Audacity Forum

Like most USB mics, the C1-U has nothing common with the ordinary version. It's a completely different mic, really.

cyrano wrote:Like most USB mics, the C1-U has nothing common with the ordinary version. It's a completely different mic, really.

Really? I thought the Behriger C-1U was the same mic as the Behringer C-1, but with the XLR connection replaced by a USB microphone chip and USB socket. The official documentation from Behringer appears to support that view. Or do you mean 'metaphorically' a different mic?

Most of the lower end USB mics are entirely different for a reason. It's extremely hard to make a true condenser with a 5V power supply. A true condenser needs 40 to 60 V polarization voltage. With 48 V phantom it's fairly trivial. The problem is, to transform 5V DV to 60 V DC, you need AC. Usually a 50 KHz or so oscillator. And it's hard to shield the extremely sensitive capsule from this noise.

IIRC, I saw pics of the innards of a USB C1 on the net and the capsule was visiually different. It's the capsule that makes 99% of a mic's character.

So a lot of manufacturers just put electret capsules in. As these are permanently charged, they do not require polarization voltage, just 3 to 6 V for the FET transistor. That doesn't mean these mics are inferior, just different. The electret version could very well have a flatter response, as they usually have. It'll probably be a little noisier too.

The same problem plays of course with USB bus powered interfaces. If you have a power hungry mic, phantom power will fail. But there's a lot of distance from the interface to the mic, so noise is easier to manage.

The specification for the C-1U says:

Transducer type condenser, 16 mm (0.63'')

https://media.music-group.com/media/PLM ... 8_M_EN.pdf
which is the same as for the Behringer C-1.
They also state in several places that it is a "large diaphragm", so I doubt that it is a misprint.

Recording hacks is a very reliable site...

http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Behringer/C-1

They give 14 mm for the capsule, which I can accept vs 16 mm in other sources. That's because some measure outer rim, others measure membrane diameter, which is obviously a little smaller.

However, they also state:

The capsule is a small-diameter cardioid electret, mounted behind a perforated plastic plate that influences the polar pattern. The capsule’s housing has an outside diameter of 17.2mm; the diaphragm diameter is presumably 10-14mm.

Behringer’s claim that this microphone is a “Professional, large-diaphragm condenser microphone for unsurpassed audio quality” is therefore at least partially untrue.

25 mm is a "medium". Anything above that number is LDC. Below is SDC. 10 to 14 mm, or even 17 is not an LDC.

You really can't believe most published tech specs for mics, not even from reputed manufacturers. The exceptions are makers of reputed measurement mics, like DPA, as they usually specify the exact measurement method. And when you compare some of these numbers, like EIN, or noise floor, they look not so good compared with numbers from more marketing oriented makers.

Behringer are well known to hype up their products. Nevertheless, it does appear that both the C-1 and the C-1U have the same size diaphragm, and are essentially "the same mic", one with USB and one with XLR. I think we agree that the C-1U (USB) would not be a good choice for lonepilgrim (the op).

Dragging the thread, kicking and screaming, back to reality.

Koz

Ok I`m back at it again..I didn`t really understand what you were saying about you had a bunch of mics going out the door but I was assuming you meant you were trying to sell them..again I didn`t come here to buy or sell anything.

On the Nyquist Prompt...do I have to apply that each time I do the noise reduction or only once?

Can you give me a general idea about how to get a better stereo mix on the final project? I`m sure it`s in the manual and I`m going there next..I`m guessing with the website I can only upload MP3s but I`m not sure.

There doesn`t seem to be any problem with the generic mix down..all the tracks stay put until I export them..if I had true quadraphonic sound I`d be happy but alas this is 2016...we can put a person on the moon but I can`t do that.

Quadrophonic output isn't a problem. It just has another name these days. Or even several. The most common name is "Ambisonic". Surround is another one, but it is usually associated with DVD Dobly AC3 playback in a 5.1 setup. And that is for movies. Ambisonic started where quadrophonic stopped. Ambisonic can also go a lot further, to complete 3D sound.

Some info:

http://www.ambisonic.net/
http://ambisonic.info/

Some ambisonic plugins make quadrophonic panning much easier and some of them are free. Ambisonic toolkit, fi. The author needs to fix his site, though, since atm it is showing nothing but a wiki error. He's been notified.

http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net/

A free plugin to do panning is TOA Core:

http://www.blueripplesound.com/products/toa-core-vst

A lot of plugins and related info can be found here:

http://www.ambisonic.net/gear.html

Audacity only has 2 output channels, though.

You would need another player. Harpex-B, for instance, which is a free player from harpex.net. And of course, an audio interface with 4 output channels.

And you don't really need to record in four channels, as long as you are prepared to align your different recordings manually. That would exclude most real ambisonic tools, but it doesn't really matter, as long as you don't need to exchange files with others and are prepared to do some experimenting to get you 4 speaker setup working as you like it.

If you'd ever like to go further, as in a 3D soundscape, you would need to record with 4 precisely spaced mics.

lonepilgrim wrote:Can you give me a general idea about how to get a better stereo mix on the final project? I`m sure it`s in the manual and I`m going there next..I`m guessing with the website I can only upload MP3s but I`m not sure.

Try the free UpStereo VST plugin from QuikQuak. See:

http://quikquak.com/Prod_UpStereo.html

It works with Audacity. It's usually used to widen the stereo field, but it can also narrow it. It's also very easy to use.