Microphone angle?

[Timebandit2]

Hi there, new to this software and forum. I'm starting to analyse for a small studio room.

I was wondering, with the microphone, should it be pointing towards the monitors or up to the ceiling?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

 

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

I prefer aiming at the speaker, but most people seem to favor 90-degree. However, that requires a 90-degree calibration file.

Regards,
Wayne

 

[Timebandit2]

Thank you, I have managed to get both readings and they are actually very very similar which I was quite pleased with, no doubt because of a RFZ (reflection free zone) in the mix position, i've been experimenting with using my old auralex foam for cloud and first reflection points, pointless throwing them away and it's almost the colour as th GIK traps! :-)

I'm getting a bit more familiar with REW, I had no idea it was so in depth!

 

[DanDan]

REW was a Laboratory, now it has grown into a Campus!
Most mics come with Cal files for both 90 and 0 degrees. However, if you don't have a file, most Omni will have a flattest response pointed slightly forward and up at about 75 degrees or thereabouts.

 

[Timebandit2]

Thanks DanDan, I bought the behringer cal mic and downloaded a cal file for it, how good that particular file is I don't know, there's loads of them floating about. The readings are getting a bit better every day as I'm slowly finding things out about REW and its setup, and there's just so many things that can influence the whole response and I haven't even started on the various DSP buttons on the back of the monitors yet!

Trying to understand the eq page today, so many tabs and ticks in there and the newer versions screen displays don't match up to the videos on you tube but the basics are the same. Once the rear wall traps are up most issues will be solved and won't use the eq page but I'm on a bit of a mission with the software and as usual, the manual is the last resort, hehe.

It's a shame that REW hasn't got some presets for different jobs to make it a bit more user friendly for those on a time scale though I appreciate there's a zillion sized rooms out there all with their own unique acoustic footprints so it would be difficult to do that, I'm not sure how these auto eq VST packages are, never heard one but read lots of comments on them.

 

[akl]

It's a shame that REW hasn't got some presets for different jobs to make it a bit more user friendly for those on a time scale

I think REW is a very fast and time saving software, very user friendly.

I do not think that there are useful cal-files available for the behringer mic, they are not individual.
Also there is no data included for the MIC-amp and AD.

There is no RFZ .

MIC have to have a different response to sources at different locations.
The 90° may not only point to the ceiling, use it to the floor or the left or right wall.

 

[DanDan]

The Behringer mics were fairly consistent way back, but became utterly wild in terms of varied responses. Best to forget about Cal files and just don't use it for HF purposes.

 

[akl]

With the Behringer MIC ( and a MIC PreAmp and an AD ) you are just able to compare measurements, but you will not know which one is the right one ... the better one.
CAL files (only individual ones of course with ser No.) are helping a little, but this still has a lot of tolerances.
CAL files are also some sort of quality control.
Usage of highcost selected MICs will do better (they come with an individual frequency response graph).
Very small capsules may do up to 120 kHz but are quite noisy. 1" has lower noise but may show limited response above 16 kHz or out of the 0°-axis.
I usually use a 1/2" capsule with a 'hard' membrane up to 40 kHz with tolerable noise.
MIC and amp response may be a little corrected by a (self-established) cal file. LEVEL-calibration is done by calibrator (special using pistonphones).
Cost are high, usage complicated ( Capsule, polarisation voltage, prepreAmp, preAmp, AD and ... a calibrator at hand)).
The minidsp UMIK may be used with a good compromise of cost and accuracy (Though the level-cal is still erroneous and the dynamic range may be improved). The diameter may be easily adapted to a standard MIC-diameter (calibrator) without great loss of accuracy. (The problem of many other mics).
--