Old 05-09-2021, 08:36 PM   #81
RJHollins
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,700
Default

With my recent re-purchase of a new ECM-8000 [because I needed the CAL file]

I compared it to my old 8000 curves [mic is 10-15 yrs old], the response
curves were quite similar ... taking into account the CAL correction.

So ... the 'quality' of the mic seems the same .... EXCEPT, with the new
one, you do not get a nice Case, nor a windscreen or mic clip :|

So, yeah ... they have gone cheap.
RJHollins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2021, 08:45 PM   #82
Tod
Human being with feelings
 
Tod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Just outside of Glacier National Park
Posts: 13,359
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Mine was from 2001. The thing to remember is the worst of ecm8000 issues are in the high end. That doesn't mean the low end couldn't be more accurate but those using it with REW for bass traps are probably are not suffering as much.
Thanks Karbo, I didn't know this and in all honesty I can't hear the really high stuff, so probably wouldn't hear the difference anyway.
Tod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2021, 05:45 AM   #83
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,489
Default

After comparing a lot of settings and techniques since my last post in this thread, I think I'm now fully able to answer the initial "question": Sonarworks Negatives.

My room isn't perfect, and there's only a limited amount of acoustic treatment I can put up (door/window/full-length built-in wardrobe on the back wall), and that amount I've likely exhausted if I still want some space to work in here.
So room correction software to the rescue. I started with Sonarworks some 2 years ago and felt, in comparison, that the sound in the room had improved significantly. Suddenly it was more fun to mix and compose. Yet something didn't feel 100% right. A/B'ing on other systems still presented me the flaws of my efforts which I thought sounded good in the studio. At least that's why you buy Sonarworks in the first place, right?

Then I got new headphones and a new headphone correction software, which again painted a completely different picture of what was going on sonically. I was totally confused to say the least and demo'd ARC3 out of interest. Not only did it sound tighter, but it also introduced only 32 samples of latency in the monitor FX chain. Bought this, sold Sonarworks including the microphone.

That last part in italics is the crucial one, which makes me come back to the "Sonarworks Negatives" question: the downside of Sonarworks, in my opinion, after testing hundreds (exaggerated) of measured profiles, is their measurement approach. You point the (cheapish) microphone horizontally and angled at the center between the speakers.

In ARC3 the only requirement is the (approximate) position of your respective measurement point. The mic shoots horizontally 90° at the front wall or - and this exactly was my revelation - it is simply angled 90° upwards (as "usually" those measurements were and still are made.). Furthermore, ARC3 builds its measurement/profile upon a room size/geometry template, which you need to choose at the beginning. In my case, I selected "project studio", the smallest room with a shorter distance between the measurement points.

I was shocked when I first heard the profile created with a Beyerdynamic MM1 (with cal file) pointing upwards. I never heard such clarity and such details in this room, no, not even on those speakers (Tannoy 10" dual concentrics with sub). Seriously, I was almost crying.
Opening the mix project from the day before finally broke the Sonarworks camel's back. I immediately knew what to change and what to do, I questioned not a single mix decision! Rooms, distortion, filters, compression ... incredibly easy and, above all, fast to dial in. EQ steps of a fraction of a dB: night and day. Let alone the choice of plugin (or outboard) colour: before it was "OK, A is nice, but B is also not bad, and C as well". Now it's "A definitely is the wrong tool. B? Perfect - let's go for it!"

So the next time you wonder why your mixes don't come out the way you'd expect them to - consider room treatment and a correction software which allows you to use 3rd party mics at 0° or 90°. It's the best spent money EVER!
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!
beingmf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2021, 05:53 AM   #84
maxdembo
Human being with feelings
 
maxdembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: All Hallows End
Posts: 1,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beingmf View Post
After comparing a lot of settings and techniques since my last post in this thread, I think I'm now fully able to answer the initial "question": Sonarworks Negatives.

My room isn't perfect, and there's only a limited amount of acoustic treatment I can put up (door/window/full-length built-in wardrobe on the back wall), and that amount I've likely exhausted if I still want some space to work in here.
So room correction software to the rescue. I started with Sonarworks some 2 years ago and felt, in comparison, that the sound in the room had improved significantly. Suddenly it was more fun to mix and compose. Yet something didn't feel 100% right. A/B'ing on other systems still presented me the flaws of my efforts which I thought sounded good in the studio. At least that's why you buy Sonarworks in the first place, right?

Then I got new headphones and a new headphone correction software, which again painted a completely different picture of what was going on sonically. I was totally confused to say the least and demo'd ARC3 out of interest. Not only did it sound tighter, but it also introduced only 32 samples of latency in the monitor FX chain. Bought this, sold Sonarworks including the microphone.

That last part in italics is the crucial one, which makes me come back to the "Sonarworks Negatives" question: the downside of Sonarworks, in my opinion, after testing hundreds (exaggerated) of measured profiles, is their measurement approach. You point the (cheapish) microphone horizontally and angled at the center between the speakers.

In ARC3 the only requirement is the (approximate) position of your respective measurement point. The mic shoots horizontally 90° at the front wall or - and this exactly was my revelation - it is simply angled 90° upwards (as "usually" those measurements were and still are made.). Furthermore, ARC3 builds its measurement/profile upon a room size/geometry template, which you need to choose at the beginning. In my case, I selected "project studio", the smallest room with a shorter distance between the measurement points.

I was shocked when I first heard the profile created with a Beyerdynamic MM1 (with cal file) pointing upwards. I never heard such clarity and such details in this room, no, not even on those speakers (Tannoy 10" dual concentrics with sub). Seriously, I was almost crying.
Opening the mix project from the day before finally broke the Sonarworks camel's back. I immediately knew what to change and what to do, I questioned not a single mix decision! Rooms, distortion, filters, compression ... incredibly easy and, above all, fast to dial in. EQ steps of a fraction of a dB: night and day. Let alone the choice of plugin (or outboard) colour: before it was "OK, A is nice, but B is also not bad, and C as well". Now it's "A definitely is the wrong tool. B? Perfect - let's go for it!"

So the next time you wonder why your mixes don't come out the way you'd expect them to - consider room treatment and a correction software which allows you to use 3rd party mics at 0° or 90°. It's the best spent money EVER!
Am I reading this correctly, ARC3 is great? Preferred to Sonarworks?
maxdembo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2021, 06:00 AM   #85
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxdembo View Post
Am I reading this correctly, ARC3 is great? Preferred to Sonarworks?
That's my experience, yes.
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!
beingmf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2021, 06:13 AM   #86
maxdembo
Human being with feelings
 
maxdembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: All Hallows End
Posts: 1,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by beingmf View Post
That's my experience, yes.
Excellent, thanks for the detailed feedback, really appreciated.
maxdembo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2021, 08:58 AM   #87
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 4,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxdembo View Post
Excellent, thanks for the detailed feedback, really appreciated.
You're welcome. Finally, I think it's a combination of a) the better mic with b) the 90° upwards measuring and c) the basic design of the software itself.
I haven't had the chance to make the same measurement with the new ARC microphone, but I seriously doubt it can touch the Beyerdynamic in terms of quality and reliability of the recording.
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.1.2.0 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
Experience the Blunzeworscht!
beingmf is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.