Beta Test: Room Correction for Android (Feature now publicly available)

guy48065 said:
Do these inexpensive mics have internal active correction (DSP)?
My B&K and PCB mics have smoother response, but still spec at similar ±1dB over similar frequency range. At >$1000 each.

I'd rather believe this is how it's accomplished so cheaply, and trust Dayton and MiniDSP--rather than believe their graphs are complete rubbish.
Click to expand...
Do any mics have internal active correction?
 
slartibartfast said:
Do any mics have internal active correction?
Click to expand...
That's my assumption, based only on the name of one of the major sellers: MiniDSP. Micro electronics is a game-changer.
There are reasons microphones with extended flat response sell for $1000 or more. If the IMM-6 and UMIK-1 can really equal that performance for $50 it would put the spendy ones out of business.
I doubt they're there yet...maybe soon they will be.
 
guy48065 said:
That's my assumption, based only on the name of one of the major sellers: MiniDSP. Micro electronics is a game-changer.
There are reasons microphones with extended flat response sell for $1000 or more. If the IMM-6 and UMIK-1 can really equal that performance for $50 it would put the spendy ones out of business.
I doubt they're there yet...maybe soon they will be.
Click to expand...
The MiniDSP audio processors use DSP, their microphones don't.
 
slartibartfast said:
You don't hear of many people using measurement mics for recording purposes. There must be a reason.
Click to expand...
A story for you.. back in the early '70s I worked my way through college as a soundman for various local bands, and I also got rented out with the PA when out of town artists who didn't bring their own PA performed locally (it was pretty rare for the big country artists of that period to have their own PA so I ended up working for Marty Robbins, Buck Owens and others.)

I recall one night I suggested the lead singer of a local band I did a lot of work for try a different microphone as the one he used -- don't remember which model of Shure -- had a notoriously non-flat response. He about chewed my head off -- I was to use his preferred microphone and nothing else. The frequency response peaks and valleys of his mic were part of the sound he wanted when singing with the band. I suspect the same thing remains true in recording studios these days.
 
mlsstl said:
A story for you.. back in the early '70s I worked my way through college as a soundman for various local bands, and I also got rented out with the PA when out of town artists who didn't bring their own PA performed locally (it was pretty rare for the big country artists of that period to have their own PA so I ended up working for Marty Robbins, Buck Owens and others.)

I recall one night I suggested the lead singer of a local band I did a lot of work for try a different microphone as the one he used -- don't remember which model of Shure -- had a notoriously non-flat response. He about chewed my head off -- I was to use his preferred microphone and nothing else. The frequency response peaks and valleys of his mic were part of the sound he wanted when singing with the band. I suspect the same thing remains true in recording studios these days.
Click to expand...
The best bootlegs always seem to be made with Schoeps mics so presumably they are flat. Measurement mics don't really need to be flat over the the whole frequency range as long as they come with a calibration file.
 
guy48065 said:
Then they're a miracle.
Don't buy stock in Schoeps, Neumann, AKG, Shure, Sennheiser.
Click to expand...
Absolutely no miracle at all. It's just so simple to make microphones with a somewhat extended and acceptably linear frequency response. There is absolutely no active correction in an iMM-6C or any similar mic.

If it was, why would they go only halfway and still provide a calibration file for the remaining non-linearity?

Recording mics are different from measuring mikes and e.g. a B&K mic is a lot more linear than e.g. a UMiK-1 and it can take far more SPL and is mechanically more robust. That's what makes it expensive.
 
harkpabst said:
...
If it was, why would they go only halfway and still provide a calibration file for the remaining non-linearity?
...
Click to expand...

Obviously you don't get individual, custom correction in a $79 microphone. You get a DSP programmed for the "typical" response of the mic capsule + an automated "calibration" that generates the correction factors for the UUT (unit under test).

I might be dead wrong here but this is a logical approach. Cheap micro electronics "fixes" so many things these days. Who would have imagined the micro transducers in our phones would sound so good? DSP ftw.
 
guy48065 said:
Obviously you don't get individual, custom correction in a $79 microphone. You get a DSP programmed for the "typical" response of the mic capsule + an automated "calibration" that generates the correction factors for the UUT (unit under test).

I might be dead wrong here but this is a logical approach. Cheap micro electronics "fixes" so many things these days. Who would have imagined the micro transducers in our phones would sound so good? DSP ftw.
Click to expand...
You really are just making this stuff up. You do get individual correction for even a cheap iMM6 microphone. The calibration file is associated with the serial number and can be downloaded from the Dayton Audio website. If DSP was included inside a microphone you wouldn't need calibration files at all and even expensive measurement mics have them.
 
slartibartfast said:
Sorry no idea what FIFY means
Click to expand...
FIFY = Fixed it for you.

@guy48065, if you continue like this you'll keep making a fool out of yourself for no reason. Why is it so hard to accept that you are wrong if everybody else tells you so?

You told us more than once now that you own the best microphones money can buy. You are rich! I envy you. Go ahead, buy one, rip it apart and show us the DSP chip you found inside.

Want me to do it? No problem, send me 135 € and I will buy one and share the tear-down with everybody.
 
harkpabst said:
...
You told us more than once now that you own the best microphones money can buy. You are rich! I envy you. Go ahead, buy one, rip it apart and show us the DSP chip you found inside.
...
Click to expand...
Never said anything of the sort.
It's a fact that true measurement microphones that measure flat--and have traceable certificates to prove it--do NOT employ DSP. They are expensive because it's actually quite difficult to get flat response 20-20k.
I'd just like to know how Dayton & MiniDSP do it for $39 & $79.
I assume they use cheap DSP chip to correct the major flaws, and supply a deviation sheet so the end user can correct the remaining error.

You two assume their mics are made of fairy dust and provide $1000 performance for $79.
I'm sorry but I'm a realist and suspect things aren't as simple as you assume.

Ultimately it doesn't matter to most. They're certainly more flat than most uncorrected rooms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

WiiM Team
Beta Test: Room Correction for Individual Channels
7 8 9
Replies
164
Views
9K
Smartplug
S
WiiM Team
Beta Test: WiiM Persistent Group
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
3K
Lochie
L
WiiM Team
Beta Test: Samba (Feature now publicly available)
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
8K
Mr Ee
Mr Ee
WiiM Team
Beta Test: Organize your all favorites in one page (Feature now publicly available)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
amix
A
WiiM Team
Beta Test: Multi-Room Low Latency Mode for Line-In, Optical-In, Phono-In, TV, and Bluetooth Inputs
Replies
13
Views
436
WiiM Team
WiiM Team
Back
Top