how to tell if the mic is dynamic or phantom?

Liu;

"Phantom Mic" is not actually a type of microphone. "Phantom power" is a
method of powering some types of mics that require power to operate. Most
condenser mics needs phantom power to operate and dynamic and ribbon mics do
not.

My advice is look at the mics you have and read carefully about each one of
them. Different mics have different characteristics. Being a condenser,
dynamic or ribbon does not make a mic "better" just different. Your best
bet when trying them out is to see whic mic best fits the situation you are
going to use it in by listening. If you have a ribbon mic in your
collection there (which is unlikely) do not apply phantom power to it as it
will damage the mic.

Hope this helps;
Steve
"liu" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:c2db9088-9b99-44c2-8b51-ceb56df43a20@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>I read in the mixer manual about phantom mic and dynamic mic. I have
> access to a few of the mic but how can I tell which one is which? Is
> there quality difference between the 2?
>
>
> Thanks for your advice,
>

Steve wrote:
> Liu;
>
> "Phantom Mic" is not actually a type of microphone. "Phantom power" is a
> method of powering some types of mics that require power to operate. Most
> condenser mics needs phantom power to operate and dynamic and ribbon mics do
> not.
>
> My advice is look at the mics you have and read carefully about each one of
> them. Different mics have different characteristics. Being a condenser,
> dynamic or ribbon does not make a mic "better" just different. Your best
> bet when trying them out is to see whic mic best fits the situation you are
> going to use it in by listening. If you have a ribbon mic in your
> collection there (which is unlikely) do not apply phantom power to it as it
> will damage the mic.
>
While what you say is true enough, there are important differences that
impose different limitations. Generally speaking a microphones can be
considered better if the moving mass is as small as possible, since that
will allow it to follow the sound waves more faithfully. If you look at
the construction of the three types of microphone, the condenser has an
extremely thin diaphragm stretched over a chamber. The ribbon has an
extremely thin piece of foil hanging very loosely in a magnetic gap,
while the dynamic has a coil of many turns attached to a diaphragm stout
enough to support it.

This last setup is almost always going to be heavier than the first two
and generally manifests itself is a resonant hump in the upper mid
range, followed by a pretty rapid dropoff above it.

d

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:27:06 +0100, Don Pearce <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Generally speaking a microphones can be
>considered better if the moving mass is as small as possible, since that
>will allow it to follow the sound waves more faithfully.

But we don't want it to be faithful, we want it to sound nice. Else
we'd throw away all those large-diaphragm condenser mics and record
everything with small-diaphragm omnis :-)

Laurence Payne wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:27:06 +0100, Don Pearce <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Generally speaking a microphones can be
>> considered better if the moving mass is as small as possible, since that
>> will allow it to follow the sound waves more faithfully.
>
> But we don't want it to be faithful, we want it to sound nice. Else
> we'd throw away all those large-diaphragm condenser mics and record
> everything with small-diaphragm omnis :-)

Well, that is the difference between nicer and better, I suppose. I have
some LD condensers which are extremely accurate with just a small eq
correction, which I have implemented as a standard filter in my DAW - a
true equaliser, if you like, because it makes the response dead flat. I
use that as a starting point. But then I tend to record music more than
create it.

d

On Jul 9, 11:50 pm, liu <[email protected]> wrote:

> I read in the mixer manual about phantom mic and dynamic mic. I have
> access to a few of the mic but how can I tell which one is which?

Does the mic work if the phantom switch is turned off ?

> Is there quality difference between the 2?

There can be, but for the most part there are good and
bad of every type of mic. Generally the very best and
most expensive mics are (phantom powered) condensor.
But there are lots of good dynamic mics that put a lot of
cheap (Chinese) condensors to shame.

It's more important to match the mic to the source
than it is to worry about which is better "quality".
Although it is impotant to have the phantom switch
"on" if it's a phantom powered mic.

What are your sources ?
What patterns are your mics ?
Are you on location ? In a well treated room ?
Is there lots of background noise ?

rd

RD Jones wrote:

> What patterns are your mics ?

You may need to explain that. Sounds like a newbie. Ah wiki comes to the
help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphone#Microphone_polar_patterns

Graham

"liu" wrote ...
>I read in the mixer manual about phantom mic and dynamic mic. I have
> access to a few of the mic but how can I tell which one is which?

Dynamic microphones don't require phantom power. They work
properly with the phantom power turned OFF.

Condenser micrphones (and some others like esoteric ribbons, etc.)
require phantom power and will be non-functional unless the
phantom power is turned ON.

> Is there quality difference between the 2?

There is a very wide range of quality available in both kinds of
microphones. Many dynamic mics are superior to some condenser
mics, and many condenser mics are superior to dynamic mics.

Many people generalize that condenser mics are superior to
dynamic mics, but there are so many exceptions and particular
situations, that the comparison isn't really useful in the real world.

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 01:30:43 -0400, Richard Crowley wrote
(in article <[email protected]>):

> Many people generalize that condenser mics are superior to dynamic mics, but
> there are so many exceptions and particular situations, that the comparison
> isn't really useful in the real world.

+1

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RZJ9MptZmU

"liu" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I read in the mixer manual about phantom mic and dynamic
> mic. I have access to a few of the mic but how can I tell
> which one is which? Is there quality difference between
> the 2?
>
>
> Thanks for your advice,

If a mic is dead to the world without phantom power, but works well with
phantom power, well then you have your answer. ;-)

There are a few legacy mics that can be damaged by phantom power, so don't
try this in a museum, or with some esoteric mic you know nothing about.
OTOH, no modern mic should be damaged by the unneeded application of phantom
power.

liu wrote:
> I read in the mixer manual about phantom mic and dynamic mic. I have
> access to a few of the mic but how can I tell which one is which?

The simple answer is by knowing the make and model of the microphone,
and doing a bit of research. The thing you need to understand to make
use of your research is that some microphones require power to operate
and others don't. Phantom powering is one of several ways to power a
microphone. Most phantom powered mics are condenser mics, and most
professional condenser mics require phantom power, but that's just a
generalization.

> Is there quality difference between the 2?

There's a quality difference between any two mics. Most people today
equate condenser mics (which often require phantom power) with high
quality, but there are many non-powered mics that are also of high
quality. It all depends on what you like, and what you have.


--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me here:
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
([email protected])