The change in your mic placement - closer to the loudspeaker instead of halfway across the room! - makes a big difference to the audio; it's now the sound of those samples you'd recorded, instead of sound bouncing around a room and thus losing much of its impact.
Mics blind test
- Thread starter Emmathom
- Start date
Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:
Just thought about a thing that nobody ever asked for : the original sample !
so now you have a base to compare...
Original Sample 16-44
so now you have a base to compare...
Original Sample 16-44
As I do not hear much difference between A2 and D in music, both sound fine, I agree with MicMan that D suits your voice best. And this I can hear clearly.
Then goes A2 (bit more highs) and last, definitely worst - B.
Mind you, I'm listening on very amateur setup (same as before). Smartphone and passable but not high end headphones.
Then goes A2 (bit more highs) and last, definitely worst - B.
Mind you, I'm listening on very amateur setup (same as before). Smartphone and passable but not high end headphones.
garp
Well-known member
To my ears (DT770 direct in the laptop) A has more lows and presence (sounds a bit like Neumann K67) and is my prefered, D is second choice if i had to choose ( sound more like K47) and B sounding "phasy" with harsh unpleasent Hi's . It is by far the worst of the three to me, with some scooped phasy frequencies in the middle. A is a Chateau Cheval Blanc D is a Chateau neuf du Pape and B is probably some Castelvin !
MidnightArrakis
Well-known member
[MicMan wrote: The change in your mic placement - closer to the loudspeaker instead of halfway across the room! - makes a big difference to the audio; it's now the sound of those samples you'd recorded, instead of sound bouncing around a room and thus losing much of its impact] -- What this posting is saying is basically the exact same thing as what I posted, only way more "wordy"!!! Why don't both you and that "Other Poster" (who genuinely and specifically "HATES ME"!!!) go and make some negative comment about his response as well??? .....I'm waiting.....
My response was just as valid as "MicMan's" comment. Even despite the bad acoustics of his small living room, his using my suggested "industry-standard" mic-placement distance of 1-meter will not only place his microphone closer to his sound-source (the same thing as suggested by "MicMan"), but it also would put his testing method to be on par with the "industry-standard" and accepted measuring distance of 1-meter.
Therefore.....I find your response to me to -- NOT -- be viable!!!
/
Nobody hates you @MidnightArrakis... Take it easy...
But have a look at your post above :
I'm glad to hear that you love your wonderful "real sound system" speakers but what is that kind of comment doing in this thread ? Seriously... ?
Each of us has his own "philosophy", and as far as I'm concerned, here's how I would react to a demand like the one in this thread:
1) I'm interested but it doesn't really meet my requirements > I still give my opinion but add a comment on the method used...
2) it does not interest me because it doesn't meet at all my requirements > I move on without making any comments at all!
this is said without aggression or hatred : peace & love ! (an expression dating back to when those great JBLs were designed)
Last edited:
much less argued, to say the least
in a small living room as mine (4mx5m), 50cm seemed the right distance to me to reduce reverb and echo
that's your right
machprod
Member
@Emmathom merci pour votre contribution.
my $0.25
For myself I kind of like the C mic for ambience at some points. However, I would like the mics to be closer so that I barely hear the room. But, *I* (as in I, myself
) would also make a NAM and an IR from them ( https://github.com/sdatkinson/neural-amp-modeler - if anyone wants me to explain/help them with this let me know )
OT - There are always a million things wrong with our DIY approaches, but each time we DIY something we typically learn from our mistakes.
I was wondering, should we have have a place in the forum with "standards" defined by us where a user can say "I used the technique on <url> to get these results" it could avoid some unwanted dialogs, help noobs get up to speed, and give us all a more level playing field.
my $0.25
For myself I kind of like the C mic for ambience at some points. However, I would like the mics to be closer so that I barely hear the room. But, *I* (as in I, myself
) would also make a NAM and an IR from them ( https://github.com/sdatkinson/neural-amp-modeler - if anyone wants me to explain/help them with this let me know )OT - There are always a million things wrong with our DIY approaches, but each time we DIY something we typically learn from our mistakes.
I was wondering, should we have have a place in the forum with "standards" defined by us where a user can say "I used the technique on <url> to get these results" it could avoid some unwanted dialogs, help noobs get up to speed, and give us all a more level playing field.
thank you @machprod !
I note that you like Mic C but this one belongs to the first test (with to much echo or reverb) : didn't you notice the part B of the test where a new mic (D) has replaced "C" and which has been done under better conditions ? page 4 I guess...
I'm having trouble with the projects on the github site. I never know where the file presenting the entire project is located...
For the second part (There are always a million things wrong with our DIY approaches) I don't understand what you mean, sorry
I note that you like Mic C but this one belongs to the first test (with to much echo or reverb) : didn't you notice the part B of the test where a new mic (D) has replaced "C" and which has been done under better conditions ? page 4 I guess...
I'm having trouble with the projects on the github site. I never know where the file presenting the entire project is located...
For the second part (There are always a million things wrong with our DIY approaches) I don't understand what you mean, sorry
machprod
Member
Sorry, I missed that I will take a new listen when I get a minute. merci
This is a python repo, you would need to install it with "pip install neural-amp-modeler" but you will want to have some coding experience. However, simply recording the training sound will be enough for others to create the model. We could make a post going over how to use it, and I can provide my GPUs for examples.
WRT to IR, you only really need to record a "pop" of some sort, you would be then be profiling the entire signal chain, (the pop) , amp, speaker, mic and room or ambience that is captured.
I am just referring to some of the previous comments, that is there is no perfect way to profile something. But we could try, as a group, to make a reproducible DIY setup. I know that there was some test on transformers in Italy a while back, where each participant used the same set up to test various transformers.
well to much "computer stuff" for me I guess
this is good
Yes ! a "protocole" that everybody would follow to be able to compare results
RuudNL
Well-known member
I just listened to the new files.
I don't hear very much difference between A2 and D.
IMHO B2 has a kind of 'dip' in the midrange, I suppose around 3 KHz.
I don't hear very much difference between A2 and D.
IMHO B2 has a kind of 'dip' in the midrange, I suppose around 3 KHz.
I may like D just a hair better than A2, but it's so close that I'm keeping that as a "may". B2 was also my least favorite of the 3.
Thank you @Wordsushi 
A2 and D sound best to me, i preferred D until reading other comments... B2 has obvious problems, beside some drops and not playing at all now.
For now i pick D as the best, but less neutral than A2 which also sounds more "consistent" on different material.
I will listen to original file for the first time tomorrow, then compare A2 to D one more time.
For now i pick D as the best, but less neutral than A2 which also sounds more "consistent" on different material.
I will listen to original file for the first time tomorrow, then compare A2 to D one more time.
What I heard, on the Smartphone's speakers, that's what I have with me right now:
Voice sounds very good, fairly neutral on A2.
The other instruments and mixes sound quite correct, linear, even warm, without obvious coloration.
Light saturation and compression
The flattest of all, may sound boring on some sources, (but honest).
I would use it on vocals and individual instruments.
The guitar sounds exceptional, rich, natural, with harmonics, brilliance,
sparkly, on D.
On other acoustic instruments, mixes,voice, it sounds very good.
It induces a state of joy.
I'm sure it takes the eq/dynamic processing nicely.
Very fine highs with attractive texture, special vibe.
Fast transients, good dynamics, clean, great headroom.
Very versatile on multiple sources,individual or even for groups, ensembles, in proximity or at a distance (the slight boost on high frequencies will help preserve sound integrity at a distance)
Refined sound.
It conveys excitement, pleasure.
B2 sounds too mid-range, boxy, phoney.Poor low frequencies.
Possibly it would work on a male voice ('smile' type) that has a native ample low-bass + very accentuated highs.
Or it would work on double-bass, kick drum,big congas,bass guitar cab( neck pickup).
It has limited uses.
Voice sounds very good, fairly neutral on A2.
The other instruments and mixes sound quite correct, linear, even warm, without obvious coloration.
Light saturation and compression
The flattest of all, may sound boring on some sources, (but honest).
I would use it on vocals and individual instruments.
The guitar sounds exceptional, rich, natural, with harmonics, brilliance,
sparkly, on D.
On other acoustic instruments, mixes,voice, it sounds very good.
It induces a state of joy.
I'm sure it takes the eq/dynamic processing nicely.
Very fine highs with attractive texture, special vibe.
Fast transients, good dynamics, clean, great headroom.
Very versatile on multiple sources,individual or even for groups, ensembles, in proximity or at a distance (the slight boost on high frequencies will help preserve sound integrity at a distance)
Refined sound.
It conveys excitement, pleasure.
B2 sounds too mid-range, boxy, phoney.Poor low frequencies.
Possibly it would work on a male voice ('smile' type) that has a native ample low-bass + very accentuated highs.
Or it would work on double-bass, kick drum,big congas,bass guitar cab( neck pickup).
It has limited uses.
Last edited:
