The ECM-8000 is now the EMM-6 and comes calibrated

[BOBinGA]

New Parts Express item:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?Partnumber=390-801

You can't beat it. $48 and it comes with an individual calibration curve.

That just saved me $30 since I was just about to pull the trigger on the old one.

-Bob

[Txgrizzly]

so what else would i need to run this to a software program running on my computer? is there an intermediate piece of gear i would need to make it work with REW?

[BOBinGA]

You need a mic cable, stand and a source for phantom power. The most widely used phantom power for our purposes is the Behringer XENYX 802 Mixer:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&Partnumber=248-576

You willl also need some adapters and cables to get from the mixer to the sound card in your computer.

Oh, and some software. I'll probably start with something simple. I think I saw a free one in a recent thread. I think it was SimpleRTA, or something like that. TrueRTA is also cheap.


-Bob

[Face]

You could also use one of these: http://pro-audio.musiciansfriend.com...ELAID=26020141

[Biermann]

How is the calibration response graph utilized, do you enter some values into the software. Can you DIY calibrate the old model, I have the original Behringer on order, but could return it and get this new 'Dayton' model if it would be easier.

Face,

How does that Edirol compare to the M-Audio Pre?

[Hdale85]

Awesome, glad to see a pre calibrated mic.

[Biermann]

Changed in respone to a change

[Hdale85]

I have an M-Auidio Firewire 410 which has phantom power and everything. The Mobile Pre USB does this as well. There is also the Firewire Solo. Lots of the M-audio products have phantom power built in.

[BOBinGA]

Biermann,
I have a copy of REW but have never used it. The Mic calibration is under Settings > Mic/Meter tab. It looks lke you have to enter your own calibration file. You can make a simple one by creating a two column text file with frequency in the first column and +/- db from flat in the second column. You get the +/- numbers from the calibration file with the mic. The frequency numbers should follow standard one third or one sixth octave center frequencies. You don't need any column labels. Save the file and load it from the settings menu in REW.

-Bob

[Biermann]

Thanks Bob,

It looks like I'll have to do some digging and find out whether the old Mic can be DIY cal'd.

Anyone using TrueRTA that can comment regarding calibration in that software, I was debating buying a license once I get my gear and have a chance to play around with it.

[Hdale85]

You can send it to someone and get it calibrated. Generally you need a reference mic to calibrate against.

[Dennis H]

Cool! If all they give you is a paper graph of the calibration, you can scan it and use SPL Tracer to build the cal file.

http://www.pvconsultants.com/audio/utility/spl.htm

[Jed]

It would be a nice touch if the calibration was a file and not a printed graph. I wonder if every mic is measured or they just give a generic "universal" response graph. The description does say "unique" graph, but I'd like to know for sure.

[ThomasW]

"Each mic comes with it's own unique response graph"

They probably run them automatically so it's printed and packaged at the end of the assembly line.

[Biermann]

Well, my Beringer showed up today along with the M-Audio Mobile Pre, and ?I am debating whether to return the mic and buy the Dayton. I called PE and the tech said the graph was of each microphone's response when tested against a reference, and though he did not have there to look at, said the graph should be of the size/quality to gather usable data for use in software.

So my question is how critical is having the calibration ability when testing my rooms and speakers? Is the variance very large on the original Behringer 8000's? I am so tempted to unbox it and start testing.

^Edit: Well Thomas beat me to it. Nice, you even got a copy of the graph.^

[Jed]

Well, my Beringer showed up today along with the M-Audio Mobile Pre, and ?I am debating whether to return the mic and buy the Dayton. I called PE and the tech said the graph was of each microphone's response when tested against a reference, and though he did not have there to look at, said the graph should be of the size/quality to gather usable data for use in software.

So my question is how critical is having the calibration ability when testing my rooms and speakers? Is the variance very large on the original Behringer 8000's? I am so tempted to unbox it and start testing.

^Edit: Well Thomas beat me to it. Nice, you even got a copy of the graph.^

I'd get the Dayton mic then. Might as well save 50 bucks and trace the graph yourself, like Dennis mentioned.

Having a calibrated mic is very important. Mics can vary in their response greatly.

[Hdale85]

Yeah generally getting a mic calibrated costs 50 bucks, so 48 for the Dayton is a steal.

[Dennis H]

Note the date on the cal graph Thomas posted. If that was done in 2000, that was back when the mics were a lot flatter than they are now. I'm assuming PE is OEMing them from Taiwan/China-based Superlux, just like Behringer and Nady.

http://www.superlux.com.tw/

Edit: one thing about a 3rd-party calibration is you can get it done below 25 Hz and above 20 kHz. But that's no big deal for the average guy that just wants an idea of what his room is doing.

[Biermann]

Thanks for the answer's guys, I ordered the Behringer from Amazon so the return won't be a hassle.

Dennis, I was going to say that calibration report looked pretty darn good compared to the REW .cal file for the ECM-8000 I was just looking at. Sad to see the precision decrease as tech has improved.

[Jed]

Let us know the date of the measured calibration graph when you get it. If it says year 2000, I would think the accuracy might be in question.

[CupCak3]

I ordered one today. It'll probably be here Thursday. I'll post back with info!

[ergo]

For a measurement microphone would of course be nice if they provided the calibration graph with useful scaling - this 80dB range graph does not really allow extracting data with 1dB precision or so that would allow to make a decent cal file out of that graph.

But seems marketing side wants the graph to look flat - so they defenetly achieve that.

[benchtester]

For a measurement microphone would of course be nice if they provided the calibration graph with useful scaling - this 80dB range graph does not really allow extracting data with 1dB precision or so that would allow to make a decent cal file out of that graph.

But seems marketing side wants the graph to look flat - so they defenetly achieve that.

Same chart, less flat:



With some work a FRD file can be created with SPLTrace:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090421092619/http://www.pvconsultants.com/audio/utility/spl.htm

Here is a Chad Grey tutorial on creating a calibration file in Soundeasy from the FRD file:
http://chadgray.info/soundeasywiki/index.cfm/Tutorials#Creating%20the%20microphone%20calibratio n%20file

[CllessuR]

New Parts Express item:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?Partnumber=390-801

You can't beat it. $48 and it comes with an individual calibration curve.

That just saved me $30 since I was just about to pull the trigger on the old one.

-Bob

Cool, I just ordered it and thought it was the old one! Thanks for the headsup. I'll be watching for recommended acessory equipment, phantom power, etc. Plan on using True RTA.

Cllessur

[CllessuR]

Let us know the date of the measured calibration graph when you get it. If it says year 2000, I would think the accuracy might be in question.

I just ordered one too, from PE. what's the reason the ones from 2000 might be questionable as to calibration?

Cllessur

[CllessuR]

Same chart, less flat:



With some work a FRD file can be created with SPLTrace:

https://web.archive.org/web/20090421092619/http://www.pvconsultants.com/audio/utility/spl.htm

Here is a Chad Grey tutorial on creating a calibration file in Soundeasy from the FRD file:
http://chadgray.info/soundeasywiki/index.cfm/Tutorials#Creating%20the%20microphone%20calibratio n%20file

Well that sucks, can you dumb it down enough where I can get mine calibrated when it arrives? This process may be well worth making a sticky out of.

Thanks, CllessuR

[Kal Rubinson]

I just ordered one too, from PE. what's the reason the ones from 2000 might be questionable as to calibration?

Cllessur

Because, if the graph says it was made in 2000, it could not possibly be an accurate representation of your particular mic from current production, could it? Unless they are selling NOS. :W

Kal

[---k---]

Well, the graph Thomas posted does have the product ID as a EMM-6, which is a new product ID. So, my pure speculative guess is that tests are more recent than 2000 and someone didn't set the date in the testing computer. I guess the worrying is for nothing.

Thomas,
Where did that graph come from?

[Jed]

I just ordered one too, from PE. what's the reason the ones from 2000 might be questionable as to calibration?

Cllessur

It's 2009. And if this is a new product I'd expect calibration to be performed at least within the same year. Also, if the file looks exactly the same as the one posted on the website, I'd question whether or not it is a unique file to that specific mic.

[ThomasW]

Thomas,
Where did that graph come from?

The pdf on PE's webs

FWIW, the date on the pdf is 08.06.00

[Saurav]

LOL. Now we need to know which part of the world that date came from. It could be 0th August 2006 for all we know

[Zilch]

Start givin' them pressure on the PE Tech Forum to provide a data file with each unit. That low-res graph is all but useless.... :toilet:

[Dennis H]

I think that's just a low-rez scan of the paper graph. Do a 300 or 600 dpi scan of the graph, crop it to a bit more than +/- 10dB and you've got plenty of pixels to work with. SPL Tracer resizes whatever pic you paste in to full screen both horizontally and vertically.

[CupCak3]

I got my stuff today... great turnaround by PE and the carrier...

Box...



Comes with a decent black case...



Inside is mic, foam tip and a mic stand clip...



My plot...



The date... (I'm assuming someone didn't set the time on their workstation)

[Hdale85]

Yeah I wonder if that's what happened. Someone just didn't adjust the time/date on the machine. Surely these mics aren't even 9 years old.

[JonP]

Hmmm... wouldn't make sense for that to be 2008...

It would be nice if the blew the FR scale up so you could actually see it, but I understand the marketing dept pressures on emphasizing "flat" rather than "ragged" looking graphs.

Suggestion for marketing department... print 20dB/division response graph that looks like a flat line, AND give customer a nice text file with the response data at a usable resolution... :T

[---k---]

Even though the scale is pretty big, that is impressively flat.

But, at least that graph is different from the previous posted graph. Further confirmation that it is for that individual mic. Is there a serial number or anything that would match up to the 00011? The one Thomas posted looks like 00096.

[CupCak3]

I did not see anything on my mic (serial number or otherwise) which would identify it as unique or match it to the graph.

I'll gladly send my mic to someone for testing to verify the included graph does truly belong with the mic if any able person is interested.

[Biermann]

Thanks for posting the graph, the time stamp is also different so it looks like they got from #11 to #96 in a span of 40 minutes. I guess we shall know soon enough once mine and a few others' show up and we have a chance to compare graphs. The response graph looks pretty darn good compared to the Behringer, so hears to hoping these are the real deal.

[CllessuR]

Because, if the graph says it was made in 2000, it could not possibly be an accurate representation of your particular mic from current production, could it? Unless they are selling NOS. :W

Kal

OH. I see, I thought each was "individually" calibrated, so I guess a calibration may be in order. Who do people send these things to for calibration?

Cllessur

[ThomasW]

Kim Girardin
E-mail: kmgrdn@luminet.net

[benchtester]

Thanks for posting the graph, the time stamp is also different so it looks like they got from #11 to #96 in a span of 40 minutes. I guess we shall know soon enough once mine and a few others' show up and we have a chance to compare graphs. The response graph looks pretty darn good compared to the Behringer, so hears to hoping these are the real deal.

I, too, hope they are the real deal. A 28 second cycle time for testing sounds about right to me. (I've been working in a pump manufacturing facility with 100% test. We spend a few minutes testing but our pumps are 5 to 10 times the price of the mic.) Apparently they have a faster printer than mine.

I am a little concerned that there isn't a serial number. But at that price range I can understand that too. I just hope the charts and mics don't get separated. :E

[chasw98]

Just for reference in case you haven't seen one before. Here is my Kim Girardin cal file for my ECM. If you look through Jonw's thread on the Spassvogel, you can see his cal file for his mic and it is much different than mine.

[Mazeroth]

Here's my Kim G calibrated ECM8000. This microphone was purchased new from PE almost a year ago to the day:

Image not available

[Hdale85]

Well if someone wants to try and test one of these it would be interesting to know how accurate the PE calibration is.