"Best" mic for Dirac Live

[Hifiaudio177]

I have a JBL SDP-55 that I have only messed with Dirac on a few times over the year or 2 I have had it. I want to do the room and software justice. Which aftermarket mic should I get?

 

[abdo123]

an UMIK-1 is the default choice, UMIK-2 is a bit more polished (in terms of quality of life features) but should not make a noticeable difference in performance..

 

[audio2920]

Yep, unless you know you have a very specific requirement for some particular aspect of the mic's performance, UMIK-1 all day long.

It's a really convenient / easy to use thing.

 

[DonH56]

You may already be using a UMIK-1 depending upon what Dirac Live unit you have. If you replace it, be sure to load the correct calibration file for your new mic.

 

[behappybevegan]

What about the Behringer ecm8000 or the Sonarworks soundid?
What makes the Umik-1 better?

 

[audio2920]

Over the Sonarworks, probably just the USB interface, which is better for (a) Convenience. e.g. if you want to measure an HDMI device on your laptop, it's just a bit quicker and neater than setting up a capture device/mic pre with phantom power. (b) you always have absolute SPL (c) probably of inconsequential error, but I like that there's less ambiguity about flatness of the signal path as a whole; the calibration file made is post the built in ADC.

Over the ECM8000, as above, plus the calibration file. AFAIK the ECM8000 doesn't have one, and response is pretty varied.

 

[test1223]

Every microphone has different of axis frequency responses (fr). Since there is no perfect omnidirectional microphone the sound from behind has a different fr than the sound from the front...

Therefore the tonality of the reflections are picked up differently depending on the microphone. This starts at about 2kHz and the differences get bigger with higher frequencies and angles.

This can't be compensated with the a calibration frequencies response file. There are also at least two possible calibrations files one where the diffuse sound field is flat and one where the direct sound is flat. These calibrations are obviously not the same.

You ideally use a microphone and calibration typ with which the development of dirac was done or which dirac recommended. Asking dirac directly might be the best option.

 

[DonH56]

What about the Behringer ecm8000 or the Sonarworks soundid?
What makes the Umik-1 better?

Over the Sonarworks, probably just the USB interface, which is better for (a) Convenience. e.g. if you want to measure an HDMI device on your laptop, it's just a bit quicker and neater than setting up a capture device/mic pre with phantom power. (b) you always have absolute SPL (c) probably of inconsequential error, but I like that there's less ambiguity about flatness of the signal path as a whole; the calibration file made is post the built in ADC.

Over the ECM8000, as above, plus the calibration file. AFAIK the ECM8000 doesn't have one, and response is pretty varied.

For me @audio2920 summed it up well. Mainly convenience, and the knowledge that my CSL-calibrated UMIK-1's response is essentially identical to my Earthworks M30, a much more expensive reference mic requiring a preamp and additional interface. I have no experience with the Sonarworks. The ECM8000 works OK (you can buy a CSL-calibrated version), but for room measurements any of them work fine, so the most convenient wins. Loading the cal file once then plugging in the UMIK-1 whenever I feel the need to measure beats dragging out a preamp and interface for my M30.

You should invest in a decent boom mic stand and perhaps a mic shock mount. You can get the stand for as low as $20 or so but I find the $100 models provide better support and don't wear out as quickly. There are some really nice ones for $300~$500 but I think those are overkill for this; I tried a $20, my usual $100, and a $500 stand and got essentially the same results, but the $20 one was light enough to be a pain to set up and get stable, and would not support a heavier mic.

IME/IMO - Don

 

[jhaider]

an UMIK-1 is the default choice, UMIK-2 is a bit more polished (in terms of quality of life features) but should not make a noticeable difference in performance..

I think UMIK-1 is probably better for Dirac calibration, and in room measurements generally. The diaphragm is half the size (1/4” vs 1/2”) so the polar response will be better. UMIK-1 is the de facto standard Dirac mic. I’d get a CSL-calibrated one if they’re available just to be sure.

UMIK-2 is better for high SPL applications.

I agree with @DonH56 re stands. K&M mic stands aren’t that expensive and work well. They are more solid than knockoffs (Onstage, Samson, etc).

 

[Sal1950]

I tried a $20, my usual $100, and a $500 stand and got essentially the same results, but the $20 one was light enough to be a pain to set up and get stable, and would not support a heavier mic.

That's a fact. I got the $20 one and it does the job but when extending the horizontal boom full length, the weight of the Umik wants to make it tip over.
I usually have to find some alternative way to stabilize it.. But for as little as I use it, I'll make do, I'm too cheap. LOL

 

[DonH56]

One trick is to drop the vertical shaft so the boom is at a slight upward angle, maybe 30 degrees, to convert some of the force vector down the shaft. IME it helps a little but not enough. I thought of hanging some weight on the stand, but then realized I was spending a lot of effort to fix a stupid little stand when I could have just bought a decent one and been having fun instead. "Value" does not mean "cheap". My time is my most valuable thing lately.

 

[BJL]

I use a UMIK-2, before that a UMIK-1, both seem fine. I don't use a mic stand at all, I borrowed one and did a couple of times and I found it to be a painful and inconvenient, especially now that I am measuring a 7.1.4 system. These days I just sit in my chair in the listening position, hold the mic in my hand and let it measure the room, with me, in the listening position. Much easier, saves money, and, to me, works just as well as using a stand. Of course I can't precisely repeat measurement, but I don't care about that, only with the listening result.

 

[Hifiaudio177]

Thanks folks. I was using a UMM-6 and my last session had very odd results. The mic itself could have been dropped over the years as well. Figured it was time to just grab the most recommended.

 

[Hifiaudio177]

I would point the UMIK-1 mic at the ceiling in each spot for a Dirac calibration, correct?

 

[DonH56]

I would point the UMIK-1 mic at the ceiling in each spot for a Dirac calibration, correct?

Yes, and use the "90 degree" cal file.

 

[Hifiaudio177]

Yes, and use the "90 degree" cal file.

Just happened to think... what about when Dirac gets to my 4 ceiling Atmos channels? Do I turn the mic parallel to the floor for those measurements?

 

[audio2920]

Haven't done it for a while but I think Dirac sweeps all speakers in one hit at each measurement position (sequentially, with very little pause between them) so I'm not sure there's opportunity to adjust the mic...?

The difference it would make to the overheads would be negligible in context anyway IMHO.

 

[abdo123]

Just happened to think... what about when Dirac gets to my 4 ceiling Atmos channels? Do I turn the mic parallel to the floor for those measurements?

Why? It’s not like you’re standing on your hands when they play.

 

[jtwrace]

The UMIK or Earthworks that you use with Audiolense.

 

[DonH56]

Just happened to think... what about when Dirac gets to my 4 ceiling Atmos channels? Do I turn the mic parallel to the floor for those measurements?

I do not, and when I asked Dirac Live a few years back they said to just leave it the same for all speakers. I am not using Dirac Live now but doubt that has changed.