Should I use the included EMM-1 or my UMIK-1 for Dirac Live?

[sycraft]

I've an XMC-1 on the way, and a copy of Dirac Live Full. I also already own a calibrated UMIK-1 from MiniDSP for other reasons. So in that situation which microphone is more recommended for use?

[monkumonku]

Dec 3, 2015 14:12:24 GMT -5 sycraft said:

I've an XMC-1 on the way, and a copy of Dirac Live Full. I also already own a calibrated UMIK-1 from MiniDSP for other reasons. So in that situation which microphone is more recommended for use?

I would recommend the UMIK-1, since it is individually calibrated. When you run Dirac it will ask you which mic you want to use and allow you to indicate where the calibration file is on your hard drive.

[geebo]

Dec 3, 2015 14:15:27 GMT -5 monkumonku said:

Dec 3, 2015 14:12:24 GMT -5 sycraft said:

I've an XMC-1 on the way, and a copy of Dirac Live Full. I also already own a calibrated UMIK-1 from MiniDSP for other reasons. So in that situation which microphone is more recommended for use?

I would recommend the UMIK-1, since it is individually calibrated. When you run Dirac it will ask you which mic you want to use and allow you to indicate where the calibration file is on your hard drive.

^ What he said. Absolutely.

[skippy1977]

I recommend the UMIK-1 as well. When I used the EMM-1 there was always an issue setting the channel levels. Since buying the UMIK-1 I haven't had a single issue running Dirac. That alone is well worth the cost of the UMIK-1.

[goodfellas27]

UMIK-1 with the 90 degrees cal file.
EMM-1 made the XMC-1 sound like crap in comparison.

[klinemj]

Definitely the UMIK...and as goodfellas notes...use the proper calibration file.

Mark

[fludimir]

Can anybody compare EMM-1 and UMIK-1 - just make two REW measurements with each mic? UMIK is individually calibrated, EMM not, but there is cross-spectrum cal file for EMM. And some folks says that emm is good mic, not worse than umik.

[klinemj]

With an appropriate calibration file, either should be fine. Do realize that if you have a umik from cross spectrum (cs) lab,the cal file is for the very mic you have. If you use the cs cal file available here for the emm, it is a cal file for 1 particular mic that an XMC own sent to cs and got a cal file for. And, there is variation from mic to mkic, so I like knowing the cal file is the specific mic I hold on my hand...not just one of the same type.

Mark

[alucard]

This thread reminded me to buy a UMIK, so I did. Question about setup: If using the 90 degree cal file, the UMIK should be horizontal and pointing towards the middle of the front two speakers?? I found this is on minidsp forum, but wanted to check with the XMC-1 group here.

- If using the Umic without calibration you should use it facing up to the ceiling
- If you use the provided calibration file face it directly to the source (or just in between both speakers if you measure a stereo setup).

[fludimir]

Feb 13, 2016 15:48:00 GMT -5 klinemj said:

With an appropriate calibration file, either should be fine. Do realize that if you have a umik from cross spectrum (cs) lab,the cal file is for the very mic you have. If you use the cs cal file available here for the emm, it is a cal file for 1 particular mic that an XMC own sent to cs and got a cal file for. And, there is variation from mic to mkic, so I like knowing the cal file is the specific mic I hold on my hand...not just one of the same type.

Mark

There is "matched by math" emm calibration file based on number of  calibrated emm mics. And its very similar to individual emm cal file for ansats mic. That makes me think that my emm with "matched by math" cal file should be mostly correct and there is no reason to buy umik (I'll also need to send it over the ocean), but cant be fully sure without real measurements. 

alucard,  90 degree cal file should be used when mic is pointed to ceiling, if you want point it on speaker you need to use 0 degree cal file. However as I know for room measurements better to point mic to ceiling

[klinemj]

Feb 14, 2016 13:41:05 GMT -5 fludimir said:

There is "matched by math" emm calibration file based on number of calibrated emm mics. And its very similar to individual emm cal file for ansats mic. That makes me think that my emm with "matched by math" cal file should be mostly correct and there is no reason to buy umik (I'll also need to send it over the ocean), but cant be fully sure without real measurements.

The main thing is that you end up happy with the result. If the matched by math or other file and mic combo work, great. I just prefer to know my cal file matches my specific mic...one less thing to worry about.

Mark

[millst]

Yeah, the individual mics vary too much. I already posted a graph way back when I had mine calibrated. Those cal files are great for removing Emotiva's house curve, but that's about it.

-tm

[fludimir]

You talk about this? emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/42450/another-cross-spectrum-cal-emm
Is it comparison of two emm without cal file, or some cal file was used?

[millst]

It's a comparison between the cal files for my mic and socketman's mic.

-tm

[fludimir]

And both your and socketman's EMM-1 mics were individually calibrated in crossspectrum lab?
I checked cal files from ansats signature (didn't found any topic about that cal files..) - there were files related to socketman's mic , ansats mic, "matched by math" - all that cal files aren't very different, mostly on 10k freq that aren't important for me. I also checked by myself mics from mine and another xmc - they have 2db difference in sensitivity and 1db difference on 2khz and higher. So again, looks like mics arent very-very different and common cal file should work. But yours graph showing much more difference

[millst]

I believe so. I don't know enough about the origins of what's in that cal file archive to comment. I think that thread shows that the difference can be significant. If you don't get lucky, then you're basically making measurements with a broken tape measure. How can you trust the results?

-tm

[klinemj]

All mics vary. This is why I keep repeating my preference for an individually calibrated mic. But again,if folks are happy with the results they get from the mic and cal file they have, that is good enough.

Mark

[fludimir]

klinemj, what you mean by "happy with results", how you can be happy of mic when looking on measurement result?

millst - you have individually calibrated emm, did you compared it to calibrated umik?

[klinemj]

Feb 16, 2016 7:07:51 GMT -5 fludimir said:

klinemj, what you mean by "happy with results", how you can be happy of mic when looking on measurement result?

millst - you have individually calibrated emm, did you compared it to calibrated umik?

What I mean is if your ears are happy with the sound, then that is good enough. The biggest risk with a mic that does not have the right cal file is that it will be off in some part(s) of the spectrum. Most data I have seen shows a mic generally off at the top or the bottom end (not at some random spikes in one particular place). So, when adjusting based on that,an improper adjustment will be made and your system will be made to be either too loud or too quiet in the part that was off.

Thankfully, with full DIRAC, if you don't like what you hear, you can modify the target curve to your liking. Of course, that takes more work that many won't bother to do. I have found that, with an individually calibrated mic, I like dirac's result the first time. I have only run it 3 times. Twice when I first got it...and only twice because I messed something up the first time. And then once more when I got a new sub.

Mark

[klinemj]

By the way, I once saw data from multiple mics of a single type from Parts Express. The standard cal file for them could be off quite a bit. If I can find that again, I will share it. While it does not apply exactly to Emotiva's mic, I am sure the trend applies to show how/where they can vary.

Mark