ST,

I'm pretty sure that with phantom power, the same DC voltage (e.g. 24V, 48V, etc.) is applied to both pins 2 & 3, referenced to pin 1 (0V or ground), so reversing 2 & 3 shouldn't present any problems...

quote:

Originally posted by Cliff-at-Bose:
Some instruments even have harmonics below the fundamental of the note, but it's rare. The most common, I think, is full metal jacket distorted guitar.

(Can't resist this...) What? You're implying that a bassoon is rarer than a full metal jacket distorted guitar??

Actually (as a bassoonist and erstwhile afficiando of musical acoustics), I know that the lowest range on the bassoon has practically no fundamental present. In general, particularly for wind instruments, the lowest notes in the natural range have the most complex harmonics, while the highest notes have the least. That's why you can tell the difference between a bari sax playing high notes vs. a soprano sax playing the same pitch in it's low range.

If you really want the sense of notes without any fundamental -- or, in another sense, harmonics below the fundamental -- try simulating a "32 ft" pipe organ pedal with the pedal notes of a smaller organ (pipe or electronic). Using a standard 16' pedal stop, play two adjacent pedals in the lowest octave (e.g.: C & C#). The resulting "beat" tone has some semblance of a 32' stop (octave lower). This only works in that lowest octave - once you get above 50-60 Hz, it just sounds out-of-tune/dissonant. --- I haven't had a chance to try this with a PAS, yet, but it works with both real pipe organs and small "home" electronic organs.

What, you say? My speakers don't go down that low (remembering that an octave below the piano low C is 16 hz)! ... It works (with decent bass speakers) because the ear often recreates a 'fundamental' from hearing the right combination of harmonics (just like your eye "fills in" the 'blind spot' in your eye).

Dan, you might enjoy the jazz contrabassoon album I was part of. Talk about a riot of overtones. I'll never forget watching the engineer circle the contra looking for appropriate places to mic that beast.

Could I propose another way of simulating the 32' stop? Pull up a simple (flute-like) 16' and play open fifths, like low C and the G above. Not quite the same "clean-out" effect as a real 32' pipe, but it sort of gives one the idea.

Hi Saxman7

I've moved my responses here (from Scott's microphone discussion)

quote:

Originally posted by Saxman7:
ST, you suggested prest 3 or 4, and I just need some clarification, as to what the names actually mean:

1. Does High Gain "Bright" mean it should be used if your mic is "bright", or if you want a "brighter" sound? And vice versa......

It's confusingly ambiguous.....at least to me.



Thanks

I think Cliff was explaining these two version 2.0 presets
03 "Vocal Mic High Gain, Bright" Vocal Microphones
04 "Vocal Mic High Gain, Normal" Vocal Microphones
when he said

quote:

Quoting Cliff-at-Bose
Also, many are happy with the new high-gain and high-gain bright presets (Hilmar’s work). He worked in some aggressive high-end filters for control of that little high squeak you might get playing loud, especially in close proximity to the system (like when the club owner backs your band up into the corner). This will help singers who are playing loud with the unusual HF extension of such mics as the Neumann 105. Developing these presets, I made sure a female singer sounded good on all these too.

in his post at the top of this discussion
Presets 2.0: Anyone listening?

quote:

Originally posted by Saxman7:

Yes, it did explain that one has a filter that can prevent some hi-gain "squeak", and I just need to know if it is the "high" or the "normal" pre-set. I'm assuming the "high-gain bright" is the one that filters the highs, as opposed to it meaning that you'll get more highs with it, right? That's what I'm unclear on.....

Hi Saxman7,

I understand what you are asking, but I think it's best to let Cliff respond to this. When it comes to the language of the presets - he's the oracle.

As to the question, "How much do presets affect mic?" my experience is that feedback becomes much more of an issue with the wrong preset.

If one of my mics starts to howl or squeal, I've learned to check the preset setting first. I often discover that it's been inadvertently changed from the one I'm used to using -- the 'correct' one.

I haven't had to use the High Gain presets yet, but I'm sure the time will come!

quote:

Originally posted by ST:
Hi Saxman7

I've moved my responses here (from Scott's microphone discussion)

quote:

Originally posted by Saxman7:
ST, you suggested prest 3 or 4, and I just need some clarification, as to what the names actually mean:

1. Does High Gain "Bright" mean it should be used if your mic is "bright", or if you want a "brighter" sound? And vice versa......

It's confusingly ambiguous.....at least to me.



Thanks

I think Cliff was explaining these two version 2.0 presets
03 "Vocal Mic High Gain, Bright" Vocal Microphones
04 "Vocal Mic High Gain, Normal" Vocal Microphones
when he said

quote:

Quoting Cliff-at-Bose
Also, many are happy with the new high-gain and high-gain bright presets (Hilmar’s work). He worked in some aggressive high-end filters for control of that little high squeak you might get playing loud, especially in close proximity to the system (like when the club owner backs your band up into the corner). This will help singers who are playing loud with the unusual HF extension of such mics as the Neumann 105. Developing these presets, I made sure a female singer sounded good on all these too.

in his post at the top of this discussion
Presets 2.0: Anyone listening?

quote:

Originally posted by Saxman7:

Yes, it did explain that one has a filter that can prevent some hi-gain "squeak", and I just need to know if it is the "high" or the "normal" pre-set. I'm assuming the "high-gain bright" is the one that filters the highs, as opposed to it meaning that you'll get more highs with it, right? That's what I'm unclear on.....

Hi Saxman7,

I understand what you are asking, but I think it's best to let Cliff respond to this. When it comes to the language of the presets - he's the oracle.

Still waiting.....