• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

I got new microphone!

thin bLue

Senior Member
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
352
Likes
1,155
20221015_231618.jpg

I got brand new Earthworks M50. One of the most reliable amateur(48V powered) measurements microphone I can get my own money.
20221027_120649.jpg
20221027_120853.jpg
20221027_120956.jpg


"Transfer Function Mag - dB volts/volts (0.10 oct)(eq)(eq:aux)"


"Hz" "Data"
10.0, 2.553364
765.4139, 2.553364
818.201, 2.561168
870.9882, 2.571134
950.1689, 2.590238
1002.956, 2.604372
1082.137, 2.614874
1161.318, 2.591398
1240.498, 2.558269
1319.679, 2.520591
1425.253, 2.495223
1530.828, 2.503082
1636.402, 2.532503
1768.37, 2.553779
1873.944, 2.538255
2032.306, 2.510198
2164.274, 2.501251
2322.635, 2.51822
2480.997, 2.528952
2665.752, 2.508032
2850.507, 2.508258
3061.655, 2.531796
3272.804, 2.495665
3510.346, 2.462659
3774.282, 2.454961
4038.218, 2.378346
4328.547, 2.382038
4645.27, 2.333984
4961.993, 2.350162
5331.503, 2.318691
5701.014, 2.340629
6123.311, 2.322927
6572.002, 2.319921
7020.693, 2.32804
7548.564, 2.35675
8076.436, 2.38124
8657.095, 2.42311
9290.541, 2.477342
9950.38, 2.552971
10663.01, 2.649497
11428.42, 2.734891
12246.62, 2.787941
13117.61, 2.832698
14067.78, 2.825506
15070.73, 2.805248
16152.87, 2.715442
17314.19, 2.644658
18554.69, 2.554104
19900.76, 2.444794
21326.01, 2.318277
22856.84, 2.331673
24493.24, 2.420716
26261.61, 2.421042
28135.56, 2.537121
30167.86, 2.652214
32332.14, 2.673718
34628.38, 2.713809
37135.77, 2.70495
39801.52, 2.467384
42652.03, 2.501243
45713.68, 2.461544
48986.49, 2.471359



Conclusions


10 Hz to 48.98 kHz
max 2.832698 @ 13.11 kHz
min 2.318277 @ 21.33 kHz
deep to peak 0.514421

10 Hz to 19.90 kHz
max 2.832698 @ 13.11 kHz
min 2.318691 @ 5.33 kHz
deep to peak 0.514007



Even without calibration file applied, generated all of things in 0.515 range.


Additionally, Metallic body looks so sexy.
 
Last edited:
OP
thin bLue

thin bLue

Senior Member
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
352
Likes
1,155
I am envious.
Just get one! Then a man of the future will take care about the bills from next month! So, you don't need to worry about purchasing or not right now.

Everything will go well!
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,524
Likes
37,057
Don't tempt me too much. I have an Earthworks cardioid and it is an excellent microphone.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,835
Likes
16,497
Location
Monument, CO
I have an M30; don't really need the extra HF response of the M50, though with speaker tweeters extending ever upwards not a bad idea for a "once in a lifetime" mic. I miss my old B&K, long gone -- about 3x the price but metal diaphragm so would hold cal much longer.

Earthworks used to recal for not too much $$$ but I have not had mine done in years now (no longer doing it "professionally" and for myself a UMIK-1 and REW does the job when I get curious).
 
OP
thin bLue

thin bLue

Senior Member
Reviewer
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
352
Likes
1,155
I have an M30; don't really need the extra HF response of the M50, though with speaker tweeters extending ever upwards not a bad idea for a "once in a lifetime" mic. I miss my old B&K, long gone -- about 3x the price but metal diaphragm so would hold cal much longer.

Earthworks used to recal for not too much $$$ but I have not had mine done in years now (no longer doing it "professionally" and for myself a UMIK-1 and REW does the job when I get curious).
Yes, Integrations of UMIK-1 are defiantly gamechanger! but one thing! box smells bad xD
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,835
Likes
16,497
Location
Monument, CO
My UMIK-1 was calibrated by CSL. When I measured, the M30 and CSL-calibrated UMIK-1 results virtually overlaid in a plot.
 

RayDunzl

Grand Contributor
Central Scrutinizer
Joined
Mar 9, 2016
Messages
13,204
Likes
16,985
Location
Riverview FL
Amusing that they carry the calibration data out to 6 decimals

"Hz" "Data"
10.0, 2.553364
765.4139, 2.553364
etc...

But find nothing to adjust in the first six and a half octaves.
 

DonH56

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 15, 2016
Messages
7,835
Likes
16,497
Location
Monument, CO
Amusing that they carry the calibration data out to 6 decimals

"Hz" "Data"
10.0, 2.553364
765.4139, 2.553364
etc...

But find nothing to adjust in the first six and a half octaves.
I think a few of those significant figures are insignificant... ;)

The jump from 10 Hz to 7xx Hz has come up a couple of times now. Another person (I forgot whom, sorry) provided a different file with more points, and in the meantime I had emailed Earthworks about it since my old cal file had something similar. Their response was that they measure 10 Hz then the response is usually flat to within their measurement system accuracy/precision up to the next measured point so they do not report the lower frequency values between. The one provided for my M30 and one for an M23 both had identical numbers (not the same for the different mics, but the same numbers for each mic, self-consistent) from 10 Hz to something in the 700~800 Hz range at 10 Hz intervals. The "top" frequency was a little different for the two mics but in the 700~800 Hz range.
 

Multicore

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 6, 2021
Messages
1,676
Likes
1,768
Amusing that they carry the calibration data out to 6 decimals

"Hz" "Data"
10.0, 2.553364
765.4139, 2.553364
etc...

But find nothing to adjust in the first six and a half octaves.
The Comfort of Numbers

Engineering can sometimes simplify complex judgements with decomposition using quantifiable measures. When it works it can be very satisfying and is often deeply impressive. The formalisms involved can themselves be very impressive. This naturally creates an incentive to apply these methods to whatever you can. The results can sometimes be weird.

For example, when I worked in wine retail (for minimum wage at the cash register in a bottle shop) some people would use the ratio of Wine Spectator scores and bottle price to choose what to drink with dinner. That publication exists because people think one-dimensional wine scores averaged from panel tastings actually mean something.

For another example, some people here upgrade perfectly transparent components of an audio playback system when Amir reviews another perfectly transparent component because something in the review shows that it "measures better". In this I guess the concept of better measurements is, since it's not practical, aesthetic, perhaps to do with nice looking graphs.

For many more examples look at, I'm sure a plenty folk here have noticed, "scientific management" (as it was hilariously called back in the day, now you can call it the takeover of the MBA class, or credentialed manegerialism), which throws up all manner of perverse and amusing outcomes based on what at the end of the day is managers trying to wear the clothing of technical boffins.

I've been thinking about The Comfort of Numbers for decades. It's often funny but it can sometimes be dangerous.

There's something just comforting and appealing about numbers when most of life unavoidably involves judgement calls with insufficient or uncertain information or the risk that you make mistakes. It's no wonder numbers are so attractive.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom