimsy then, cos my U87 feels lilke an empty beer can in
comparison to RODE NT1000, K2 etc.
Of course that is a design feature of the U87 that totally complements the
overall sound...
geoff
Don Pearce
wrote:
Just downloaded the two smaller files (TLM103/SP1), and as they stand
they can't be compared fairly. The SP1 needs to be given an extra
1.5dB of gain to bring it up to the same level. That being done, it is
really very similar to the TLM103. In much the same way as the fun and
games we had with the NT1-A, a very minimal amount of eq will make
them indistinguishable.
Where they do differ considerably is in the quiet pause, where the TLM
drops to a much lower residual noise level than the SP1.
d
--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com
Arny Krueger
news:vhMIh.13493$Wc....@bignews3.bellsouth.net
> hi; who sells them?
No, he solders some fancy capacitors in them and somehow thereby overcomes
the random tensioning of the diaphragms. ;-)
Mike Rivers
> I think it's sort of stupidly good for the money, and actually not bad
> regardless of cost.
Lots of that these days, but I think the secret to making a really
good mic is still safe with those who still do it. We tolerate a lot
of "really good for the money" today because we tend to use more mics
than we used to, probably in part to imitate the big studio sessions
of the 80s, and partly because of availability.
I don't need any more mics, otherwise I'd be curious and probably try
one myself. I've heard similarly good reports no the small capsule
Behringer and Samson mics.
> The construction is not on a par with some famous name brands, the
> cicuit board being mounted on some leftover Erector Set parts.
Hmmmm . . . . well I guess they weren't meant to be taken apart, but
the cheaper they are, the more we're inclined to do that.
Arny Krueger
news:45f3cf3d....@news.plus.net
> Just downloaded the two smaller files (TLM103/SP1), and
> as they stand they can't be compared fairly. The SP1
> needs to be given an extra 1.5dB of gain to bring it up to the same
> level.
I came up with a 1 dB difference, but the 103 was still the louder one.
>That being done, it is really very similar to the TLM103. In
> much the same way as the fun and games we had with the
> NT1-A, a very minimal amount of eq will make them
> indistinguishable.
This time the differences are mostly in the midrange. The 103 is a bit
brighter this time.
> Where they do differ considerably is in the quiet pause,
> where the TLM drops to a much lower residual noise level
> than the SP1.
I don't think a 1.5 dB difference is that much all by itself, however much
of the difference was probably masked by other noise sources. The noise in
the SP1b could be the most obvious quality difference.
Meindert Sprang
news:1173612866.6...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 11, 12:20 am, walki...@nv.net (hank alrich) wrote:
>
> > I think it's sort of stupidly good for the money, and actually not bad
> > regardless of cost.
>
> Lots of that these days, but I think the secret to making a really
> good mic is still safe with those who still do it. We tolerate a lot
> of "really good for the money" today because we tend to use more mics
> than we used to, probably in part to imitate the big studio sessions
> of the 80s, and partly because of availability.
>
> I don't need any more mics, otherwise I'd be curious and probably try
> one myself. I've heard similarly good reports no the small capsule
> Behringer and Samson mics.
The problem is, however, that professional dares to admit having tested a
Samson of Behringer... :-)
> > The construction is not on a par with some famous name brands, the
> > cicuit board being mounted on some leftover Erector Set parts.
I have a couple of Samson CL15's and these are very rigidly constructed.
Die-cast housing and the PCB is mounted firmly in the die-cast frame.
I am curious whether a professional ever tested and compared one of these
against the "industry standards".
Meindert
Don Pearce
wrote:
>"Don Pearce" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:45f3cf3d....@news.plus.net
>
>> Just downloaded the two smaller files (TLM103/SP1), and
>> as they stand they can't be compared fairly. The SP1
>> needs to be given an extra 1.5dB of gain to bring it up to the same
>> level.
>
>I came up with a 1 dB difference, but the 103 was still the louder one.
>
>>That being done, it is really very similar to the TLM103. In
>> much the same way as the fun and games we had with the
>> NT1-A, a very minimal amount of eq will make them
>> indistinguishable.
>
>This time the differences are mostly in the midrange. The 103 is a bit
>brighter this time.
>
I equalized the levels in the midrange - that's probably why we came
up with different gain figures. The brightness difference is very
slight - I would be hard pressed to know which mic I was hearing if it
was simply taken off the shelf and stuck in front of somebody.
>> Where they do differ considerably is in the quiet pause,
>> where the TLM drops to a much lower residual noise level
>> than the SP1.
>
>I don't think a 1.5 dB difference is that much all by itself, however much
>of the difference was probably masked by other noise sources. The noise in
>the SP1b could be the most obvious quality difference.
>
Looking a bit more carefully it is clear that everything on the screen
is external noise.
Scott Dorsey
>
>Lots of that these days, but I think the secret to making a really
>good mic is still safe with those who still do it.
If that... sometimes it seems like they have forgotten it. I see no
other explanation for the C-3000.
>I don't need any more mics, otherwise I'd be curious and probably try
>one myself. I've heard similarly good reports no the small capsule
>Behringer and Samson mics.
I have yet to see any small-diaphragm Chinese-made mikes that I would
consider okay, with the exception of the punched-metal omni electrets.
The truth is that it's just harder to make a small diaphragm mike than
a large diaphragm mike, and the tolerances required are greater.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Ty Ford
(in article <1hurzul.vyhh941usia7xN%walk...@nv.net>):
For each of those files? With all due respect, bite me. :)
Ty
Les Cargill
> hi; who sells them?
I'd love to be corrected, but they look to be
out of production.
--
Les Cargill
hank alrich
> "hank alrich" wrote...
> > Ty Ford <tyre...@comedycast.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several hours ago.
> >
> > Whew, that's a relief, considering my investment in that sucker! Hope
> > you had some fun. I'll get those files and give a listen.
>
> Hank,
> Was this the one back from Jim Williams?
>
> -zero
No, it's stock. I even sent Ty the original packaging, which has the
look and feel (make that "appearance and heft") of HOSA cable packaging,
designed to hang on a peg wall. Eventually I'll send Ty a mod'd one,
once I have one mod'd.
hank alrich
> BEN wrote:
>
> > hi; who sells them?
>
> I'd love to be corrected, but they look to be
> out of production.
And I've been wondering about that. It's possible that this is the best
side-address mic Marshall has offered, and at the lowest price in their
line. Leaving out even a cheap transformer helps lower the price, yet
raise the performance. I wonder if this thing is disappearing because if
word got all the way out it would cannibalize much of the rest of their
line.
Les Cargill
You'd think that would be pretty clear before they got out to
start with. Nothing wrong with marking 'em $200 to keep the
bottom from falling out.
--
Les Cargill
Mike Rivers
> For each of those files? With all due respect, bite me. :)
Even I was able to find the download link . . . eventually.
Chomp!
hank alrich
> hank alrich wrote:
> > Les Cargill wrote:
> >>BEN wrote:
> >>>hi; who sells them?
> >>I'd love to be corrected, but they look to be
> >>out of production.
> > And I've been wondering about that. It's possible that this is the best
> > side-address mic Marshall has offered, and at the lowest price in their
> > line. Leaving out even a cheap transformer helps lower the price, yet
> > raise the performance. I wonder if this thing is disappearing because if
> > word got all the way out it would cannibalize much of the rest of their
> > line.
> You'd think that would be pretty clear before they got out to
> start with.
Not unless they actually listened to the mics.
> Nothing wrong with marking 'em $200 to keep the
> bottom from falling out.
What? That's like $150 "wrong"! <g>
Steve King
I can find no source for these mics. I think that means that the ones Hank
and I have are now VINTAGE! I can see the Ebay prices skyrocketing soon.
And, all because of Ty's "endorsement". Thanks, Ty.
Steve King
hank alrich
> "hank alrich" wrote...
> > Les Cargill wrote:
> >
> >> hank alrich wrote:
> >> > Les Cargill wrote:
> >
> >> >>BEN wrote:
> >
> >> >>>hi; who sells them?
> >
> >> >>I'd love to be corrected, but they look to be
> >> >>out of production.
> >
> >
> >> > And I've been wondering about that. It's possible that this is the best
> >> > side-address mic Marshall has offered, and at the lowest price in their
> >> > line. Leaving out even a cheap transformer helps lower the price, yet
> >> > raise the performance. I wonder if this thing is disappearing because
> >> > if
> >> > word got all the way out it would cannibalize much of the rest of their
> >> > line.
> >
> >> You'd think that would be pretty clear before they got out to
> >> start with.
> >
> > Not unless they actually listened to the mics.
> >
> >> Nothing wrong with marking 'em $200 to keep the
> >> bottom from falling out.
> >
> > What? That's like $150 "wrong"! <g>
>
> I can find no source for these mics.
Go to: http://www.pssl.com
In the seach window put: mca sp-1
> I think that means that the ones Hank
> and I have are now VINTAGE! I can see the Ebay prices skyrocketing soon.
> And, all because of Ty's "endorsement". Thanks, Ty.
Sooner or later they will be vintage. I'm already approaching vintage
myself, so they better hurry up and get these out of production.
Ty Ford
(in article <1hurzsa.1aj2c27dhwahvN%walk...@nv.net>):
Just a thought.....What if the SP1 Hank sent me was the only one they got
right and the rest were pure crap?
Regards,
Ty Ford
Ty Ford
(in article <_5adnXTTxPrQwGnY...@comcast.com>):
I endorsed nothing. I hooked it up, mooshed some noise through it and
uploaded it, even though pansy-handed people like Hank had to break a sweat
to find the link. Jeeze Hank, bookmark the spot so you won't have to hurt
your lilly whites again. (As per the RAP AQ, You'll notice I have yet to
employ the term audio cunt.) :)
Ty Ford
(in article <1hus0vr.5y2me9h7t07qN%walk...@nv.net>):
The blister pack has the look of something you might find at "The Dollar
Store."
Arny Krueger
news:GdmdndaUs6tOy2jY...@comcast.com
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 11:43:21 -0400, hank alrich wrote
> (in article <1hus0vr.5y2me9h7t07qN%walk...@nv.net>):
>
>> -zero wrote:
>>
>>> "hank alrich" wrote...
>>>> Ty Ford <tyre...@comedycast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several
>>>>> hours ago.
>>>>
>>>> Whew, that's a relief, considering my investment in
>>>> that sucker! Hope you had some fun. I'll get those
>>>> files and give a listen.
>>>
>>> Hank,
>>> Was this the one back from Jim Williams?
>>>
>>> -zero
>>
>> No, it's stock. I even sent Ty the original packaging,
>> which has the look and feel (make that "appearance and
>> heft") of HOSA cable packaging, designed to hang on a
>> peg wall. Eventually I'll send Ty a mod'd one, once I
>> have one mod'd.
>>
>>
>
> The blister pack has the look of something you might find
> at "The Dollar Store."
My guess is that these are made up out of capsules that couldn't past muster
for more expensive mics. Given how cheap Marshall mics can be, that is a bit
scary. Not that I don't personally own nearly a half-dozen Marshall mics.
;-)
It would be fun to test say 10 samples, and see how the deficiencies stack
up.
hank alrich
> My guess is that these are made up out of capsules that couldn't past muster
> for more expensive mics.
I kind of doubt they even bother to check that kind of stuff for mics in
this sandlot ballpark. If they did, they wouldn't be in this mic
business; they'd be in that other mic biz where that kind of detail is
considered important. <g>
The pair I have seem decently matched.
hank alrich
> hank alrich wrote:
>
> > Ty Ford wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks to Hank Alrich for sending me an MCA SP1.
> >> I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
> >> TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1.
> >>
> >> The files are now loading into my On Line Archive into a folder called
> >> TLM 103 NT2a SP1.
> >>
> >> Hank, the SP1 went into the mail back to you several hours ago.
> >
> > Whew, that's a relief, considering my investment in that sucker! Hope
> > you had some fun. I'll get those files and give a listen.
> >
> >
>
> Just a thought.....What if the SP1 Hank sent me was the only one they got
> right and the rest were pure crap?
I couldn't tell one from the other in the pair I bought, and I'll bet
Jim Williams has seen at least a reasonable sample of these. He's been
touting them for several years now. I could've sent you the pair, but I
didn't want to spend so much on postage that I could have bought another
mic.
Arny Krueger
I'd like to be able to download a pair of mono recordings or a stereo
recording made from a pair of them mounted togehter like Ty does.
drichard
not sure if that's up-to-date, or not.
Dean
On Mar 11, 2:49 pm, "Steve King"
<steveSPAMBL...@stevekingSPAMBLOCK.net> wrote:
> "hank alrich" <walki...@nv.net> wrote in message
> Steve King- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Les Cargill
> Pro Sound Stage and Lighting shows them as in stock, for $39.95. I'm
> not sure if that's up-to-date, or not.
>
It is, it is. Mine came in to-day.
<snip>
--
Les Cargill
jwill...@audioupgrades.com
> Mike Rivers wrote:
> > Ty Ford wrote:
> > > Thanks to Hank Alrich for sending me an MCA SP1.
> > > I have just uploaded some two channel files to my server.
> > > TLM 103 versus SP1 and Rode NT2-a versus SP1
> > time someone mentions a more expensive cheap mic?
>
> Yes, it's that one. I finally succumbed to curiousity and spent about
> $94 on a pair of them, including shipping and CA state sales tax. Ever
> since, I've been seeking shock mounts that don't cost more than the
> mics. <g> I think I've found 'em at BSW, from On Stage, about $25 each.
>
> > So, putting on my producer's hat, what did YOU think? I don't have the
> > patience to download the files and get them to someplace where I can
> > listen to them over something more useful for comparison than Minimus
> > 7 speakers on my "good" computer.
>
> I think it's sort of stupidly good for the money, and actually not bad
> tracks were entirely usable. I look forward to either modding it myself,
> if I can figure out what to put where and where to get the what to put
> there, or sending it to Jim for the mods.
>
> I think one of the reasons it sounds decent is that it's
> transformerless, using a clone of the Schoeps circuitry. I still hear a
> little edge that I don't hear in some much more expensive LDC's (this
> has a 20 mm. diaphgram, sort of a smal LDC), and I wonder if the mods
> will reduce that. But seriously, for what it sounds like and what it
> cost, I can't see paying one cent more for a Chinese cardioid LDC. I've
> heard several that cost many multiples of forty bucks that don't sound
> as good.
>
> The construction is not on a par with some famous name brands, the
> reassembling it one must be careful not to try to tighten the body
> solidly, because it will never feel solid in the way a U87 does, and if
> one keeps twisting I'm pretty sure the Erector Set parts will give up
> the cheese ghost in this particular machine.
>
> --
> ha
> Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam
The hard sound from these is a result of some of the parts they use.
The cap off the casule is a mono ceramic, bad choice. I use a MIT
MultiCap there. I replace the 2sk170 fet which I find to sound cloudy
to a fast J305 from Siliconix. The bipolars are changed to Hitachi
2sa1083's. I up the polarization voltage from 40 to 57 volts which
increases output by around 5 db. That plus the lower noise
semiconductors makes this a very quiet mic. The ouput caps are
enlarged to allow 20 hz to pass and those are bypassed with more MIT
caps. I use Dale RN55 resistors for the audio path. Panasonic FM
electrolytics are used for long term reliability. Some of mine I
installed Kimber black pearls silver teflon wire off the capsule.
I have 14 of these. They are the best cheepo mic made. Many users have
reported that these hold up well against the Fatherland originals. I
agree.
Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Mike Rivers
> The cap off the casule is a mono ceramic, bad choice. I use a MIT
> MultiCap there. I replace the 2sk170 fet which I find to sound cloudy
> to a fast J305 from Siliconix. The bipolars are changed to Hitachi
> 2sa1083's. I up the polarization voltage from 40 to 57 volts which
> increases output by around 5 db. The ouput caps are
> enlarged to allow 20 hz to pass and those are bypassed with more MIT
> caps. I use Dale RN55 resistors for the audio path. Panasonic FM
> electrolytics are used for long term reliability. Some of mine I
> installed Kimber black pearls silver teflon wire off the capsule.
Not much left of the original than the capsule and the case, is there?
Have you done any experiments with damping the metal parts or opening
up the grill?
drichard
Do you do this as a service for others? If so, how much do you charge
to upgrade an SP1 as you've described? Do you have a website?
Thanks,
Dean
> Audio Upgrades- Hide quoted text -
drichard
Yes, I got one too. For $40 it's worth it just to play with. And
except for the ultra-cheesy packaging, I'm very pleasantly surprised.
I can find things to use this mic on, for sure.
Dean
Les Cargill
Les Cargill
> Hi Les,
>
> Yes, I got one too. For $40 it's worth it just to play with. And
> except for the ultra-cheesy packaging, I'm very pleasantly surprised.
> I can find things to use this mic on, for sure.
>
I may leave 'em unmodified as my go-to acoustic guitar
mics. They won't pass a key jingle test, but the resulting
sound from an acoustic is pretty dang useful. I'll try 'em
on overheads after a while, when I can set something up.
They are, in the original, nauseating on mandolin without
some low pass filtering :) If Albert Collins played
mandolin...
But I'm tempted to attempt Mr. Williams mods as
specififed. Might purchase another pair for that.
> Dean
>
> On Mar 16, 10:10 pm, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>drichard wrote:
>>
>>>Pro Sound Stage and Lighting shows them as in stock, for $39.95. I'm
>>>not sure if that's up-to-date, or not.
>>
>>It is, it is. Mine came in to-day.
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>--
>>Les Cargill
>
>
>
--
Les Cargill
Ty Ford
(in article <45fc76a2$0$5822$4c36...@roadrunner.com>):
Having heard the one Hank was kind enough to send. I am very impressed. I
don't know if they got lucky with that one mic/capsule or if they have
stumbled on to something they can reproduce.
Jim, I'd be willing to test one of yours against the NT2-a and TLM 103 and
put those files up on my site with the others for comparison.
Steve King
Ty, I'd be happy to send you mine. That way you could not only test another
stock SP1 but also be able to test it against Jim's mod, which I would love
to hear.
Steve King
hank alrich
Capsule, case, and the circuit board, which is easily accessed and looks
spacious enough and old fashioned enough for folks less skilled and
equipped than Jim to work with.
hank alrich
> Hi Jim,
>
> Do you do this as a service for others? If so, how much do you charge
> to upgrade an SP1 as you've described? Do you have a website?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dean
Jim is famous, in an underground sort of way compared to Britney, for
his upgrades.
hank alrich
> Jim, I'd be willing to test one of yours against the NT2-a and TLM 103 and
> put those files up on my site with the others for comparison.
And if you needed a stock SP1 again against which to compare the mod'd
one, holler.
Ty Ford
(in article <1hv6bd7.bs0bcj1h84i96N%walk...@nv.net>):
> Ty Ford wrote:
>
>> Jim, I'd be willing to test one of yours against the NT2-a and TLM 103 and
>> put those files up on my site with the others for comparison.
>
> And if you needed a stock SP1 again against which to compare the mod'd
> one, holler.
>
>
either Hank's or Steve's....I'm in.
Ty
Arny Krueger
Unfortunately, there's no entry for the SP1 on the relevant web page:
http://www.audioupgrades.com/pl1.html
hank alrich
> "hank alrich" wrote:
> > drichard wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jim,
> >>
> >> Do you do this as a service for others? If so, how much
> >> do you charge to upgrade an SP1 as you've described? Do
> >> you have a website?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Dean
> >
> > www.audioupgrades.com
> >
> > Jim is famous, in an underground sort of way compared to
> > Britney, for his upgrades.
>
> Unfortunately, there's no entry for the SP1 on the relevant web page:
>
> http://www.audioupgrades.com/pl1.html
The Audiogrades website is not a fine example of recent upgrading. <g>
Email Jim directly or give him a call.
Les Cargill
Jim said this in the thread ( message ID
<1174145213.6...@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com> >
"The hard sound from these is a result of some of the parts they use.
The cap off the casule is a mono ceramic, bad choice. I use a MIT
MultiCap there. I replace the 2sk170 fet which I find to sound cloudy
to a fast J305 from Siliconix. The bipolars are changed to Hitachi
2sa1083's. I up the polarization voltage from 40 to 57 volts which
increases output by around 5 db. That plus the lower noise
semiconductors makes this a very quiet mic. The ouput caps are
enlarged to allow 20 hz to pass and those are bypassed with more MIT
caps. I use Dale RN55 resistors for the audio path. Panasonic FM
electrolytics are used for long term reliability. Some of mine I
installed Kimber black pearls silver teflon wire off the capsule."
That is at least a start. The only thing mysterious to me is
"up the polarization voltage", but I have yet to buzz the card out -
I presume it's a resistor swap, and seems the last thing to try
if it's not.
--
Les Cargill