Nicely done Marco. Fun hearing your voice too.

replace your the OP link with your just added media video. See the camera icon? It's where your media is located now.

audiokid, post: 439144, member: 1 wrote: Nicely done Marco. Fun hearing your voice too.
I would add (embed) this into your media files here: http://recording.org/media/add

Thanks Chris, I hope my french accent doesn't disturb too much ;)

pcrecord, post: 439146, member: 46460 wrote: Thanks Chris, I hope my french accent doesn't disturb too much ;)

Nah, its awesome. :love:

Ok thanks ! :)

That was cool Marco. Kinda neat hearing my pal's voice for the first time, too. :)

Video is totally pro man, gonna have to pick your brain on some things as far as how you accomplished the production so well! Killer, looking forward to more.!
Ps. Love the accent. I'm half frennch Canadian myself, but Boston people don't sound nearly as cool. It really is remarkable how good this mic sounds. Excellent..

K,
The audio is obvious, T47 and KSM44 - ISA - UA 4-710 converter - RME FF800
The video is a Canon T6i with a timelapse controler taking 1 photo each 2 secs, then adobe premier...

I wonder how much the pre amp is contributing to the fullness, all in all its a fairly transparent signal chain. It's not the first time I've immediately noticed something a bit special when the isa was involved. But really it seems to me like the mic is 85% of the sound.

It just sounded so legit on my phone, which usually leaves a lot to be desired.

Aside from what you've already answered. I've got a couple more.

What sample rate did you use, how did you do the bounce/SRC, did you use dither at all?

What about the encoding to you tube? Did you use a standalone encoding algorithm ?

Also how did you do the little intro thing? That's actually something I want to do as one of my services. With so many YouTube channels I equate it to a business card design type thing.

Cannon eh? I swear cannon lol, I got to use/rent one of there HD handhelds for a wedding project one time. Thing was like 10k sticker. Got it from ats rentals in Boston for 300 for the weekend.

Would you mind if I copy catted you and built one or two of those mics sometime? I'd like to stRt w something I know sounds good.

kmetal :
ISA ?? you have a good point about the ISA, I will test the mic with the internal pre of my RME ff800 and compare the sound. I'll let you know. I chose the ISA because they are the preamps I own that are the most transparent (even tho they are transformer based). Since the Mic has a JFet and a transformer, I'll check with other pre. Just to give you an idea

Sample Rate : I always record at 24bit96khz in sonar. I then export from Sonar to a 16bit 48khz file (using sonar default dithering), Then I import it Adobe Premiere.

Encoding Youtube : Adobe Premier has a prebuilt HD youtube export setting.. in the export menu, I just scroll and choose the format I need.

About the intro : I happen to have created my logo myself in photoshop. Since each part was a layer I exported each one seperatly and then imported those images in Adobe Premiere.
once in Premier I could easily play with the position and movement of the logo's parts
Also I recorded the music myself Acoustic guitar, electric bass are real instruments and the drum was recorded on TD9 kit then played on Addictive Drums

Canon : Yes, I've been a Canon user for years. It'll be hard to change now since I own a few nice lens and many speedlights. Filming with a DSLR is a great budget way to get
good quality. The T6i I use have an acceptable autofocus in video mode, so it isn't so bad

I wouldn't present the products from microphone-parts.com as a success story if I wanted to be alone. Matt is a very nice guy and offer pristine diy kits. I'm waiting for my second one (the T12)
Copy cat me anytime you want K ;)

Sweet deal Marco. Are you using the Isa one? Seems there's dual, quad, and 8 channel versions. Also have you used the digital out option with the isa? I know you mentioned the UA conversion for the vid, just wondering if you've ever used the focusrite conversion.

So looks like I'll be looking into some of those might kits I'll make sure I speak with Matt when the time comes. Also looks like canon is a good place to look for DSLR cameras for a casual person like me, between my iPhone, and iPad, and the DSlR i'll be close to the four camera angle maximum allowed in my video editing program.

That logo process sounds like it was tedious, is that the case?

Is there any reason you went with the T6i instead of the T6S? I quickly googled it and noticed a $200 price difference, I figured I'd ask you before I started trying to decipher the specs

Oh sorry, my bad... I have the T6S !! lol the big difference for me is that it can focus between pictures burst mode.

I have 2 ISA Two and 1 ISA 428 mk1 I don't have their converter card, so I send the signal to the UA 4-710 which offer 4 inputs to the converter and then it goes to the FF800 via adat.

I'm also interested to Matt's kit with an 87 capsule but I already had the circuit T84 (ordered an extra one while trouble shooting my T47) so I ordered the rest of the parts to build a T12 ;)

Hey guys, I thought I'd add a small recording of the T47 with the preamp of the RME FF800 VS the ISA.
For those who fear the ISA might be a the magic wand to the sound of my video.

I think they sound very similar but the FF800 have a bit less Hi-mid and highs..
Let me know what you think
Specially you kmetal ;)

[MEDIA=audio]http://recording.or…

Attached files T47 & ISA VS FF800.mp3 (2.4 MB) 

Oh, I should say is that the ISA will sound different if I use different impedance settings. On my last recording, it was set to the ISA110 setting. I also have a low setting med and high !

Interesting and thank you for doing this. I love comparisons.
I'm not listening in my studio but I am listening through good monitoring.

• FF800 has a more natural upper mid.
• ISA has a brighter possibly edgier upper mid.

In this comparison,I prefer the FF800. I also believe it would take EQ better.

I thought so too Chris ;) Thanks

Thing is, this is just showing a speach recording. When I get a willing signer here, I'll make further tests ;)
All in all to this point, I'm loving this little mic ! :)

pcrecord, post: 439245, member: 46460 wrote: Thing is, this is just showing a speach recording.

One of the very nice things I noticed, and that I personally listen for - is how pleasant sounding the "S's" are... and I attribute that mostly to the mic, ( though we can't leave out your voice, either) because the S's sounded smooth and silky using both pre's.
That said, both pre's you used are nice pre's... but, it all starts with the mic. There's not a pre in the world that will polish a turd mic that sounds bad on its own. LOL

I think you've really got a winner here, Marco. (y)
Nicely done, Mon Ami. ;)

So, can you give us the final price tag of how much it cost you to build the mic, and roughly the amount of time you had in the final build after you solved the faulty transformer issue?

The kit is 369$ USD on www.microphone-parts.com and if i remember it was 15 or 25$ for the shipping to Canada.
I had a defective part which I won't put in the equation because Matt was very nice and gave me many rebates on the parts I need to build a second mic.
Once I got the second transformer, it took 10min to install and the mic was working.

It took about 2 hours to build and the instruction booklet is so detailed that at no point I was in doubt on what to do next.

Awesome, pal... thanks. :)

DonnyThompson, post: 439252, member: 46114 wrote: One of the very nice things I noticed, and that I personally listen for - is how pleasant sounding the "S's" are

yeah.

pcrecord, post: 439245, member: 46460 wrote: When I get a willing signer here, I'll make further tests

It will be interesting to hear how it holds up to SPL. Have you tried belting out some vocals?

audiokid, post: 439263, member: 1 wrote: It will be interesting to hear how it holds up to SPL. Have you tried belting out some vocals?

I did try to record one of my song to see how different the sound is and I can tell I can be very close to it without problems. I intend to try it on a bass drum and/or as a room mic in a near future.. I'm guessing it will take high spl well. btw it has an internal -10db pad switch and a polar patern switch.

It's part of my process to make many tests with new gear I get. I'll get back to you with my results. It's fun to have some interest on what I do ;)

pcrecord, post: 439242, member: 46460 wrote: Hey guys, I thought I'd add a small recording of the T47 with the preamp of the RME FF800 VS the ISA.
For those who fear the ISA might be a the magic wand to the sound of my video.

I think they sound very similar but the FF800 have a bit less Hi-mid and highs..
Let me know what you think
Specially you kmetal ;)

[MEDIA=audio]http://recording.or…

First of all Marco, thank you so much for taking the time to do this.

I've been listening to these on my phone because that's how we roll over here at couch potato studios, and I will say they both sound quite good, although I seem to be hearing the exact opposite of Chris.

To my ears, the ISA sounds a bit scooped, Relative to the FF 800, and seems a bit "Richer" in the top end, and perhaps a bit more "setback". From the phone The ISA sits better, but securely in this role as a voiceover. As soon as possible I'd like to obviously relisten on a set of decent speakers, but those are my first impressions.

As Donny said there is absolutely no bite in the sssss's and it sounds very smooth and defined.

And absolutely none of that harsh upper mid range that is prevalent in so much gear today even beyond just the budget level.

This easily sounds like it's from the thousand dollar price category. Can't wait to hear your next bill, looking forward to making a few of my own.

Do you notice any tonal differences between DISA two and the I SA for? I always wonder when the same device is in various different rack formats whether or not there is any sacrifice in quality, particularly with the ISA 8. If I remember correctly the I SA two is a single space rack And the ISA for is a dual space rack box, so it seems that the space requirements are proportional.

Looks like a Canon DSLR camera is now on the list for me.

kmetal, post: 439279, member: 37533 wrote: To my ears, the ISA sounds a bit scooped, Relative to the FF 800, and seems a bit "Richer" in the top end, and perhaps a bit more "setback". From the phone The ISA sits better, but securely in this role as a voiceover. As soon as possible I'd like to obviously relisten on a set of decent speakers, but those are my first impressions.

I agree, the ISA sounds brighter but imho that is not necessarily my preferred choice. I'll explain my theory.

This is what I meant when I thought this mic sounded more natural through the FF800 and would take EQ better.

The ISA sounds altered (scooped as you nailed it) like an exciter was incorporated into the design. I'd rather have the option to "scoop" or add excitement via my EQ where needed.

Thus, the ISA would not be my choice for brighter upper mid sources. The ISA is limiting tracking uses for me which is why I prefer the FF800 in this comparison.

That's cool man, that's kind of what I thought you were getting out in the original post. Particularly with your awesome mid range EQ's I could see where having a less "pre-eq" type sound to disk makes a whole lot of sense.

In all honesty he I think I'm in general a sucker for a scooped sound, and a lot of high-end. It's actually something I'm trying to address in your mixes, because I think I goose the top way too much especially on vocals. And snares. This ends up with some issues in mixing, and even worse issues in mastering.

The ISAs are my best choice for quiet sources, for drums and guitars.
I would usually chose one of my LA-610 for vocals, but if I do tests, the both sound different.
So the ISA are wiser choice to keep it real and not trick people. I will also consider doing tests with the FF800...

As for the difference between the ISA Two and 428. I didn't scientificly compared them, but I get the impression the sounds very alike. Same headroom and clean power. I was lucky to find my 428 as a brand new unused demo in a store for 1k (CAD) and it's actually an older build than the ISA two I got...

And guys guess what ? I just received the parts for my second build (T12). I'll let you know how it turns out ;)

What's interesting here is I have never liked the FF800 preamps. They lack clarity and life in comparison to higher end preamps.

I suspect the reason I prefer the FF800 pre-amps in this comparison could be because the mic has bright attributes which the FF800 could be taming down or liking the most (less revealing).

Just a hunch. Thoughts?

The T47 actually produce less high frequencies than other mics I own (like the KSM 44 and a lot less then the StudioProject C1)

I guess in the sample I made, I didn't have problems with the HF of the ISA. To me the high-mids were more pronounced which got my voice to be a bit more nazal.

This is very tricky because there is many things at play when doing mic/preamps shootouts.
The gain at which a preamp is set may change how it sounds and also the impedance (which cannot be set on the RME)
Also the tone of my voice can be different at different times and I could have a different projection and/or intention. (I'm not doing this everyday)
If I listen to my voice on the video, I don't really think there is too much high-mids.
But the audio recording was recorded all with the FF800 and then I introduced the ISA.
Maybe if I would have done it the otherway around the opinions would be different. We may have said the FF800 lacks clarity, because we got used to it before the comparaison...

Just some thoughts ;)

What you've done already has proven the T47 kit is a hell of a deal because they both sound good. Its a winner for voice-overs already and most likely a lot of other sources too. Keep going .

audiokid, post: 439321, member: 1 wrote: What you've done already has proven the T47 kit is a hell of a deal because they both sound good. Its a winner for voice-overs already and most likely a lot of other sources too. Keep going .

+1. Absolutely.

Can't wait to hear what the others sound like. By the time a I actually heard the ff800 pres a few years ago, I've been reading for years how 'amazing' they were. By the time I heard them I felt they were a bit lackluster. But maybe my expectations were too high?

If nothing else this demo shows that the pre is as good as the mic that's plugged into it. The ISA sounds better than when I heard a 57 through it, which I thought sounded pretty damn good (solid and clean), and the ff800 pres sound leagues better than the other recording which was probably online somewhere.

In all honesty unless the test is for like matching components, or benchmarks, I don't think scientific approaches tell the whole story. I think a test like this that shows the gear used in typical everyday fashion, with similar gain levels really tells us what to expect in general.

Now if we were all in the same studio, hearing the same thing, maybe a little closer matching of things would matter, but with me on my phone, Chris in his studio, Ect Ect, I think this test is perfect.

I look forward to more of these from you Marco, and everyone else.

Some of the gear we use isn't possible to build, but I've been saying for a while now that I think there's a lot of namesake going on when we're talking about say 1,500$ for one Chanel of a design that is forty+ years old.

Microphone-parts obviously did their homework with the components they selected. This is a great thread.