Lowering SD Condenser noise, Pearl CMR-55H / CR-55.

[Bo Hansen]

If you are intersting in Swedish PEARL history, my old friend Martin Westlund have a lot of good reading here:

http://www7.tripnet.se/~jazz/equipm.htm

http://www7.tripnet.se/~jazz/equipm-2.htm

--Bo

 

[rodabod]

Excellent website!

"This is a microphone from the Japaneese drum and instrument manufacturer "Pearl" and it has got nothing to do with Pearl Microphone Laboratory in Sweden! This Japaneese microphone is called CR-57 and features a double condencer capsule - at least that is what the specifications read - and can be powered either by a 9 Volt battery or by phantom power. It actually is a quite terrible microphone with a very high noice floor and weak frequency respone from low polarization of the capsule, bad overall construction and poorly choosen semiconductors."

 

[Guest]

I'm glad someone realized that the modal behaviour of a rectange is worse with a rectangle rather than better! It's funny how they claim it's "better" but don't even attempt to bullshit you or science you with any explanation of "better".
BTW, the chart they provide doesn't resemble the results I got....
On the plus side, that big rectangle capsule is awesome on snare bottom!
regards,
DBock

 

[mrelwood]

[quote author="mtt-tom"]this mic was made by (or for) the japanese Drum-Company Pearl (not the swedish company PEARL) in the early 80's and definitively aimed for home recording purposes. Electret condenser type.[/quote]

Okay... so this would make my CR-55 a completely different than my CMR-55H? Doesn't the true condenser CR-55 work with a 9V battery also?

If I understood correctly, almost any condenser can be powered with a 9V battery, they just lack severely in the headroom and frequency response. Many condenser spec sheets say they can be powered with 9-48V. Is it the same with electrets, can they handle 48V or should they have a system to lower the voltage?

So, if this is a electret mic, there is nothing one can do to lower the noise floor? If so, I'll just use them for western/overhead, and get myself a pair of affordable condensers that would serve me better in recording church ambience or a grand piano. I do have a pair of Neumann KM84i's that are good but a bit on the softer side, so I wouldn't mind a bit brighter, forward-sounding mics. I'll list a bunch of cheap mics, is there something that stands out from the bunch? In a positive way, that is... )
I have heard a lot of people praise Oktava and modded MXL's. Many of the listed are aimed for drum overheads, and I don't know if they would serve me right. I do seem to like AT's and Beyers, possibly MXL's.

AKG C-430
Audio-Technica ATM-33A
Behringer B5
Behringer ECM8000
Beyer MCE-530
JoeMeek JM27S
M-Audio Pulsar
MXL 603
Oktava MK012
Peavey PVM 48O
SE 1A
Sennheiser e614
Shure PG81
SP C4

 

[gyraf]

The "real" mics that can be powered with 9-48V phantom do this by having an internal step-up voltage converter for polarisation voltage. Your mic hasn't, seen from the pics..

Jakob E.

 

[bcarso]

[quote author="Scodiddly"]Hard to say without seeing the back of the actual capsule, but I suspect an electret with the built-in FET (like Panasonic). Those are noisy just because of how the FET and the gate bias are handled.[/quote]

From the looks of the board the FET is on the board. It wouldn't make too much sense, though it is possible, to have a second FET as the additional gain/buffering after the internal capsule FET.

 

[mrelwood]

It took so long for me to write the previous message, a lot of You guys had the time to answer already. I like how the mic works with western guitars. It does emphasize some, but I find it working quite good on an acoustic guitar. And I bet I'm not surprising anyone if I say I didn't pay much for these.

But I'd love some comments on the SD condensers. I am being offered a Sennheiser e614 pair for 250€, which I bet is easily negotiable. Any hope they would serve me better?

Thanks!

-Aki.

 

[HappyTom]

Anyone tried the Pearl capsul at all?
I'd like to try it in a G7 but it's expensive so it would be nice if someone used one already.

[quote author="DBock"]
I'm glad someone realized that the modal behaviour of a rectange is worse with a rectangle rather than better! It's funny how they claim it's "better" but don't even attempt to bullshit you or science you with any explanation of "better".
BTW, the chart they provide doesn't resemble the results I got....
On the plus side, that big rectangle capsule is awesome on snare bottom!
regards,
DBock[/quote]
Do you have any charts of your results and how did you perform the test?

HT

 

[innercityman]

Hi,

I just made a research about this mic I have for years now (more than twenty) and found that old topic...

The "real" mics that can be powered with 9-48V phantom do this by having an internal step-up voltage converter for polarisation voltage. Your mic hasn't, seen from the pics..

What I can say is that I always used mine with 48V fantom power and after all these years, it still works like a charm. I just gave it to my son who wanted a clean broadcast mic to record some voices for his videos. He is really happy with it.

 

[RuudNL]

Long time ago I had one (CR-55). It didn't sound good and it was noisy.
I used the body to build my own microphone...

 

[innercityman]

Don't know about the CR55, mine was CMR-55H. Not the best mic I had but usable on snare for example.