Elecraft

Heil HC-4, HC-5

Classic

List

Threaded

18 messages Options

Robert 'RC' Conley

Heil HC-4, HC-5

I'm about to purchase a Heil Proset to use with my K3.
Which "AD-1" will I need......???
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

DAVID M. Elliott

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

Depends on what you want to sound like. HC4 is very narrow. In my opinion, it is lousy under any circumstances. HC5 is less so but still very narrow. The new HC6 gives very good almost HI FI results with the K3. I have tried them all with the K3 and that is my opinion. If you use the wide band HC6, you can use the equalizer on the K3 to match either the HC4 or HC5.

73 de W6BK

On Mar 31, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Robert 'RC' Conley wrote:

> I'm about to purchase a Heil Proset to use with my K3.
> Which "AD-1" will I need......???
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

In reply to this post by Robert 'RC' Conley

AD-1K (Kenwood).

Of course, you can connect to the rear panel jacks without
using any AD-1 adapter.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Robert
> 'RC' Conley
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 10:23 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
>
>
> I'm about to purchase a Heil Proset to use with my K3.
> Which "AD-1" will I need......???
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Dick Dievendorff

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

In reply to this post by Robert 'RC' Conley

Maybe this has already been answered, but the Heil AD-1K, the red Kenwood
adapter, is the appropriate adapter for the Elecraft K3 8-pin Foster
connector.

The K3 also has a back panel 3.5mm jack that accepts the Heil microphone
plug directly.

Some prefer front connections, some prefer back. I sometimes prefer having
the headphone connected through the front panel so I can pull it out and get
speaker audio without fiddling with a menu. When the headphones are on the
front panel, it seems easier to also have the microphone connection on the
front. But all my microHAM connections are back panel, and when I'm set up
for a contest, it's all back panel.

73 de Dick, K6KR

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Robert 'RC' Conley
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 7:23 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5

I'm about to purchase a Heil Proset to use with my K3.
Which "AD-1" will I need......???
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Robert 'RC' Conley

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

In reply to this post by Robert 'RC' Conley

I want to thank everyone who responded to my question about the Heil
Adapter "AD-1" I was very fortunate this weekend past during the CQ WW
WPX contest. I was able to use both the Yamaha and a Heil headsets
operating at a fellow ham's during the contest on an Icom. I found the
Heil less fatiguing during my operating periods. This is what
convinced me on my purchase. I did need to know which adapter was
required for my K3. Now I know the "AD-1K"
72 de kc5wa
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

AD4C2009

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

In reply to this post by DAVID M. Elliott

Well I consider a waste of money to buy the Heil one,unless as you said it be the new HC6.
For half the price or less depending on which store you get it,the Yamaha CM-500 is a better choise,either the headphones and the mic has a wider audio response and likewise the K3 will be able to equalize the TX audio as the operator wanted to sound.
My two cents.

AD4C

"For a refined ham it is compulsory to own a k3"

--- On Thu, 4/1/10, David M. Elliott <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: David M. Elliott <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
To: "Robert 'RC' Conley" <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 3:53 AM

Depends on what you want to sound like. HC4 is very narrow. In my opinion, it is lousy under any circumstances. HC5 is less so but still very narrow. The new HC6 gives very good almost HI FI results with the K3. I have tried them all with the K3 and that is my opinion. If you use the wide band HC6, you can use the equalizer on the K3 to match either the HC4 or HC5.

73 de W6BK

On Mar 31, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Robert 'RC' Conley wrote:

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

The CM-500 is a very good headset for the money but the
microphone has far too many lows and is lacking in high
frequency response necessary for articulation. While it
is possible to fix the problem with the TX EQ it should
not be necessary to do so.

Unfortunately, I lost the HC-5 in my 25 year old ProSet
this past weekend and given the price/availability of
replacement elements and other parts, I'll probably have
to replace the entire ProSet rather than just the HC5 and
and housing.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Hector Padron
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 9:11 AM
> To: David M. Elliott
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
>
>
> Well I consider a waste of money to buy the Heil one,unless
> as you said it be the new HC6. For half the price or less
> depending on which store you get it,the Yamaha CM-500 is a
> better choise,either the headphones and the mic has a wider
> audio response and likewise the K3 will be able to equalize
> the TX audio as the operator wanted to sound. My two cents.
>
> AD4C
>
>
>
> "For a refined ham it is compulsory to own a k3"
>
> --- On Thu, 4/1/10, David M. Elliott <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> From: David M. Elliott <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
> To: "Robert 'RC' Conley" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 3:53 AM
>
>
> Depends on what you want to sound like. HC4 is very narrow.
> In my opinion, it is lousy under any circumstances. HC5 is
> less so but still very narrow. The new HC6 gives very good
> almost HI FI results with the K3. I have tried them all with
> the K3 and that is my opinion. If you use the wide band HC6,
> you can use the equalizer on the K3 to match either the HC4 or HC5.
>
> 73 de W6BK
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Robert 'RC' Conley wrote:
>
> > I'm about to purchase a Heil Proset to use with my K3.
> > Which "AD-1" will I need......???
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > Elecraft mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:[hidden email]
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Julius Fazekas n2wn

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

In reply to this post by Dick Dievendorff

...and if you go through your computer sound card (using N1MM), you don't need the adapter either.

73,
Julius
n2wn

Julius Fazekas
N2WN

Tennessee Contest Group
http://www.k4ro.net/tcg/index.html

Tennessee QSO Party
http://www.tnqp.org/

Elecraft K2 #4455
Elecraft K3/100 #366
Elecraft K3/100

AD4C2009

Re: Heil HC-4, HC-5

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

"lacking in high frequency response necessary for articulation"?

I totally disagree with that statement,it has more highs than enough,in fact it covers the whole spectrum from 100 to 4000hz on the K3,I can make it sound as high as a HC5 or even the HC4,in regards to the "lows" simply cut them down with the TX EQ,in fact you can make it sound ANY WAY you want it to sound.

AD4C

"For a refined ham it is compulsory to own a k3"

--- On Thu, 4/1/10, Joe Subich, W4TV <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Joe Subich, W4TV <[hidden email]>
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
To: "'Hector Padron'" <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 2:23 PM

The CM-500 is a very good headset for the money but the
microphone has far too many lows and is lacking in high
frequency response necessary for articulation. While it
is possible to fix the problem with the TX EQ it should
not be necessary to do so.

Unfortunately, I lost the HC-5 in my 25 year old ProSet
this past weekend and given the price/availability of
replacement elements and other parts, I'll probably have
to replace the entire ProSet rather than just the HC5 and
and housing.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

In order to have reasonable articulation, the CM-500
needs at least 3dB (closer to 6dB) per octave of boost
above 800 Hz and requires 6dB per octave of cut below
400 Hz in order to avoid being "boomy" or "muddy."

It should never be necessary to use that much EQ to make
a microphone "sound good" and is a symptom of a poorly
designed capsule (or preamp).

73,

... Joe, W4TV

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hector Padron [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 4:51 PM
> To: W4TVJoe Subich
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
>
>
> "lacking in high frequency response necessary for articulation"?
>
> I totally disagree with that statement,it has more highs than
> enough,in fact it covers the whole spectrum from 100 to
> 4000hz on the K3,I can make it sound as high as a HC5 or even
> the HC4,in regards to the "lows" simply cut them down with
> the TX EQ,in fact you can make it sound ANY WAY you want it to sound.
>
> AD4C
>
>
>
>
> "For a refined ham it is compulsory to own a k3"
>
> --- On Thu, 4/1/10, Joe Subich, W4TV <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> From: Joe Subich, W4TV <[hidden email]>
> Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
> To: "'Hector Padron'" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 2:23 PM
>
>
>
> The CM-500 is a very good headset for the money but the
> microphone has far too many lows and is lacking in high
> frequency response necessary for articulation. While it
> is possible to fix the problem with the TX EQ it should
> not be necessary to do so.
>
> Unfortunately, I lost the HC-5 in my 25 year old ProSet
> this past weekend and given the price/availability of
> replacement elements and other parts, I'll probably have
> to replace the entire ProSet rather than just the HC5 and
> and housing.
>
> 73,
>
> ... Joe, W4TV
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email]
> > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Hector Padron
> > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 9:11 AM
> > To: David M. Elliott
> > Cc: [hidden email]
> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
> >
> >
> > Well I consider a waste of money to buy the Heil one,unless
> > as you said it be the new HC6. For half the price or less
> > depending on which store you get it,the Yamaha CM-500 is a
> > better choise,either the headphones and the mic has a wider
> > audio response and likewise the K3 will be able to equalize
> > the TX audio as the operator wanted to sound. My two cents.
> >
> > AD4C
> >
> >
> >
> > "For a refined ham it is compulsory to own a k3"
> >
> > --- On Thu, 4/1/10, David M. Elliott
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: David M. Elliott <[hidden email]>
> > Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Heil HC-4, HC-5
> > To: "Robert 'RC' Conley" <[hidden email]>
> > Cc: [hidden email]
> > Date: Thursday, April 1, 2010, 3:53 AM
> >
> >
> > Depends on what you want to sound like. HC4 is very narrow.
> > In my opinion, it is lousy under any circumstances. HC5 is
> > less so but still very narrow. The new HC6 gives very good
> > almost HI FI results with the K3. I have tried them all with
> > the K3 and that is my opinion. If you use the wide band HC6,
> > you can use the equalizer on the K3 to match either the HC4 or HC5.
> >
> > 73 de W6BK
> >
> > On Mar 31, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Robert 'RC' Conley wrote:
> >
> > > I'm about to purchase a Heil Proset to use with my K3.
> Which "AD-1"
> > > will I need......???

Jim Brown-10

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 19:06:14 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>In order to have reasonable articulation, the CM-500
>needs at least 3dB (closer to 6dB) per octave of boost
>above 800 Hz and requires 6dB per octave of cut below
>400 Hz in order to avoid being "boomy" or "muddy."

You and I must be listening to very different CM500s. Many
members of our contest club bought them and have them on the
air, and I own two. Every CM500 I've heard sounds great with
only the two low octaves at full cut, and no other EQ.

How do you listen to evaluate a transmitted signal? My
standard method is with my K3 set for at least 2.7 kHz
bandwidth (and wider is better, so that I'm not fooled by what
the RX filtering is doing, and so that I don't miss
distortion). Indeed, you can make any signal on the band sound
very muddy or very thin and bright by using a narrow filter and
shifting it high or low with respect to the signal.

>It should never be necessary to use that much EQ to make
>a microphone "sound good" and is a symptom of a poorly
>designed capsule (or preamp).

No, it's the sound of a mic with different EQ. Go to the Shure
website and study the frequency response of their
communications mics, like the 444. They have limited low end,
and a BIG peak (about 8dB) around 3kHz. The reason for that
peak is the rolloff built into the skirts of SSB TX filters --
it compensates for that rolloff! Heil mics do the same thing
(but not very nicely, to my ear). Compare those communications
mics with the Shure SM81, which is flat as a pancake up to 15
kHz.

I own a lot of pro dynamic and condenser mics that are flat
from 50 Hz to 12 kHz, and I've used a few of the dynamics with
my ham gear when I didn't have a ham mic handy. RE16, RE20,
RE27 are examples -- I've done a LOT of contesting with them,
and I can easily make them sound very competitive, but also
very clean. If I plugged them in with no TXEQ, they would sound
VERY muddy. They need a LOT of low cut (full cut on at least
the three lowest bands of the K3 equalizer) and that big peak
around 3kHz. There's NOTHING wrong with the design of those
mics or the preamp. They are simply designed for a different
purpose -- high quality recording and broadcast of speech and
music.

73,

Jim Brown K9YC

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

AD4C2009

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

Thanks Jim,very well explained,that is why I use my CM-500 at my K3 and no other mic anymore,they all sound terrific.

AD4C

"For a refined ham it is compulsory to own a k3"

--- On Fri, 4/2/10, Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Jim Brown <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)
To: "Elecraft List" <[hidden email]>
Date: Friday, April 2, 2010, 12:53 AM

On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 19:06:14 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>In order to have reasonable articulation, the CM-500
>needs at least 3dB (closer to 6dB) per octave of boost
>above 800 Hz and requires 6dB per octave of cut below
>400 Hz in order to avoid being "boomy" or "muddy."

You and I must be listening to very different CM500s. Many
members of our contest club bought them and have them on the
air, and I own two. Every CM500 I've heard sounds great with
only the two low octaves at full cut, and no other EQ.

How do you listen to evaluate a transmitted signal? My
standard method is with my K3 set for at least 2.7 kHz
bandwidth (and wider is better, so that I'm not fooled by what
the RX filtering is doing, and so that I don't miss
distortion). Indeed, you can make any signal on the band sound
very muddy or very thin and bright by using a narrow filter and
shifting it high or low with respect to the signal.

>It should never be necessary to use that much EQ to make
>a microphone "sound good" and is a symptom of a poorly
>designed capsule (or preamp).

No, it's the sound of a mic with different EQ. Go to the Shure
website and study the frequency response of their
communications mics, like the 444. They have limited low end,
and a BIG peak (about 8dB) around 3kHz. The reason for that
peak is the rolloff built into the skirts of SSB TX filters --
it compensates for that rolloff! Heil mics do the same thing
(but not very nicely, to my ear). Compare those communications
mics with the Shure SM81, which is flat as a pancake up to 15
kHz.

I own a lot of pro dynamic and condenser mics that are flat
from 50 Hz to 12 kHz, and I've used a few of the dynamics with
my ham gear when I didn't have a ham mic handy. RE16, RE20,
RE27 are examples -- I've done a LOT of contesting with them,
and I can easily make them sound very competitive, but also
very clean. If I plugged them in with no TXEQ, they would sound
VERY muddy. They need a LOT of low cut (full cut on at least
the three lowest bands of the K3 equalizer) and that big peak
around 3kHz. There's NOTHING wrong with the design of those
mics or the preamp. They are simply designed for a different
purpose -- high quality recording and broadcast of speech and
music.

73,

Jim Brown K9YC

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Jim Brown-10

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:43:05 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>My CM-500 is very "muddy" with only the bottom two bands of
>TX EQ cut to the maximum. I also need to reduce 200 Hz and
>boost 1600/2400/3200 Hz.

I suspect there's something wrong with the CM500 you have.

73,

Jim K9YC

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

> I suspect there's something wrong with the CM500 you have.

It certainly does not appear to have any problem other than
being extremely "flat" to the point of muddy. With heavy EQ
and aggressively cutting the bottom end, the CM-500 is capable
of excellent sounding audio. However, I would not recommend
it for use with a transceiver that lacks the level of control
over transmit equalization provided by the K3.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 1:21 AM
> To: Elecraft List
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:43:05 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>
> >My CM-500 is very "muddy" with only the bottom two bands of
> >TX EQ cut to the maximum. I also need to reduce 200 Hz and
> >boost 1600/2400/3200 Hz.
>
> I suspect there's something wrong with the CM500 you have.
>
> 73,
>
> Jim K9YC
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Bob Naumann W5OV

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

For my CM500 I have my K3's EQ set to:

Band +/-
1 0
2 0
3 -6
4 -6
5 -10
6 0
7 +4
8 +8

Aside from the mic being a little "hot" (no close-talking allowed) the TX
audio sounds great. It sounds good to me in the monitor and I have gotten
positive compliments on it over the air on those very rare times I actually
get on SSB.

73,

Bob W5OV

P.S. The DVR is really a good deal. The recorded messages sound identical to
live transmissions - perfect!

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 12:21 AM
To: Elecraft List
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:43:05 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>My CM-500 is very "muddy" with only the bottom two bands of
>TX EQ cut to the maximum. I also need to reduce 200 Hz and
>boost 1600/2400/3200 Hz.

I suspect there's something wrong with the CM500 you have.

73,

Jim K9YC

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Joe Subich, W4TV-4

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

Bob,

> For my CM500 I have my K3's EQ set to:
>
> Band +/-
> 1 0
> 2 0
> 3 -6
> 4 -6
> 5 -10
> 6 0
> 7 +4
> 8 +8

Except for bands 1 and 2, the effect of your EQ is very similar
to my "DX" settings.

DX/
Band contest Ragchew
50 -16 -16
100 -16 -16
200 -6 -3
400 0 0
800 -3 -3
1600 +6 +3
2400 +10 +5
3200 +12 +6

These settings provide a shelving (low cut) filter at about
150 Hz (a typical hum/rumble filter). The "ragchew" setting
is a 3 dB/octave slope and the DX/contest setting is a 6 dB
per octave slope. The -3dB "dip" at 800 Hz could be a bit
deeper and reduces background noise in the "interformat gap"
- the area, typically between 600 and 1200 Hz, where the human
voice has no energy.

Both versions get "great audio" reports ... but as I have said,
it should not be necessary to be so aggressive with the EQ. My
early training in the recording studio was to use the right mic
for the job and use as little equalization as possible.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bob Naumann
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 7:31 AM
> To: 'Elecraft List'
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)
>
>
> For my CM500 I have my K3's EQ set to:
>
> Band +/-
> 1 0
> 2 0
> 3 -6
> 4 -6
> 5 -10
> 6 0
> 7 +4
> 8 +8
>
> Aside from the mic being a little "hot" (no close-talking
> allowed) the TX audio sounds great. It sounds good to me in
> the monitor and I have gotten positive compliments on it over
> the air on those very rare times I actually get on SSB.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
> P.S. The DVR is really a good deal. The recorded messages
> sound identical to live transmissions - perfect!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Jim Brown
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 12:21 AM
> To: Elecraft List
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)
>
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:43:05 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>
> >My CM-500 is very "muddy" with only the bottom two bands of
> >TX EQ cut to the maximum. I also need to reduce 200 Hz and
> >boost 1600/2400/3200 Hz.
>
> I suspect there's something wrong with the CM500 you have.
>
> 73,
>
> Jim K9YC
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

Jim Brown-10

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4

I said:

>> I suspect there's something wrong with the CM500 you have.

On Fri, 2 Apr 2010 02:21:24 -0400, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

>It certainly does not appear to have any problem other than
>being extremely "flat" to the point of muddy. With heavy EQ
>and aggressively cutting the bottom end, the CM-500 is capable
>of excellent sounding audio. However, I would not recommend
>it for use with a transceiver that lacks the level of control
>over transmit equalization provided by the K3.

OK, look at it this way. Because of our ham club group purchase,
I've seen or heard quite a few samples of this mic, and their
response is well tailored for use in communications -- that is,
rolled off low end, some breath pop and handling noise that needs
more low end rolloff, and enough pre-emphasis around 3kHz that it
doesn't need any more. That sort of response is not natural for an
electret capsule -- it would be provided by external circuit
components.

Yours doesn't appear to have that response tailoring, and you're an
experienced audio engineer who would know, so I'd say that the
sample of mic you have is defective, perhaps missing one or more of
the tailoring components. That wouldn't prevent it from sounding
good with the EQ you've implemented.

Consider this. The CM500 is sold by discount retailers for about
$45 or less. That means they're paying about $35 for it. It's a
pretty well built product, both headphones and mic sound very good.
I've specified functionally equivalent products (Beyer, Sennheiser,
AKG) for production intercom systems. Their cost is on the order of
$300-$400. What's the difference? 1) Ruggedness 2) Quality
control. My guess is that the CM500 comes out of the factory with
little or any QC. Yours is not the first QC problem I've heard
about. I corresponded privately with another member of this list
who got a bad mic. It was quickly replaced by the vendor at no
cost.

73,

Jim K9YC

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

vk3dbd

Re: CM-500 Response (was: Heil HC-4, HC-5)

Re audio on tx

Bob W5OV and others commented on the variations of the tx eq setting

My K3, when first used on air SSB with local 80m net produced reports of
"terrible basy audio, "woolly", "muddy" etc

I use the standard MH2 mic . Evetually the following setting produced
acceptable (good) audio as verified by anumber of suitably "qualified" stns

1 = -7
2 = -5
3 = -4
4 = +1
5 = +3
6 = +2
7 = +4
8 = +8

Obviously some voices and some hearings differ enormously!

David
K3 #1728
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html