Looking for electret capsule manufacturer recommendations

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The specified minimum supply voltage isn't neccesarily indicitive that it's not electret - the circuitry could require 44 volts min, for reasons other than polarizing the capsule (high headroom, for example), though not very likely.
I figured it was a safe bet since the current known AKG electrets list 9-52v. But I've read the C414 EB could run on 9v because of the converter in it, and that's externally polarized. I've seen conflicting stuff on the C314, some claiming it's electret, and some claiming it's externally polarized. I'm sure there would be more information if it were more popular, but it costs more than a used modern C414, and the 314 isn't very cheap used from what I've seen.
Maybe you'll have better luck than I, but I ordered several of these from a couple of different sources, and they were all extremely bright.
Are they the same capsule or just identical looking?
 
Last edited:
Subjective perception of brightnes is a tricky thing. Here's the typical response of those capsules, none of the ones i have deviate from this response. 5db hf boost, smooth as baby's bottom. You can disregard LF bump, it's due to emi, the capsule is flat down to 30hz.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20220309-204440_TeamViewer.jpg
    Screenshot_20220309-204440_TeamViewer.jpg
    224.9 KB
I must have got two 'bad' batches, then. Mine are very much brighter than TSB 2555, which are also supposed to be only 5-6 dB at top. I agree they are very rich and smooth, though.

I'm judgeing this by direct comparison, not just 'subjective' impression.

Referring to your earlier AKG C3000B thread, just snagged a broken one for $80; hope the capsule's OK - not interested in the circuit.
 
Last edited:
Look the same and bought from same source . . . ?
I thought a couple sources might mean they could've been manufactured by another company.

Subjective perception of brightnes is a tricky thing. Here's the typical response of those capsules, none of the ones i have deviate from this response. 5db hf boost, smooth as baby's bottom. You can disregard LF bump, it's due to emi, the capsule is flat down to 30hz.
Have you tried using a couple in a multipattern build? I'm curious as to how they would perform like that.
 
Pretty likely these are all being made by the same Chinese factory; just being sold by different people. They are all utterly identical.

No I haven't used them for anything - they wouldn't be any less bright in a dual application.
 
Pretty likely these are all being made by the same Chinese factory; just being sold by different people. They are all utterly identical.

No I haven't used them for anything - they wouldn't be any less bright in a dual application.
I don't think they would either. I'm wondering if two used in a mic for a multipattern design would give a mic that has a near consistent frequency response in different patterns.
 
I don't think they would either. I'm wondering if two used in a mic for a multipattern design would give a mic that has a near consistent frequency response in different patterns.
I'm not aware of any multipatern mic that does this. You would either need auto eq compensation, or manage to break couple laws of physics.
 
I'm not aware of any multipatern mic that does this. You would either need auto eq compensation, or manage to break couple laws of physics.
Probably misleading marketing then. I don't think any of them are truly close to being nearly consistent but the electret based multipattern ones suggest similar responses in different patterns, though maybe that's just really misleading marketing.
 
Must be, polarisation method has nothing to do with that. As a matter of fact, two aligned diaphragms might give better results. So i suggest you try both methods, see what gives you better results. One dual, or two diaphragm aligned capsules.
 
Turns out the ST31s are electret as well. I also did not double check to make sure it was side address. It is end address, which is not a problem per se, but it does prove to be a challenge when trying use these to build dual capsule side address prototypes.

So we're back to electrets. Which is totally fine. Now I have to figure out how to mount them back to back.

Thanks!

Paul
 
Just FYI - the C4500 has the same electret capsule as the C3000B.
Turns out the ST31s are electret as well. I also did not double check to make sure it was side address. It is end address, which is not a problem per se, but it does prove to be a challenge when trying use these to build dual capsule side address prototypes.

So we're back to electrets. Which is totally fine. Now I have to figure out how to mount them back to back.

Thanks!

Paul
FWIW, I did this with an AT2035 (electret):
https://gearspace.com/board/low-end-theory/1369487-nearly-free-ldc-fig-8-a.html#post15793349
 
Last edited:
Not entirely sure what you mean, but what I did didn't require any capsule 'dissection'.
The thread linked on the first page, the electret capsules are shown being dissected. In my case, I will need to find a way to mount two capsules close together similar to what you see with LDC capsules. Putting two electrets back to back as is will be too wide for the test bodies I'm using.

Thanks!

Paul
 
The thread linked on the first page, the electret capsules are shown being dissected. In my case, I will need to find a way to mount two capsules close together similar to what you see with LDC capsules. Putting two electrets back to back as is will be too wide for the test bodies I'm using.

Thanks!

Paul
That was Kingkorg showing what the capsules are built like. It's actually a pretty good thing to have people who do that around here, it gives us valuable information about them.
 

Attachments

  • 20220315_205936.jpg
    20220315_205936.jpg
    61.8 KB
  • 20220315_205952.jpg
    20220315_205952.jpg
    70.2 KB
  • Screenshot_20220315-210619_TeamViewer.jpg
    Screenshot_20220315-210619_TeamViewer.jpg
    148.4 KB
Last edited:
Back
Top