Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Charlie Jeal]

                 

Dave you almost owed me a new laptop then.

Charlie

[Tom Young]

......somehow that sort of makes sense when you consider you are working to reduce *comb* filtering.

(I know that is pretty lame)

[John Roberts {JR}]

For people who stick their nose where it doesn't belong?

JR

[Charlie Jeal]

JR,

While your on this thread I wonder if you can shed any light on this Peavey ERO 10 measurement mic? its got the AMR branding on the mic and I know you were involved in that group at Peavey.

Charlie

[John Roberts {JR}]

Charlie Jeal wrote on Fri, 09 January 2009 20:26

JR, While your on this thread I wonder if you can shed any light on this Peavey ERO 10 measurement mic? its got the AMR branding on the mic and I know you were involved in that group at Peavey. Charlie

While I didn't work on the transducer engineering, I was "AMR boy" back in my early  days.

The ERO-10 was not designed as a measurement mic but a recording mic, and they  sounded quite good (IMO) when used right. IIRC it was an omni.

AFAIK the capsule wasn't anything special, but they are generally quite flat up to 8 kHz or so, and while not uber flat much above that have usable response as high as you need for most recording.

Peavey needed a measurement mic when they started selling their early digitally controlled analog graphic EQ, so the ERO-10 got drafted, painted black, and presto it was a Peavey measurement mic.. I think the Peavey model had a different name (PV....something).

I kind of liked using one or two of them for overheads above a drum kit (in the studio).

JR

[Charlie Jeal]

Thanks for that JR,


Looks like the TR40 will have to earns its living a while longer then, although I'm pretty sure I can always find a use for the ERO 10.

Charlie

[John Roberts {JR}]

Charlie Jeal wrote on Fri, 09 January 2009 20:53

Thanks for that JR, Looks like the TR40 will have to earns its living a while longer then, although I'm pretty sure I can always find a use for the ERO 10. Charlie

Not to disparage anybodies mic, but is suspect many low cost "reference" mics use off the shelf capsules and are not manually trimmed.  They are quite good stock at low-mid frequencies where it matters..

I can sell you a capsule for $1 that'll probably do OK (I use two in my tuner) but you'll need to wire it into a shell and connector and add a few sundry discrete components...

JR

[Charlie Jeal]

Once I'm back to full working capacity when the hernias fixed I'll go buy another M30 to replace my currently banana shaped one, some idiot dropped my bag over a 20' balcony and the rest of the contents bent it a little. Of course as usual no-one knew who it was that did it so I'm left with the cost so the back up TR40 will have to do.

Charlie

[Nick Hickman]

John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 10 January 2009 02:48

Peavey needed a measurement mic when they started selling their early digitally controlled analog graphic EQ, so the ERO-10 got drafted, painted black, and presto it was a Peavey measurement mic.. I think the Peavey model had a different name (PV....something).

Was it the PVR1?

The Peavey PVR2 is still available.  From the way it and its packaging look, one would guess it originates from the same place as the Behringer ECM8000.  I compared my PVR2 against my M30:

Nick

[Tom Young]

It appears my recollection was flawed. Sorry about that.

[ProSoundWeb Community]