Quality Microphone Audio

David Holmgren

OK I figured it was time for the author of the post to weigh back in.
After hearing from all of you that I was off my rocker for not using the internal EQ I decided to roll up my sleeves and give it another go.  I listed to all of you suggestions and have now successfully made my Flex sound like a Flex...with awesome audio.  The outboard sound hardware I bought has been packed up and will be returned.

I noticed my thread got hijacked a few times but I was OK with that because it's all about spreading the wealth of knowledge we all have learned on the Flexible road to success.

Best 73,

Ruffers!

Ken - NM9P

Excellent! Now with the savings you can afford that new amp, antenna, or transverter you have always wanted!  Have fun!

Ken - NM9P

Stephen Hawkins NG0G

 original post: "I think most people are lured into a Flex based upon how great they sound on the air. "
Really? I've never heard that.  I bought mine because the digital CW filters don't ring like my old radio.  And the close in dynamic range is good.   With the DX station in my left ear, and a massive, strong pileup "up 2" in my right ear.  My left ear is no longer affected by the pileup like with my older radio.

David Holmgren

For the millionth time I told you to stop exaggerating and generalizing!  Kidding.  OK instead of "most" I should have said "some"    Also if you're in the CW part of the band you won't hear that great audio sound of a Flex radio. 

We each find that precious feature(s) in the Flex that makes it sparkle like a diamond.

Stephen Hawkins NG0G

I don't operate CW 100% of the time.  I shift to SSB if that's where the DX station is.  I chose Heil HC-6 in my mike profile and used what were the default settings for that.  And I will admit that I have received several unsolisited compliments on my audio.  This surprised me as it had never happened with my old FT-1000MP MkV Field. I made no changes other then to choose Heil HC-6 for my mic profile, and DX.  I think my preference for CW came from living with mediocre antennas and no amp for a long time.  CW gave me an edge.  326 confirmed on CW and only 244 on ssb.

David Holmgren

Sounds good on all of your accomplishments.  I'll say for the record I'm a different kind of ham.  If we were all the same it would be a boring world.  I cherish and enjoy the great conversations I have by calling CQ and meeting interesting people hearing their stories more than any certificate, plaque or award.  For that reason I don't have anything hanging on my walls in the shack.  Case in point yesterday I met 4 amateurs across the US and had a great time.  If I hear an interesting DX station I'll give them a few calls to try and reach them for novelty sake but if it doesn't happen oh well.  I couldn't even tell you how many countries I have as I'd have to count them up in the log. 

I think the reason I don't feel a need to collect awards etc with Ham radio is if I complete it then I'll get board and leave the hobby.  I've known hams that only focused on awards and then when they finished up they quit.  With all the facets to this hobby it's a shame to take a narrow focus and miss all that it has to offer.  This has worked for me for the past 41 years starting out as a 16 year old kid so I think I'll stay the course. 

Gary L. Robinson

I agree ... I never solicit audio reports but get many many comments how great my 6400 sounds and they always ask what microphone do I use and  how much did I spend for it.   I use the hand mic that came with it and hold it properly + set the smartsdr equalizer appropriately.

---Gary WB8ROL

Pat ON3CQ

Can someone post the EQ settings for the Heil 781.

N8SDR

Keep in mind that everyone's voice is different and depending on what your looking for EQ can change from little to very different. 

I use a TX bandwidth of 50-3500 with this PR781 setting: 
63 +2
125 -5
250 -8
500 -4
1K +3
2K +8
4K +7
8K +7

If I run narrow I use the below settings which are a bit closer to the default profile for the PR781 in the SSDR software:

63 +1 
125 -3
250 -8 
500 -3
1K +2
2K +3
4K +7
8K +7

I also found I needed to  use a bit less  on the Mic gain from default I use between 42-45. Proc setting on Norm.

Both seem to get  good reports- but I personally like the first a bit more. 

Pat ON3CQ

Tested the setting today and got nice reports tnx for the info.

Ernest - W4EG

I am constantly being complemented on how well my Flex-6700LE audio sounds.
After, I stopped using and  adjusting the EQ, or adding  PROC - NOR-DX-DX+
The Mic is a Heil Goldline PRO,with 2 different elements (I don't recall the element numbers.) Resting on a converted Kenwood MC-60 mic holder, using the BAL input on the rear of the F-6700 and the PTT wiring connected to the MIC connector in  the front. 
And I must add, that if you like to use VOX, just lock it with the LOCK bottom on the Mic base.

George KF2T

Not to mention your broadcast quality voice, Ernest!

Terry AB2UE

N8SDR xmit bandwidth is 50-3500hz, yet 8Khz slider @+7db.  That's 4500hz above the hi cut. Is the 8K slider even doing anything ?

Ernest - W4EG

George, you are very kind.
Working EU, Asia and Africa with a wet noodle. 
Tnx and loving FL everyday more. LOL
73, From IOTA: NA-138 Amelia

N8SDR

from what others have noticed yes there seems to be  much over lap in the EQ filtering. I  would like to see the Q and bandwidth that the EQ is based on

Terry AB2UE

My point is, any EQ frequency above the 'hi cut' should be cutoff by the hi cut given the slope of the filter in the flex radio.  I have used a audio signal generator[15mV] into my yaesu mic input & found that audio frequencies  above  the xmit bandwidth 'hi cut' are not present & do not generate RF output. I have plotted the xmit filter curve which is similar to a 'bell' curve, which is much wider than that of a flex. Perhaps someone could inject audio signals into a flex mic input to plot its filter slope.
My rule of thumb is to set the EQ frequencies within the range of the xmit bandwidth if possible. My yaesu parametric eq allows me to do that , where the flex graphic EQ  slider frequencies are fixed. Maybe a flex in my future someday. 73

Ken - NM9P

The overlap means that there is some interaction between the 4K and 8K sliders as to how they affect the audio contour below the filter cutoff. When using a 3.5 KHz cutoff I don’t think that overlap will have much effect. In cases where the cutoff is between the frequency range of two sliders, there would probably be more effect of the overlap. I prefer in other cases to drop sliders to the bottom on ranges that will not affect the audio contour . This seems to keep those frequencies from overloading the processing stages. It is especially important with the bass sliders. But I have observed some smaller problems with extremely highly boosted highs as well. Steve Or Tim once posted a graphic that showed the frequency response curves of the EQ sliders. Of course, the higher you turn them, the more interaction they have because of the Bandwidth varies with the gain of the slider.

Bill -VA3WTB

Ken, this is one problem with the PR781. You have to EQ to extremes to settle them down as they have such a heavy base response and suffer high freq.

In the case of N8SDR above I don't think the 4K and the 8K slider has much effect with his cut off settings, otherwise setting upwards of +7 on the sliders would be driving the PROC a little hard.

I remember that post from Tim, there has been some changes to the EQ since that graph, I wonder what it would look like today?

Ken - NM9P

I would love to have a PR781, but you need to know how to drive it.  I have the PR22 and it's frequency response is very similar except for the PR781 has some more bass, and perhaps a little more highs.  But a lot more rear side rejection.

The 63 and 125 needs some serious roll-back on the '781.  Perhaps even the 250

On my PR22, my favorite TX EQ profiles are:

*Rag-Chew-1:        EQ: -2,  -1,  0,  2,  6, 8, 7, -10  ===  Filter range: 65-3000  === PROC: NORM

Rag-Chew-2:        EQ: -4,  -2,  0,  2,  7, 8, 7, -10  ===  Filter range: 65-3000  === PROC: NORM
         (THis has a little less bass and a little more sparkle)

*2.7K  DX profile:  EQ:  -4, -2, 0,  2, 7, 9, 7, -10 === Filter range  165-2900 === PROC DX+

*2.3 Narrow:          EQ:  -10, -4, 0, 4, 7, 9, 8, -10 === Filter Range:  300-2600 === PROC: DX+
        (My "Ear Bleeder" contest/DX Hole buster profile.)

2.5 DX:                    EQ: -5, -3, -1, 1, 7, 9, 7, -10 === Filter Range 200-2700 === PROC DX+

If I had a PR781, I would probably start with these, but nudge the low end sliders down a bit while listening to my own audio via FDX on another slice to get them right.

The thing I love about the flex is how easy it is to adjust any of these parameters.
I have listened to other guys adjusting some other rigs and it is a nightmare of drilling down into multiple levels of several menus!   The eventually got them sounding pretty good, but wow!

Ken - NM9P

N8SDR

All I can say is the settings I posted work well for me, end of story. 

KL4QG

Anyone try Neewer NW-600 Microphone with 48V P power supply -Best audio reports with this on many ham radios

Craig Williams

Agree!

Mike VE3CKO

That looks like a Chinese clone of the infamous BM-600 (**** movement), as it is in the price range, specs etc. My guess is Neewer requisitioned so many to be branded, hence another clone available on Amazon. To be called a studio microphone is advertising hype. Maybe home studios where budget is everything to most, but the pros would use microphones costing many times more than $19.99 not because of the cost but because of it's duplicatability of knowing the behaviour of the microphone. Problem with low end microphones like this is you buy 5 and all 5 will likely have different characteristics, patterns and frequency response, bad for the professional studio environment when time is money.
As to reports saying its the best, well it's all subjective to who's saying it, so if your buddys in your rag chew say it's great that's fine but certainly not really accurate. It certainly will sound far, far better than a hand microphone. Audio checks are of course helpful but you are absolutely dependent on the person giving you the report. I have found a lot of audio checks where countless adjustments are made, it's comical to listen sometimes and often ends with "sounds great now", not because it sounds great, but everyone is getting sick and tired of hearing, "how does it sound now?", know what I mean.
I've had a couple BM-600 side by side comparisons with the Heil PR-40. Here are my thoughts. It's a great looking microphone and for $19.99 sounds pretty good on the Flex but you will have to cut the low freq quite a lot, it's a bassy microphone. It does not sounds nearly as good as the PR-40 but it's pretty decent, however, the PR-40 wins hands down not only for sound quality but because with the BM-600 and NW-600 you must speak into the side of the microphone. This means when I was using it, my vision in front of me is obstructed by the microphone making it difficult to mult-task on multi-screens.
The good news is that you will have good sounding audio with this microphone if the EQ is setup right, for the price that is pretty good. Do not think for a second it will out perform better microphones.
There have been many threads on this topic, search you will find them.

Brian Denley KB1VBF

I have used electrets (need bias), condensers (need 48 volt phantom power) and dynamics (pr781, pr40, etc). They can all sound great but I am partial to the dynamics. They don’t pick up much background noise, need no bias, are low output so need boost. I notice every talk show uses dynamics.

KL4QG

The main microphone going be RadioSport Headset with wide range condenser mic element -I do have icom SR 30 I like try need find someone make me mic cables etc for Flex 6400M
We all wait till after Alaskan nets are over than we help each other being helping someone with signal reports with new Dipole or Microphone fine tuning -We all have meet in person so we find that great why adjust audio -took me about 3 adjustments good go/

George Brown

Another Audacity question...I have no difficulty recording received CW on the bands with Audacity.  DAX1 on the RX slice and Audacity Recording Device to DAX Audio RX 1 (Flex Radio Systems).  I would also like to include my end of the CW QSO but I just can not figure out the correct setting.  In other words, I want to record both sides of a CW QSO.  Is that possible?  Any thoughts?

Bill -VA3WTB

This has been asked from people trying to record both sides of a SSB conversation. Audacity does not allow for both channels. Only one at a time.

Neal Pollack, N6YFM

"Why do so many of us overkill our station?"

Perhaps because we like blinky lights and lots of control knobs almost
as much as talking on the air?   Or because we can, or because he who has
the most toys, enjoys their man-cave more?

Oh, wait, are we supposed to get on the air, or just stand back and look
at all the blinky lights?

David Decoons, wo2x

It is not overkill if you use the features.

I have invested in making my station fully remote, even though over 90% of my operating is done from within the front of the radio. But am glad I did. 

I have been in the hospital 6 times since August. (46 days total). Currently here Now and about to get on 75 meters from my iPad running SmartSDR for IOS and Node Red client. 

Node Red allowed me to program a Raspberry Pi to integrate amp control and monitoring, rotor control, and station power control into a browser window which runs split screen with SSDR for IOS.

besides I do it for the challenge. This week tentatively my early disability retirement kicks in and I need things to keep me occupied.

Dave wo2x

George Brown

Thanks Bill.  I had that feeling.  73