thread at another forum

[analogguru]

As to be expected the bigger the coupling capacitor the less resonant the circuit becomes.

 

[RuudNL]

With a bigger capacitor the resonance frequency shifts down and because of more losses becomes less obvious.
I have seen many bad combinations of transformer inductance and output capacitor causing LF 'bumps'.

 

[dmp]

There are two kinds of common posts that don't contribute much and rub people the wrong way... a lot of good examples of them.

1) instead of trying to answer the question explain why the question is wrong in a generally unhelpful way.
Example: how do I build a great bass DI? Answer: great bass is in the fingers, learn to play like jamerson.

2) implying you know the answer but not giving it.

Probably good to just hit cancel if your thinking of posting either of these kinds of things. Much better to do your best to be as helpful as possible.

I agree with what someone else said, it's most likely nobody saw the question vs the 'forum' trying not to be helpful. Lots of people around here go out of their way to help and answer questions.

 

[Phrazemaster]

I am by no means an expert in anything audio, much less designing circuits or answering complex questions.

However, I'm a teacher by trade, computers and technology. While I know a certain core set of things like nobody's business, in most of my day to day I get asked questions I have absolutely no idea the answer to.

I can generally look at the question, and figure it out. But I don't already know the answer - I have to think about it, try stuff, and then come up with a solution.

I'll be honest I get a little pissed off at the same people asking me how to do things over and over again - that I don't know how to do yet I apply myself and figure out - but that they are not willing to even try. They act like I owe them the answer and I get really annoyed at this. Because it takes something out of me - my life, my time, my energy, that I could spend on other things.

I don't begrudge the greats here for not always spoon feeding. Even though they may know the answers, it doesn't mean they owe it to me or anyone else to take their life time and energy to respond.

Ultimately it's better to learn to fish.

Mike

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I actually did post the same inquiry as a separate question here in June.

I remember I saw it at the time, but I had no clue what "C5 in Dany's circuit" is, and was not willing to start a goose chase. Had you attached a schemo to your post, you may have got more answers, probably one from me.

BTW I had a look at the GS thread.
One of the posts read "Most of my mics go down to lower than 20 hz by design. I like the depth and tightness of the low end when the phase shift is removed. I like to feel the low end on recordings, it adds energy. A HPF removes any unwanted low end. "
Anybody with decent knowledge of signal processing knows that a HPF produces at least as much phase-shift as reducing the LF response in the head amp.
Some of the answers about phase-shift just make no sense; it has been demonstrated times and again that phase-shift audibility is extremely program-dependant. The rule of 10 applied to amplitude response is a remnant of the past, when systems had few stages interconnected, but in a modern electroacoustic chain where dozens of stages are interconnected, the multiplication of individual 0.05dB losses can become significant. OTOH, the corresponding 6° phase-shift's audibility is highly questionable.
Remember that one of the reasons for this rule of 10 was concerned about capacitors losing their capacitance due to aging.

Now if you think that kind of answer is more useful than those you get from here, you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't share it.

 

[Gus]

What transformer are you using? This is a big deal.

 

[kingkorg]

He found the solution, but failed to report here. I am puzzled even more, but whatever... it was something something he was missing

Quote from GS:
Well, I figured this thread deserved an update.

I had my Mouser shopping cart ready to go with Wima 2.2, 3.3 and 4.7 caps, as suggested, along with some other project stuff, and just as I was about to buy it all, I had a kind of epiphany. My experience with U87's goes back to recording on 2" tape and, with the 416 as my main axe for years, I've never used one to record straight to digital.

I started to think what my ears were missing was a good old fashioned "tape bump". So, I inserted the UAD Ampex ATR-102 plugin right before my DAW and... boom...there it was... the little touch of "something-something" extra in the lows I wanted to hear on my voice. Previously, I had tried just goosing the lows with different EQ's, but it wasn't nuanced exactly how I wanted. Given how these mics were originally designed to record to tape, it just kinda makes sense somehow and, again for my purposes, on my voice, it makes this mic sound how I like... all without having to perform surgery on it.

 

[gyraf]

:

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Well, I think he doesn't like the kind of answer he got from here because they are too technical. Apparently he prefers adding some dose of magic than actually trying to find a scientific solution.

 

[kingkorg]

The thing i would do is to measure the plugin for frequency response and THD and try to get that in the circuit.

However my experience with some other tape plugins tell me there might be multiband compression going on. Companies use it to emulate some tape properties.