ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Uhfr vs Ulxd  (Read 13304 times)

Dan Currie

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #20 on: September 22, 2016, 02:37:33 pm »

I had a moment to do a few more experiments...


4 UHFR at 100mw


4 UHFR at 100mw bundled together




4 UHFR at 100mw in the trays
Logged

Riley Casey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1364
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #21 on: September 23, 2016, 03:38:40 pm »

I'm going to bet that current SM58s sound more like their 1970s counterparts than 4560s with 2440s on 2350s sound like modern speakers.  :P


This is in connection to another recent thread about 58s.  Dave, do the new ones sound significantly different from the old ones?  It's so rare for me to hear new and old ones next to each other and in front of the same noise sources.

drew gandy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 271
  • Chicago and burbs
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #22 on: September 23, 2016, 09:32:28 pm »

I'm going to bet that current SM58s sound more like their 1970s counterparts than 4560s with 2440s on 2350s sound like modern speakers.  :P

Yeah! Tell me about it. 
Of course, a lot of things in mic land have gone the other way.  Ever use a PGA58? 
Logged
Remember, you can talk yourself into (or out of) anything.  That's how the human brain works...

brian maddox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2272
  • HeyYahWon! ttsss! ttsss!
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2016, 12:28:58 am »


Thank you for enlightening me.

I do remember calling it SIA-Smaart. In those times the hire company I worked for in Portugal had a Windows machine that would be formatted every month so I could reinstall the 30-day trial.

Sent from my Xylophone using Tapatalk...

I've still got a set of floppy disks that say JBL-Smaart on them.  Not sure where JBL factored into the mix, but I used that version of Smaaet for a lot of years....
Logged
"It feels wrong to be in the audience.  And it's too peopley!" - Steve Smith

brian maddox
bdmaudio@gmail.com

'...do not trifle with the affairs of dragons...

       ....for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup...'

Dan Currie

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #24 on: September 26, 2016, 09:33:32 pm »

On the Smaart topic...



UHFR


ULXD


UHFR/ULXD

The ULXD's are a little closer to 2.9ms but Smaart catches the peak just after it.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2016, 09:41:46 pm by Dan Currie »
Logged

Dave Stevens

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29660
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #25 on: September 27, 2016, 01:44:31 am »

This is in connection to another recent thread about 58s.  Dave, do the new ones sound significantly different from the old ones?  It's so rare for me to hear new and old ones next to each other and in front of the same noise sources.

I'm going to bet that current SM58s sound more like their 1970s counterparts than 4560s with 2440s on 2350s sound like modern speakers.  :Pa

ERC's hit the nail on the head with that one.   :)

My comment on a "new" 58 was a comparison between a mic that was smashed, caked in stale liquor and various bodily fluids and a new mic out of the box.  Not between generations.  However, I did the bark test using a 15-20 year old 58 from my touring workbox and a couple year old 58 from the show.  I couldn't really hear much a difference.  I haven't been using 58s for mission critical lead vocal in 15-20 years.    So much has changed in both loudspeakers and ear mons that any difference may well be up to the reproducing transducer rather than the mic.  With the 58 capsules we use for events with either a UHFR or ULXD I don't hear much of a difference, if any and the guys out in the truck haven't noticed anything.
Logged

Merlijn van Veen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 309
    • www.merlijnvanveen.nl
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #26 on: September 27, 2016, 03:44:02 am »

On the Smaart topic...



UHFR


ULXD


UHFR/ULXD

The ULXD's are a little closer to 2.9ms but Smaart catches the peak just after it.

Dan any change you have a dB(A) weighting in your measurements?


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

Dan Currie

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #27 on: September 27, 2016, 10:04:17 am »

Dan any change you have a dB(A) weighting in your measurements?


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPad met Tapatalk

Merlijn,
  Nice catch!! There had to have been something going on with the pink noise generator.  I was thinking, 'wow...those filters are way higher than a TM400.'  Not sure when I'll see the gear again but I'm happy to look into it. 
Logged

Riley Casey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1364
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #28 on: September 27, 2016, 12:29:19 pm »

" 4560s with 2440s on 2350s" That was an age test Dave.  You failed  ::)

Scott Helmke

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1421
Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #29 on: September 27, 2016, 01:27:31 pm »

Merlijn,
  Nice catch!! There had to have been something going on with the pink noise generator.  I was thinking, 'wow...those filters are way higher than a TM400.'  Not sure when I'll see the gear again but I'm happy to look into it.

The actual response is pretty ruler flat, but with some weirdness in the phase trace.

Ultimately there isn't enough gain in the beltpack to use it with a battery powered Earthworks test mic, and Shure doesn't yet make a test/measurement mic head for the handhelds.
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Uhfr vs Ulxd
« Reply #29 on: September 27, 2016, 01:27:31 pm »


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.076 seconds with 24 queries.