rpc
Junior Member
Posts: 67
|
Post by rpc on Apr 1, 2019 7:37:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by timcampbell on Apr 1, 2019 12:19:11 GMT -6
Welcome RPC. That isn't really true. David Josephson, MBHO, Telefunken, Upton, Beesneez, OPR, a russian company or two, Korby, Lawson, Heiserman and myself all manufacture mechanically correct CK12 capsules. I believe only MBHO and myself have collaborated with AKG.
|
|
rpc
Junior Member
Posts: 67
|
Post by rpc on Apr 1, 2019 13:01:35 GMT -6
Welcome RPC. That isn't really true. David Josephson, MBHO, Telefunken, Upton, Beesneez, OPR, a russian company or two, Korby, Lawson, Heiserman and myself all manufacture mechanically correct CK12 capsules. I believe only MBHO and myself have collaborated with AKG. Tim, Thanks for the cordial reply! I certainily agree that all the folks you referenced are making 5-chamber capsules (per Mark Fouxman's definition) that are functionally identical to the CK12. It simply seemed to me that some of the details of Herr Sauschlager's capsule (both inside and outside threads on the insulator, threaded assembly of the front and back of each resonance chamber, extra holes in the brass rings for terminal attach) are closer to the historic AKG examples. That plus his location in Vienna made me wonder whether he had some contact with the original capsule makers.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 1, 2019 13:54:06 GMT -6
One assumes that the omnis that Dooley was talking about are either dynamics or pressure omni condensers. Yes?
To me when you say "mult" it means you plug a source into a jack that is paralled with two or more other jacks to obtain MULTiple outputs of the one source. Just multing the outputs doesn'r get you M-S - you have to set up a matrix via a mixer or the proper transformers to do that.
That's where your nomenclature lost me.
I don't think that assumption has to be made from what Wes says. You understand multing as I meant it. Mult the two channels into 4. Turn the first pair into omni. Turn the second pair into 8. Put that into a MS matrix. That is a test proof that the result sounds the same as listening to the two outputs of the mic as a stereo signal. Thus, the output of a dual output mic is equivalent to mid side with an omni mid. Yeah, I got that now. Actually I already KNEW that, but I'd forgotten.... I've forgotten more stuff than I ever knew....
I was just looking at it from the opposite end.....
I think we have a small discrepancy over the use of the term "matrix", but no biggie.
|
|
|
Post by markfouxman on Apr 1, 2019 14:23:19 GMT -6
Well I don't know about others but I was taught much of what I do by Karl Peschel and Norbert Sobol of AKG and all my membrane material is NOS AKG mylar manufactured in he 60's-70's. AKG never had high failure rates manufacturing these capsules. Their high failure rates came from trying to repair broken capsules. They stopped building "brass" CK12's because they are very labor intensive and so too expensive for their bean counters. Tim, I guess, the correct way of putting it would be not "high failure rates", but rather "low tolerance machining". I took dimensions of a few capsules using high precision micrometers and optical comparators and deviations were more than 100microns even front to back (!!!), which is absolutely unacceptable by modern standards. Whether we want it or not, that's also the part of the 'historic' AKG capsule. At that era there were no CNC (or even NC) machines available, so to make those in quantities with high tolerances would be impractical and very expensive. That's the part of the reason why they had all those internal high pitch threading--just to be able to dial up the things, which in turn took additional labor. The main problem with that is you change volume of say, second chamber--you also change volume of the third one (and inevitably compromise the pattern). With modern machinery and/or use of precision stock shimming it is possible to make this capsule much more efficiently. The main problem, the electronic, or acoustical engineers usually are not good mechanical engineers, and vc vs... Best, M
|
|
|
Post by markfouxman on Apr 1, 2019 14:26:12 GMT -6
Double post. Please delete
|
|
|
Post by markfouxman on Apr 1, 2019 15:01:17 GMT -6
5-chamber capsules (per Mark Fouxman's definition) RPC, I know some do not call the space between diaphragm and first backplate a 'chamber'. While that space is not a resonator it defines damping of the diaphragm and the acoustical resistance of the backplate holes do form an acoustically enclosed volume. In my mind it definitely IS a chamber. Best, M
|
|
|
Post by miscend on May 27, 2019 19:45:00 GMT -6
So why do we even bother anymore? Apparently the yields were extremely low with the original brass AKG capsules, the failure rate was so high it is impractical to make them now in that way. All these boutique cats making clones having basically reverse engineered the originals but the quality is not the same because they just know the designs but have no clue what proprietary processes were used to make them. For example how long was the treatment, at what temperatures, speed of temperature changes, what atmosphere(s) were used during processing, etc. Who is the vendor of that specific, difficult-to-make lubricant/bearing/component? And thousands of similar questions. Well I don't know about others but I was taught much of what I do by Karl Peschel and Norbert Sobol of AKG and all my membrane material is NOS AKG mylar manufactured in he 60's-70's. AKG never had high failure rates manufacturing these capsules. Their high failure rates came from trying to repair broken capsules. They stopped building "brass" CK12's because they are very labor intensive and so too expensive for their bean counters. Austrian Audio have a new video out. They confirm the high failure rate of the original capsules. It was a 65% failure rate which meant they could only produce one capsule per day.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on May 27, 2019 20:22:41 GMT -6
Thanks for reminding me to buy a Lottery Ticket! Chris
|
|