Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dan Mortensen" data-source="post: 121091" data-attributes="member: 2826">Re: S16 and phantom popsThat seems to me to be substantively different. Having the two source choices on the same AES port is not the same as having one internal and one on an AES port or having one real and one virtual.My money is on that being the difference between us, since Timmy&#039;s and my setups responded the same. It doesn&#039;t seem like sharing the show files would be enlightening if the hardware is not the same.It&#039;s a fine but real nuance.Based on past experience, I won&#039;t rule out that I&#039;m doing something wrong, but the results are consistent and two people are getting the same result (presuming that Timmy implements the option that works for me when using the same equipment).The other reason to do it the way Jan and Christian suggested, perhaps without knowing what they were suggesting (based on Jan&#039;s last note), rather than globally phantom-powering everything if the phantom channels do not line up 1:1 on the two S16&#039;s, is what Timmy said about not putting phantom on the wireless receivers.I&#039;ve long heard but never experienced that some receivers will blow up if you put phantom power on their XLR outputs. That never made sense to me, but I do try to avoid it when possible. &nbsp;In the same way, it has never made sense that phantom powering a mic transformer somehow changes it forever and that change is audible. Although I&#039;ve been listening carefully to pretty high resolution PA&#039;s for quite some time, I&#039;ve never claimed to have golden ears. Any tiny differences in mic quality from one individual to the next are either clearly a result of capsule damage, or are lost in the uncontrolled environments that I am always in, where tens or hundreds of other factors have much more influence on how it sounds than those tiny differences. Cables fall into the same category, afaic./Rant.Maybe I&#039;ll go back to lurking for a while. This has been a lot of posts from me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dan Mortensen, post: 121091, member: 2826"] Re: S16 and phantom pops That seems to me to be substantively different. Having the two source choices on the same AES port is not the same as having one internal and one on an AES port or having one real and one virtual. My money is on that being the difference between us, since Timmy's and my setups responded the same. It doesn't seem like sharing the show files would be enlightening if the hardware is not the same. It's a fine but real nuance. Based on past experience, I won't rule out that I'm doing something wrong, but the results are consistent and two people are getting the same result (presuming that Timmy implements the option that works for me when using the same equipment). The other reason to do it the way Jan and Christian suggested, perhaps without knowing what they were suggesting (based on Jan's last note), rather than globally phantom-powering everything if the phantom channels do not line up 1:1 on the two S16's, is what Timmy said about not putting phantom on the wireless receivers. I've long heard but never experienced that some receivers will blow up if you put phantom power on their XLR outputs. That never made sense to me, but I do try to avoid it when possible. In the same way, it has never made sense that phantom powering a mic transformer somehow changes it forever and that change is audible. Although I've been listening carefully to pretty high resolution PA's for quite some time, I've never claimed to have golden ears. Any tiny differences in mic quality from one individual to the next are either clearly a result of capsule damage, or are lost in the uncontrolled environments that I am always in, where tens or hundreds of other factors have much more influence on how it sounds than those tiny differences. Cables fall into the same category, afaic. /Rant. Maybe I'll go back to lurking for a while. This has been a lot of posts from me. [/QUOTE]

Verification