The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Enhanced Audio M600 mic mount - Audio Samples
Old 4th March 2006
  #1
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Enhanced Audio M600 mic mount - Audio Samples

Hello Everyone,

OK, there's been a lot of talk about these wonderful mounts but nobody had yet posted any samples, so I decided I would share a short sample which I recorded with the M600 and with the Chinese mount that came with the mic used to record these.

The recording chain used to record these samples is high end and transparent and it was recorded using a high end Ribbon microphone (I am not putting names of manufacturers for the sake of keeping the conversation about the mounts, instead of diverting the attention to some other piece of gear).

I didn't have a chance to go into a studio so it was done in my apartment.

The sample is of me playing a short segment from a Bach solo flute movement from the Partita in a minor. I have played these 2 files to a few people and they all agree that there is a palpable difference.

One was recorded after the other and the height and distance to the mic was the same in both instances.

I am curious to hear what you guys think..

Thank you
Peace
Marco
Attached Files

Bach M600 44k16bit.WAV (5.40 MB, 2628 views)

Bach Chinese Mount 44K16bit.WAV (5.58 MB, 2485 views)

Old 4th March 2006
  #2
Lives for gear
 
lowswing's Avatar
 

if the only thing that change is the mic mount (and not your position etc...) than i have to say i'm impressed with the new mount
Old 4th March 2006
  #3
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
setup

Quote:
Originally Posted by lowswing
if the only thing that change is the mic mount (and not your position etc...) than i have to say i'm impressed with the new mount
My position and distance from the mic was the same and I tried to play the same, as much as I could both times (in terms of interpretation). I have to say that I am really impressed with the mounts, I don't want to use any other mounts after trying these!
Old 4th March 2006
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Thanks a lot for the kind efforts.
To my humble ears the difference seems obvious. The example of the new shockmount simply has more from everything, frequency ( especially low mids ) room ( almost like cardioid to omni ) and presence.
Hadn´t I experienced the difference between a buffered and unbuffered stand myself just days ago, I would had assumed that you had been closer to the mic with the new shockmount example.

After my trial with isolating the stand I posted about it in another thread and speculated about suspect build up and cancellation from vibrations either going from the floor through the stand into the mic, or / and eventually even through the mics housing when being hold too elastically with rubber strings (?).

It is weird on first glance that a mic can be better isolated through a stiff construction than through an elastical one, but apparently that´s how it is.

I suppose everybody will be profitting from the new insight, even if it will be costing him almost 300 bucks for a rather simple construction.

But the advantage of freeing the signal from mud and FQ loss should be making things so much easier and better during mixing time. thumbsup

Ruphus
Old 4th March 2006
  #5
Lives for gear
 
syra's Avatar
The sound difference is huge...can it be the mic mount alone?...I'm speechless if it is.
Old 5th March 2006
  #6
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
try it for yourself!

Quote:
Originally Posted by syra
The sound difference is huge...can it be the mic mount alone?...I'm speechless if it is.
The only thing I could say to that is that you should try one for yourself. Like I said before, I can't go back to using regular mounts. Even with high end small diaphragm condensers, which are really detailed, I feel there's a marked improvement in the amount of HF clarity with the M600 mounts.

The flute is one of those instruments where it is so easy to sound harsh and tight up in the high register and I feel the M600 mounts give me a chance at achieving the degree of clarity I am after in my recordings.

I've tried those mounts with high end mics and with not so high end mics and in both cases the improvement is palpable. It's a worthwhile investment.

Peace
Marco
Old 5th March 2006
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Kyle Ashley's Avatar
 

I'd like to get one but my only problem is that they only hold mics up to 65mm and my Charteroak is about 68mm. I wonder if they will offer a larger model one day?
Old 5th March 2006
  #8
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Contact David

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Ashley
I'd like to get one but my only problem is that they only hold mics up to 65mm and my Charteroak is about 68mm. I wonder if they will offer a larger model one day?
Contact David at www.enhancedaudio.ie to see if he can do something for you. He's great to deal with, and he's been very helpful every time I've had a question or concern about the mounts.

Peace
Marco
Old 6th March 2006
  #9
Gear addict
 

hate to be the lone detractor but

the m600 mount has more low frquency harmonic content and this is very hard to believe that the mount alone could do that.More likely the way you played the piece is the causation of the change.Has to be a more scientific way of showing that harmonic richness is increased via the mic holder.
Old 6th March 2006
  #10
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
M600 test

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucegel
the m600 mount has more low frquency harmonic content and this is very hard to believe that the mount alone could do that.More likely the way you played the piece is the causation of the change.Has to be a more scientific way of showing that harmonic richness is increased via the mic holder.
Unfortunately I don't have pairs of the ribbon microphone I used to record the files; otherwise I would have recorded both microphones at the same time. I think what I will try to do next, is setup a matched pair of small diaphragm condensers mics together, one with the M600 and one with the stock suspension mount and see what happens then. At least my performance will be Exactly the same in both samples.

Peace
Marco
Old 6th March 2006
  #11
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucegel
More likely the way you played the piece is the causation of the change.Has to be a more scientific way of showing that harmonic richness is increased via the mic holder.
I concur. I cannot hear a big difference. In my experience, most of the time the difference between two takes with identical setups is bigger than in these examples.

Eg. the first five notes of the M600 clip are played with more diaphragm pressure, more controlled/projected sound and better frasing. I don't think a shockmount can do that
Old 6th March 2006
  #12
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
New test

Ok, I agree that the testing methodology wasn't quite accurate but I still think these mounts make a big difference (for me they do, and that's all I care). I just wanted to share my enthusiasm for something that I think improves the sound of recording.

This is a new test done with a matched pair of high end small diaphragm condensers. They were placed side by side, at the same height and distance and recorded at the same TIME, so the performance and the Breath support, etc. is the same. They were aimed at the body of the flute, placed a little bit higher than the instrument.

You are welcome to think what you want, I still hear a difference!

Peace
Marco
Attached Files

Bach M600 mount.WAV (5.69 MB, 2721 views)

Bach stock mount.WAV (5.68 MB, 2005 views)

Old 6th March 2006
  #13
Gear interested
 

Dear Marco

Thank you for posting your recordings and your overwhelming support
and enthusiasm for the Enhanced Audio M600.

You may be interested to read this recent quote,

"I used the Enhanced Audio M600 extensively during the making of the
David Gilmour album 'On An Island'.

Apart from the vocal, the other main application I used them on
was on some of the drum mics, and on the bass guitar amplifier.

The M600 makes the mic more focused and bigger sounding,
particularly the bottom end, which is tighter and cleaner.

It's like switching from 16 bit to 24 bit".

Andy Jackson
Engineer, (David Gilmour/Pink Floyd)

You may also like to visit www.davidgilmour.com

Click on ‘On An Island’ to view the daily video clip, plus the Electronic Press Kit.
See if you can spot the M600.

Also available is http://emirecords.co.uk/players/dg/
Check out the ‘On An Island’ video

‘On An Island’ is released in the UK on 6th March and in the US on the 7th March.

Best regards

David Browne
Enhanced Audio
Old 6th March 2006
  #14
Lives for gear
 
syra's Avatar
yeah, the difference still is big...I need to try one of those...
Old 6th March 2006
  #15
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

Hello David,

How about a reasonable price?
I don´t know what a "low resonant aluminium ring" is supposed to be as I´d think a aluminium ring to resonate or not consistantly according to its mass, but wouldn´t say ~ 60 to 150 bucks be plenty trade value for such a piece of manufactory?

As it works well many people will be buying it. The more close to reasonable the price the more.

Otherwise a good part of the folks might wait until another manufacturer brings out a rigid holder.

( I recall to have asked Waves a similar question years ago, but they preferred to keep their extreme-on-the-item policy and got corresponding market reaction after a while.)

Audio Technica guys, are you listening? Turn on the mills!

Ruphus

PS:
To the Brauner people although obviously rarely lurking on the net:
Now that it seems that clamping works better, couldn´t you deliver massive spare parts that would replace the rubber of your shockmounts by simply wedging between holder and mic?
Old 6th March 2006
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Hmm, the second example with the matched mic pair I actually prefere the sample without the M600 mount. It has a more even recording somehow. However, if the point was that there truly is a difference then I agree.

Cheers!
bManic
Old 12th March 2006
  #17
Lives for gear
 
AdamJay's Avatar
 

any chance of hearing the M600 a/b'd with a stock mount on something other than flute... say.. a male vocal perhaps?

unfortunately, i record more male vocalists than flutists. (whatchagonnado?)
Old 12th March 2006
  #18
Lives for gear
 

Yeah, I thought the same thing. Not too many flutes coming through my studio, and not to be rude, but the this particular flute recording doesn't suit my taste. Don't know if it was the mic or the room or what, but it sounded weird to me, and it was a little hard to hear past that. I'm not knocking it, I'm just saying it's not my taste. I prefer a more airy open flute, on the rare occasion that I'm recording one. But, that's beside the point. This company would do themselves a lot of good if they would post some vox or acoustic guitar samples. I'll believe it when I hear it, and there are too many variables with this flute recording. I think acoustic guitar and vox recorded in a good room would be more telling.

j
Old 12th March 2006
  #19
Lives for gear
 
AdamJay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayman
Yeah, I thought the same thing. Not too many flutes coming through my studio, and not to be rude, but the this particular flute recording doesn't suit my taste. Don't know if it was the mic or the room or what, but it sounded weird to me, and it was a little hard to hear past that. I'm not knocking it, I'm just saying it's not my taste. I prefer a more airy open flute, on the rare occasion that I'm recording one.
Isn't that a bit subjective though? i mean the subject isn't the recording itself, but rather the a/b comparison of the recording without and with the M600.
it was recorded in an apartment.

when i listen to these types of a/b tests i'm not judging the recording itself. but rather the differences between the recordings, as we are judging the variable. In this case, the variable is the microphone mount. With the M600, the flute sounded more finished, as if it were solo'd in a mix, complete with equalization. Without the M600, it sounded about as good a flute recording one could get in an apartment.

I was curious to perhaps how the tonal shape of a male vocal would change, would it be as noticable as the flute example, or less noticable. But realizing that another sample of a male vocal will most likely not answer my question, i think i'll just go ahead and order a pair from lasvegasproaudio tomorrow. They have a great trial/return system, and if gilmour's engineer, mr. wagener, and so many others (with reputations on the line) are saying this thing rocks then the least i can do is utilize lasvegasproaudio's trial system. I've learned that some questions just cannot be answered on forums or with a/b tests. I need to hear what this thing does to MY TC30k's and MY AT4060.
When i realize how much great gear i've bought for thousands of dollars without hearing it in MY environment, a $275 mic mount endorsed by so many suddenly becomes a very, very small chance to take.
Old 13th March 2006
  #20
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayman
I prefer a more airy open flute, on the rare occasion that I'm recording one.
Perhaps you are just used to the way many engineers record flute by putting a mic in front of the mouthpiece, thereby accentuating the high frequency airiness of the tone. That's just not my style. The flute was recorded by aiming the mics at the body of the instrument not the mouthpiece, that's why you don't hear the breathy airiness of the tone. Anyway, it's just another way or concept of recording flute. Like someone else said, it's not about the recording but about the variable implied in the use of the mount. Considering I didn't use EQ the M600 mount bring a focus to the recording that it is often difficult to achieve even with the best EQs. Just my .02 cents.

Peace
Marco
Old 13th March 2006
  #21
Gear Head
 

I'm surprised at the difference between the 2 versions... I do play flute everyday so I'm quite used to how it sounds, and to my hears the recording made with the stock shockmount was lacking the 'solidity' in the bass (for lack of a better term) that the other one had.

A beautiful flute tone I must say, it shows that you worked a lot on your instrument!
Old 13th March 2006
  #22
Lives for gear
 
sunflute's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elie
A beautiful flute tone I must say, it shows that you worked a lot on your instrument!
Thank you Elie
Peace
Marco
Old 13th March 2006
  #23
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamJay
Isn't that a bit subjective though? i mean the subject isn't the recording itself, but rather the a/b comparison of the recording without and with the M600.
it was recorded in an apartment.

when i listen to these types of a/b tests i'm not judging the recording itself. but rather the differences between the recordings, as we are judging the variable. In this case, the variable is the microphone mount. With the M600, the flute sounded more finished, as if it were solo'd in a mix, complete with equalization. Without the M600, it sounded about as good a flute recording one could get in an apartment.
Yes, it is subjective, and that's why I said it was just a matter of my taste. My main point is: for ME, this particular recording, in this environment (an apartment with an occasional car driving by), along with the variable of him possibly playing different for each take (a variable which others have mentioned in this thread) make it difficult for me to make a determination on this product.

You're right AdamJay, it is a small chance to take considering the $$ we spend on other gear. Especially with the trial/return program they offer.

j
Old 13th March 2006
  #24
Lives for gear
 
AdamJay's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayman
along with the variable of him possibly playing different for each take (a variable which others have mentioned in this thread) make it difficult for me to make a determination on this product.
did you check out the new files, post #12in this thread?

he recorded the same take. matched pair of condensors side by side.
this is the take that i judge. i came into the thread late and didn't bother to listen to the first pair of comparison files.

check it out if you haven't yet. its a more controlled comparison, and the differences can be better judged i think.
Old 13th March 2006
  #25
Lives for gear
 

OK, my bad! I'm sorry, I didn't see the new post. If you download the first test at the top of the thread, you'll know why I was saying what I was saying, including the part about the quality of the recording. The new test is night and day, and MUCH easier to hear and believe the difference. Sorry to all about that!

j
Old 13th March 2006
  #26
Lives for gear
 
Brad McGowan's Avatar
The science behind it all.

For my day job I work as a mechanical engineer in the aerospace industry. I design aerospace structures. I've been following this thread and was equally impressed with the improved clarity of the M600 samples. After talking with some of the other designers, dynamicists, and stress analysts I work with I think I can shed some light on the science behind this product.

Typical environmental acoustic disturbances due to mechanical vibrations such as traffic, heavy machinery, and seismic energy, live in the subsonic and infrasonic frequency ranges. The largest amplitudes of noise from these sources are present below ~100 Hz. Traditional shockmounts use elastic suspension to isolate the mic from subsonic disturbances. However, the resonant or natural frequency of these elastic bands is most likely on the order of 10 Hz (give or take). The mic is therefore decoupled from subsonic energy like foot stomps that may make their way up through a mic stand. However, the resonant frequency of the elastic is likely still in a range where it can couple with the infrasonic disturbances I have mentioned. When two structures have natural frequencies that are relatively close to one another you can get large constructive interference. This is why old bridges get excited and practically self destruct in earthquakes. Another good analogy would be what happens acoustically in a listening room. The room has a certain modal response based on its dimensions. Let’s say that the first mode of the room is 40 Hz. When you play a 40 Hz tone the room is excited and in certain locations you hear much more 40 Hz than there really is. The same thing happens with the elastic shockmount. At infrasonic frequencies close to the resonant frequency of the elastic bands the shockmount is actually excited by the acoustic loads. This coupling causes the infrasonic frequencies to mask frequencies in high octaves. That’s why you hear the traditionally shockmounted mic as congested and less open.

The Enhanced Audio design is structurally much stiffer and holds the mic much more rigidly. The naturally frequency of the coupled Enhanced Audio shockmount and microphone system is orders of magnitude higher than the elastic suspension shockmount. It’s natural frequency is most likely high enough to be outside of the frequency band where the abundance of infrasonic and subsonic energy lives. So when these low level disturbances make their way to the mic they do not couple with or excite the shockmount/mic system. This shock isolation design is very typical in the aerospace industry when you want to structurally isolate an electronics component. You typically design the isolator such that its naturally frequency is orders of magnitude less than offending/harmful frequencies you are trying to protect the electronics from.

The following statement on the Enhanced Audio website is slightly misleading though.

The Enhanced Audio M600 breaks away from the convention of suspension mounting by clamping the microphone within two low resonant aluminium rings

The aluminum rings look actually very stiff, so their resonant frequency (natural frequency) would most likely not be very low, but actually rather high as I have already stated.

The website also states the following:

Theory is one thing, reality another, technical specifications are important but we believe that there is nothing that goes beyond your own personal experience and listening with your own ears.


Well now everyone knows the theory of why this thing works the way it does. There actually is science behind it all. So it’s probably not good marketing to play on “audio voodoo” anymore. David Browne—I’ll gladly accept any freebies you’d like to send me if you’d like to use this explanation on your website. heh

Brad
Old 14th March 2006
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Ruphus's Avatar
 

That´s the way I like it. thumbsup

Ruphus
Old 29th March 2006
  #28
Lives for gear
 

Doesn't anyone besides me ever check volume levels between these kinds of samples? I'm a mechanical engineer too, but I don't need the degree to hear 1 to 3 dB differences in sound levels. And I see this over and over in posted comparisons...

When the samples are matched in gain the difference is quite... different. I realize they are said to be matched mics... I assume identical cable and preamps... so *something* is responsible for the level variance... if the M600 is doing that then it's worth something there. I'd swap mic positions, cables, and preamps and repeat a second round as well if I were doing it and heard that much difference.

But the raw tonal differences are not nearly as extreme when set to the same levels. I fool myself all the time with comparisons on my own systems and recordings like that.

Thanks for the clips Sunflute, good ideas worth exploring there. Perhaps the M600 really can add some value but I'm not convinced yet from the samples.


Steve
Old 30th March 2006
  #29
Gear interested
 

THE ENHANCED AUDIO M600 CONTINUES TO CONVINCE:

ANDY JACKSON - Engineer (David Gilmour / Pink Floyd)

HAYDN BENDALL - Producer/Engineer (Elton John, Kate Bush, XTC)

ROB EATON - Producer/Engineer (Pat Metheny,Jeff Beck,Eric Clapton)

TONY FAULKNER - Renowned British Classical Engineer

MICK GLOSSOP - Producer/Engineer (Van Morrison,Frank Zappa,Waterboys)

TONY PLATT - Producer/Engineer ( AC/DC, Bob Marley, Foreigner )

MIKE ROSS TREVOR - Recording Engineer (John Williams, Andrew Lloyd Webber)

KEN NELSON - Producer / Engineer (Coldplay, Badly Drawn Boy, Kings of Convenience)

MICHAEL WAGENER - Producer/Engineer (Ozzy Osbourne,Metallica,Extreme)

RAFA SARDINA - Producer/Engineer (Stevie Wonder, Dr Dre, Macy Gray, Sheryl Crow)


DAVID BROWNE – ENHANCED AUDIO -
Old 30th March 2006
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Brad McGowan's Avatar
Hi David,

Did you ever get the email I sent you? I never heard anything from you.

thanks,
Brad
Loading mentioned products ...
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get instant access to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
andredb / High end
48
gainreduction / High end
18
IMS / So much gear, so little time!
3
Bob Blank / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
0

Forum Jump