# Sticky  MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone



## Sonnie

*MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone*

MiniDSP is a sponsor here at Home Theater Shack!

The UMIK-1 is an omni-directional USB measurement microphone providing Plug & Play acoustic measurement. From speaker & room acoustic measurement to recording, this microphone provides low noise and accurate results you can rely on. Forget about driver installation, OS compatibility and un-calibrated mics. The Umik-1 is a USB Audio class 1 device automatically recognized by all Operating Systems (Windows/Mac/Linux). It is provided with a unique calibration file based on the serial number. Time to finally focus on your measurements with three simple steps: Unpack, Plug, Measure!

No more mic preamp, no more phantom power, no more sound card calibrations... and USB Plug 'n' Play.

JohnM is currently working on a few tweaks to make using the UMIK-1 with REW a real convenience, however it can be used with REW as it is now.

See also: Using the UMIK-1 and REW with HDMI output

Cost is $75 and that includes the calibration file.




















The following measurements show a comparison of the three mics I have on hand, the UMIK-1, IBF Akustik EMM-8 and the Behringer ECM8000.

These measurements are from a first use and quick setup of a Denon 4520 receiver that I am currently reviewing. It has been setup with Audyssey XT32, but not fully optimized for my HT room. I will get into more of that later with my review, but I wanted to at least get the mic comparison out of the way.

This is not a professional lab test my any means, although care was taken to do the best I could to get the mics equally aligned. There are no doubt some minor variances due to an imperfect test, but it is sufficient to show that the UMIK-1 is a worthy choice, especially taking into account the ease of use with REW.

All mic measurements were adjusted to align at 100Hz.

Here is a comparison between my IBF EMM-8 (calibrated in Germany) vs my ECM8000 (calibrated by Cross-Spectrum Labs):









Calibrated in two different parts of the world, I have to believe these are fairly accurate. 

Next we add in the UMIK-1:









I also wanted to compare my external USB sound card that I have been using with the HDMI output on my laptop. Here is that comparison using the UMIK-1 mic:









Here are all three mics with the additional HDMI output measurement included:









I am of the opinion that if you have an HDMI output on your computer, purchasing nothing more than the UMIK-1 and HDMI cable makes for a very simple setup to use with REW. No external sound card is needed, no mic preamp, and no SPL meter is needed. Even if you do not have HDMI, the UMIK-1 is still a worthy consideration... and would be my choice of mics.

I did try the headphone output, but I could never get the controls set so that they were not effecting the output signal and could not get an accurate output measurement. The HDMI output was much simpler to work with anyway.


----------



## JohnM

To use the UMIK-1 with REW (on Windows) in advance of the next REW beta (which will take care of all the following for you, along with some other things):

- Plug in the mic
- Start REW
- On the soundcard preferences make sure you are using the Java driver selection and select UMIK-1 as the input device and MICROPHONE as the input.
- On the Mic/meter preferences tab make sure you select "Mic or Z weighted SPL meter" as the input type and use the browse button to load the UMIK cal file.
- On the Analysis preferences make sure "Use loopback as timing reference" is not selected

The UMIK-1 can handle signal levels up to 130dB, but that means at normal measurement levels you will get warnings from REW about the input level being low. You can ignore those warnings.

The current version of REW cannot access the Capture volume control for USB mics, you can alter it manually if desired using the Windows recording volume mixer.


----------



## Sonnie

Excellent John... do you have an estimated date for the next beta release of REW?


----------



## JohnM

Worst case it would be just before new year as I'm on holiday between Christmas and new year so I'll have time available, but I'm hoping to get it out before Christmas.


----------



## EarlK

John,

- Will there ever be a way ( & are you able to create a soft-patch within future releases of REW ) to use these new USB based microphones in conjunction with, REW's option to  *"Use loopback as a timing reference"* ?

Thanks <> EarlK


----------



## Sonnie

FYI... I ordered one of these and already have the tracking info for shipping and the calibration file was emailed to me for my serial number.


----------



## Dale Rasco

I'll be interested in seeing how well they perform.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Another knockout calibrated mic offering. Wow, it used to take upwards of $300 for a factory calibrated mic plus an interface, now all you have to do is get out of one dinner date with the significant other, and you are set. Except for the fallout.

The timing loop back question is a good one. Perhaps MiniDSP can provide their converter delay time, add in "standard" USB buffering time, and have REW subtract those out automatically... Assuming no significant time variables. Just thinking out loud, certainly John already has a plan in mind.


----------



## ack_bak

So I have a Mac and am completely new to all of this, but I should be able to install REW, buy this mic and plug it in via USB and away I go? Is it easier to generate test tones via a tone generator CD (I use one of these now with an SPL meter) or should I use my Mac to do that which means I need to connect to my receiver/amp?


----------



## fuzz092888

So I went to the post office today and picked up my UMIK-1. Apparently when miniDSP ships it to you they require a signature for delivery. Once I got home and started to unpack it, I must say I was sorely disappointed in what I saw. Not with the actual product, but with the care in which this product was packed. As you can see below there was nothing protecting the carrying case except a thin cardboard shell. Because of this my tab that is supposed to keep it shut was snapped off, the case was open a bit when I opened the box, it is cracked in multiple places, and the bottom is scuffed to no end. Definitely a much different experience than when I opened my calibrated Behringer mic.

As to the mic and accessories, I'm extremely happy with them. The mic has a nice weight to it and is fairly similar to the Behringer, albeit a bit smaller. The small stand is a nice touch and the USB cord feels substantial, if a bit short. I plugged the mic into my macbook pro and it was immediately recognized. Fired up REW and opened the MIDI audio controller and I was able to adjust the gain, add the cal file and it worked first time. There were zero issues, no drivers or software, and nothing else to do except calibrate the REW SPL meter with the new mic. Absolutely fantastic.


----------



## Patzig

Awesome, looks good. Mine is in the mail.

EDIT: It would be awesome to see some measurement comparisons between the umik-1 and the behringer.


----------



## fuzz092888

Patzig said:


> Awesome, looks good. Mine is in the mail.
> 
> EDIT: It would be awesome to see some measurement comparisons between the umik-1 and the behringer.


I'll try, but recently my REW measurements with the behringer mic have been restricted to when I'm running parallels and there's a nasty delay which can effect the measurements a bit, but worth a shot.


----------



## Patzig

That's cool. Could you tell us the date that you ordered? Just wondering how long mine is gonna take


----------



## fuzz092888

Ordered late December 2nd, so let's call it December 3rd. Didn't ship until December 5th-6th, then took 5 days to get to my door, although probably would've taken four since delivery was attempted on a Monday.


----------



## ack_bak

fuzz092888 said:


> So I went to the post office today and picked up my UMIK-1. Apparently when miniDSP ships it to you they require a signature for delivery. Once I got home and started to unpack it, I must say I was sorely disappointed in what I saw. Not with the actual product, but with the care in which this product was packed. As you can see below there was nothing protecting the carrying case except a thin cardboard shell. Because of this my tab that is supposed to keep it shut was snapped off, the case was open a bit when I opened the box, it is cracked in multiple places, and the bottom is scuffed to no end. Definitely a much different experience than when I opened my calibrated Behringer mic.
> 
> As to the mic and accessories, I'm extremely happy with them. The mic has a nice weight to it and is fairly similar to the Behringer, albeit a bit smaller. The small stand is a nice touch and the USB cord feels substantial, if a bit short. I plugged the mic into my macbook pro and it was immediately recognized. Fired up REW and opened the MIDI audio controller and I was able to adjust the gain, add the cal file and it worked first time. There were zero issues, no drivers or software, and nothing else to do except calibrate the REW SPL meter with the new mic. Absolutely fantastic.


Fuzz, this sounds really promising for a newbie who owns nothing but Mac's and Linux boxes. What I am not clear on is that I assume you need a connection from your Mac to an amp/receiver to generate the test tones? What cable do you use? I am using an iMac and my understanding is that I don't need an external sound card for this mic..


----------



## fuzz092888

ack_bak said:


> Fuzz, this sounds really promising for a newbie who owns nothing but Mac's and Linux boxes. What I am not clear on is that I assume you need a connection from your Mac to an amp/receiver to generate the test tones? What cable do you use? I am using an iMac and my understanding is that I don't need an external sound card for this mic..


As long as the soundcard in your computer isn't total garbage, which the mac ones usually aren't, then all you need is one of these.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10218&cs_id=1021815&p_id=5601&seq=1&format=2


----------



## ack_bak

fuzz092888 said:


> As long as the soundcard in your computer isn't total garbage, which the mac ones usually aren't, then all you need is one of these.
> http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10218&cs_id=1021815&p_id=5601&seq=1&format=2


Thank you sir.


----------



## Sonnie

Sounds like they need to do a little better on the packing. They should send you another case... please let them know.


----------



## fuzz092888

Sonnie said:


> Sounds like they need to do a little better on the packing. They should send you another case... please let them know.


I used the "contact us" form on their website this morning after I opened everything up, but am still waiting for a response.

I also talked to another guy who just got his today and it was fine. Arrived in perfect condition. Lucky duck.


----------



## sdurani

fuzz092888 said:


> As long as the soundcard in your computer isn't total garbage, which the mac ones usually aren't, then all you need is one of these.
> http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10218&cs_id=1021815&p_id=5601&seq=1&format=2


Most laptops I've seen don't have a line out but instead a headpone out. Can that be used to send the REW sweep signal to the receiver/pre-pro or is that output equalized for something like speech intelligibility? The reason I'm asking is because I had read that the line input on a computer is different from a mic input, with the difference being that the latter was equalized for speech (on-line gaming, teleconferencing, etc). Wanted to know if that was the same for line out vs headphone out because I'll be able to connect the UMIK-1 to my laptop via USB for input signal, but only have a headphone jack for output signal. (Trying to retire my M-Audio Mobilepre USB.)


----------



## djnagle

Hi All, new to the forum. I used the PE OmniMic for a bit (borrowed from a friend) and was going to buy one but found this instead. I was shipped yesterday. I have no idea how to use REW so I need to dig into that.

I am looking forward to hearing the answer to sdurani question.


----------



## fuzz092888

sdurani said:


> Most laptops I've seen don't have a line out but instead a headpone out. Can that be used to send the REW sweep signal to the receiver/pre-pro or is that output equalized for something like speech intelligibility? The reason I'm asking is because I had read that the line input on a computer is different from a mic input, with the difference being that the latter was equalized for speech (on-line gaming, teleconferencing, etc). Wanted to know if that was the same for line out vs headphone out because I'll be able to connect the UMIK-1 to my laptop via USB for input signal, but only have a headphone jack for output signal. (Trying to retire my M-Audio Mobilepre USB.)


The headphone out should be fine. I've never heard of a headphone out being optimized for anything. The only thing that will influence the headphone out is the quality of the sound card.


----------



## sdurani

Thanx fuzz.


----------



## fuzz092888

No problem, enjoy the mic. If you have any problems just contact miniDSP. I had an issue and they are working with me to get it all sorted out.


----------



## Phillips

I use a USB mic and it works very well with my laptop sound card (which i was able to do a calibration file as well)?

To calibrate my laptops sound card (Vista OS) i had to disengage the effects, then it all worked.
The laptop had a headphone out + mic in.

Also had to change to a single sweep. (for my mic i did).

Adjust the levels in & out (mine is set to 50 mic + 60 speaker (headphone) out.


----------



## sfdoddsy

I received my UMIK a couple of days ago, and whilst it works exactly as advertised with the WIndows version of REW, it seems to have a few issues with the Mac version. Which is a little disappointing as that is why I bought it.

When using it with OS X Lion and my Mac Mini, it defaults to 48K format and I had to change the sample rate to 48K in REW. However, whilst I could make a measurement, there was something drastically wrong with the FR, with a massive roll-off below 1khz.

I replicated this with my Macbook Air.

After some fiddling about, I found that if I switch the sample length in the measurement window from 256K to 128K the FR was as expected and the same as the Windows version.

However, the question is what effect reducing the sample length will have on accuracy?

That aside, the calibrated response seems to be more accurate than my uncalibrated ECM8000, especially at the top.

Fuzzmeasure seemed to be fine.

Here's a pic of the issue with a 256K sample length.


----------



## ophir

fuzz092888 said:


> The headphone out should be fine. I've never heard of a headphone out being optimized for anything. The only thing that will influence the headphone out is the quality of the sound card.


Would you recommend the headphone out over an HDMI connection?


----------



## fuzz092888

ophir said:


> Would you recommend the headphone out over an HDMI connection?


I wouldn't expect any difference, but try both and see if there are any meaningful differences.


----------



## AudiocRaver

sfdoddsy said:


> However, the question is what effect reducing the sample length will have on accuracy?


Longer sample length gives better signal-to-noise ratio, better immunity from the effects of minor background noise. Using the multiple sweep option is another way to get the same effect.

Edit: I have no explanation for the weird frequency response with the 256K sample length, that is a head scratcher. Have you gotten the same result more then once that way?


----------



## fuzz092888

UMIK on top calibrated behringer on the bottom.

EMP-E-41B/Crown XLS2500/macbook pro soundcard


----------



## Patzig

wow awesome results Fuzz, thanks for posting that


----------



## JohnM

EarlK said:


> - Will there ever be a way ( & are you able to create a soft-patch within future releases of REW ) to use these new USB based microphones in conjunction with, REW's option to  *"Use loopback as a timing reference"* ?


It might be possible to use ASIO4All to make a composite ASIO device that uses another soundcard path for the loopback return, but I haven't had a chance to try that yet.


----------



## sfdoddsy

AudiocRaver said:


> Longer sample length gives better signal-to-noise ratio, better immunity from the effects of minor background noise. Using the multiple sweep option is another way to get the same effect.
> 
> Edit: I have no explanation for the weird frequency response with the 256K sample length, that is a head scratcher. Have you gotten the same result more then once that way?


Yep. With the Mac Mini over several sessions and my Macbook Air.

Going to longer samples makes it even worse as the roll- off starts at 2k.

I hope it is a REW/Umik thing that can be fixed in an update (since Fuzzmeasure is fine) but now I've worked it out at least I can work around it by doing multiple sweeps.


----------



## sfdoddsy

Patzig said:


> wow awesome results Fuzz, thanks for posting that


Indeed. In spite of the issues I've mentioned, the performance of the mic seems great.

My ECM8000 is not individually calibrated, and the generic REW cal file actually makes the response worse. The Umik out of the box does not have its deficiencies and tracks my calibrated ARC mic well. 

Once you add the cal file it feels even more trustworthy.

My only other beef is the short USB cable. 2m is nowhere near enough.


----------



## sfdoddsy

Patzig said:


> wow awesome results Fuzz, thanks for posting that


In spite of the issues I've mentioned, the performance of the mic seems good.

It is extraordinarily close to my ECM8000, with a somewhat more accurate top end.

My only other beef is the short USB cable. 2m is nowhere near enough.


----------



## Phillips

fuzz092888 said:


> UMIK on top calibrated behringer on the bottom.
> 
> EMP-E-41B/Crown XLS2500/macbook pro soundcard



Interesting difference


----------



## fuzz092888

UMIK on the top Behringer on the bottom, this time in the sub frequencies. Outlaw LFM-1 EX. I also had the sub connected to an anti-mode dual core. I'm still getting the hang of the anti-mode, but you get the idea. Pretty similar.

1m










1in










LP


----------



## Phillips

What would be the difference between USB mics, i use the Omnimic?


----------



## fuzz092888

Phillips said:


> What would be the difference between USB mics, i use the Omnimic?


A few db, a few Hz, nothing too significant. I know I read somewhere the UMIK-1 has more information in the cal file, but don't quote me on that.


----------



## fuzz092888

As a quick update, I contacted miniDSP about getting a new box and they told me it would be easier to just send me a new mic, but that I'd have to return the one I have. I asked them a question about the return process and they haven't responded since. It's been about about a day since I sent the e-mail, hopefully they get back to me soon so we can get this over with.


----------



## Phillips

fuzz092888 said:


> A few db, a few Hz, nothing too significant. I know I read somewhere the UMIK-1 has more information in the cal file, but don't quote me on that.


Thanks for that

The other USB mics dont have any advantages over the UMIK other than few db, few Hz?

Something about ADC, what is this?


----------



## fuzz092888

Phillips said:


> Thanks for that
> 
> The other USB mics dont have any advantages over the UMIK other than few db, few Hz?
> 
> Something about ADC, what is this?


Actually it's the UMIK that has that advantage over the Dayton. It basically means that it has a built in "sound card" which encodes the audio file at 24 bits and either 44.1 or 48kHz


----------



## Phillips

fuzz092888 said:


> Actually it's the UMIK that has that advantage over the Dayton. It basically means that it has a built in "sound card" which encodes the audio file at 24 bits and either 44.1 or 48kHz


So you don't use the laptops soundcard at all?

Currently i use the Omnimic with my laptop soundcard which has produced very good results, once the soundcard was produced.

I wonder if there will be any advantages with the new REW update for the Omnimic?

Currently i can only use single sweep, and have no loopback, which i beleive John is looking at.

One thing i like is the portability of the USB mic, which is obvious.


----------



## fuzz092888

Phillips said:


> So you don't use the laptops soundcard at all?
> 
> Currently i use the Omnimic with my laptop soundcard which has produced very good results, once the soundcard was produced.
> 
> I wonder if there will be any advantages with the new REW update for the Omnimic?
> 
> Currently i can only use single sweep, and have no loopback, which i beleive John is looking at.
> 
> One thing i like is the portability of the USB mic, which is obvious.


You don't use the laptop or computer soundcard for input at all, it is all handled by the UMIK. For output you still use whatever soundcard you have.


----------



## Phillips

fuzz092888 said:


> You don't use the laptop or computer soundcard for input at all, it is all handled by the UMIK. For output you still use whatever soundcard you have.


Sorry my opologies

So the same as the Omnimic.


----------



## cazzesman

Hi all. 

Recently received the Umik1 and I am having some problems with my setup in Rew. I have loaded the Mic's Cal file into the REW system and it is recognised

This is what I have.

PC running SOtM PCIe USB3 into USB into Audiophilleo2 into NAD digital Amp. The driver for the SOtM is it's own design. I use JRiver V16 and it runs in Inclusive use with the AP2.

When I go to REW preferences to set up have the following..

Soundcard -

I can select 44.1 - output is Audiophilleo2 - input is Mic Umik1 

Using - Main speaker to check levels

Calibration file is - Umik 1

Mic/Metre

C-Weighted ticked (no Z weight available on screen) 
Cal file is selected as - Umik1.cal

Analysis - loop back 'Un-ticked"

I can get audio out through my speakers but I get no input reading on either left or right meters

I have nothing to adjust the levels with via the Audiophilleo2.

My soundcard is a realtek but it is bypassed in this config.

Any suggestions? 

Regards Cazzesman


----------



## AudiocRaver

cazzesman said:


> Hi all.
> 
> Recently received the Umik1 and I am having some problems with my setup in Rew. I have loaded the Mic's Cal file into the REW system and it is recognised
> 
> This is what I have.
> 
> PC running SOtM PCIe USB3 into USB into Audiophilleo2 into NAD digital Amp. The driver for the SOtM is it's own design. I use JRiver V16 and it runs in Inclusive use with the AP2.
> 
> When I go to REW preferences to set up have the following..
> 
> Soundcard -
> 
> I can select 44.1 - output is Audiophilleo2 - input is Mic Umik1
> 
> Using - Main speaker to check levels
> 
> Calibration file is - Umik 1
> 
> Mic/Metre
> 
> C-Weighted ticked (no Z weight available on screen)
> Cal file is selected as - Umik1.cal
> 
> Analysis - loop back 'Un-ticked"
> 
> I can get audio out through my speakers but I get no input reading on either left or right meters
> 
> I have nothing to adjust the levels with via the Audiophilleo2.
> 
> My soundcard is a realtek but it is bypassed in this config.
> 
> Any suggestions?
> 
> Regards Cazzesman


This might not be it at all, if you are using a USB3 interface for the UMIK-1, I have heard elsewhere that some audio devices do not play well with USB3. You would think that with backward compatibility there should be no issues, but others have had trouble running USB2 devices into USB3. Do you have a USB2 that you can try it with? As I said, not a guaranteed fix, just something to try. That is all that comes to mind for me.

Best of luck.


----------



## blitzer

I just got mine a couple days ago - everything arrived just fine. As previously stated, the sensitivity of this mic is really low. I am currently experimenting with the MiniDSP 2X4 and this Mic. The integration with REW is good. Sooooo much simpler than the typical setup.


----------



## JohnM

cazzesman said:


> Recently received the Umik1 and I am having some problems with my setup in Rew.


To control the input volume for the UMIK you will need to use the Windows volume control. You should also untick C weighting, that is only for use with a C-weighted SPL meter.


----------



## Sonnie

I received the one I ordered today... 5 days from Hong Kong to Alabama... not bad. All is is good condition here.


----------



## cazzesman

Thanks will give it a try.

Regards Cazzesman


----------



## strumf666

Just made my order; hope it arrives soon. From what I have read, this should be what I need, to be able to see the difference audyssey is making with the sound.


----------



## fuzz092888

Just as an update, I'm still trying to work with miniDSP on my broken box. They take between 2-3 days to respond to e-mails, although I'm on day 2 since I last e-mailed them and don't have much hope for tomorrow. I really don't think this process should have taken this long, nor do I think Parts Express would have strung me along for a week if I had an issue.

To be fair, miniDSP customer service has always been pleasant and has never rejected my request for a new box or a new mic, but they don't really seem to be answering my questions definitively which then necessitates another e-mail and another wait, then another e-mail and another wait etc etc. I feel as though if I had bought a dayton mic, had this problem, and contacted parts express it would have been worked out in a day or two and I'd probably have a new mic by now.

Thinking about picking up the Dayton mic at this point and just shipping the miniDSP UMIK back.


----------



## Sonnie

I wouldn't let a cracked box cause me to send a good mic back. I believe you will eventually get a good box.

Even when I was dealing with Tony on sponsorship we were several days between emails.


----------



## Phillips

I think that good communication is a key to good business


----------



## fuzz092888

Sonnie said:


> I wouldn't let a cracked box cause me to send a good mic back. I believe you will eventually get a good box.
> 
> Even when I was dealing with Tony on sponsorship we were several days between emails.


It's not the cracked box that would give me cause to send it back, it's the lack of protocols and the accompanying somewhat vague answers. I don't see the Dayton as an inferior mic, at least right now, and I know how good the customer service is at parts express since I've dealt with them several times. 

However, so far, in dealing with miniDSP I explained my broken box problem, said I would like a replacement box because I plan to take this mic with me and need a functioning travel box. I also explained that the mic was not firmly planted in the box when it arrived due to the clasp breaking and the box opening and asked if there could be any potential problems due the the increased jostling it received.

I got a response a few days later saying it would cost the same to ship a new box or new box and mic and that it would be easiest to ship a new mic. I said that was fine, but asked how they would reimburse the cost of shipping the old mic back, (they said they would do so) and if they wouldn't ship the new mic until they had received the old one back since that wasn't made clear.

I then got a somewhat contradictory e-mail back saying that if I was having technical issues with the mic they would ship me a new one, otherwise they'd be shipping me a new box Monday. I explained that I was having a few connection issues and asked if the rolloff in the upper frequencies was normal and have yet to hear back.

Based on my past experiences with parts express the first response I would have gotten back would read something like, Sorry to hear you had trouble here's a return label to ship us back the broken one and we'll ship you out a new one. 

That's what I'm looking for in terms of customer service. I don't think miniDSP has bad customer service, I'm just not experiencing the clarity and decisiveness I'm used to. What I wished miniDSP had said was either "we're sending you a new box" or "here's a return label we'll ship your new mic out immediately/when we receive the old one" Pretty simply stuff IMHO.


----------



## Sonnie

I thought you posted several comparisons with your Behringer mic and they were similar in response... so are there new response issues you are having?

I definitely would not take a chance... and if you are happy with the Dayton mic and not happy with the customer service of miniDSP, send their mic back and get a refund. You had an unfortunate situation.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Mine arrived yesterday with no apparent damage to the case or contents. I have yet to try it but hope to do so this week.


----------



## Sonnie

Yeah... my package was fine, but also have not tested the mic yet. I want to compare it with my IBF and ECM.

Hopefully Alex's issue is the exception and Tony can get the customer service worked out. I think this is part of their expanding/growing pangs, as I have not heard of any customer service issues with their main line product. I was rather impressed with the order process and it arriving from Hong Kong in 5 days.


----------



## sub_crazy

I think I am going to pick up one of these but after the holidays as things are too hectic right now. 

I also am hoping to see if most are using there laptops internal sound card with success out of the headphone outs. Being able to just plug in the mic and run the test tones from the internal sound card would be the ultimate so I have my fingers crossed. 

I am really looking forward to running the new REW that was just released yesterday.


----------



## Phillips

I use a USB mic with REW.

I have attached a graph of both the Internal Laptop soundcard and mic calibration.


----------



## Sonnie

I think it will all depend on the quality of your sound card, but most of the laptops I have looked at recently seem to have pretty good sound cards... and HDMI out as well. So either a 3.5mm to stereo RCA from the headphone output or an HDMI cable should work.

EDIT: The headphone out did NOT work for me. I never could get a clean output. The HDMI output worked beautifully... including the ability to see REW on my 10' screen.


----------



## Mattcc22

So hdmi will work? I thought all of the RCA cabling was so you got a mono channel split out. With hdmi you would be back to stereo correct?


----------



## Sonnie

I would think so, yeah. 

What would be nice is if John could get the output to be 5.1 via HDMI... :bigsmile:


----------



## sub_crazy

Sonnie said:


> I would think so, yeah.
> 
> What would be nice is if John could get the output to be 5.1 via HDMI... :bigsmile:


I was thinking of asking for Dolby Atmos, might as well aim high


----------



## fuzz092888

miniDSP shipped me a new mic with expedited shipping and it will be here Thursday I believe.


----------



## djnagle

I just picked mine up from the post office. It is in fine shape with all the parts there and the box in good shape. I can't work with it until tomorrow night. I am looking forward to messing with it. I am not looking forward to learning REW. I am use to the OmniMic and know it well, but I have never used REW. As a matter of fact, I've not even downloaded it yet. I'll do that tonight and start getting familiar with the program.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I got around to trying mine out tonight. This is my first exposure to REW so I don't have anything to compare it to. Even so, setup was super easy and I haven't found anything to complain about so far (other than my general lack of REW knowledge). The included clamp and tripod are pretty handy too. This was just what I needed to get this PB13-Ultra under control in my living room.


----------



## ophir

Got mine last week and have been learning REW with it since then. Super nifty and lets me geek out on measurements, but one thing I've noticed is the "dB FS In" is really low, ~ -36. I haven't figured out a way to get it up to the recommended -18. Mic mixer volume in Win 7 maxed out at 100 and input volume maxed out at 1.00. Does dB FS In need to be -18 or is -36 ok?

UMIK-1 -> Lenovo laptop -> HDMI out -> Denon 3310 AVR


----------



## ophir

By the way, mine arrived in 6 business days along with a MiniDSP. Everything arrived in great condition.


----------



## JohnM

ophir said:


> one thing I've noticed is the "dB FS In" is really low, ~ -36. I haven't figured out a way to get it up to the recommended -18. Mic mixer volume in Win 7 maxed out at 100 and input volume maxed out at 1.00. Does dB FS In need to be -18 or is -36 ok?


It is fine as is, the UMIK can measure up to 130dB, so signal levels are lower at normal test levels.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I have been getting a similar message, stating that REW expects levels at -10dB or higher, but it will still plot the curves for me. I still have lots room to increase volume, just getting used to the way it works before doing so.


----------



## Sonnie

I have updated the first post to include measurement comparisons between three mics I have, all with calibration files.


----------



## EarlK

Thanks for that !










That difference of @ 7.5db at 10K is quite significant ( & very much in keeping with what Herb recently discovered when comparing his calibration vs P.E.s, for the same UMM-6 microphone ).


:sn:


----------



## JohnM

Peter Loeser said:


> I have been getting a similar message, stating that REW expects levels at -10dB or higher


Are you using V5.01 beta 10?


----------



## Peter Loeser

JohnM said:


> Are you using V5.01 beta 10?


I think I am running 5.0 (on OS X). I don't have an SPL meter, so I just went with a level that would give me plots and ignored the message for now.


----------



## Sonnie

EarlK said:


> Thanks for that !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That difference of @ 7.5db at 10K is quite significant ( & very much in keeping with what Herb recently discovered when comparing his calibration vs P.E.s, for the same UMM-6 microphone ).
> 
> 
> :sn:


It could be differences in calibration methods and mic orientation. To be more precise I should use the orientation for which the mic is calibrated... and I did not give that much thought at the time... all were at 90°. I think I have two files from Herb on my ECM8000... one for 0° and one for 90°, if I am remembering correctly. Of course I can't hear 10kHz very well anyway, so for me it would not be significant.


----------



## Skylinestar

Can the UMIK-1 function as an accurate SPL meter? If yes, how to set it?


----------



## Sonnie

I don't think there is anything to set with REW, just plug 'n' play and it works as an SPL meter.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Sonnie said:


> I don't think there is anything to set with REW, just plug 'n' play and it works as an SPL meter.


On the OS X version as well? Maybe I misunderstood.


----------



## Sonnie

That would be a question for John... as I am not familiar with that version.


----------



## EarlK

Sonnie said:


> It could be differences in calibration methods and mic orientation. To be more precise I should use the orientation for which the mic is calibrated... and I did not give that much thought at the time... all were at 90°. I think I have two files from Herb on my ECM8000... one for 0° and one for 90°, if I am remembering correctly. Of course I can't hear 10kHz very well anyway, so for me it would not be significant.


Right you are !

Pointing the ECM8000 90deg to source , while using the 0deg ( to source ) calibration, would nicely explain the blue line .

:sn:


----------



## JohnM

The V5.0 OS X version does not have the updates for UMIK, you would have to do SPL calibration in the old fashioned way.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I realized I had the input gain really low in the OSX sound settings, which should explain the low level pop-ups I was getting. I didn't have enough time (had to catch a flight) to run a test tone to confirm.


----------



## dtsES

hi john,

do you plan to update rew on osx to fully use the umik-1?

thx a lot for your work!

regards


----------



## JohnM

Hi Markus, I will make an OS X version, but I need to get a new Mac as my old Mac Mini cannot be upgraded to the latest OS X. I'm hoping to have something to try on OS X before the end of January.


----------



## phazer99

I already have an uncalibrated Behringer ECM8000, but 'm considering buying a UMIK-1 just to get a calibrated measurement mic (the data for ECM8000 at Cross-Spectrum doesn't look very good (sorry, can't post links  ) ). I want to use it with full range calibration using software like Dirac Live. Would you say it's worth the investment?


----------



## strumf666

Microphone arrived in 5 days, I am impressed, usually stuff from Hong Kong gets lost or travels for more than a month. Time for some measurements


----------



## djnagle

JUst plugged in my new UMIK, fired up REW and it is working flawlessly.


----------



## JonP

> That difference of @ 7.5db at 10K is quite significant ( & very much in keeping with what Herb recently discovered when comparing his calibration vs P.E.s, for the same UMM-6 microphone )





Sonnie said:


> It could be differences in calibration methods and mic orientation. To be more precise I should use the orientation for which the mic is calibrated... and I did not give that much thought at the time... all were at 90°. I think I have two files from Herb on my ECM8000... one for 0° and one for 90°, if I am remembering correctly. Of course I can't hear 10kHz very well anyway, so for me it would not be significant.


Well... I'm in the club too, or about to be. Santa Wife has one heading my way from Hong Kong.... 

I am somewhat concerned about that huge difference up at the high end... I will be using it for speaker measurement and design, so accuracy everywhere is important. I'd like to think I'll be able to trust the supplied cal.

So, a couple of questions... Could you clear up whether you did on axis (or 90deg) measuring, and was the cal files the ones for 0 or 90 deg? And, what do we know about the supplied UMIK-1 file? 0 or 90deg?

I have a couple of the ECM's, one with a cal file from Herb at Cross Spectrum. So I could try comparing as you have for more data... 

Should get here soon...


----------



## JohnM

The UMIK-1 cal is on-axis, 0 degree.


----------



## pelliott321

I am trying to order the mic from miniDSp but having problems 
I am in the States and when I try to close the deal with paypal I get a message that paypal does not allow US shipping to HK
Bit the PO is correct and has my name and address as shipped to
I sent an email to miniDSP yesterday and there is not response yet


----------



## Sonnie

I don't think we can get you any faster results that emailing them directly. :huh:

You might contact PayPal, as it seems that is where the problem exist.


----------



## cdnbum88

I just ordered the mic. 

I am hoping my daughters Lenovo Ideapad P580 will be sufficient enough to work with this unit or if I will need an external soundcard. 

I have an Marantz AV7005 and using the AS-EQ1 in the mix. Will I have any issues using this with this combination?

Sorry, very new to the REW world. I love what XT32 has done with my HT setup and looking to tweak more with this unit.

Does this save the updates on your AVR? How does it know what curve or tweaks you have done?


----------



## sub_crazy

I just placed my order as well.

Welcome to the HTS cdnbum88.

This is not meant to replace the mic you use for Audyssey, it is only used to measure the response of your system but it will not save anything to your AVR. 

What it will be useful for is to measure your system before applying any Audyssey processing so you can make some possible changes in there placement to improve response naturally. It will also give you a better idea of how your response actually is since the graphs that the AS-EQ1 put out are exaggerated to look really smooth. 

Can't wait to get mine and see how low can I go!


----------



## cdnbum88

sub_crazy said:


> I just placed my order as well.
> 
> Welcome to the HTS cdnbum88.
> 
> This is not meant to replace the mic you use for Audyssey, it is only used to measure the response of your system but it will not save anything to your AVR.
> 
> What it will be useful for is to measure your system before applying any Audyssey processing so you can make some possible changes in there placement to improve response naturally. It will also give you a better idea of how your response actually is since the graphs that the AS-EQ1 put out are exaggerated to look really smooth.
> 
> Can't wait to get mine and see how low can I go!


After I typed it and thought for a minute I realized how stupid my question was :blink: So this will let me see where my potential 'issues' are and then try to move the speakers to try and adjust to improve the SQ. I don't have lots of options with wife approved locations :bigsmile: but can adjust a little. I wish I had more options for acoustic materials as I know they would improve my room, but without WA options I think XT32 has done a great job with my HT system. 

Hoping this will show me some of the short falls and go from there. I hope I can just use the HDMI from laptop and this mic and be good to go


----------



## sub_crazy

It wasn't a stupid question, your system is more complicated than most with 2 mics you need to use to calibrate so it would be easy to confuse. Members are less likely to jump on people around here at the HTS so never be worried to ask a question.

Let us know how you like the Umik-1 and I will make sure and do the same.


----------



## Zeitgeist

Lots of interesting information. I'm not looking for a new mic currently, but it's REALLY hard to beat the convenience of a USB mic.

Looks like the FR graphs are pretty good. The price seems pretty decent too!


----------



## golffnutt

Where do I buy this Mic? Thank you.


----------



## sdurani

golffnutt said:


> Where do I buy this Mic?


Here: http://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/umik-1


----------



## golffnutt

sdurani said:


> Here: http://www.minidsp.com/products/acoustic-measurement/umik-1


Thank you sdurani for that link. Do you or any others on this thread feel that the REW calibration program would be better than my Audysey program which came with my Onkyo TX-SR 876 AVR? I know absolutely nothing about the REW program but the Audysey program seems to work pretty good. Your replies and sharing of your knowledge would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and Happy New Year to everyone.


----------



## Sonnie

REW is not a calibration program... it will analyze your system in several different respects, but does no equalization itself. It can help you with suggestions on what to equalize. It will let you see what Audyssey is doing to your system. I think most of us here use it more to help determine what we need to equalize our subwoofer response, but we also like to see the overall response of our systems.

Happy New Year!


----------



## Phillips

golffnutt said:


> Thank you sdurani for that link. Do you or any others on this thread feel that the REW calibration program would be better than my Audysey program which came with my Onkyo TX-SR 876 AVR? I know absolutely nothing about the REW program but the Audysey program seems to work pretty good. Your replies and sharing of your knowledge would be greatly appreciated. Thank you and Happy New Year to everyone.



REW actually doesn't do what the Audysey, YPAO etc does.
REW measures what these have done to the sound/room, in your system Audysey, with more accuracy.

REW will help to fine tune the effects your system with bass traps, EQ etc.

Hope this helps a bit


----------



## bulldog

I'm curious to know exactly what John has done to help install/use this mic as a PNP option in the new REW. 

The reason I ask is that although this mic is a good option at a good price, it comes directly from Hong Kong and isn't truly individually calibrated like for instance a UMM-6 USB Mic would be that you can purchase from Herb at CSL, who is also a great forum contributor, and a US Based business, for about the same price.

I don't have either mic yet and I've been helping some folks get on the REW bandwagon over at AVS and there have a been a lot of questions and concerns from folks worrying about setting REW up for the first time.

While I know it's simple and have been working with it for a few years now, I do know it would be much better/easier if John could/would offer the same support for the UMM-6 Mic as he does for this MiniDSP mic as I feel more comfortable in recommending the UMM-6 to folks for the reasons mentioned above, mostly due to the personalized calibration though.

I'm not a huge poster over here and if there is a thread this would be more appropriately posted in, I'll be more than happy to move it or ask again.

Can someone explain the difference in setting up the UMM-6 mic vs setting up the MiniDSP mic in REW and can someone who is in contact with John ask if he can add support for the UMM-6 Mic just as he has the MiniDSP or direct me to the proper forum in which to ask this question?

Thanks so much,

--J


----------



## golffnutt

bulldog said:


> I'm curious to know exactly what John has done to help install/use this mic as a PNP option in the new REW.
> 
> The reason I ask is that although this mic is a good option at a good price, it comes directly from Hong Kong and isn't truly individually calibrated like for instance a UMM-6 USB Mic would be that you can purchase from Herb at CSL, who is also a great forum contributor, and a US Based business, for about the same price.
> 
> I don't have either mic yet and I've been helping some folks get on the REW bandwagon over at AVS and there have a been a lot of questions and concerns from folks worrying about setting REW up for the first time.
> 
> While I know it's simple and have been working with it for a few years now, I do know it would be much better/easier if John could/would offer the same support for the UMM-6 Mic as he does for this MiniDSP mic as I feel more comfortable in recommending the UMM-6 to folks for the reasons mentioned above, mostly due to the personalized calibration though.
> 
> I'm not a huge poster over here and if there is a thread this would be more appropriately posted in, I'll be more than happy to move it or ask again.
> 
> Can someone explain the difference in setting up the UMM-6 mic vs setting up the MiniDSP mic in REW and can someone who is in contact with John ask if he can add support for the UMM-6 Mic just as he has the MiniDSP or direct me to the proper forum in which to ask this question?
> 
> Thanks so much,
> 
> --J



Thanks everyone for your replies and answers, they really helped. Is the mic that I need to purchase the only thing I need to buy in order to get started with REW? Thank you.


----------



## Phillips

bulldog said:


> worrying about setting REW up for the first time.



These forums are very helpful with setup etc.




bulldog said:


> While I know it's simple and have been working with it for a few years now, I do know it would be much better/easier if John could/would offer the same support for the UMM-6 Mic as he does for this MiniDSP mic as I feel more comfortable in recommending the UMM-6 to folks for the reasons mentioned above, mostly due to the personalized calibration though.





bulldog said:


> Herb at CSL, who is also a great forum contributor, and a US Based business, for about the same price.



Agree


I thought the UMIK was individually calibrated?




bulldog said:


> I'm not a huge poster over here and if there is a thread this would be more appropriately posted in, I'll be more than happy to move it or ask again.



Maybe post in the UMM-6 thread.




bulldog said:


> Can someone explain the difference in setting up the UMM-6 mic vs setting up the MiniDSP mic in REW and can someone who is in contact with John ask if he can add support for the UMM-6 Mic just as he has the MiniDSP or direct me to the proper forum in which to ask this question?



What i understand is that there wouldn't be any difference. Only thing that comes to mind is the SPL, which comes with the UMIK calibration file, not sure if it comes with the UMM-6.


----------



## Phillips

bulldog said:


> I'm curious to know exactly what John has done to help install/use this mic as a PNP option in the new REW.
> 
> The reason I ask is that although this mic is a good option at a good price, it comes directly from Hong Kong and isn't truly individually calibrated like for instance a UMM-6 USB Mic would be that you can purchase from Herb at CSL, who is also a great forum contributor, and a US Based business, for about the same price.
> 
> I don't have either mic yet and I've been helping some folks get on the REW bandwagon over at AVS and there have a been a lot of questions and concerns from folks worrying about setting REW up for the first time.
> 
> While I know it's simple and have been working with it for a few years now, I do know it would be much better/easier if John could/would offer the same support for the UMM-6 Mic as he does for this MiniDSP mic as I feel more comfortable in recommending the UMM-6 to folks for the reasons mentioned above, mostly due to the personalized calibration though.
> 
> I'm not a huge poster over here and if there is a thread this would be more appropriately posted in, I'll be more than happy to move it or ask again.
> 
> Can someone explain the difference in setting up the UMM-6 mic vs setting up the MiniDSP mic in REW and can someone who is in contact with John ask if he can add support for the UMM-6 Mic just as he has the MiniDSP or direct me to the proper forum in which to ask this question?
> 
> Thanks so much,
> 
> --J





golffnutt said:


> Thanks everyone for your replies and answers, they really helped. Is the mic that I need to purchase the only thing I need to buy in order to get started with REW? Thank you.



The only extra you will need is a RCA from your laptop to the receiver.

I use the Omnimic and this the only extra i needed.


----------



## golffnutt

Phillips said:


> The only extra you will need is a RCA from your laptop to the receiver.
> 
> I use the Omnimic and this the only extra i needed.


Thank you Phillips for your reply.


----------



## cadett

So, as I understand it, when taking measurements, the mic should be pointed towards the speaker & not the ceiling, while using the supplied calibration file.


----------



## calibro2

I just got my UMIK today. I can't find a calibration file anywhere or instructions on where to download it. Can anyone point me in the right place?


----------



## calibro2

I found it in my email. n/m


----------



## djnagle

calibro2 said:


> I just got my UMIK today. I can't find a calibration file anywhere or instructions on where to download it. Can anyone point me in the right place?


My calibration file came in an email from MiniDSP after I bought it.


----------



## calibro2

Anyone have any success porting their calibration file to spectrum lab?


----------



## Doctor X

Sorry if this has been covered but can this mic be used as an SPL meter to set speaker/subwoofer levels using AVR test tones?


----------



## JohnM

Yes, with REW's SPL meter - the cal file includes the sensitivity info REW needs to translate the readings into SPL figures.


----------



## Dazbike

I wonder if there is a backlog in orders. I ordered on Jan 2 and website has not updated from "confirmed". I have not received an email confirming shipment and the calibration file. Anyone else experiencing a delay?

Would this microphone be suitable to use with a DRC program such as Audiolense? I have checked with Dirac and thye have run some tests with one which they have had in their office but no conclusion yet as they have had inconsistent results on 2 computers they have tried it. One worked and the other they had an issue with. They are preparing for CES but will get back to me after the show.


----------



## Doctor X

I've always wanted to get into REW but never could. I had an old RS meter but I could never get it to work properly. This was several years back.

So this new mic ... basically you just plug it into your notebook/PC, and two cables to your receiver, and that's that? I really think I should move on this as it gives me another opportunity to be able to measure using REW which I've always wanted to do but without requiring additional gear .. like an ext soundcard and phantom power.


----------



## thed1ceman504

Hi Everyone,

I am having some issues with my UMIK-1 and hope some of you might have some helpful advice.

1st Problem:
On both Mac (REW v5) and Windows (latest REW beta), the SPL readings appear to be way off. In my quiet apartment, the UMIK reports about 65-75 dBSPL, C-weighted. I have a standalone SPL meter which reads about 10-15 dB below this. I would tend to trust the calibration on the UMIK over my cheap SPL meter, but I think the UMIK reading is way to high for just the ambient noise level. These measurements were taken with the UMIK cal file loaded in to REW in both Mac and Windows.

2nd Problem:
When using the UMIK and REW on Mac, REW reports that the UMIK is clipping when taking measurements. This happens even when using my Macbook speakers for output, so I'm sure the sound pressure is not actually exceeding the range of the UMIK. I tried adjusting the UMIK level in the Mac OS MIDI Setup, but it did not appear to have any effect on the results. I am using a 128k sample length for these measurements.

Has anybody seen these issues? Any ideas?

Thanks,
Mike


----------



## sub_crazy

I am having an issue with my UMIK-1 as well, the tracking # says it is pending a customs inspection since 1-3-2012 :rant:


----------



## Dazbike

*Quote*
We are sorry to let you know your order is delayed because the
product (UMik-1) is currently out of stock.

We will ship out your order as soon as we receive the next batch of UMik-1.

We apologize for the delay.

miniDSP
*Unquote*


----------



## JohnM

thed1ceman504 said:


> 1st Problem:
> On both Mac (REW v5) and Windows (latest REW beta), the SPL readings appear to be way off. In my quiet apartment, the UMIK reports about 65-75 dBSPL, C-weighted. I have a standalone SPL meter which reads about 10-15 dB below this. I would tend to trust the calibration on the UMIK over my cheap SPL meter, but I think the UMIK reading is way to high for just the ambient noise level. These measurements were taken with the UMIK cal file loaded in to REW in both Mac and Windows.


The OS X version of REW (V5.0) does not know about UMIK-1, SPL readings for OS X need to be calibrated using the procedure in the help (Calibrating the SPL Reading). 

For the Windows version (assuming V5.01 beta 11 or later) did REW automatically detect the UMIK and ask if you wanted to use it? If not, please set the input device back to default on the REW soundcard preferences then shut down and restart REW, it should ask if you want to use the UMIK-1 and then ask for the cal file. If you had already done that, please post a screenshot of the REW soundcard preferences dialog.



> 2nd Problem:
> When using the UMIK and REW on Mac, REW reports that the UMIK is clipping when taking measurements. This happens even when using my Macbook speakers for output, so I'm sure the sound pressure is not actually exceeding the range of the UMIK. I tried adjusting the UMIK level in the Mac OS MIDI Setup, but it did not appear to have any effect on the results. I am using a 128k sample length for these measurements.


Is the UMIK selected as the default device and REW set to use the default input?


----------



## Dazbike

John, do you plan to have the Umik 1 integrated into the Mac version of REW in the future?


----------



## JohnM

Yes, but I need to get hold of a way to run the latest OS X release first (which I'm working on). There are likely to be limitations in the SPL calibration though - under Windows REW can read the input volume control setting and take it into account in the SPL figure, but under OS X the Java runtime does not provide access to the volume controls. There is a chance that the Oracle Java runtime has addressed that, however.


----------



## Dazbike

Thanks John. This Mic and it's simple plug and play (at least for Windows) has persuaded me to get into room measurement. I am sure that many who were sitting on the fence will also jump in.


----------



## thed1ceman504

Hi John,

Thanks a lot for your reply. 



JohnM said:


> The OS X version of REW (V5.0) does not know about UMIK-1, SPL readings for OS X need to be calibrated using the procedure in the help (Calibrating the SPL Reading).
> 
> For the Windows version (assuming V5.01 beta 11 or later) did REW automatically detect the UMIK and ask if you wanted to use it? If not, please set the input device back to default on the REW soundcard preferences then shut down and restart REW, it should ask if you want to use the UMIK-1 and then ask for the cal file. If you had already done that, please post a screenshot of the REW soundcard preferences dialog.


Yes, REW did automatically detect the UMIK on the Windows version. I clicked yes and loaded the cal file. I did not change any other preference settings away from their default. Unfortunately, I was borrowing a Windows laptop and can't get a screenshot for you.



JohnM said:


> Is the UMIK selected as the default device and REW set to use the default input?


On the input clipping when using REW on Mac - I was previously changing the input device in the REW soundcard preferences from 'default' to the UMIK, then running sweeps. Now, I tried selecting the UMIK as the default input device in the Mac OS System preferences, and then starting REW. I now receive an error when REW starts, which says: "Unable to access the selected device
javax.sound.sampled.LineUnavailableException: Unexpected Error". I am using Mac OS X 10.8.2 on a 2010 Macbook Pro.

Maybe REW was never actually using the UMIK (rather, built-in mic instead) when I was experiencing the clipping in Mac OS?


----------



## Patzig

Ok I know this has been asked many times, but I'm just trying to make sure I have the mic configured properly for the SPL meter in REW and also to reflect correct spl reading on FR plots. Everything is setup and working, but the spl measurements seem much higher than I would have guessed. I have a PC with windows 7, hdmi out to receiver, miniDSP usb mic in, and REW beta 12. The 2 volume adjustments for input volume of the mic are the windows mic volume control and the input volume control in REW. What should I have both of these values set at for correct readings? Thank you


----------



## JohnM

Patzig said:


> The 2 volume adjustments for input volume of the mic are the windows mic volume control and the input volume control in REW. What should I have both of these values set at for correct readings?


They should both be showing the same thing, except the Windows control goes from 0 to 100 and the REW control from 0 to 1, so 53 on the Windows control (for example) should be appearing as 0.53 in REW. If they are both showing the same then it doesn't matter too much what they are set to, anywhere between 0.5 and 1.0 should produce the same SPL reading for the same signal. If you are measuring 'normal' levels (not trying to measure maximum output of your sub, for example) set the control to 1.0 in REW or 100 in Windows, but if you need to measure levels above 110dB use 0.53 / 53.


----------



## JohnM

thed1ceman504 said:


> Maybe REW was never actually using the UMIK (rather, built-in mic instead) when I was experiencing the clipping in Mac OS?


Possibly. It is worth trying different sample rate settings in REW (44.1k and 48k) to see if that helps.


----------



## Patzig

> They should both be showing the same thing, except the Windows control goes from 0 to 100 and the REW control from 0 to 1, so 53 on the Windows control (for example) should be appearing as 0.53 in REW. If they are both showing the same then it doesn't matter too much what they are set to, anywhere between 0.5 and 1.0 should produce the same SPL reading for the same signal. If you are measuring 'normal' levels (not trying to measure maximum output of your sub, for example) set the control to 1.0 in REW or 100 in Windows, but if you need to measure levels above 110dB use 0.53 / 53.


Awesome, thank you John


----------



## Gilles27

JohnM said:


> The OS X version of REW (V5.0) does not know about UMIK-1, SPL readings for OS X need to be calibrated using the procedure in the help (Calibrating the SPL Reading).
> 
> 
> 
> thed1ceman504 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I am having some issues with my UMIK-1 and hope some of you might have some helpful advice.
> 
> 1st Problem:
> On both Mac (REW v5) and Windows (latest REW beta), the SPL readings appear to be way off. In my quiet apartment, the UMIK reports about 65-75 dBSPL, C-weighted. I have a standalone SPL meter which reads about 10-15 dB below this. I would tend to trust the calibration on the UMIK over my cheap SPL meter, but I think the UMIK reading is way to high for just the ambient noise level. These measurements were taken with the UMIK cal file loaded in to REW in both Mac and Windows.
> 
> 
> 
> For the Windows version (assuming V5.01 beta 11 or later) did REW automatically detect the UMIK and ask if you wanted to use it? If not, please set the input device back to default on the REW soundcard preferences then shut down and restart REW, it should ask if you want to use the UMIK-1 and then ask for the cal file. If you had already done that, please post a screenshot of the REW soundcard preferences dialog.
> 
> Is the UMIK selected as the default device and REW set to use the default input?
Click to expand...



I just got my umik1 and I'm having the same problem. 
REW recognized the mic and asked if I want to use it and then asked for the cal file which I loaded.
When using the spl meter I'm getting 70-75 db of ambient noise level, which can't be right. 

I have an aperion audio spl meter, which as far As I know is the same as the analog RadioShack meter, and when setting that to the lowest db scale (60db) the needle doesn't even move. 

I don't have accesses to the mic right now but I will post a screenshot of the sound card preferences tomorrow. 

Looking forward to messing around with REW and the minidsp. That's a winning combination :clap:


----------



## JohnM

Gilles27 said:


> I just got my umik1 and I'm having the same problem.


Please also include which OS you are running and which version of REW, and have a look at the REW log files (location is shown in the Help -> About box) and see if they contain an entry that states a figure for Mic Sensitivity, and what that figure is.


----------



## Gilles27

JohnM said:


> Please also include which OS you are running and which version of REW, and have a look at the REW log files (location is shown in the Help -> About box) and see if they contain an entry that states a figure for Mic Sensitivity, and what that figure is.



I'm running REW 5.01 beta 12 build 2849.

OS is Windows 7 64 bit.

There's the following entry in the logs:

??? 10, 2013 5:00:48 PM roomeqwizard.CalData calFileLoader
INFO: Mic sensitivity -15.188 dB

That is also the sensitivity value in the cal file.


----------



## JohnM

Thanks for that. Please try setting the input volume control in REW to 1.0 and see if that changes the SPL reading you get when the room is quiet, please also let me know approximately what value is shown in the DB Fs gauge below the SPL figure, it will be varying so a rough figure is fine.


----------



## spaceape

Im confused about the hdmi connection option. onder:I though the microphone where connected by USB?


----------



## Patzig

The Mic in USB for audio in. If your computer has a HDMI connection, you can use that for audio out, to your amp or receiver.


----------



## spaceape

Patzig said:


> The Mic in USB for audio in. If your computer has a HDMI connection, you can use that for audio out, to your amp or receiver.


Thank you for explaining this mate. Much difference to just using the normal left/right aux in on the AVR?

I wonder how this microphones accuracy compares to the Premium+ calibrated Cross-Spectrum Dayton EMM-6 that i currently own and if it's worth getting the UMIK-1? Well i guess we'll only know for sure with time. 

It sure is handy not having to find and set the external soundcard/preamp and attach adapters each time i want to do a measurement. :clap:


----------



## Patzig

Just did a quicky test with umik-1 Mic and a borrowed radio shack analog spl meter. Windows 7 32-bit, hdmi out audio, REW beta 13. Put the spl meter in REW on C-weighted, and well as the radio shack meter. The readings from both were mostly within 2 db at the frequencies I tested from 20hz-20,000hz. I also changed the mic input volume in REW to different levels and all spl readings stayed the same at given frequencies. Thanks for all your work John, I love this software.


----------



## phazer99

I have purchased a UMIK-1 and has done some measurements in REW (beta 13) under Windows 7. The results are very strange compared to measurements with my Behringer ECM8000. The frequency response curve rises with more than 30 dB from 40 Hz to 1.5 kHz (I've tried both with and without the UMIK calibration file). This is with subs and Audyssey MultEQ XT32 calibration enabled, so I would expect a pretty flat curve down to about 30 Hz. The ECM8000 curve is much flatter. See attached image for measurement curves.

Any help on what might be the problem is much appreciated.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Is it possible that your sound card's output stage has that much low-frequency rolloff? If it does, and you have run sound card calibration for use with the Behringer measurement mic, that rolloff would not show up in the upper curve but would show up in the lower curve which does _not_ include any calibration for the sound card output stage. That is the only explanation that I can think of.

Note: That is a _lot_ of rolloff, perhaps there is some other signal processing going on in the computer that you are not aware of.


----------



## phazer99

AudiocRaver said:


> Is it possible that your sound card's output stage has that much low-frequency rolloff? If it does, and you have run sound card calibration for use with the Behringer measurement mic, that rolloff would not show up in the upper curve but would show up in the lower curve which does _not_ include any calibration for the sound card output stage. That is the only explanation that I can think of.
> 
> Note: That is a _lot_ of rolloff, perhaps there is some other signal processing going on in the computer that you are not aware of.


I don't think that's the problem, I'm using the SPDIF output of the Realtek sound device on my motherboard and all effects are turned off. It's the same output I use for all sound playback in Windows. I don't use any soundcard calibration file in REW, neither for the Behringer or the UMIK.


----------



## Phillips

phazer99 said:


> I don't think that's the problem, I'm using the SPDIF output of the Realtek sound device on my motherboard and all effects are turned off. It's the same output I use for all sound playback in Windows. I don't use any soundcard calibration file in REW, neither for the Behringer or the UMIK.



Just to clear up, is your ECM8000 mic individually calibrated?

Why aren't you using the UMIK calibration file?


----------



## phazer99

Phillips said:


> Just to clear up, is your ECM8000 mic individually calibrated?
> 
> Why aren't you using the UMIK calibration file?


No, the ECM8000 is not individually calibrated (that's why I bought the UMIK).

I've tried both with and without the UMIK calibration file, the frequency response curve looks very similar. I'm not using a soundcard calibration file though.


----------



## akhtarmoughal

Hi can we do 5.1 with hmdi or just left and right channel now


----------



## JimP

I think the goal is to be able to run all channels either individually or in pairs using a computer equipped with HDMI output and ASIO audio drivers for the output signal. Not sure if it's limited to 5.1 or 7.1.


----------



## Sonnie

If I am not mistaken REW would need to produce a 5.1 signal for your processor to be able to decode it and at this time it does not. I believe John has talked about adding this in one of the future releases.


----------



## akhtarmoughal

Hi my laptop is two year old Dell xps the audio driver is need to download or already in there the idea is REW to know room acoustics and correct it to install acoustic panels or get eq box to fix it


----------



## JohnM

phazer99 said:


> I have purchased a UMIK-1 and has done some measurements in REW (beta 13) under Windows 7. The results are very strange compared to measurements with my Behringer ECM8000


Could you post the .mdat file for the two measurements? Also, any special reason you are using a linear frequency axis rather than log?


----------



## JohnM

akhtarmoughal said:


> Hi can we do 5.1 with hmdi or just left and right channel now


If you are using a laptop or computer that has multi-channel HDMI output you may be able to choose the various channel pairs as outputs in REW. Sometimes those are available when using the Java drivers, but more often it is necessary to use ASIO drivers - installing ASIO4All is a way of providing ASIO drivers for an HDMI output if they are not already installed.


----------



## phazer99

JohnM said:


> Could you post the .mdat file for the two measurements? Also, any special reason you are using a linear frequency axis rather than log?


I'm attaching a new measurement I just did comparing the two mics. No particular reason why I use the linear axis, haven't thought about it actually.


----------



## phazer99

I tried using another Windows application to sample a 1 kHz sine wave (generated in REW) using the UMIK-1. I can play back the sample and hear the tone but it's at a very low volume and there's a lot of background noise. When I try to sample a 100 Hz sine wave there is nothing but noise in the recorded sample. This is at a sound level so high I have to cover my ears. 

Clearly the mic can't be working correctly, right?


----------



## JohnM

Does look very odd, probably need to contact MiniDSP. Is it the same if you choose the left channel in REW rather than the right?


----------



## phazer99

JohnM said:


> Does look very odd, probably need to contact MiniDSP. Is it the same if you choose the left channel in REW rather than the right?


Yes, the results are basically identical for both channels. I've contacted MiniDSP, thanks for your help!


----------



## BrianZ

Does anyone know if this MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone is useful for other purposes than for input to the REW software? Maybe it could be used as a general purpose mic on a PC, but is there a way to use it for input to another device (eg, digital camera) with more conventional mic jack?


----------



## satbirbains

I wouldn't have thought it would be much use on a digital camera. In order to use the mic the device it is being attached to needs to have a USB Host which none that i know of do. However some tablets and phones support USB On-The-Go which will act as a host and if the USB port can provide enough power then the mic should work in theory. Maybe an android vs of REW which we can plug the UMIK-1 to have the ultimate portable measuring device! 

BtW has anyone had any order shipment confirmations? ordered mine just over a week ago, stock was due in yesterday but I have no idea what the backlog numbers are, I fear it could end up taking a while..I only hope that the latest shipment was enough to fulfill all back orders and supply new ones..


----------



## sfdoddsy

My Umik mic has suddenly stopped working. The blue light glows, but it isn't recognised by my computer (either MB Air or Mini, running OSX and Win 7 via Bootcamp).

I've tried it with multiple cables, with REW and Fuzzmeasure, and in the respective sound control panels.

Any thoughts?


----------



## satbirbains

Hmm doesn't sound great. I was going to suggest a different cable but seeing as you have tried that i'm not sure. Obviously it is receiving power but it is not being recognized by the computer. I don't know about macs but for the PC does it show up in the device manager at all? If not then the only thing I can suggest is contact miniDsp as it would appear to have developed a fault.


----------



## Phillips

sfdoddsy said:


> My Umik mic has suddenly stopped working. The blue light glows, but it isn't recognised by my computer (either MB Air or Mini).
> 
> I've tried it with multiple cables, with REW and Fuzzmeasure, and on a Mac and a PC.
> 
> Any thoughts?



Just a thought and questions might be asked by Minidsp.

1.Go into Control Panel > (this is all OS dependant) Sound > Recording > and look for the mic been recognized and might say Working or Unavailable.
2.Does it show up in REW Preferences.


----------



## sfdoddsy

Nope, it isn't recognised by OSX or Windows.

To their credit, the fine folk at MiniDSP have offered to send a replacement.


----------



## AudiocRaver

It certainly has the sound of a failed microphone.


----------



## Dwight Angus

Before I order the UMIK-1 want to confirm cable I need to run from laptop to my Onkyo 5508 Preamp. The preamp is located approx 25 ft from home theater room. I can locate laptop in HT next to Mic so 2m usb cable length not an issue. However the cable from laptop has to be 25 ft long. If HDMI cable are there handshake issues to be concern about given the length or should I just use a rca cable from mic jack to preamp?


----------



## Sonnie

I use an el cheapo 25' HDMI cable and don't have any issues.

I am not following your last question... it seems to be referencing two different things. You will use the provided USB to Mini-USB cable from your mic to your computer... there is no preamp involved. Then from your laptop to your 5508 you will use the HDMI cable, which has nothing to do with a mic jack.


----------



## Dwight Angus

If the HDMI cable length was an issue I was considering an alternative connection ie rca cable from headphone jack on laptop to 5508. If 25 ft HDMI works well for you then no issue thats what I will use. Thnx Sonnie


----------



## Dwight Angus

Just ordered the UMIK 1. Will shop around for a cheap 25 ft HDMI cable. Looking forward to REW measurements with a calibrated mic.


----------



## Patzig

For anyone that cares, I actually tried different lengths of usb extension cables with the umik-1 to see how far away from the computer I could get. I found that a 10' (and anything shorter) usb exension cable (plus the length of the umik-1 cable) works fine with windows and a standard usb 2.0 port. However, my 20' usb extension cable did NOT work. The mic would get power, but windows would not recognize the mic as being plugged in. This matters for those of us wanting to use a HTPC that is outside of the room to take measurements.


----------



## Sonnie

Hmmm... I use a 20' USB extension with mine and it works fine. Not sure what brand it is but I know it was cheap.


----------



## Dwight Angus

Patzig said:


> For anyone that cares, I actually tried different lengths of usb extension cables with the umik-1 to see how far away from the computer I could get. I found that a 10' (and anything shorter) usb exension cable (plus the length of the umik-1 cable) works fine with windows and a standard usb 2.0 port. However, my 20' usb extension cable did NOT work. The mic would get power, but windows would not recognize the mic as being plugged in. This matters for those of us wanting to use a HTPC that is outside of the room to take measurements.


Thnx thats good to know. I have decided to use the standard 2 m usb length with the Umic/laptop and get a cheap 25 ft HDMI cable.


----------



## Dwight Angus

Dwight Angus said:


> Thnx thats good to know. I have decided to use the standard 2 m usb length with the Umic/laptop and get a cheap 25 ft HDMI cable.


Patzig did you happen to also try the same configuration with a 3.0 USB setup? Just curious to see if the results are similar as my laptop has both 2.0 and 3.0 usb's.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Patzig said:


> For anyone that cares, I actually tried different lengths of usb extension cables with the umik-1 to see how far away from the computer I could get. I found that a 10' (and anything shorter) usb exension cable (plus the length of the umik-1 cable) works fine with windows and a standard usb 2.0 port. However, my 20' usb extension cable did NOT work. The mic would get power, but windows would not recognize the mic as being plugged in. This matters for those of us wanting to use a HTPC that is outside of the room to take measurements.


Sometimes longer USB runs need a repeater cable. I have a 15 footer that works well with an audio interface at 20 ft total run with the repeater, should work with a USB mic, (does not work for external hard drives, though).


----------



## Sonnie

Ah-ha... that is why mine works without issue... it has a repeater on it.


----------



## larft

FYI USB 2.0 spec calls for a max 5 meter cable length due to round trip signal timing limitations, a longer cable may time out on you, why they make cables that do not conform to the spec is any body's guess.


----------



## JimP

Laptop usb outputs aren't always putting out the right voltage either. Using a powered hub may help those.


----------



## AudiocRaver

larft said:


> FYI USB 2.0 spec calls for a max 5 meter cable length due to round trip signal timing limitations, a longer cable may time out on you, why they make cables that do not conform to the spec is any body's guess.


Indeed, the repeater cable is certainly no cure-all, seems to work in some cases and not others. With audio data streaming in one direction, it seems to be more forgiving.


----------



## Skylinestar

Is there a need to get a separate SPL meter if I plan to use the UMIK1 for REW purpose? I remember reading somewhere that UMIK1 has built in SPL meter function, unlike other mics (UMM6).


----------



## Dwight Angus

Skylinestar said:


> Is there a need to get a separate SPL meter if I plan to use the UMIK1 for REW purpose? I remember reading somewhere that UMIK1 has built in SPL meter function, unlike other mics (UMM6).


Yeah I read that as well. The spl meter in REW uses sensitivity data from the provided calibration file so based on what I read you don't need any additional spl meter.


----------



## AudiocRaver

That is correct.:T


----------



## Dwight Angus

MiniDsp advised they have shipped my UMIC-1 today. I also picked up 25 ft HDMI cable.


----------



## Trike

I have mine coming as well. With the calibration file, is it good down to 5hz?


----------



## Dwight Angus

Trike said:


> I have mine coming as well. With the calibration file, is it good down to 5hz?


Yeah read that as well. With a calibrated mic I should be able to trust the measurement results and spend my time finding the best dual sub locations and optimal speaker positioning. Once completed I will then focus on any required EQ'ing. I have already installed the majority of my room treatments.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Dwight Angus said:


> MiniDsp advised they have shipped my UMIC-1 today. I also picked up 25 ft HDMI cable.


Being nosey here. You didn't pick up a 25 foor HDMI cable for the UMIK-1 connection to your computer, did you? Because the UMIK-1 uses USB. Plus USB can not go 25 feet without running into timing problems.:bigsmile:


----------



## Dwight Angus

My laptop has HDMI out so I can use HDMI to connect my laptop to my Onkyo preamp. I chose HDMI since I read there are problems with USB over longer distances unless you use a repeater. Of course I will use the usb cable provided to connect laptop to the UMIC-1


----------



## AudiocRaver

Bag pardon, you clearly know what you are doing, sometimes you see someone's comment and you're not sure. Just being thorough.:T


----------



## larft

Well, I ordered a UMIK-1 yesterday and it shipped today, at least today my time which is Eastern time in the US, or tomorrow morning if you're on Hong Kong time. Reading back to the earlier posts in this thread there was some concern about prompt email replies from miniDSP, it's easy for those of us in the US to forget how far out of sync we are with Asia time wise, Hong Kong is 13 hours ahead of me in the Eastern time zone. Several years back when I was working for a global corporation I helped transfer products to the US from Asia and when I would send Emails I would often not hear a reply until the next day due to the time difference, you had to plan ahead and time your messages to make sure you got timely responses. From what I have seen from other responses to the forum and my order so far they seem to be a very customer oriented company and my order shipped out promptly, so I'm optimistic so far.

I also ordered a Beringer UCA202 primarily so that I can get both digital and analog line outs from the older laptop I plan to use, I have no confidence that the headphone out from the on-board sound will give me a flat response, plus it will give me another way to interface the laptop to my 2 channel music system.

So, I'm looking forward to getting things hooked up and start doing some measuring once I receive everything, I'll plan to post my results and I'm sure I'll have plenty of questions for the forum coming in the near future.


----------



## fuzz092888

The concerns weren't over a lack of response over the course of a couple hours, or even 24 hours. It wasn't even necessarily over response times per se. It was a lack of decisiveness when I approached over an issue I had with a broken case and the possibility of a damaged mic. In the end they made good and I was very happy with the customer service. So happy I just purchased a miniDSP 2X4 in a box. Mic works great, is easy to use and I plan to use it with the miniDSP for subwoofer equalization and integration with REW. I think it will be interesting to compare what I can do with the miniDSP to what the antimode 2.0 dual core does. DSPeaker, is another awesome company.



larft said:


> Well, I ordered a UMIK-1 yesterday and it shipped today, at least today my time which is Eastern time in the US, or tomorrow morning if you're on Hong Kong time. Reading back to the earlier posts in this thread there was some concern about prompt email replies from miniDSP, it's easy for those of us in the US to forget how far out of sync we are with Asia time wise, Hong Kong is 13 hours ahead of me in the Eastern time zone. Several years back when I was working for a global corporation I helped transfer products to the US from Asia and when I would send Emails I would often not hear a reply until the next day due to the time difference, you had to plan ahead and time your messages to make sure you got timely responses. From what I have seen from other responses to the forum and my order so far they seem to be a very customer oriented company and my order shipped out promptly, so I'm optimistic so far.
> 
> I also ordered a Beringer UCA202 primarily so that I can get both digital and analog line outs from the older laptop I plan to use, I have no confidence that the headphone out from the on-board sound will give me a flat response, plus it will give me another way to interface the laptop to my 2 channel music system.
> 
> So, I'm looking forward to getting things hooked up and start doing some measuring once I receive everything, I'll plan to post my results and I'm sure I'll have plenty of questions for the forum coming in the near future.


----------



## MANswers

Hi Forum members,

I am in the process of understanding REW and EQ techniques, for this i am doing a lot of reading on the forum, reading various articles and guides.
Its helping me a lot, in the mean while, i wanted to start collecting all the right tools to start my new journey into room eq basics and advancing ahead with proper knowledge and guidence.
I was recommended to get a UMIK-1 mic to begin with with the room measurements. What additional items do i need along with umik-1 mic.. ie. cables, audio input pins.. etc. Although i know that umik-1 is usb based, but additionally would i require anything else?
I will be connecting this to my HTPC, the htpc has a pretty decent card its a Asus HD7850.
The subwoofer is a Tuba HT (THT), the front mains are Definitive Technology Mythos ST speakers, with other mythos line up for making a 7.1 setup.

Please guide what additional items would i need along with the UMIK-1 mic.


----------



## JohnM

If you are generating the REW test signals from your HTPC then you won't need anything else (barring perhaps a USB extension cable if the one that comes with the UMIK isn't long enough).


----------



## truwarrior22

Hey everyone,

I use a Radio Shack analog meter right now with REW. Seems to work ok, however, I'm about to purchase a minidsp. Will this UMIK-1 be a good investment as well or should I stick with the RS meter? My laptop doesn't have HDMI out, just display port. I normally use the soundcard line out to the AVR to generate the test tones.

Thanks!


----------



## JohnM

If your interest is addressing the low frequencies the RS meter is fine. UMIK-1 is a good option if you need full range measurements.


----------



## truwarrior22

JohnM said:


> If your interest is addressing the low frequencies the RS meter is fine. UMIK-1 is a good option if you need full range measurements.


Great thanks, just ordered a minidsp. Figured I would get the mic to sence the shipping was the same amount. Didn't really want to spend another $20 if I decided to get it in the future!

Anyways, I'l going to try to use it to turn my woofers in my BP7000SC's into midbass woofers, then send anything below 60-80hz to my HGS-18 subwoofer


----------



## etc6849

I just ordered the UMIK-1. Hope it ships soon


----------



## monomer

Anyone notice that the calibration file format on the new batch has changed? The recent batch of UMIK's only has calibration file values down to 20.1Hz and then it just ends... in addition the UMIK's in this batch apparently experience a large step going from 802Hz to 812Hz. Anyone know why that is? Was the calibration procedure changed? and why does that 'step' with these new UMIK's, happen to be between the exact same two adjacent frequencies (always between 812Hz and 802Hz)? Could it be due to different calibration 'test beds' possibly being used and one is messed up? Then there is the question of, if the UMIK is spec'd at +/- 1dB from 15Hz-20kHz then where are the 15-20Hz correction factors in the file? I've asked these questions on the manufacturer's forum and am still awaiting a response. Anyone here have any answers? Hopefully there is just some simple explanation...

To see what I'm talking about go here and put in 7000275 for the Serial Number and "submit" it. That's the calibration file for my UMIK... you can try other numbers above or below that in sequence to further see what I'm referring to about the files containing a large step between 802Hz and 812Hz. Also if you put in a number below 7000188 (those are from the old batch) you'll see how the calibration file format used to look with calibration values going down to 4.6Hz.


----------



## Dwight Angus

monomer said:


> Anyone notice that the calibration file format on the new batch has changed? The recent batch of UMIK's only has calibration file values down to 20.1Hz and then it just ends... in addition about half of the UMIK's in this batch apparently experience a large step going from 802Hz to 812Hz, the other half don't exhibit any such 'step'. Anyone know why that is? Was the calibration procedure changed? and why do the half of these new UMIK's, the one's exhibiting this large jump, happen to be between the exact same two adjacent frequencies (always between 812Hz and 802Hz)? Could it be due to different calibration 'test beds' possibly being used and one is messed up? Then there is the question of, if the UMIK is spec'd at +/- 1dB from 15Hz-20kHz then where are the 15-20Hz correction factors in the file? I've asked these questions on the manufacturer's forum and am still awaiting a response. Anyone here have any answers? Hopefully there is just some simple explanation...


I am following your question closely as I have not yet received my Umik-1 and expect it has similar calibration issues.


----------



## monomer

Dwight Angus said:


> I am following your question closely as I have not yet received my Umik-1 and expect it has similar calibration issues.


Follow the link I just added to my earlier posting above to see specifically what I'm talking about.

Here it is again for your convenience... submit Serial # 7000275 to see my UMIK calibration file... then submit a number below 7000188 to see what the older calibration files look like. Something definitely has changed...


----------



## Dwight Angus

Your right. When I compare the 2 calibration files (yours vs prior) there are big differences. Your file starts at 20hz vs 5 hz for files below 7000188. I also saw your post on the Minidsp forum. Got to be a bogus file. Wait to see what they say. Perhaps there is a logical explanation.


----------



## monomer

Did you check out some of the other serial number files from the new batch? Like 7000277 or 7000274 or 7000270... these are particularly bad... the worst in that decade of serial numbers (270-279)
Still no official word at all from the DevTeam over at the miniDSP forum... surely they've seen the thread over there. It should now be almost 2 o'clock Tuesday morning in Hong Kong by my calculations, so they had all Monday to see the posting and respond. Maybe they are sooo busy no one had the time to look at the forum on Monday OR maybe they are checking into it, which would not be a good sign because it means there's not a simple explanation and thus most likely no quick easy solution. The longer it takes to get a response from the DevTeam, the more worried I will become as to what kind of resolution might come out of this.


----------



## fuzz092888

monomer said:


> Did you check out some of the other serial number files from the new batch? Like 7000277 or 7000274 or 7000270... these are particularly bad... the worst in that decade of serial numbers (270-279)
> Still no official word at all from the DevTeam over at the miniDSP forum... surely they've seen the thread over there. It should now be almost 2 o'clock Tuesday morning in Hong Kong by my calculations, so they had all Monday to see the posting and respond. Maybe they are sooo busy no one had the time to look at the forum on Monday OR maybe they are checking into it, which would not be a good sign because it means there's not a simple explanation and thus most likely no quick easy solution. The longer it takes to get a response from the DevTeam, the more worried I will become as to what kind of resolution might come out of this.


If you look at the miniDSP forum you'll see that they are holiday from Monday to Wednesday and you should expect responses to e-mails and inquiries starting Thursday.


----------



## Trike

We'll that's interesting about the calibration only going down to 20hz. I hope there's an explanation for this.


----------



## Dwight Angus

Yes I looked at some of the other serial # files from the new batch and they do look bad. Not sure what to say about it. I was notified today that my Umic-1 is sitting in customs so I expect delivery will occur shortly.I also expect I will have the same calibration file issue as you so I will also post a concern on their forum referencing your post as a reminder to sort this out asap.


----------



## Dwight Angus

fuzz092888 said:


> If you look at the miniDSP forum you'll see that they are holiday from Monday to Wednesday and you should expect responses to e-mails and inquiries starting Thursday.


I guess that explains why we have not seen a response.


----------



## monomer

fuzz092888 said:


> If you look at the miniDSP forum you'll see that they are holiday from Monday to Wednesday and you should expect responses to e-mails and inquiries starting Thursday.


Thanks for that!!! I didn't notice it... this eases my mind a little knowing that there still might be a simple, easy answer to all this speculation. So hopefully we can expect an offical response by Wednesday evening or Thursday morning.


----------



## Phillips

Attached are the UMIK files imported into REW to show them

I think the graph shows the correct data? 

Hope this helps, looks interesting.


----------



## monomer

I'm really glad you took the time to graph those responses... now I can better see what's going on... and what I'm seeing is quite bizarre.

Obviously it looks like the calibration curve beyond 802Hz has simply been transposed by some constant (but arbitrary) amount, however what is really disconcerting, now that I can see the relationship visually, is just how eeriely flat the "curve" is from 802Hz down to 21Hz... much too flat, much too perfect and on so many mics? that simply cannot be for real. Even those that were shipped UMIKs with better looking calibration files have now got to wonder if their super flat response calibration file is actually even true. Then of course there is the question of what happens to the response down below 20Hz... it's still going to be a big mystery but from the last recorded calibration level it also appears that it might be the beginning of a new transposition of the curve below 20Hz but we really don't know for sure since the data just ends abruptly at that point. There simply is no calibration correction value below 20Hz. And the mystery thickens...

I really want to hear an explanation from a miniDSP tech about what's up with these crazy calibration files... what a time to be off on a 5 day weekend. At this point I can't help but believe these UMIKs have to be shipped back to Hong Kong so they can make this right... but we'll have to wait and see what it is they suggest be done to fix the problems. By consulting the serial numbers (assuming they were shipped out in sequencial order) there's got to be more than 100 of them that were shipped out last week... that's gonna be a lot of money in shipping returns.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Forgive me for being super curious about your plot of the five calibration curves. How was it generated? Are all five of the curves exactly superimposed below 800 Hz? And what is the additional horizontal straight line? And what caused the offsets of the curves above 800 Hz? Was some of that offsetting done manually for your plot, or are there actually discontinuities in the data at that frequency, actual jumps in the calibration curves? Thanks, I am just trying to understand what I am seeing.


----------



## HifiZine

I believe those are the cal files without transposition or adjustment. It looks like an acoustic measurement above 812 Hz was spliced onto some sort of "null" measurement below, the numbers 802 Hz and below are probably just electronic noise. However, the above-812 was done at seemingly random levels....

My initial tests of a UMIK indicate that it's fairly flat down to 20 Hz, possibly within its +/- 1 dB tolerance even without a cal file.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Thanks, I had to see for myself, so I downloaded the calibration files for those serial numbers plus a few others, and sure enough that is exactly the way they plot out in REW.


----------



## Phillips

AudiocRaver said:


> Thanks, I had to see for myself, so I downloaded the calibration files for those serial numbers plus a few others, and sure enough that is exactly the way they plot out in REW.


There was no adjustment what so ever, just imported in.


----------



## AudiocRaver

So I see. Thank you.


----------



## larft

Hopefully this is just a glitch in the files themselves and not something that happened when they were measured, although that's probably a long shot. If the actual measurements were skewed at measurement time, say by an improperly calibrated rig, then the mic itself would probably have to be sent back to be remeasured. Mine should arrive in a few days, it will be interesting to see what I end up with.


----------



## Dazbike

Received my UMIK today. Serial 7000237 and exactly the same calibration issue. 

I am really looking forward to seeing the response from MiniDSP on this one!


----------



## larft

I tried to check my order status on the miniDSP site and can't log into my account at the moment, it keeps telling me I don't have one or wrong username/password, hopefully this is just a "Holiday" system issue. Anyone else having trouble?


----------



## HifiZine

larft said:


> I tried to check my order status on the miniDSP site and can't log into my account at the moment, it keeps telling me I don't have one or wrong username/password, hopefully this is just a "Holiday" system issue. Anyone else having trouble?


I can log in without a problem.. try the "Forgot password" or "Forgot username" links 

http://www.minidsp.com/component/user/reset
http://www.minidsp.com/component/user/remind


----------



## dezibel-3

Hi at all,
the discussion about the "new" cal-files of the UMIC has been interessted to me. So I decided to compare the cal-files.
What we see in the first pic are the older cal-files from SerNo: 7000001 up to 7000188. 
It looks fairly real for about 200 differnt mics. At 1006.5565 (~1kHz) all mics are normalized to 0 dB.

Within the sec. pic (SerNo: 7000190 - 7000340; 7000189 is not available) there is no normalization identifiable! At 20 Hz some measurements have a peak up from -6 dB to about 2 dB. Then the curves alternate around zero with max 0.0125 dB.
At 812.413 Hz some measurements have a significant peak of +- 4 dB max. And then they proceed very similarly. It looks that way all curves are parallel.

I don't trust these files. What do you think about it?

BTW: My UMIC is "Pending customs inspection"


----------



## monomer

*WOW!!! *How long did it take to compile that??? Simply amazing and also very telling with just a glance. Something is very wrong with the calibration procedure on this second batch of UMIKs... neither half looks right. Basically every calibration file in the second batch looks to be bogus.

It would be nice if you could also re-post those graphs over on the manufacturer's forum so they too can plainly see what the issue is.


----------



## truwarrior22

I just ordered one...should I cancel my mic order?


----------



## larft

Just received my mic, it's serial #7000425 and the cal file is similar to other recent ones:










As you can see I'm in the same boat as everyone else. It will be interesting to see what the response is.


----------



## monomer

truwarrior22 said:


> I just ordered one...should I cancel my mic order?


If it were me, I would cancel and wait until we see how all this is going to shake out. I'm suspecting that all the newer UMIKs will require a re-calibration to meet the 15-20KHz +/-1 dB specs they advertise. This would mean return shipping/calibration/shipping back... you will most likely save yourself some trouble and time if you wait just a little before ordering one. Hopefully we should know something more by Thursday.


----------



## monomer

larft said:


> Just received my mic, it's serial #7000425 ...


Dang! that means they've shipped out at least 235 of these new UMIKs last week... that's going to be a lot of return shipping.


----------



## dezibel-3

monomer said:


> *WOW!!! *How long did it take to compile that??? Simply amazing and also very telling with just a glance. Something is very wrong with the calibration procedure on this second batch of UMIKs... neither half looks right. Basically every calibration file in the second batch looks to be bogus.
> 
> It would be nice if you could also re-post those graphs over on the manufacturer's forum so they too can plainly see what the issue is.


Thanx monomer.
It tooks about one and a half hour. I'm using Excel with macros to download the files automaticly. So it's very fast to get the 340 files.
I can set a link in the miniDSP forum. Good idea :T


----------



## AudiocRaver

dezibel-3: Nice work. Thank you for taking the time. Your charts really tell a story.

In case it is not already obvious to anyone, a UMIK-1 with serial number 7000190 or above is usable WITHOUT the calibration file installed in REW, for the purpose of getting rough measurement results, It would not be usable for critical or highly-accurate measurements at this time. When new calibration files are available for those UMIK-1's - calibration files known to accurately reflect the true frequency response for each unit respectively - then they will be useable for critical measurements with their new calibration files installed in REW.

Edit: Do not try to use one of the 7000190+ units with the calibration file installed. It will cause you to get unusable results.


----------



## AudiocRaver

dezibel-3: How hard would it be for you to provide a calibration file with the "average" set of data points from your first plot, for *temporary* use by newer UMIK-1 owners for taking *non-critical* measurements? Would that be of use to anyone? You could give it a totally bogus serial number so it could be easily identifiable. Just a thought. Anyone interested? Of course, dezibel-3, it is entirely up to you, and you have already gone above & beyond the call of duty.


----------



## monomer

I assume he must already have it... after all the graph was created in Excel and the average is displayed in red on the graph. I think it would be useful for taking rough measrements in REW but the reality is that at some point those of us who may require more accuracy will need to send the mic back to Hong Kong for a re-calibration.


----------



## satbirbains

I wonder how likely it is that an updated file can be produced. I don't know how the calibration works but surely if the measurements are incorrect the only way to get a valid file is to re calibrate and therefore send the mic back?

Disappointed to say the least, past 3 weeks have seemed to drag, was happy to see the shipped email and find it is now in customs only to stumble onto this. The cynical part of me (which if I'm being honest is a big part!) wonders at the timing of this issue, why all of a sudden change your calibration method / output? I hope it wasn't down to the sudden surge of orders that needed to be fulfilled :/ 

Anyway I guess there's no point speculating until we hear from them, which is also annoying as everyone is off on holiday for what I can only presume is down to the new year..wish everyone would stick to the Gregorian calendar!..just kidding!


----------



## larft

I worked 9 years in Quality Control at my previous company, gauge verification/calibration was an important part of our responsibilities and some instruments are less sensitive to drift than others, some you have to watch like a hawk and pay attention to your results, checking the results is the most important part.

I would imagine due to the backlog they were in a hurry to get things shipped out and someone either didn't follow procedure or their procedure isn't robust enough to catch a bad result, the readings we were given should have been flagged as out of range from the norm and the problem corrected. To me this looks like a computer interface issue, like they should and didn't do a clean reboot and recal before running the job.

Before I joined this forum I bought a Dayton DATS Audio Test System, some of you are certainly familiar with it, it will measure the TS parameters of drivers and test capacitors etc. I had calibrated it and used it and then let it sit connected for some time, the computer may have gone to sleep, I don't remember but I tried using it again later on to test some capacitors and got some really screwy results, I rebooted and re-calibrated and all was well and this looks like a similar case.

I guess there's a small chance that the readings can be straightened out but I doubt it.

At least that's my 2¢ FWIW......


----------



## AudiocRaver

monomer said:


> .....the reality is that at some point those of us who may require more accuracy will need to send the mic back to Hong Kong for a re-calibration.


Absolutely.


----------



## AudiocRaver

larft said:


> I guess there's a small chance that the readings can be straightened out but I doubt it.


It is conceivable that it can all be straightened out on their end, bit I, too, expect that returning the units in question for re-calibration will be necessary.

Mistakes happen. We may never get a complete explanation of how this all came about, but what matters is that

the problem was caught relatively quickly and the user community knows to not be misled by potentially erroneous measurement results
the problem has not cost anyone life or limb or loss of property or business; not minimizing the annoyance factor, just trying to keep it in perspective
the problem is fixable
A good company will jump on a problem and do what it takes to regain customer confidence. I trust we will all be willing to allow MiniDSP the opportunity to make things right and regain OUR confidence, and one day soon we will all be back to posting about the wonderful progress we are making with our various measurement and improvement projects.:sn:


----------



## dezibel-3

AudiocRaver said:


> dezibel-3: Nice work. Thank you for taking the time. Your charts really tell a story.
> 
> In case it is not already obvious to anyone, a UMIK-1 with serial number 7000190 or above is usable WITHOUT the calibration file installed in REW, for the purpose of getting rough measurement results, It would not be usable for critical or highly-accurate measurements at this time. When new calibration files are available for those UMIK-1's - calibration files known to accurately reflect the true frequency response for each unit respectively - then they will be useable for critical measurements with their new calibration files installed in REW.
> 
> Edit: Do not try to use one of the 7000190+ units with the calibration file installed. It will cause you to get unusable results.


You are absolutly right. It makes no sense using the "newer" cal-files which are in the range approximately of +6 dB to -8 dB instead of of the "older" files which have a range of about +2.4 to -2.9 dB. The highest deviations are within the frequency <16Hz and >2kHz (> +-1 dB). 
I'll post an "AverageCal-File" separatly.


----------



## dezibel-3

Here is the "AverageCalFile" whitch uses the average values from my erlier post.
I could load it into REW and it seems to be ok. If you have any problems with it, let me know.
Good luck raying:


----------



## JohanWa

Is it verified that old calibration files where correct?
The file "AverageCalFile.cal" have a compensation factor of ~0.1dB at 10KHz.
If the UMIK-1 have the same panasonic capsule as the ECM8000 the new calibration files looks more correct in the 800-20KHz range (if you normalize it).


----------



## HifiZine

A simple solution - if only temporary - for those who have the mic already would be to simply replace the lines below 812Hz with a single line at 20 Hz, which has the value recorded for 812 Hz. In fact, just removing all lines below 812 Hz would probably work. If someone that has one of these could do that and run a sweep with a modified file, that would be helpful I think.

Or, if someone in AU has one (post-0190) and would like to overnight it to me, I'll do it and compare it against an M30 and a CSL-calibrated EMM-6. If the cal file isn't correct, I'll generate a new one for you as thanks for the loan 

BTW I compared a UMIK (7000144) against the M30 and the CSL-calibrated EMM-6 and running without the cal file, it's within a dB down to 20 Hz.


----------



## ausvette

@HifiZine I'm on the Gold Coast, I can overnight you one - serial number 7000248 .

I don't seem to be able to PM you, can you send me an email at [email protected] and we'll organise shipping you one.

Thanks,
Dave.


----------



## truwarrior22

I requested to have my mic order put on hold/cancelled to this is figured out. The order has just been confirmed so they shouldn't have shipped it yet, etc. Thanks for the heads up everyone.

Jack


----------



## sonic_blue

Ugh, why did I have to find this thread. My serial no. is 7000323 and the cal file is entirely within +/- 3dB and doesn't have that spike at 20hz or 800hz

Maybe its just a database entry error on minidsp's server?

edit: actually no there is a spike at 800hz on mine, but its tiny:

773.187	0.0050 
782.812	0.0083 
792.557	0.0090 
802.424	-0.0025 
812.413	0.3771 
822.526	0.3898 
832.766	0.4034


----------



## redsandvb

Thanks for posting this info about the calibration files. I just found out about the UMIK-1 and was thinking of ordering one. I'll hold off now until things are cleared up a bit.


----------



## HifiZine

sonic_blue said:


> At minidsp forum it's suggested that perhaps they didn't bother doing a calibration below 800hz as most are "within spec" in that range anyway:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/RDXY1NB.png


Um... that's my measurement  The point of it is that the adjustment to the cal file that I suggested above will probably be a reasonable workaround, not to speculate on what/why miniDSP did  I will be trying it with ausvette's mic tomorrow (thanks Dave!).


----------



## etc6849

I sent a request to cancel my order. I placed my order on Sunday, right before the posts on the calibration issue. I hope MiniDSP will cancel my order. I was wary of ordering stuff from Hong Kong, I guess I should have followed my instincts! I did read the first 10 pages of this thread first though...

No offense to Chinese companies, but I have little trust in their quality control or that they are using non-counterfeit parts. The fact that they shipped mics out like this tells me they have no quality control whatsoever and are going through a separate manufacturer. Sounds like a dangerous situation to me and a bad way to run a business (if you want to sell stuff in the US).

I ordered a camera charger from China once and it was wired backwards!?! After that experience, I've avoided ordering anything from individual factories found on ebay; that is until this fiasco.

So, if my order is cancelled, is this USB mic ok to use with REW under Windows 7 64-bit?:
http://cross-spectrum.com/measurement/calibrated_umm6.html


----------



## HifiZine

Response from miniDSP:

http://www.minidsp.com/forum/18-umi...estion-about-freq-range?limit=6&start=24#7907


----------



## sonic_blue

HifiZine said:


> Response from miniDSP:
> 
> http://www.minidsp.com/forum/18-umi...estion-about-freq-range?limit=6&start=24#7907


I am satisfied with their response. So basically it is a matter of scaling of the data due to the 2 different rigs being used for those ranges to improve accuracy. However, that still doesn't explain the anomaly at 20hz.

I guess I got lucky as the "step" at 20hz and 800hz is already quite low on mine:









http://i.imgur.com/lel0wzG.jpg


----------



## monomer

sonic_blue said:


> I am satisfied with their response. So basically it is a matter of scaling of the data due to the 2 different rigs being used for those ranges to improve accuracy. However, that still doesn't explain the anomaly at 20hz...


Nor does it answer the question of how low does the calibration go below 20Hz, if at all. Guess we will all have to wait until next week to see what the newly revised calibration files look like. At least it doesn't appear we will have to send it back to Hong Kong for a re-calibration.


----------



## thatsnasty

sonic_blue said:


> I am satisfied with their response. So basically it is a matter of scaling of the data due to the 2 different rigs being used for those ranges to improve accuracy. However, that still doesn't explain the anomaly at 20hz.
> 
> I guess I got lucky as the "step" at 20hz and 800hz is already quite low on mine:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/lel0wzG.jpg


I got the 0277 serial that was posted earlier in the thread.
The step at 20-30hz on mine is pretty awful, hopefully this is due to the cal file as well.

Posted on the minidsp forum so I hope we get a fix soon.


----------



## JohanWa

I plotted three graphs using three different calibration files in the rangen 20–800 Hz(ignoring the first sample). 
The graphs looked like random noise. I don't think scaling could fix the 20–800 region.


----------



## AudiocRaver

dezibel-3 said:


> Here is the "AverageCalFile" whitch uses the average values from my erlier post.
> I could load it into REW and it seems to be ok. If you have any problems with it, let me know.
> Good luck raying:


Once again, thank you for all your work.


----------



## sonic_blue

JohanWa said:


> I plotted three graphs using three different calibration files in the rangen 20–800 Hz(ignoring the first sample).
> The graphs looked like random noise. I don't think scaling could fix the 20–800 region.


I don't think it would be scaling of the data that is already there in the .txt file, but rather the data that the .txt file was generated from, that has been incorrectly processed in some way. At least that's what Tony @ minidsp seems to be implying.

It'll be interesting to see once new calibration files come through whether it's just the 20-800hz range that gets changed or if its the 800+ , or both.

Despite the dodgy calibration file I've managed to use REW + Umik1 + minidsp to turn my horrible boomy, muddy, bloated Audioengine 5+ speakers into delightfully clean sounding "monitors". They had real issues with 100hz-300hz range booming away at +12dB which was easily sorted with REW's automatic EQ correction biquads which I then imported into minidsp:









http://i.imgur.com/JZKGH8C.jpg


Apparently the UMIK-1 is pretty accurate in that range anyway even without the cal file, which is probably why I'm hearing such a dramatic improvement in the bass :sn:

One question though, where should the Umik's volume be set in Windows 7 properties? The default is "10" on my laptop. Should I leave it at 10 or should it be at max? Does it make any difference to REW? I feel that my Umik is reporting levels in REW lower than they actually are. For example when the mic says 80dB SPL, it sounds very loud to me. I actually got sore ears from playing that sine sweep at 80dB, and REW kept telling me to increase it to 90dB!


----------



## AudiocRaver

It is a relief to be getting a detailed response from MiniDSP, and a relief that fresh calibration files can _hopefully_ be generated without having to return microphones for recalibration. No doubt they are aware that the solution will be scrutinized by the user community. I too am very curious to see what happens below 20 Hz, at those discontinuity points, and to see by looking both at individual curves and at an updated group plot of all the new curves together (we are all hoping that someone will be generous enough with their time to generate and post one) that all portions of the curves look like truly valid individually-measured calibration curves.:bigsmile:


----------



## Dwight Angus

Will have to wait till Monday or Tuesday next week for new files to be generated. Fingers crossed.


----------



## ronnies

where can I find a pdf document that clearly explained the complete REW set up with umik-1. I found it yesterday but did not save it. I have spent over 30 mts to find it today to no use. 

can some one point me in the right direction please.


----------



## monomer

JohanWa said:


> I plotted three graphs using three different calibration files in the rangen 20–800 Hz(ignoring the first sample).
> The graphs looked like random noise. I don't think scaling could fix the 20–800 region.


I hear what you are saying and it would really be most unfortunate for everyone involved if that turns out to be the case... right now I'm hoping they can 'fix' the files by rescaling... but until they can actually talk to their supplier and get a look at those original calibration data, everything said so far about just using a simple script to re-scale the original data will fix the issue is conjecture on their part at this point, however it is the hope I am going to cling to until I can view those re-scaled files for myself next week.


----------



## Trike

Just got my mic. Same issue with the calibration file.


----------



## Dwight Angus

I missed delivery of mine today. Have to drive to post office tomorrow to take delivery.


----------



## JimP

ronnies said:


> where can I find a pdf document that clearly explained the complete REW set up with umik-1. I found it yesterday but did not save it. I have spent over 30 mts to find it today to no use.
> 
> can some one point me in the right direction please.


In the upper right corner of your browser (hope you're using Internet Explorer), click on the star, then click on History. You should be able to find it there.


----------



## monomer

AudiocRaver said:


> ...I too am very curious to see what happens below 20 Hz, at those discontinuity points...


Its interesting to note that in that first batch, all the mic response curves seem to do a dip at what appears to be around 20-22Hz... do you suppose that could be yet another measurement technique switch-over frequency? If so, then maybe when all the files were compiled someone just forgot to include the "below 20Hz" calibration measurement file data? (A probability I think not inconceivable given all the other compilation mess-ups... ouch! all this does not bode well for some one's start to the New Year when they get back to work on Monday.)


----------



## HifiZine

monomer said:


> Its interesting to note that in that first batch, all the mic response curves seem to do a dip at what appears to be around 20-22Hz...


Have you looked at the vertical scale on the graphs? The "dip" is about 0.15 dB...


----------



## monomer

HifiZine said:


> Have you looked at the vertical scale on the graphs? The "dip" is about 0.15 dB...


Yes but size of the dip is not really relevent to the phenomenon... Every single line that I can clearly decipher has the exact same slope dip in the exact same place by the same amount... more than mere coincidence don't you think? Nowhere else on those graphed lines do I detect this type of universal behavior in unison. How would you explain this universal behavior amoung so many mics with differing response curves?


----------



## sonic_blue

HifiZine said:


> Have you looked at the vertical scale on the graphs? The "dip" is about 0.15 dB...


Coincidentally the "dip" is only 0.35dB on my [botched] calibration file.


----------



## satbirbains

Hi all,

Just wondering if anyone has ordered the mic from the UK and if so how long customs took to clear the package? Mines been there a week now and the tracking from SpeedPost still states pending customs inspection. Not sure who deals with the transit of the mic from customs to my delivery address, guessing it would be a national courier such as ParcelForce. Also did anyone get charged customs duty? If so how much was it? Don't want to have to pay much more..wishing I had bid on an ebay item now!

Cheers


----------



## MANswers

Has this issue with the new mic resolved. I was looking forward to buy a UM1-K mic..


----------



## monomer

A representative of miniDSP has responded over on the manufacturer's website forum with an explanation of the error and assures it is just a simple script fix away... however it won't be available until next week sometime when their supplier gets back from a week long holiday (for Chinese New Year). There is some skepticism that the 'fix' may take more than a simple script to correct but no one (including the miniDSP tech) really knows anything for sure at this point in time... in fact, we won't really know anything until the updated corrected files are online to be viewed and downloaded. I'd suggest waiting 'til next week (probably by mid-week) and see what the scuttle-butt is by then.


----------



## MANswers

Monomer, thanks for your reply mate. I really appreciate you explain that well.
Have another quick question...

I have a Tuba HT (THT subwoofer), and looking forward to calibrate it. The speakers are Def Tech Mythos ST lineups.
And i am beginning to understand the eq process using rew.
However can someone guide me to a fantastic simple beginners guide to eq'ing using UM1K-1 and miniDSP.
What minidsp is ideal for me.


----------



## AudiocRaver

monomer said:


> Yes but size of the dip is not really relevent to the phenomenon... Every single line that I can clearly decipher has the exact same slope dip in the exact same place by the same amount... more than mere coincidence don't you think? Nowhere else on those graphed lines do I detect this type of universal behavior in unison. How would you explain this universal behavior amoung so many mics with differing response curves?


Agreed, it does seem indicative of there being some stitching together of portions of the curve at that point. It makes you wonder, if the offset is the same for all samples, why is there any offset it all? Unless there is a known sensitivity difference between test beds being accounted for. Not a big concern, but a curiosity, and something to keep an eye on.


----------



## monomer

AudiocRaver said:


> Agreed, it does seem indicative of there being some stitching together of portions of the curve at that point. It makes you wonder, if the offset is the same for all samples, why is there any offset it all? Unless there is a known sensitivity difference between test beds being accounted for. Not a big concern, but a curiosity, and something to keep an eye on.


Though small, its mere existence does give me hope that there actually exists a calibration file for the below 20Hz response that somehow missed being incorporated into the "botched" calibration files for the seond batch of UMIKs we now have... meaning that the whole freq range (this time starting from at least 15Hz) can be properly recreated from the original measurement data. I really wish I understood the mic calibration process better.


----------



## monomer

MANswers said:


> ...And i am beginning to understand the eq process using rew.
> However can someone guide me to a fantastic simple beginners guide to eq'ing using UM1K-1 and miniDSP...


Though I have been using REW for quite a few years now, I'm just a novice when it comes to miniDSP... in fact, mine should be delivered today, (said with fingers-crossed). I read all the info I could find on the manufacturer's website and carefully read the datasheets they made available and viewed the YouTube videos (there are only two put out by miniDSP). Soon after purchase of the plug-in (4-way advanced) I downloaded it and played with it... I think this is going to be easy to manipulate but because of its amazing flexibility, I predict it will be quite time-consuming and complex to get my system to optimum in-room response over large area because of my particular situation (MY SITUATION: 4 subs total, two mid-bass units and two-ULF units needing first to deal with cross-over points between subs and then to get the best compromise of in-room response over 8 seated locations consisting of adjustments to gain, phasing/delay, parametric EQing, and judicious sub placements... with each change confounding the others). However I believe for most situations, especially with a single sub, it will be a snap...


MANswers said:


> ...What minidsp is ideal for me.


Here is a posting I wrote on another forum trying to help someone else with a similar question understand how to chose a miniDSP and a plug-in...

Using my meager knowledge of these devices/systems I will try to simplify the process of selection for you:

1)What do you want to accomplish? First you must have a clear idea of what exactly it is you're intending to do and be able to visualize the steps you are going to take to do it (paying attention to the order in which you are planning to do them)

2)Select the Hardware. Decide on how many inputs and how many outputs this is going to require. Now you should be able to select the appropriate basic miniDSP module... also if you have Pro equipment then select a 'balance' module otherwise 'unbalanced' should do. Select it as a "kit" if you are going to physically house this device (usually within a larger enclosure... maybe inside a speaker cabinet? etc) otherwise you'll want to choose it as an "in a box" model. Don't worry about Rev A or B as these can be changed by an internal jumper later if necessary... this just switches the maximum input level (sensitivity) from .9Vrms to 2.0Vrms.

3)Finally select a plug-in. This is the programming that allows you to access the power of the circuitry of the DSP. If you selected a 2X4 miniDSP module (which I think will suffice for most situations involving multiple subwoofers... 4 or less that is) then either the 2.1-way or the 3/4-way plug-in should be your only choices for sub(s) control. The 2.1 plug-in should work in most instances where you'll need to use two separate inputs (like involving a left and a right channel) in conjunction with your sub(s)... having 2 outputs dedicated to each (left and right channels) while the other 2 outputs feed a sub or two. The 3/4-way is more applicable when you need lots of individual control for each output and not so much on the input side (like feeding it the LFE from a receiver say). Select the "Advance" version if you intend to use REW to configure the biquad values of the parameteric EQ for you.

Bottom line here: I can see where in the vast majority of situations a 2X4 miniDSP with a 4-way advanced plug-in would be just the ticket.

Hope this helps.


----------



## Dwight Angus

I also hope they can recreate the original file measurement. I suspect we will hear some feedback by mid next week although their website is saying Monday. Fingers crossed.


----------



## ack_bak

This has been a very frustrating experience. Ordered the UMIK-1 the first week of January and their site said they were backordered until end of the month. Still had not heard anything the first week of February and sent an email asking for a status update and no reply.

Then it arrived this week and of course my mic is affected by the calibration issue and now I have to wait until they post the corrected calibration files. The bummer is that I have been waiting like a month and a half now and cannot even use the mic and I actually have time this weekend to finally start measuring my room.

I was on the fence between this product and the Dayton, and at this point I really wish I would have gone with the Dayton USB mic. Their customer service is much more responsive and reliable.

Hopefully the new calibration files will be posted Monday but I have a suspicion it won't be that easy.


----------



## HifiZine

ack_bak said:


> cannot even use the mic


You can use the mic without the cal file, at least it will get you started, they are not that far off out of the box. You'll have a big learning curve with REW anyway. The two I have measured seem to be about a dB down at 20 Hz and have a peak of 3 dB at 10 kHz.


----------



## monomer

MANswers said:


> ...However can someone guide me to a fantastic simple beginners guide to eq'ing using UM1K-1 and miniDSP.
> What minidsp is ideal for me.


Apparently HifiZine is being quite modest since he hasn't mentioned it but I discovered he has a very good article that might be just what you are looking for.... go here to check it out.


----------



## MANswers

Monomer, thanks so much for all your help, tips and links, I am starting my quest into learning the science of sound and taming it.


----------



## sonic_blue

monomer said:


> I predict it will be quite time-consuming and complex to get my system to optimum in-room response over large area because of my particular situation (MY SITUATION: 4 subs total, two mid-bass units and two-ULF units needing first to deal with cross-over points between subs and then to get the best compromise of in-room response over 8 seated locations consisting of adjustments to gain, phasing/delay, parametric EQing, and judicious sub placements... with each change confounding the others).


Wow, 8 seated locations, that is going to be tough  I found the "average measurements" function to be quite useful in REW. What I did was measure at my 2 main seating locations, then average their measurements into a new (third) graph, and then get REW to generate the biquads to flatten that averaged graph. This way instead of having +6dB at one seat, I end up with +3dB and -3dB at the other seat. 

Also I only use cut, no boost, because I have large nulls moving even slightly to the right or left :mooooh:

It seems that unless your room is treated you could spend an eternity chasing these blasted peaks and nulls that appear and disappear at such little differences in seating position!


----------



## thatsnasty

HifiZine said:


> You can use the mic without the cal file, at least it will get you started, they are not that far off out of the box. You'll have a big learning curve with REW anyway. The two I have measured seem to be about a dB down at 20 Hz and have a peak of 3 dB at 10 kHz.


Except this isn't true at all for half the mics.
Mine shows 20hz as equal to 100-200hz when my speakers are high passed at 50hz aka i have no response at all that low.


----------



## monomer

Apparently the newly corrected calibration files are up (go here to read about it directly)... the bad news is there is no correction below 20Hz... sigh... they say "the supplier wasn't able to get a very reliable data" (I think that really translates into "We either forgot to or didn't bother to measure the last batch of UMIKs down that far so now there is no data record that can be spliced into the re-scaled file")... so basically these new UMIKs are no longer considered accurate down to their advertised spec of 15Hz @ +/-1dB

Yes, unfortunately that does bother me a little... if it were an auto manufacturer there'd be either rebates paid out (ala Hyundai's recent false mileage claims) or recalls set in motion to correct (re-calibrate the mic properly) for the false advertising claims... instead all we get is "the supplier wasn't able to get a very reliable data" This is beginning to make me wonder what to believe. I just hope my new calibration file is for real this time.


----------



## HifiZine

thatsnasty said:


> Except this isn't true at all for half the mics.
> Mine shows 20hz as equal to 100-200hz when my speakers are high passed at 50hz aka i have no response at all that low.


Hi thatsnasty, if your speakers are highpassed at 50 Hz then you would expect to see a lower reading at 20 Hz even if the mic were perfectly flat. If they show equal... well I'm confused. Perhaps you could post some graphs? At any rate, to assess the response of a microphone, it needs to be compared against a different (calibrated) microphone. The cal documentation from Earthworks and CrossSpectrum Labs includes the response of their "reference" microphone, so I believe that's how they do it as well, although of course more rigorously.


----------



## HifiZine

monomer said:


> Apparently HifiZine is being quite modest since he hasn't mentioned it but I discovered he has a very good article that might be just what you are looking for.... go here to check it out.


Hi monomer, thank you for the kind words  That article will I hope still be useful, although it of course has nothing about the UMIK. It also pre-dates the REW integration with miniDSP, so just talks about manual adjustment of the filter parameters.


----------



## dezibel-3

Hi,
as already known, minidsp has been published the new calibration files for SN#7000190-7000439.
Ok here is the comparsion of these 250 cal-files. Look here for the "older ones".

Now they look more similar to calibration files (see 500 calibrations of different mics: http://www.hifi-selbstbau.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=367)
Four mics are a little bit out of range (267, 342, 344 and 406). 









What is very interesting all files have zero dB at 990 and 1002 Hz.








Edit: Last Friday my UMIK arrived. It has been pending with customs 4 or 5 days. So the delivery duration was about a week. There was no tax but importation VAT of 19% ~ 15 Euro.


----------



## monomer

dezibel... big thanks for doing that. Makes me feel better about things now that the new calibration files are more normal looking.


dezibel-3 said:


> ...What is very interesting all files have zero dB at 990 and 1002 Hz...


I'm assuming all these mics were normalized at 1kHz (which was another step they failed to do on the original calibration files). My new calibration file has values totally different from the original one I downloaded... must have been due to the normalization process. They definitely look a LOT better now anyway... I believe (probably on Thursday) I'll compare my UMIK with its new calibration file to my EMM-6 with its calibration file and see how closely they both agree. If I'd known that the calibration file was going to just end at 20Hz, I would not have bothered to purchase this UMIK as my EMM-6 already does that.... sigh. It's bad when the specs change AFTER you purchase.


----------



## dezibel-3

monomer have you planned to compare the two mics with a measurement or just compare the cal-files?
If you make a measurement I'm very nosey about the results.
What do you want to measure at these low frequency under 20 Hz?

Edit: miniDSP has updated the UMIK-1 datasheet (20 HZ- 20 kHz)


----------



## monomer

I was thinking about nearfield measurement of one of my subs... most likely the Rythmik (has a spec of 14Hz -3dB) also maybe a system measurement taken in our basement theater.

Here is one I took last month using the EMM-6 to get an idea of the in-room response of a new sub I'd just built.


----------



## Jairus

I've been following this thread for a month, and I'm still not sure if I should pick up this mic or not. If I wanted to buy a mic tomorrow, should I get this? Or maybe an SPL meter and an EMM6 or ECM8000 instead?


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> dezibel... big thanks for doing that. Makes me feel better about things now that the new calibration files are more normal looking. I'm assuming all these mics were normalized at 1kHz (which was another step they failed to do on the original calibration files). My new calibration file has values totally different from the original one I downloaded... must have been due to the normalization process. They definitely look a LOT better now anyway... I believe (probably on Thursday) I'll compare my UMIK with its new calibration file to my EMM-6 with its calibration file and see how closely they both agree. If I'd known that the calibration file was going to just end at 20Hz, I would not have bothered to purchase this UMIK as my EMM-6 already does that.... sigh.It's ba when the specs change AFTER you purchase.


Matter of interest where was your EMM-6 calibrated?


----------



## cosp600rr

Sorry if this is a little off topic but can somebody tell me where to point the mic when measuring. Ceiling, at speaker being measured or in the middle of the front wall between speakers. All at ear level of coarse.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Matter of interest where was your EMM-6 calibrated?


Bought it from PartsExpress and it has its own downloadable calibration file keyed to the mic's serial number... very similar to the way this UMIK is sold. Sadly its calibration file too only goes down to 20Hz even though its response range is advertised as being 18Hz to 20kHz... thus it is also misleading. Its only $48 but after purchasing a pre-amp it comes to about the same money in the end.


----------



## monomer

Jairus said:


> I've been following this thread for a month, and I'm still not sure if I should pick up this mic or not. If I wanted to buy a mic tomorrow, should I get this? Or maybe an SPL meter and an EMM6 or ECM8000 instead?


I'm not sure anybody could or should tell you which mic to get... it would depend upon so many personal factors... such as budget, needs, requirements, function, expectations, etc. I think most here are purchasing the UMIK simply for the ease of integration with REW. For anyone new to REW the UMIK might represent the least frustrating way to get up and running.


----------



## monomer

dezibel-3 said:


> ...miniDSP has updated the UMIK-1 datasheet (20 HZ- 20 kHz)


They also tightened up the tolerance from "*+/-1dB*" bringing it down to a more reliable "*+/- .5dB with calibration file*" almost as if to insinuate that they now have better reliability and confidence in their measurements, yet I was told just this morning that anything below 20Hz was no longer considered reliable. Still as of this moment, the first batch of UMIKs are showing calibration files that go all the way down to 4.6Hz, and yet apparently this latest batch of UMIKs does not have calibration files that can be trusted below 20Hz even with the supposedly greater accuracy now being claimed at and above 20Hz. I'm sensing some contradictions... I'm getting a feeling that some of the explanations that were given out by miniDSP are possibly not the complete story.


----------



## sonic_blue

As I suspected, the new calibration file has made practically no difference for me:









http://i.imgur.com/IHKuYKY.jpg


----------



## logicators

I decided to go the safer route and cancelled the UMIK-1 order I placed on Friday (it was not shipped yet so cancellation was easy).

I have ordered a calibrated UMM-6 from cross-spectrum labs instead. I will get unique calibration data down to 5 Hz and the price is almost the same.

The only down side is that it will require manual SPL calibration which should be ok since I already have a RS SPL meter.


----------



## Rob41

Hi all,
This is is my first post here but I've tried to get a bit of an education reading posts for the last week.

I just ordered a MiniDSP 4x10 and the Umik-1 mic. I've got to say I'm pretty excited about all of this.  I can already see it's going to keep me busy.....in a good way.

A couple weeks ago I did my first ever recap/rebuild on a SAE 2600 and enjoyed the whole process. This will be my first venture into using an active crossover. I am eager to move my hobby/passion in this direction.

I've downloaded and installed the latest version of REW so I'm good to go with that. Next I'll download the "plug-in" software for the miniDSP.

I do have a couple questions though. I read the included USB cable is pretty short. Will it effect the readings if I use a longer cable? Is ten feet too much?

Also, are both ends of the USB cable standard USB....one male end and one female end?

Thanks
-Rob


----------



## HifiZine

Hi Rob, I've been using a 4 m cable (13 ft) without problem. The connector on the mic end is a "mini B" connector - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#Mini_and_Micro_connectors


----------



## Rob41

Thanks for the info I appreciate it.


----------



## Jairus

monomer said:


> I'm not sure anybody could or should tell you which mic to get... it would depend upon so many personal factors... such as budget, needs, requirements, function, expectations, etc. I think most here are purchasing the UMIK simply for the ease of integration with REW. For anyone new to REW the UMIK might represent the least frustrating way to get up and running.


I'm looking for something to help get me started on making my room sound better for a nearfield monitor music production setup. I want to get some decent measurements so that I can start figuring out what kind of treatment/etc I need to be looking at. I haven't used REW before, which is why I was looking at the UMIK-1 for ease of setup, but I don't want to buy something if it's being shipped with bad calibration data or is otherwise sketchy due to quality control issues.


----------



## Phillips

Depends on how much you are in a hurry, wait for the UMIK file issues to settle down or order a UMM-6 from Cross Spectrum


----------



## Jairus

I would need to also pick up an SPL meter if I get the UMM-6, right?


----------



## HifiZine

Jairus said:


> I would need to also pick up an SPL meter if I get the UMM-6, right?


If you need your plots to reflect the actual SPL at which the measurement took place, yes. If you only need relative frequency response, no.


----------



## satbirbains

Would anyone be kind enough to post a near-field measurement comparison between the UMIK-1 with updated calibration file against another calibrated mic?


----------



## HifiZine

satbirbains said:


> Would anyone be kind enough to post a near-field measurement comparison between the UMIK-1 with updated calibration file against another calibrated mic?


I could, but I think it's become pointless, there's too much jostling and weird agendas going on now. It's a $75 microphone for goodness sake! PM me if you really need something specific and why.


----------



## satbirbains

Fair enough, the only reason I asked was for peace of mind of the mic's accuracy combined with being intrigued how it held up against other mic's! Although the total price for me was much higher than the $75 product price when also including shipping, customs tax and courier handling fees, basically double! 

Having just started looking at room measurements this debacle threw me a little, however if you are happy with the microphone, I'm sure I will be to


----------



## sonic_blue

Rob41 said:


> I read the included USB cable is pretty short. Will it effect the readings if I use a longer cable? Is ten feet too much?





HifiZine said:


> I've been using a 4 m cable (13 ft) without problem.


I've been using the supplied 1.5m cable + a 3m USB extension cable (total = 4.5m) without issue. I have compared measurements with and without the extra 3m extension cable and there was no difference. However I did look into it and apparently the USB specification says it's not designed for cable lengths greater than 5m, so I would keep that in mind, otherwise you could get signal degradation which could affect your measurements. 

I also did another test with HDMI audio out from my desktop PC vs my laptop's 3.5mm analogue out, expecting the HDMI to provide a better signal due to it being digital. To my surprise I found both were measuring identically, except for the 0-30hz range which is ~3dB stronger from the laptop. 

I guess if you're looking to calibrate the very low bass range in the 0-30hz range you might want to get a mic with calibration data in that range, as well as using a digital audio signal.


----------



## Rob41

sonic_blue said:


> I've been using the supplied 1.5m cable + a 3m USB extension cable (total = 4.5m) without issue. I have compared measurements with and without the extra 3m extension cable and there was no difference. However I did look into it and apparently the USB specification says it's not designed for cable lengths greater than 5m, so I would keep that in mind, otherwise you could get signal degradation which could affect your measurements.
> 
> I also did another test with HDMI audio out from my desktop PC vs my laptop's 3.5mm analogue out, expecting the HDMI to provide a better signal due to it being digital. To my surprise I found both were measuring identically, except for the 0-30hz range which is ~3dB stronger from the laptop.
> 
> I guess if you're looking to calibrate the very low bass range in the 0-30hz range you might want to get a mic with calibration data in that range, as well as using a digital audio signal.


Thanks sonic. I'll pick up a 4 or 5m cable before it arrives. I think the UMIK-1 (and miniDSP 4x10 HD) is going to work out just fine for my needs.


----------



## monomer

Jairus said:


> ...but I don't want to buy something if it's being shipped with bad calibration data or is otherwise sketchy due to quality control issues.


Originally the calibration files had a number of issues but much of that has apparently been resolved... I'd give it a few days to make sure no one has found any issues with the corrected files. However don't expect to have accurate values below 20Hz since this is where the calibration values end and most files are beginning to show a large dipping trend starting just prior to that (as can be seen on this graph from a few postings back). The dipping trend is only a problem if one were attempting to add approximations of corrections below 20Hz to the txt file by trying to anticipate the trend.

Now it seems someone has noticed a curiosity with these new files... all the sensitivity factors are identical (-21.1 dB) across all the newly corrected calibration files, yet sensitivity factors does vary, as one might expect, across the calibration files from the first batch of UMIKs. Why do the values for the first batch vary and yet not for the second batch? For now I guess the jury is out on how much of an issue this will turn out to be for some... still with all that said I think the UMIK might work well for what you're expecting to do.




A RANT CONCERNING MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE SO FAR:
My only beef is how this all has so far played out for me... I already had a mic that I trust to 20Hz. What I was specifically looking for was a mic that would offer some degree of accuracy to 15Hz (by virtue of having a calibration file that goes that low)... I THOUGHT that was going to be this UMIK because of its published specs (15Hz-20kHz +/-1 dB) and because the calibration files of the first batch of UMIKs went down to 4.6Hz... every indication was that's what I was buying for $95. However AFTER I purchased my UMIK, first there's a mistake in the calibration file, then even after the corrected file is released instead of including sub 20Hz values into the calibration file they decide to change the published response specs on their website on the low end from 15Hz up to 20Hz. I specifically purchased the UMIK for the below 20Hz response and two weeks after my purchase they simply change the specs because they no longer are able to obtain reliable data (that was their official response... I now have my own ideas as to real reason they changed the spec from the first batch). I'm sorely disappointed with the way they conduct their business dealings with innocent customers. Regardless of whose fault those mistakes were, one thing is known for certain, IT WAS NOT THE CUSTOMER'S FAULT. The fact that this is only a $95 (includes shipping) mic does not excuse the way this manufacturing quality issue has played out. Hindsight tells me I would have gotten what I wanted had I purchased a UMM-6 from cross-spectrum... they are nearly the same price (after including the shipping) and their specs and their calibration files are consistent and proven.


----------



## monomer

HifiZine said:


> ...too much jostling and weird agendas going on now. It's a $75 microphone for goodness sake!...


I can't figure out your connection to miniDSP but you keep apologizing for them both over here and over there. Your rational keeps boiling down to the same thing... 'what can you expect for a $75 mic?' I expect what they promise to deliver, no more but no less. A spec of 15Hz to 20kHz +/-1dB WAS their published specification... I was just the poor sucker who believed it. According to you, if it doesn't deliver what the manufacturer promises, its somehow the customer's fault for not taking the price into consideration and thus be willing to accept something less than what was promised. There are no agendas, only a history of events.


----------



## HifiZine

Sorry, just trying to help... my bad.


----------



## berndine

Hi


I read a lot about Umik-1 lately and I have received mine 1 week ago and made some measurements. Can anyone clarify to what extend measured results are reliable now? I am not interested in measurements <20 Hz.

I input my mic in Audio DAW and I receive nearly no signal from the mic (Recording my Speakers).
The Windows mixer is already 100% Is the mics sensitivity THAT bad?

Cheers Thomas


----------



## sonic_blue

I understand your frustration monomer ("bait and switch") however for me the experience has been very positive as the device has made such a dramatic improvement to the sound quality of my speakers.

Ok, so Minidsp messed up by 5hz on their specs. I guess you could ask them to return it for a refund, but I'm guessing the shipping costs make it unviable. I guess you could try just using the mic anyway and seeing if you are satisfied with the sound after calibration. Frankly, I've found there are such huge swings in frequency response due to room acoustics that all I can really achieve anyway is a general overall calibration of +/-5dB at 1/3rd smoothing. I guess if you have one dedicated listening position then you could really dial them in, but I've found that even moving my head as little as 30cm to the right or left can cause a certain narrow band of frequencies to become very loud or quiet. So, if the mic is within 1-2dB @ <20hz (which the calibration from the previous batch suggest) then I would imagine this should be satisfactory. Or, maybe not. Maybe you've already invested hundreds in room acoustics and want to eek out that extra 10% of performance?


----------



## Phillips

Jairus said:


> I would need to also pick up an SPL meter if I get the UMM-6, right?



I thought the UMM-6 had a sensitivity value in the calibration file?


----------



## monomer

sonic_blue...
Don't get me wrong, I realize mistakes and goof-ups sometimes happen and that's just a part of business but I do concern myself with is how the problem is resolved, that ultimately will tell me something about the company and if I'd be willing to do business with them in the future. I actually ordered a miniDSP from them (before receiving my UMIK) , it just hasn't been delivered yet (...today hopefully) and I'm pretty excited about it. Once I have it in hand and see that its working properly (and I have no doubt it will)... only then I will inquire directly to miniDSP to ask if they will accept a return of my UMIK on their dime (meaning they pay shipping) and I will explain my reason as due to false advertising at the time of the purchase... and see where it goes from there. (IF they do approve the return I intend to then purchase a calibrated UMM-6 from cross-spectrum).

I don't think the UMIK is a bad deal and expect it to be as good as my EMM-6, its just that I don't need it if I can't get a calibration file with it that goes below 20Hz. Its already down -2dB as it crosses 20Hz so without any calibration it most likely is easily off by over 2dBs and who knows how much more at anything lower. My basement theater is a highly treated acoustical space... do I absolutely NEED to tune my subs' low end response accurately? nope, I agree its not critical but why do I need two mics with the same range of accuracy? I just feel it was a waste of money spent being as I already own an EMM-6 that is calibrated to 20Hz and also have a RS digital SPL meter.


----------



## Phillips

We all make mistakes, but the key is how and fast we correct them.

I think the problem is that they didn't change the specs until after the consumer first bought it up. Ideally you would hope they would back the consumers opportunity to return there mic if it is not going to fill there needs due to this?

Will be interesting to see.


----------



## sfdoddsy

The problem I have is that there has been no communication to owners outside this thread and briefly on their forum. If you didn't check, you wouldn't know.

I'm on my second Umik (the first died), and whilst Minidsp did ship the replacement with no questions asked, i'd expect them to notify those with the new batch.

I only found out because John (Hifizine) asked me how the new mic was going and i told him I was getting a weird boost.

The sensitivity issue also bugs me.

I have a bunch of Minidsp products, but this and the issues with differing EQ results for different plug-ins gives me pause


----------



## sonic_blue

monomer said:


> sonic_blue...
> Don't get me wrong, I realize mistakes and goof-ups sometimes happen and that's just a part of business but I do concern myself with is how the problem is resolved, that ultimately will tell me something about the company and if I'd be willing to do business with them in the future. I actually ordered a miniDSP from them (before receiving my UMIK) , it just hasn't been delivered yet (...today hopefully) and I'm pretty excited about it. Once I have it in hand and see that its working properly (and I have no doubt it will)... only then I will inquire directly to miniDSP to ask if they will accept a return of my UMIK on their dime (meaning they pay shipping) and I will explain my reason as due to false advertising at the time of the purchase... and see where it goes from there. (IF they do approve the return I intend to then purchase a calibrated UMM-6 from cross-spectrum).
> 
> I don't think the UMIK is a bad deal and expect it to be as good as my EMM-6, its just that I don't need it if I can't get a calibration file with it that goes below 20Hz. Its already down -2dB as it crosses 20Hz so without any calibration it most likely is easily off by over 2dBs and who knows how much more at anything lower. My basement theater is a highly treated acoustical space... do I absolutely NEED to tune my subs' low end response accurately? nope, I agree its not critical but why do I need two mics with the same range of accuracy? I just feel it was a waste of money spent being as I already own an EMM-6 that is calibrated to 20Hz and also have a RS digital SPL meter.


At the time of purchase were you aware that the specs for the umik-1 were *15hz*-20khz? If so, then you can't really complain about not getting calibration data below 15hz. But you _can_ complain about not getting data for 15-20hz. Whether 5hz is enough to warrant a refund is open to opinion though. If it was me and a customer was complaining about 5hz of calibration data I probably wouldn't be too thrilled about it :spend:

If it were a legal case, I don't think you could argue that because the previous batch had calibration data all the way down to 0hz that therefore they are obliged to provide the same calibration data for the current batch. Because, nowhere in the product specs does it say you will get calibration data outside of the range specified.


----------



## berndine

Seems like everyone has the same sensitivity ratings, too. So there is another problem


----------



## AudiocRaver

dezibel-3 said:


> Hi,
> as already known, minidsp has been published the new calibration files for SN#7000190-7000439.
> Ok here is the comparsion of these 250 cal-files...


dezibel-3,

Thanks again for compiling all of the charts and data for the user community to view. That's a real service.:T


----------



## Rob41

dezibel-3 said:


> Hi,
> as already known, minidsp has been published the new calibration files for SN#7000190-7000439.
> Ok here is the comparsion of these 250 cal-files. Look here for the "older ones".
> 
> Now they look more similar to calibration files (see 500 calibrations of different mics: http://www.hifi-selbstbau.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=367)
> Four mics are a little bit out of range (267, 342, 344 and 406).
> 
> View attachment 40638
> 
> 
> What is very interesting all files have zero dB at 990 and 1002 Hz.
> View attachment 40637
> 
> 
> Edit: Last Friday my UMIK arrived. It has been pending with customs 4 or 5 days. So the delivery duration was about a week. There was no tax but importation VAT of 19% ~ 15 Euro.


Thanks for putting together this information dezibel. Looking at the 0 db at 990 and 1002Hz, could it be that because 1KHz is the "accepted" middle of the 20Hz to 20KHz scale, this area was the zero point for the calibrations? I've read that in reality, the center of the scale is actually closer to 640Hz.


----------



## Birdie

berndine said:


> Seems like everyone has the same sensitivity ratings, too. So there is another problem


The sensitivity values has been changed when I looked today but can they be trusted?


----------



## dezibel-3

Hi Rob41. Normalization [email protected] is usual (see the link to hifi-selbstbau.de). The arithmetic average is (20000-20)/2= 9990 Hz. This has nothing to do with the measurement method and of course the scaling - it's logarithmical.
I guess what you see at 640 Hz is about the middle of the scale. Exactly the middle is at 634 Hz. This is because there are 559 measurement points - from 20 Hz to 20 kHz.


----------



## monomer

Birdie said:


> The sensitivity values has been changed when I looked today but can they be trusted?


Good question... mine went down to -18dB but others have gone up to as high as -26dB and that was after looking at only 10 files. I don't think the whole first batch of UMIKs spanned that much sensitivity variation between files but then I didn't look at every single file in that first batch, only spot scanned about 40 or so several days ago and those seemed to range between -14.3 dB to -16 dBs or there 'bouts. All these changes cropping up without much explanation forthcoming even on the manufacturer's forum leaves one with more questions than answers about what exactly went wrong with the second batch's calibration files and speaks to your concerns which prompted your question "...but can they be trusted?" that's a question even those with first batch UMIKs might now be asking as well. I no longer know what the he*ll is going on with these UMIKs... I now just wish some offical representative of miniDSP would speak up about these 'silent' updates (the whys and hows of what's being done behind the scenes with each change) to those of us who've already purchased one of their mics to calm our growing fears about the accuracy of these ever changing calibration files.


----------



## monomer

sonic_blue said:


> At the time of purchase were you aware that the specs for the umik-1 were *15hz*-20khz? If so, then you can't really complain about not getting calibration data below 15hz. But you _can_ complain about not getting data for 15-20hz. Whether 5hz is enough to warrant a refund is open to opinion though. If it was me and a customer was complaining about 5hz of calibration data I probably wouldn't be too thrilled about it :spend:...


Unbelievable!!! So its now a question of how important is the range between 15-20Hz? Its important to me but apparently not to you... but somehow you missed the real point which is I AM NOT TO BLAME FOR THE MISLEADING SPECS... somehow its more convenient to blame the customer isn't it? It certainly costs less. Explain again... HOW WAS I TO BLAME EXACTLY? 

HISTORY OF EVENTS: 
I just purchased a mic according to my needs based upon their published specification at the time, only to have it arrive, find out there was a strange problem with the calibration files they put up and so I mentioned it here and start a thread on the miniDSP forum to call it to their attention while also inquiring about these calibration files ending at 20.1Hz while their specs claim otherwise... YES, I was the one who brought all this to their attention as well as your's!!! They conveniently ignored my question about ending the file at 20Hz despite rescaling the files... only AFTER I questioned them again directly on their forum about their specs on their website do they suddenly (WITHOUT notifying any of their customers) change the specs to accomodate their "new" calibration methodology which BTW was also done WITHOUT telling anyone that's what they'd decided to do on the second batch of UMIKs (the decision was apparently made a while ago too). Is this really being honest and forthcoming on their part? Then someone inquires about the unvarying sensitivity factor and without responding to this poster's question they suddenly (again, WITHOUT notifying any of their customers) change all the sensitivity factors. Wouldn't it have been more prudent to email all customers who've already purchased a UMIK from the second batch to call their attention to the fact that there are newer more accurate calibration files now online? Do you see a pattern of behavior occurring here? Its slowly becoming apparent that these new UMIKs had undergone significant changes in manufacture and calibration yet they failed to QC a single one of these new mics before they were all sent out to us, apparently we are now their beta testers. Amazing, just amazing. Now, a couple of new owners of these mics have noticed an unusually high noise floor apparently coming from the mic itself (suddenly only now we are being told it seems the new UMIK's electronics were modified from the first batch to increase sensitivity... could this have had any relation to the current high noise floor issues? Don't know, guess we'll just have to keep tuning in to find out...)

This is beginning to remind me of that tagline from the movie Jaws, "Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water..." Anyone thinking about purchasing a UMIK might want to wait until the smoke clears first... I'm just saying...


----------



## satbirbains

I have taken some measurements with my UMIK-1 and am having some strange peaks at 45hz. I played a sine wave and recorded using the RTA function. The db reported with the calibration file loaded is 88db my spl meter reports 68db, could this be down to an incorrect calibration file or am I missing something? Is there any other tests I can do that would provide a better idea as to what is going on? :huh:

I have the latest stealth calibration file loaded.

thanks.

edit: it seems my SPL meter and the mic agree on the actual db down to about 150hz after that the two readings become further and further apart. Could it be my SPL meter is less sensitive at those frequencies at around 80db? or is the mic too sensitive?!


----------



## Phillips

Luckily i have being watching this thread.

Due to poor customer service / communication (extremely important to a business) very unlikely i will be purchasing any MiniDSP products.

As i have said in a previous post we all make mistakes, but how we fix them is the key.

It comes down to all the new fixes, can they be trusted?

The Dayton UMM-6 from Cross Spectrum is looking a great option.


----------



## Birdie

Today I compared my UMIK-1 with a SPL meter and the Sens Factor in the latest calibration file is incorrect with exactly 6 dB. If I change the supplied Sens Factor of approx -22 dB to -16 dB my SPL meter and the UMIK-1 measure identically.

How hard can it be to get it correct from the manufacturer?

At least I now know what Sens Factor to use for my UMIK.:clap:

//Birdie


----------



## satbirbains

hmm, I've only found discrepancies at certain frequencies. I will re-test more thoroughly tonight or tomorrow. to make sure. my sens factor is 24.x but I will try at 18.x as well.


----------



## snowmanick

Sorry if I am asking a question that has already been answered, but I see some problems have been mentioned over the last few pages. I ordered a UMIK-1 this AM and am catching back up on it. Are the new cal files accurate, or am I going to be running into issues that are known here but not yet addressed?

I'm a little flustered. I've been meaning to order one of these for abut a month and finally got around to it today, and now I am seeing a lot of distressing info.

My concerns are more about the accuracy >20 hz (lower would have been nice), and the above posters comments that it seems there are some issues where the sens, tilts, for lack of a better word. I'm planning on using this for set-up/integration/acoustic panel placement with REW (the built in support from REW for this was a primary motivation for the UMIK-1 one over other mic's). The mic will not be used for creating eq files in the foreseeable future, if that makes a difference.

Should I try to contact MiniDSP and cancel this order?


----------



## monomer

snowmanick... check your PM box.


----------



## satbirbains

Ok plotted some results, please excuse the graph! I only did from 40hz as I was measuring with my speaker and the response falls off massively below this. The biggest variance is between 40hz and 100hz with up to 14dB difference., although above this the differences are linear and a lot closer together..thoughts?


----------



## monomer

Were you using the general compensation factor (correction table) for the SPL meter?
Actually thinking about it now... that would make the difference even greater wouldn't it?


----------



## satbirbains

Nope no correction factor. I just don't know what to make of it. Going back to what I asked before, a comparison of the UMIK-1 batch 2 vs another calibrated mic would help clear things up..right now I have no idea if my mic is accurate or not. No weird hidden agendas, just straight up easy to interpret results.


----------



## ack_bak

I have now sent two emails to Minidsp with no reply. The first at the beginning of February about the status of more order, and the second earlier this week with regards to the calibration files. No answer to either.

If anyone is in the market for an opened but never been used mic PM me. I would be willing to sell it for $60+ shipping. At this point I think I am going to get the Omnimic.


----------



## Phillips

ack_bak said:


> I have now sent two emails to Minidsp with no reply. The first at the beginning of February about the status of more order, and the second earlier this week with regards to the calibration files. No answer to either.


Not the best customer service / communication.




ack_bak said:


> At this point I think I am going to get the Omnimic.


If you want the software as well thats fine, but i don't think they sell the mics seperately?

Another option is the Dayton UMM-6 USB MIc from Cross-Spectrum, although it doesn't a sensitivityfactor?

How does the UMIK form the zero gain required for absolute SPL?


----------



## monomer

Okay, FINALLY today I get some time to try out my UMIK and compare it against my EMM-6
They appear to have come from the same manufacturer... housings are nearly identical (small length difference due to the balanced socket on the EMM-6 makes it a tad longer). The plastic cases, mic holder, foam filter are all exactly identical.

The sensitivity factor on my calibration file appears to be exactly 6dB too large... IOWs after I changed it from -18.5026dB to -12.5026dB it matched the EMM-6 response curve level-wise as well as agreed with my digital RS SPL meter (using Pink Noise) so I'm sure that change in the sensitivity factor was due to the modification of the electrical sensitivity that miniDSP claims they performed on the second batch of UMIKs.

It appears my two calibrated mics read essentially the same as you can see from my REW measurements just taken in our upstairs living room (the real theater is in the basement... I'll be playing around in there later tonight hopefully). The green line is the UMIK and the blue line is the EMM-6... both were in the identical same place as I swapped them in and out of a mic holder at the end of a rigid boom mic stand. Bottomline is after my adjustment to the sensitivity factor I can now trust this mic's calibration file as much as I do my EMM-6... down to 20Hz that is. Hope this helps others.


----------



## JohanWa

monomer said:


> The sensitivity factor on my calibration file appears to be exactly 6dB too large... IOWs after I changed it from -18.5026dB to -12.5026dB it matched the EMM-6 response curve level-wise as well as agreed with my digital RS SPL meter so I'm sure that change in the sensitivity factor was due to the modification of the electrical sensitivity that miniDSP claims they performed on the second batch of UMIKs.
> Hz that is. Hope this helps others.


I have noticed the error with the sensitivity factor for the latest batch. The devteam on minidsp says that they increased the gain of the microphone by 6 dB.
This should be the reason for decreasing the factor by 6dB. 

This is a silly mistake because an increase of the gain should increase the sensitivity factor instead of lower it.

I highly doubt they increased the gain at all because that would mean that the current factor is 12dB wrong instead of the 6dB you measured.
I have written about this on the minidsp forum.
Thank you for measuring this. It helped me.


----------



## monomer

JohanWa said:


> ...I highly doubt they increased the gain at all because that would mean that the current factor is 12dB wrong instead of the 6dB you measured...


Yes, that is my guess too at this point. I'm just amazed that they didn't even look at those calibration files BEFORE they began shipping hundreds of UMIKs out the door to customers around the world... you would have thought they'd have taken all of 20 minutes to spot check just one of these UMIKs from the new second batch as soon as they arrived in-house especially since there were engineering changes made as well as modifications to the test beds and that would have caught all these errors in time to correct them thus allowing miniDSP to preserve a professional reputation... instead we now know they are unresponsive to their customers in time of crisis as well as lacking in ordinary QCing inspections of incoming and out-going product... not very inspiring and to top it off, they have now made it known that changing specs AFTER the sell is an acceptable business practice in their eyes.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> they have now made it known that changing specs AFTER the sell is an acceptable business practice in their eyes.


Really, what was there reasoning?

Some people would find this acceptable, but some not.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Really, what was there reasoning?
> 
> Some people would find this acceptable, but some not.


That's just it, there was no stated reasoning, they just did it... so apparently this is an acceptable business practice. It seems sometime during manufacture of the second batch of UMIKs it was decided that any calibration data below 20Hz was no longer to be considered reliable, so calibration files just stop at 20.1Hz... however they continued to maintained on their website that these mics still had a tolerance spec of 15Hz-20kHz +/-1dB until I asked them point blank last week how could that be? Then they just changed the spec... which leaves me to wonder how the first batch of UMIKs was able to have reliable calibration data down to 4.6Hz... or were they lying about those also? 

When Hyundai was caught touting overly optimistic MPG figures, it was not thought to be okay by the government though many of their customers didn't seem to mind... however when caught in the lie Hyundai owned up to it, apologized and made monetary reparations to their customers thus keeping much of their reputation in tact.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> That's just it, there was no stated reasoning, they just did it... so apparently this is an acceptable business practice. It seems sometime during manufacture of the second batch of UMIKs it was decided that any calibration data below 20Hz was no longer to be considered reliable, so calibration files just stop at 20.1Hz... however they continued to maintained on their website that these mics still had a tolerance spec of 15Hz-20kHz +/-1dB until I asked them point blank last week how could that be? Then they just changed the spec... which leaves me to wonder how the first batch of UMIKs was able to have reliable calibration data down to 4.6Hz... or were they lying about those also?
> 
> When Hyundai was caught touting overly optimistic MPG figures, it was not thought to be okay by the government though many of their customers didn't seem to mind... however when caught in the lie Hyundai owed up to it, apologize and made monetary reprimands to their customers.



My opinion is that customers should be given the opportunity to return them, again some will, some won't?


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> My opinion is that customers should be given the opportunity to return them, again some will, some won't?


Agreed, but return for a refund of the full amount including shipping both ways... however, because paying shipping both ways will surely eat up any profit that would have been gained upon the resell, many a company will balk and refuse to eat the shipping costs apparently perferring to suffer damage to reputation rather than give up any profit margin at all. And definitely no company would pay the shipping if it would result in a net loss.

In the end I'm glad the calibration file for this UMIK is accurate enough (and the sensitivity factor can now be easily adjusted, though I'm sure miniDSP will correct it for all the files soon) so these mics have some value on the used market... meaning one can resell on eBay, etc and expect to get a reasonable price for it. If the calibration files had been totally bogus these UMIKs would have much less value. BTW, I never experienced any issue with a high noise floor... hope those guys follow up on that issue when they find out the answer.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> Agreed, but return for a refund of the full amount including shipping both ways... however, because paying shipping both ways will surely eat up any profit that would have been gained upon the resell, many a company will balk and refuse to eat the shipping costs apparently perferring to suffer damage to reputation rather than give up any profit margin at all. And definitely no company would pay the shipping if it would result in a net loss.
> 
> In the end I'm glad the calibration file for this UMIK is accurate enough (and the sensitivity factor can now be easily adjusted, though I'm sure miniDSP will correct it for all the files soon) so these mics have some value on the used market... meaning one can resell on eBay, etc and expect to get a reasonable price for it. If the calibration files had been totally bogus these UMIKs would have much less value. BTW, I never experienced any issue with a high noise floor... hope those guys follow up on that issue when they find out the answer.



Yes for people that would like to return them (the specs not what up to some peoples purposes, 20 vs 15hz), it would be probally cheaper just to send another mic and not return the old one?

I'm glad that you are happy with the mic. 
Has there been any notification that the mic files have had problems, why i ask there doesn't seem to be very much posting vs the ammount of mics sold?
Customers could be out there using the mic not realizing the problem, and how easy it is to fix.


----------



## Birdie

monomer thanks for your measurements, glad your findings matches mine.
Hopefully miniDSP will give there point of view on this and finally get the sensitivity factors
they published correct.


----------



## larft

I've been struggling getting a decent sound card calibration generated and finally did, hopefully if I rerun the procedure it will be repeatable. So I started working with my UMIK-1 (Ser#70000425) and when I bring up the SPL meter I get this in a quiet room:









Does this look normal? Like I have a ~ -60dB noise floor in my room/circuit? I even put the mic in it's case and partly closed it up and get the same reading so it has to be primarily mic circuit noise. My handheld SPL meter reads from the UMIK-1 and I get similar readings from 3 different computers so it can't just be the electronics on the computer side. I guess this continues to raise the question of the accuracy of the sensitivity measurement in the cal file, if I edit my file from -21.1 to -16.1 I can get it to agree with my SPL meter for the "C" weighting. 

Any thoughts out there?


----------



## monomer

larft said:


> ...Any thoughts out there?


First of all since you say your sensitivity factor is still -21.1dB, I'm going to suggest you go back and retrieve your calibration file again as they've changed all the sensitivity factors back to their original readings (meaning back when those files were bogus and needed rescaling)... backstory: somehow after rescaling the calibration files, all the sensitivity factors were set to -21.1dB this was a mistake and since then they've been changed back to their original values. 

Your UMIK serial# 7000425 has a sensitivity factor of -19.0671dB according to your current calibration file (I looked it up)... I suggest subtracting 6dB from that value (due to yet another mistake they made), which will make it -13.0671dB and edit your file with that value in place, now "save" the file... you will then need to "Clear" and then "Select" the file again so that REW will be forced re-load the calibration file with the new sensitivity value in it. Now check your SPL reading again. What's it reading now? A quiet room should be somewhere in the forties.

You don't need to calibrate the sound card with a USB mic. How are you connecting your computer to your receiver? hopefully you're using an HDMI connection. The UMIK is essentially 'plug-n-play' once you get the calibration file with the corrected values in place.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> ...Has there been any notification that the mic files have had problems, why i ask there doesn't seem to be very much posting vs the ammount of mics sold?...


You noticed that too... Last week I went in search of threads about this second batch of UMIKs and found that most audio related forums on the Internet apparently don't have even a single posting concerning the UMIK at all. Of the forums that do, most threads have less than 6 posts with the last posting dated sometime in the December timeframe. It seems like the HTS is about the only place other than over on the manufacturer's forum that is even actively discussing these calibration file issues. Only later did I realize that more than two hundred of the second batch UMIKs were shipped out and I ask myself the same question you just did. :huh:
My experience over the years tells me only about 3-5% of forum readers ever post anything on a forum ever so... that would mean 8 to 12 posters should represent nearly everyone, you would think... that is IF they are reading this one thread because there appears to be no other thread even on this forum discussing these calibration file issues.


Phillips said:


> ...Customers could be out there using the mic not realizing the problem, and how easy it is to fix.


This I fear is probably what's happening... in fact because miniDSP has failed to notify new owners about changes in the calibration files, many are probably still using that first bogus calibration file they'd put up. I wonder if a thread should be started with a more revealing title to attract those individuals and update themonder:


----------



## Rob41

Thanks for the info monomer...and others here. I will need to follow your instructions when my UMIK-1 mic and miniDSP 4x10 arrive in a week...hopefully.

This will be my first time using any of this software (mic or REW or plug-in) and I have no other measuring instruments or software. With that said, if there is any way I can contribute any further information to add to what is already known I will. Just let me know.


----------



## monomer

sonic_blue said:


> At the time of purchase were you aware that the specs for the umik-1 were *15hz*-20khz? If so, then you can't really complain about not getting calibration data below 15hz. But you _can_ complain about not getting data for 15-20hz. Whether 5hz is enough to warrant a refund is open to opinion though. If it was me and a customer was complaining about 5hz of calibration data I probably wouldn't be too thrilled about it :spend:...


Interestingly I was looking at a UMIK-1 flier the miniDSP guys stuffed in the box together with my miniDSP module... apparently I was wrong, it was worse... what I thought was 15Hz turns out to be really 5Hz... yes, that's what the UMIK-1 flier has on it! It says *5Hz-20kHz +/-1dB* and then they show an example calibration file that goes down to *4.6758 Hz*. I must have envisioned seeing a 1 in front of the 5Hz. I am still awaiting a response from them as to what my options are.


----------



## monomer

Rob41 said:


> ...This will be my first time using any of this software (mic or REW or plug-in) and I have no other measuring instruments or software...


Tell me 'bout it... I too have a miniDSP which I won't be able to play around with until spring break (coming up in two weeks). However I have been using REW for years and I've also been playing around with the miniDSP plug-in and it seems simple enough to configure (in fact, that was the reason I purchased it). I too am in Michigan... Reed City, you anywhere close by? If you are I might be able to assist if you get too frustrated.


----------



## Rob41

monomer said:


> Tell me 'bout it... I too have a miniDSP which I won't be able to play around with until spring break (coming up in two weeks). However I have been using REW for years and I've also been playing around with the miniDSP plug-in and it seems simple enough to configure (in fact, that was the reason I purchased it). I too am in Michigan... Reed City, you anywhere close by? If you are I might be able to assist if you get too frustrated.


I'm in Cheboygan. Thanks for the offer but I ship out in three weeks and won't be back home until the middle of July. The miniDSP plug-in does look pretty simple and like you, was part of the reason I went with it. I've already made my rough adjustments for crossover points ans specific driver corrections. I should be in the ballpark already. Now I just need to wait for it to arrive.

Do they send you an e-mail when they actually ship it? I ordered my and haven't heard anything accept the order confirmation they sent. How long did it take for you to get yours monomer?


----------



## monomer

Yeah, they will send an email from Customer Service-miniDSP and in it is a link to HongKong SpeedPost and your tracking number. Click the link and paste in the tracking number. You will get that email the day they ship and within a day it will leave Hong Kong and appear to arrive in the U.S. within hours but that I believe is because of it is actually crossing the International dateline (as they fly back into yesterday). In any case, at some point its handed off to either USPS or some other stateside delivery service. My UMIK was shipped on a Thursday and arrived by DHL carrier that Saturday. My miniDSP also left on a Thursday but was handed off to USPS on Monday, which was President's Day so they weren't moving anything... it was finally delievered on Wednesday and has been sitting on my desk ever since. My particular set-up is going to be quite complex... four subs (two mid-bass units and two ULF units... so they will need to be crossed over) and I will be trying to find the best compromise for in-room bass response across 8 seated locations in a two tiered layout. It actually sounds pretty good right now with just an Audyssey Multi-EQ calibration but I want even better if I can get it. I'm estimating it will take me several days to get it right and once I get started on something complex I don't like to lose my focus until I'm satisfied I'm finished... that's why I'm waiting for spring break, when I'm at home and the wife's at work.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> I must have envisioned seeing a 1 in front of the 5Hz.


Maybe on page one of this thread?


----------



## m R g S r

Wait so I haven't read the whole thread I'm sorry. Did the first batch of mics have bogus cal file sensitivity? 

And what are the dates for the first and second batches? 

Thanks guys!


----------



## larft

monomer, thanks for the reply, I grabbed the new file.

4 decimal places on the sensitivity seems a bit over done like they should have rounded it but I'm nitpicking.

I'm just starting to learn REW and thought the sound card cal was necessary to get an accurate test signal output from the computer, especially if I have to use the analog out, at least the instructions from what I can see tell you that you need to do so, but I haven't read through all of them yet. Also, I'm playing around with several scenarios and I'll need analog and digital connections so I started there. Part of the problem I'm seeing with the USB mic now that I have it is the cable length limitation, my HTPC is cabled through the wall to the next room where my HT is set up, I'm beginning to wish I had gone the more expensive route of a phantom powered mic with a conventional cable, oh well.

Finding out that the cal files had changed again through this forum is a testament to how good this forum is but not so much for MiniDSP, it would have been nice to see an Email from them announcing the change.


----------



## phazer99

larft said:


> I'm just starting to learn REW and thought the sound card cal was necessary to get an accurate test signal output from the computer, especially if I have to use the analog out, at least the instructions from what I can see tell you that you need to do so, but I haven't read through all of them yet.


Depends on what you want to measure. If you, like me, play music through the same digital output that you are using in REW, you don't want to use a sound card cal file. You want to measure the entire sound reproducing system in this case.


larft said:


> Part of the problem I'm seeing with the USB mic now that I have it is the cable length limitation, my HTPC is cabled through the wall to the next room where my HT is set up, I'm beginning to wish I had gone the more expensive route of a phantom powered mic with a conventional cable, oh well.


You can use a 15 feet USB extension cable. Is that not enough?


----------



## larft

phazer99,



phazer99 said:


> Depends on what you want to measure. If you, like me, play music through the same digital output that you are using in REW, you don't want to use a sound card cal file. You want to measure the entire sound reproducing system in this case.


Yes the whole system is one of the things I want to measure although I would think that using the soundcard cal file would just help to eliminate the computer from the picture, if it's a digital connection it won;t make much difference however, analog from what I've seen is a different story. I'm interested in speaker building and another thing I want to be able to do is profile raw drivers as well as complete speaker systems so the more accurate the test signal the better



phazer99 said:


> You can use a 15 feet USB extension cable. Is that not enough?


Barely and I'm at the maximum length, maybe over when adding in the length of the cable with the mic.


----------



## monomer

m R g S r said:


> Wait so I haven't read the whole thread I'm sorry. Did the first batch of mics have bogus cal file sensitivity?
> 
> And what are the dates for the first and second batches?
> 
> Thanks guys!


Whoa, let's not start any rumors! I have no idea if the sensitivity factor on the first batch was correct or not... however, there is something amiss in the second batch. The first batch of UMIK apparently sold out like back in December I think. All new orders were immediately backordered... finally when the shipment (second production batch of UMIKs) arrived, it was like 3 days before Chinese New Year celebrations and miniDSP personnel was so intent on filling all of the backorders and getting then shipped out before the weekend festivities started that no one ever even look at a single calibration file from this new batch. It was obvious something was really screwed up but no one saw it until I got mine and looked at the file. I'm no expert in these things but I could tell some things looked strange and so I inquire about it in this thread and I also began a thread over on the manufacturer's website to find out more about it. Well, things were very slow to being resolved due to Chinese New Years, which apparently is like a week long or so affair. A week later the calibration files got rescaled so they now make sense but then the sensitivity factor was changed to the same number for all files, which lead someone else to take notice and ask about that. Turns out that too was a mistake and they reverted it back to the first sensitivity values they had published... then offered an explanation for the confusion saying they'd made some sort of mod to the second batch of UMIKs to increase sensitivity by 6dB (I was told this was an engineering decision made in response to customer feedback from the first batch of UMIKs). Now it apparently seems those values are wrong... if my own comparison to my EMM-6 (and RS SPL meter using pink noise) is valid, then it seems no significant mod was made to the sensitivity of these UMIKs at all and if one were to simply reduce the current sensitivity factor by 6dBs they will arrive at what is the correct sensitivity for their UMIK. (Example, if the file currently states the sensitivity factor as -18dB then replace it with -12dB.)

I contacted them about this yesterday and I did get a response back from the DevTeam over at miniDSP (took less than a day) and though the question of them accepting a return from me was sidestepped (not a complete surprise to me) they did offer more explanation about my specific concern with the missing values below 20Hz... hopefully we are still working on a solution from my particular situation. They also admitted that they are aware that there is something wrong with the current sensitivity factors in those files and said the mic's manufacturer was looking into it and it would be resolved very soon. I responded by thanking them for the fast and curteous response and also suggested that after they correct the sensitivity factor that they then send out an email to every owner of a second batch UMIK notifying them of a new updated file replacing the one they downloaded. Hopefully this will end the 'excitement' of the last two weeks concerning those crazy bogus calibration files and we can all get down to using the mic with REW.

Hope that takes some of the confusion out of it for you... its been a wild ride.


----------



## brausch1

When using a UMIK-1, does the internal sound card need to be calibrated prior to using REW?


----------



## Rob41

brausch1 said:


> When using a UMIK-1, does the internal sound card need to be calibrated prior to using REW?


I haven't yet received mine, but from what I've read calibrating your sound card is not necessary with this mic.

I'm sure others with first hand knowledge will let you know for sure.


----------



## monomer

brausch1 said:


> When using a UMIK-1, does the internal sound card need to be calibrated prior to using REW?


No, its essentially a "plug-n-play" operation. If you can, I suggest you use an HDMI connection from computer to receiver.


----------



## brausch1

monomer said:


> No, its essentially a "plug-n-play" operation. If you can, I suggest you use an HDMI connection from computer to receiver.


Thanks for the quick reply. I wasn't sure if my soundcard would be processing information, hence the need for calibration. My laptop doesn't have an HDMI port, so I will need to use the headphone out.


----------



## monomer

larft said:


> ...Barely and I'm at the maximum length, maybe over when adding in the length of the cable with the mic.


I'm thniking all you need do is add a repeater right? They sell various lengths with "booster" or repeater built into the female end, I've even seen some with lengths up to 50ft, however I believe 15ft to be that max between repeaters so get two or even three 15-footers with booster and conect end-to-end.... check out eBay.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Maybe on page one of this thread?


Ah, thank you... I was beginning to question my sanity there.


----------



## ack_bak

monomer said:


> Whoa, let's not start any rumors! I have no idea if the sensitivity factor on the first batch was correct or not... however, there is something amiss in the second batch. The first batch of UMIK apparently sold out like back in December I think. All new orders were immediately backordered... finally when the shipment (second production batch of UMIKs) arrived, it was like 3 days before Chinese New Year celebrations and miniDSP personnel was so intent on filling all of the backorders and getting then shipped out before the weekend festivities started that no one ever even look at a single calibration file from this new batch. It was obvious something was really screwed up but no one saw it until I got mine and looked at the file. I'm no expert in these things but I could tell some things looked strange and so I inquire about it in this thread and I also began a thread over on the manufacturer's website to find out more about it. Well, things were very slow to being resolved due to Chinese New Years, which apparently is like a week long or so affair. A week later the calibration files got rescaled so they now make sense but then the sensitivity factor was changed to the same number for all files, which lead someone else to take notice and ask about that. Turns out that too was a mistake and they reverted it back to the first sensitivity values they had published... then offered an explanation for the confusion saying they'd made some sort of mod to the second batch of UMIKs to increase sensitivity by 6dB (I was told this was an engineering decision made in response to customer feedback from the first batch of UMIKs). Now it apparently seems those values are wrong... if my own comparison to my EMM-6 (and RS SPL meter using pink noise) is valid, then it seems no significant mod was made to the sensitivity of these UMIKs at all and if one were to simply reduce the current sensitivity factor by 6dBs they will arrive at what is the correct sensitivity for their UMIK. (Example, if the file currently states the sensitivity factor as -18dB then replace it with -12dB.)
> 
> I contacted them about this yesterday and I did get a response back from the DevTeam over at miniDSP (took less than a day) and though the question of them accepting a return from me was sidestepped (not a complete surprise to me) they did offer more explanation about my specific concern with the missing values below 20Hz... hopefully we are still working on a solution from my particular situation. They also admitted that they are aware that there is something wrong with the current sensitivity factors in those files and said the mic's manufacturer was looking into it and it would be resolved very soon. I responded by thanking them for the fast and curteous response and also suggested that after they correct the sensitivity factor that they then send out an email to every owner of a second batch UMIK notifying them of a new updated file replacing the one they downloaded. Hopefully this will end the 'excitement' of the last two weeks concerning those crazy bogus calibration files and we can all get down to using the mic with REW.
> 
> Hope that takes some of the confusion out of it for you... its been a wild ride.


I contacted them, very professional and courteous, about the calibration file and spec issue and asked if they were going to correct the issue or allow us to send the mics back for refunds and nothing. I have now tried contacting this company three times and have never gotten a reply.

Their communications are poor. It would be nice if someone from the company would respond to this thread about the issue and what they are doing to resolve it (if anything).

On a side note REW works like a champ. I just don't know how much I can trust these measurements.


----------



## minidsp

Dear All,

Sorry for not being active in this thread! We actually got asked by some of you to participate in this thread. It does make sense as we try to communicate better with everybody. We try out best to answer all questions on already few public forums (inc ours) which is already quite resource intensive for our team so I appreciate your understanding. I'll give a general summary here but unfortunately can't promise in my position (Director) that I'll spend my days answering posts here. I love being part of communities, just too little time these days unfortunately :-( . If you have any urgent questions, sending an email to our team is the easiest way to get in touch with us! Sounds good? 

Now, I didn't get a chance to read the 36p of threads here (but did read quite a few) and I can see from most comments that the focus of this calibration file is triggering quite a lot of questions/emotions! That's normal, it's Audio a passion and we all want you to have a great measurement kit!  On our side, Audio is also a passion and we're aware of the issue as we already communicated one miniDSP website.

This mishap caused all of us trouble and I understand your point as a customer. You can rest assured that we're working hard on finding closure to the matter by communicating daily with the supplier to iron out all remaining minor issues (sensitivity/low freq extension). Sometimes, the fact that we don't have a daily update doesn't mean that we're slacking.  Behind the scenes we're just making sure we know all elements before we make announcements. Hoping this makes sense. 

I also read from some posts that we're not answering your emails. :-( I'd be happy to personally check all this for you on what could be the reason for not hearing back from us! We have server logs which could tell us maybe what's the issue? One of our Moto is to make sure we work hard to answer all emails even though we do receive a lot of inquiries on a daily basis. [email protected] is the easiest address or the website contact page. IMPORTANT NOTE: Gmail may have a junk filter that did in the past file the email in the wrong folder. Please double check in case. 

@ ack_bak. I see that you couldn't hear back from you from some inquiries? Sorry to hear that. :-( Please PM me to see what's going on here. If your first name is Tim (my guess from order and server logs), we can see all emails answered here from our server but we did receive an error from Hotmail on some of them (Remote host said: 550 Requested action not taken: mailbox unavailable Giving up on 65.54.188.72.). Please get in touch with us via email for more info. Most likely that your account is setup with an incorrect address. 

That's all for today! We'll make sure to keep everybody updated when we have more info hopefully in the next few days as final review is about to be finalized by our supplier. If you have further question, don't hesitate to contact our team ([email protected]) or through the miniDSP forum for more info. 

May the REW force be with you! 

Tony Rouget
(Director @ miniDSP)


----------



## Rob41

Thanks for the update Tony.

I also have received an answer to my e-mail inquiry I sent yesterday. Devteam/miniDSP said, "we're currently waiting to confirm one calibration file issue with regards to the sensitivity. In the mean time, we've been putting holds microphone shipment since Monday to confirm that data first".

It's good to see they are working on fixing the sensitivity issue and I hope they will make the corrected file available publicly.

Mine would be arriving any time now if it weren't for their corrections. At least things should be more accurate once it does arrive. I have to ship out soon and I hope it gets here before then.


----------



## ack_bak

Tony,

Thanks for the reply. I will try contacting you from a different email address than my hotmail account if there are issues with that account for some reason (I rarely use that account).

Thanks for the update on the situation. I know, for me, it helps answer what you are doing to address the issue and I certainly don't expect you to answer every little question posed in this thread, but when there is a major issue(s) such as what we have had recently, updates from your company are appreciated.

Hopefully you will have an ETA as to when the issue will be resolved and can share it with the forum.


----------



## monomer

@Tony Rouget... thank you so much for responding in this thread. It makes me feel better to know that miniDSP is working on a resolution to the issues outlined in this thread.


----------



## 8086

phazer99 said:


> Depends on what you want to measure. If you, like me, play music through the same digital output that you are using in REW, you don't want to use a sound card cal file. You want to measure the entire sound reproducing system in this case.
> 
> You can use a 15 feet USB extension cable. Is that not enough?



The USB 2.0 Spec says you can have a maximum (sum) cable length of 15 feet. No more or you will encounter power issues and data errors. The solution to cable length is to use a laptop. If you don't have one, borrow one.


----------



## AudiocRaver

A USB repeater cable will work with SOME devices. I have this one, have used it successfully for a total length of 16 feet (the repeater) + a 12 foot USB cable with an audio interface. Other REW users use similar cables successfully with a UMIK-1. It seems to work where the data stream is primarily in one direction. It does NOT work with bidirectional data like an external hard drive.


----------



## 8086

AudiocRaver said:


> A USB repeater cable will work with SOME devices. I have this one, have used it successfully for a total length of 16 feet (the repeater) + a 12 foot USB cable with an audio interface. Other REW users use similar cables successfully with a UMIK-1. It seems to work where the data stream is primarily in one direction. It does NOT work with bidirectional data like an external hard drive.


Nice device. Bookmarked. 

You could also use a USB network device server, but it will add latency to your device. I can imagine getting improper room measurements when it comes to anything in REW which requires precise timing. I suspect this repeater will affect latency as well, just as they do in real world networking. JohnM might have to chime in on this one.

Also, the USB repeater cable is BUS powered. So it will reduce the amount of current availble to your microphone. I don't know the Behringer's specs; but If it requires 500ma, then this won't work at all.


----------



## monomer

AudiocRaver said:


> ...have used it successfully for a total length of 16 feet (the repeater) + a 12 foot USB cable with an audio interface. Other REW users use similar cables successfully with a UMIK-1...





8086 said:


> ...I can imagine getting improper room measurements when it comes to anything in REW which requires precise timing. I suspect this repeater will affect latency as well...
> 
> ...but If it requires 500ma, then this won't work at all.


These are obviously conflicting statements... which to believe?
I actually just got the identical cable in the above link today in the mail, except I purchased it on eBay (came in from California) for almost half the Amazon price and shipping was free. I also have a straight (unboosted) 10-foot USB extension cable that I was using with REW and the UMIK yesterday to take some measurements. Tomorrow I will compare the results between the two and note if there is any difference between the measurements recorded in REW, and hopefully that should settle this bit of confusion as to whether an extension cable with a repeater (booster circuit) will work or not.


----------



## 8086

monomer said:


> These are obviously conflicting statements... which to believe?
> I actually just got the identical cable in the above link today in the mail, except I purchased it on eBay (came in from California) for almost half the Amazon price and shipping was free. I also have a straight (unboosted) 10-foot USB extension cable that I was using with REW and the UMIK yesterday to take some measurements. Tomorrow I will compare the results between the two and note if there is any difference between the measurements recorded in REW, and hopefully that should settle this bit of confusion as to whether an extension cable with a repeater (booster circuit) will work or not.



A better solution is to use a laptop.


----------



## monomer

8086 said:


> A better solution is to use a laptop.


I have a laptop (actually its my wife's) but its so much easier and faster to just use my HTPC... plus the HDMI is already connected to my AVR. The 10-footer is all I need to reach the furthest listening positions. I purchased this 15-footer with repeater for an entirely different purpose (to extend a USB lan card for better reception) but as long as I have it here why not compare the two and see if it would be a workable solution for others?


----------



## 8086

monomer said:


> I have a laptop (actually its my wife's) but its so much easier and faster to just use my HTPC... plus the HDMI is already connected to my AVR. The 10-footer is all I need to reach the furthest listening positions. I purchased this 15-footer with repeater for an entirely different purpose (to extend a USB lan card for better reception) *but as long as I have it here why not compare the two and see if it would be a workable solution for others?*


No reason not to and by all means, show us some results.


----------



## ejh2854

*UMIK-1 and CM-140 side-by-side*

I wonder if some of you more seasoned hands might chime in to comment... I'm a brand-new user to REW, with a brand-new UCA202 (dangling off an older XP SP3 laptop), a brand-new UMIK-1 (700-0410), and a brand-new CM-140 ('verified' model bought from Cross-Spectrum Labs).

Reading through various posts, and seeing some users expressing reservations about the UMIK-1 I was curious to see what results would come from running the same sweep through the same speaker at the same settings through the two mics... in this case, run sweeps with the UMIK-1 then with the CM-140 while touching _nothing_ other than the connection to the laptop. 

The two mics were placed one atop the other on a tripod about two meters away from the loudspeaker... a nothing-special old bookshelf chosen strictly for convenience (it was sitting there on the bench). Tip-to-tip, the mics were perhaps an inch apart. The CM-140 was connected via the UCA202 inputs, while the UMIK-1 was connected directly to the laptop via USB. The "off test" mic was physically disconnected in all cases. The 700-0410 cal file was used, then cleared before running the CM-140.

Two sweeps with the UMIK-1 (with cal file) then one CM-140, as above, from 58Hz to 14kHz with -nothing- altered other than the mic being used:









Other than the obvious liabilities of the speaker under test, am I comparing these two mics appropriately? The CM-140 shows as the green trace, difference is most noticeable (appx 3dB) at ~8kHz. 

FWIW it was interesting to note that with the miniDSP cal file cleared, a sweep with the UMIK-1 is practically indistinguishable from the CM-140:









Just to repeat, there was absolutely nothing "optimized" nor "lab conditions" of any sort employed... on the contrary, this particular room has a lousy noise floor (multiple desktops and a switch running, all with fans) so the CM-140 is reading 64.something C scale 'slow' just sitting there on the tripod.

In the eyes of an REW/audio-testing newb, there appears to be fair correlation between the UMIK-1 and the CM-140 under the circumstances... enough, any way to recall the old Chinese proverb that "man with two clocks never know what time it is". 

Does this answer anyone's concerns, or simply raise more questions? ...as noted at the outset, I've got about a half-hour total experience with all of the above so pls don't shoot the messenger :blink:

BTW "thanks!" to both miniDSP and Cross-Spectrum Labs for great service... the UMIK-1 was ordered on Saturday, 2/16 and delivered Thursday 2/21; the CM-140 order was placed on Monday, 2/25 and arrived here Thursday 2/28.

Ed

edit: - oddly, I can see two images above during "preview" but not once saved... will get to the bottom of it.

For those interested, the first photo is http://ironcreek.net/~ed/justcrap/mic comparo.jpg and the second http://ironcreek.net/~ed/justcrap/mic comparo2.jpg

.


----------



## Rob41

Welcome to the shack ejh2854!

Thanks for the info which will surely be of help to the more experienced. Hm, so both mics are either correct or both incorrect without using the UMIK-1 cal file. My UMIK-1 has not arrived just yet. I ordered mine on Monday 2/18. I think it's hit or miss on shipping time.


----------



## ack_bak

*Re: UMIK-1 and CM-140 side-by-side*



ejh2854 said:


> I wonder if some of you more seasoned hands might chime in to comment... I'm a brand-new user to REW, with a brand-new UCA202 (dangling off an older XP SP3 laptop), a brand-new UMIK-1 (700-0410), and a brand-new CM-140 ('verified' model bought from Cross-Spectrum Labs).
> 
> Reading through various posts, and seeing some users expressing reservations about the UMIK-1 I was curious to see what results would come from running the same sweep through the same speaker at the same settings through the two mics... in this case, run sweeps with the UMIK-1 then with the CM-140 while touching _nothing_ other than the connection to the laptop.
> 
> The two mics were placed one atop the other on a tripod about two meters away from the loudspeaker... a nothing-special old bookshelf chosen strictly for convenience (it was sitting there on the bench). Tip-to-tip, the mics were perhaps an inch apart. The CM-140 was connected via the UCA202 inputs, while the UMIK-1 was connected directly to the laptop via USB. The "off test" mic was physically disconnected in all cases. The 700-0410 cal file was used, then cleared before running the CM-140.
> 
> Two sweeps with the UMIK-1 (with cal file) then one CM-140, as above, from 58Hz to 14kHz with -nothing- altered other than the mic being used:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Other than the obvious liabilities of the speaker under test, am I comparing these two mics appropriately? The CM-140 shows as the green trace, difference is most noticeable (appx 3dB) at ~8kHz.
> 
> FWIW it was interesting to note that with the miniDSP cal file cleared, a sweep with the UMIK-1 is practically indistinguishable from the CM-140:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to repeat, there was absolutely nothing "optimized" nor "lab conditions" of any sort employed... on the contrary, this particular room has a lousy noise floor (multiple desktops and a switch running, all with fans) so the CM-140 is reading 64.something C scale 'slow' just sitting there on the tripod.
> 
> In the eyes of an REW/audio-testing newb, there appears to be fair correlation between the UMIK-1 and the CM-140 under the circumstances... enough, any way to recall the old Chinese proverb that "man with two clocks never know what time it is".
> 
> Does this answer anyone's concerns, or simply raise more questions? ...as noted at the outset, I've got about a half-hour total experience with all of the above so pls don't shoot the messenger :blink:
> 
> BTW "thanks!" to both miniDSP and Cross-Spectrum Labs for great service... the UMIK-1 was ordered on Saturday, 2/16 and delivered Thursday 2/21; the CM-140 order was placed on Monday, 2/25 and arrived here Thursday 2/28.
> 
> Ed
> 
> edit: - oddly, I can see two images above during "preview" but not once saved... will get to the bottom of it.
> 
> For those interested, the first photo is http://ironcreek.net/~ed/justcrap/mic comparo.jpg and the second http://ironcreek.net/~ed/justcrap/mic comparo2.jpg
> 
> .


Thanks for posting that. What about below 58hz?


----------



## ejh2854

*Re: UMIK-1 and CM-140 side-by-side*



ack_bak said:


> What about below 58hz?


With these speakers? ...I'd be sweeping up scraps of the woofer cone all afternoon


----------



## monomer

8086 said:


> No reason not to and by all means, show us some results.


Okay so here it is... I actually re-ran this comparison 5 times to be sure the results were repeatable. I used my UMIK in a mic holder at the end of an rigid boom on a mic stand with the 4 foot USB that comes with the UMIK attached to first a 10-foot USB extension cable (no repeater), save the measurement then I close REW swap with the 15-foot USB extension with repeater while moving nothing else and using the same USB port, open REW, measured and saved, then compared the two. Below is a capture of a typical comparison where MAGENTA is with the 10-foot extension without repeater and the TEAL is the 15-footer with repeater. As you can see the traces are nearly identical... So there is a very tiny and barely measureable difference (probably due to the added delay of the repeater and added 5-foot length possibly) but that difference is never going to be audibly noticable. So, anyone contemplating the use of a long USB extension with repeater (AKA booster circuit) draw your own conclusions...


----------



## monomer

Apparently all the online calibration files for the first batch of UMIKs has now been replaced with the same format as used for the second batch... also now ending before 20Hz.


----------



## takeokun

Problem solved! 
Easy way.


----------



## Nemesis.ie

takeokun said:


> Problem solved!
> Easy way.


It sounds more like a step backwards to me - especially as many of us wanted the extension to 15Hz and the ~5Hz cal file looked even better. I'd not have bought if it had only been to 20Hz at the time.

So does this mean the original files (I'm in that batch) are "not right"/can't be trusted? :dontknow:


----------



## takeokun

Nemesis.ie said:


> It sounds more like a step backwards to me...


Sure it its.
I was just being sarcastic. 

Well:

1- Or the hardware isn't capable of being calibrated below 20Hz and so the first batch had a "non realistic" calibration data in that range;

2- Or the hardware is capable of being calibrated below 20Hz and someone "forgot" to calibrate the second batch below that frequency.

Looking at the specs in the UMIK-1 webpage it shows:
"Frequency response 20Hz-20kHz +/-0.5dB with calibration file loaded"

On the box of my UMIK-1 says:
"Frequency response 18Hz ~ 20kHz"

So maybe the most probably option is number 1 I guess.


----------



## monomer

takeokun said:


> ...Or the hardware isn't capable of being calibrated below 20Hz and so the first batch had a "non realistic" calibration data in that range...


I'm pretty sure it CAN be calibrated below 20Hz, the only real question is one of tolerance. I will assume the tolerance opens up as the cal freqs go lower... leading to less reliable values being generated. Personally I don't care if the tolerance in those lower freqs are +/- 2dBs, its still gotta be better than nothing. Looking at the composite graph that was created on the first batch... it goes crazy below 20Hz meaning I sure would never be able to guess what happens to my UMIKs response down there, so I'd rather have some 'ballpark' numbers than a flat 0dBs (no correction). I DON'T NEED that tight +/- .5dBs really, just get me in the ballpark down there and I'd be good with that.


----------



## takeokun

Oh I see.
It's really makes sense.


----------



## Phillips

Is the mic capsule the same?


----------



## Phillips

Nemesis.ie said:


> It sounds more like a step backwards to me - especially as many of us wanted the extension to 15Hz and the ~5Hz cal file looked even better. I'd not have bought if it had only been to 20Hz at the time.
> 
> So does this mean the original files (I'm in that batch) are "not right"/can't be trusted? :dontknow:


Haven't they changed calibration companies, and that's the reason?


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Haven't they changed calibration companies, and that's the reason?


My understanding is they only changed something to do with the test bed to supposedly make it more accurate... the explanation was vague. Then they said they were changing the calibration file format of the first batch to match with the second batch as apparently that can be generated from the raw data, however specifics are lacking. Perhaps some one should ask over on the manufacturer's forum for a more detailed response?


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> My understanding is they only changed something to do with the test bed to supposedly make it more accurate... the explanation was vague. Then they said they were changing the calibration file format of the first batch to match with the second batch as apparently that can be generated from the raw data, however specifics are lacking. Perhaps some one should ask over on the manufacturer's forum for a more detailed response?



Matter of opinion, personally are you happy with the UMIK?

What held you back from buying the UMM-6?

Bit of confusion which one to buy on this site.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Matter of opinion, personally are you happy with the UMIK?
> 
> What held you back from buying the UMM-6?
> 
> Bit of confusion which one to buy on this site.


Yeah, now that its gotten past the bogus calibration file and crazy sensitivity factor thing, it does seem like a good quality mic... its just that I wish they would still publish the below 20Hz stuff in the calibration files, even if they now think the data to be unreliable... I mean how bad can it be really? Its still got to be better than not knowing anything and having to go with no calibration values at all at those really low freqs.

To tell you the truth, I didn't really look very hard at the UMM-6 through Cross-Spectrum because I ASSUMED (my fault) that they would be nearly the same accuracy-wise and they both claimed to be making calibration file data available down to 5Hz... and I was really interested in getting the miniDSP for my subs, so I thought why not buy everything from the same company? Besides Cross-Spectrum mentioned something in their FAQ about the UMM-6 having a rather large noise floor compared to the EMM-6 (which I already have). The price difference never really made it into the equation at all for me... that small difference in price is just chump change really. And I guess it didn't hurt that REW had recently made the UMIK plug-n-play.

Right now the DevTeam and their supplier are looking into the below-20Hz data to see if they can suppy that data... IF they can include it into the calibration file I will be one happy camper and have no regrets for having gotten this UMIK.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> Right now they are looking into the sub-20Hz data... if they can include it into the calibration file I will be one happy camper.



Interesting enabling to have <20hz data without having the mic there?

How accurate would it be, maybe better not to have that <20hz data at all?


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Interesting enabling to have <20hz data without having the mic there?
> 
> How accurate would it be, maybe better not to have that <20hz data at all?


I believe they got all the raw data off those test rigs from 5Hz on up, just like they did for the first batch of UMIKs. They may have realized (or may be they even got some complaints? I don't know) that data that low in the freq spectrum isn't going to be reliable to the same degree as the above 20Hz stuff so they then made the decision to not publish it. I'm just guessing here since they haven't said anything specifically about what actually prompted the decision to remove that data from the calibration files other than the manufacturer believes the data to be unreliable. To me, unreliable simply means a larger tolerance factor is more appropriate but what that is no one's saying just yet. Basically anything can become reliable if the tolerance is opened wide enough.

...on that composite graphing of all the responses from second batch of UMIKs (see below) do you see how much they are varying just above 20Hz... so imagine what's going on below 20Hz. Sure they are not going to be able to hold a +/-.5dB down there but surely its got to be better than say +/-2dB... I think I'd even be thrilled with a +/-3dB.


----------



## Rob41

I just got my miniDSPandUMIK-1 mic today, first impressions here http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/electronic-processing-equalization-devices/66050-minidsp-4x10-hd-umik-1-arrived-today.html and I just downloaded the calibration file for mic #700-0345. Would this .txt file be the one you guys already have? If not, let me know if you want it.


----------



## snowmanick

Rob41, I don't have an answer for you, but I do have a question. When did you order your UMIK-1? I'm still waiting on a shipping notice and am trying to get an idea of where I'm at. 

(I emailed MiniDSP a few days ago and haven't heard back, currently my order is just showing as "confirmed")


----------



## Rob41

snowmanick, I placed my order on the 2/18. I too just had the "confirmed" email until the day they shipped. Once shipped it only took 5 days to arrive.

Looking at the miniDSP website I can see shipments for the UMIK-1 mic are delayed.


----------



## Infrasonic

I believe they are holding shipments until they can iron out the inconsistencies from the 2nd batch. 

http://www.minidsp.com/forum/18-umi...estion-about-freq-range?limit=6&start=54#8302


----------



## Nitrofreakman

Mine was shipped out on the 7th, so hopefully I get it next week..I'm pretty new to all this, but it would have been nice to get lower than 20Hz measurement, but I'm still looking forward to getting it.


----------



## monomer

Nitrofreakman said:


> ...it would have been nice to get lower than 20Hz measurement...


I have a strong feeling they have the below 20Hz data but are resisting releasing it due to tolerance issue... I don't care if the calibrated values fall a little outside the tolerance, its surely better than no values at all. Perhaps if I start a thread to petition the miniDSP people to release this data to us UMIK owners so we can decide whether we wish to incorporate those value in our calibration file or not instead of them making the decision for us... but then we have to get enough UMIK owners onboard (to post in that thread) to get some attention.

EDIT: here is the thread I just started over there... we get enough UMIK owners to ask for this option and I bet they will release the full cal data for us.


----------



## Nitrofreakman

monomer said:


> I have a strong feeling they have the below 20Hz data but are resisting releasing it due to tolerance issue... I don't care if the calibrated values fall a little outside the tolerance, its surely better than no values at all. Perhaps if I start a thread to petition the miniDSP people to release this data to us UMIK owners so we can decide whether we wish to incorporate those value in our calibration file or not instead of them making the decision for us... but then we have to get enough UMIK owners onboard (to post in that thread) to get some attention.
> 
> EDIT: here is the thread I just started over there... we get enough UMIK owners to ask for this option and I bet they will release the full cal data for us.


 I have to agree with that idea, unless of course it would make the mic inconsistent across the whole frequency range to use the other file..I'm still very excited about getting it ( although I have so much to learn ), and I'm already very impressed with the speed that it's travelling at, it was already in Richmond BC:unbelievable::clap::clap:, I'm guessing it will show up very soon...now to figure out REW:nerd::sweat:

I'll check out your other thread right now..


----------



## Rob41

Others may already be aware of this but it was new to me. A couple weeks went by after receiving my UMIK-1 and the miniDSP 4x10 and I get a bill in the mail for $34.63. I'm sure it's kosher but is something I hadn't thought of. The charges are the import fees and taxes. If you're getting just the mic it will surely be much less.

Just thought I'd pass this along so nobody gets surprised.


----------



## fuzz092888

Rob41 said:


> Others may already be aware of this but it was new to me. A couple weeks went by after receiving my UMIK-1 and the miniDSP 4x10 and I get a bill in the mail for $34.63. I'm sure it's kosher but is something I hadn't thought of. The charges are the import fees and taxes. If you're getting just the mic it will surely be much less.
> 
> Just thought I'd pass this along so nobody gets surprised.


That's weird. I ordered the UMIK awhile ago, got the replacement a couple weeks ago, and I think it's been a couple weeks since I received my 2X4 and I haven't gotten any import fees or charges. I wonder if they're on the way.


----------



## Rob41

Maybe it had something to do with the way they shipped mine. For some reason they sent my stuff through Fedex. Could be something to do with the way Fedex process imports as opposed to speedpost and USPS?


----------



## monomer

Don't pay it! Something sounds mighty fishy about that... are you sure its not some sort of scam? I received my UMIK back on Feb 9 and later my miniDSP arrived on Feb 20 and I never got any sort of charges whatsoever... in fact, I've gotten (a lot of) stuff from Hong Kong in the past and have never been charged any kind of import fees or taxes ever. I think its bogus and I would inquire a bit further about it... and I too live in Michigan.


----------



## kingpin748

If it shipped FedEx it might be a brokerage fee which they charge sometimes. I've received bills after the fact like that before. I prefer USPS because they only charge duties & tax. Easiest way to find out if its legit is to call FedEx. Use the number on their Webpage instead of what's on the bill as scammers are getting really god at this stuff.

On a side note I've yet to receive my mic. I bought it on the 3rd or something and while they did email me about the delay I have yet to hear back from them despite a request for a shipping update.


----------



## Phillips

Yep scammers are at a abundance.
Only way to find out is phone the oppropiate company without opening or clicking on a link.


----------



## Nitrofreakman

I've had Fedex send me bills afterwards for brokerage fees, but recently, they just call for a credit card number instead. I really give MiniDSP credit for getting my UMIK to Canada ( Vancouver ) and through customs, in a shorter timeframe than Canada Post can ship it from Vancouver to Saskatchewan! Canada Post really dropped the ball here..the mic has been sitting in Saskatoon ( about 90km away from here ) since yesterday morning:scratch: I'm guessing it'll show up today though ( yay! Pat yourselves on the back Canada Post-or maybe punch yourselves in the face:boxer: ) In any case, I'm excited to try REW for the first time!

**update**

I just picked up the mic from the post office. First impression, it looks/feels like a quality unit ( I have no previous experience with another mic, or any in room equalization/correction software, but the mic feels heavy and of good quality ). I can't wait to start learning..


----------



## Rob41

Just an update:

I called the Fedex number from the internet and was able to verify the invoice for "Duties, Tax, Customs, Other Fees" was in fact correct. Not a big deal having to pony up the additional $34.63 but I just wanted to be sure the bill was legit.


----------



## McStyvie

Just ordered the Mini DSP 2x4 and the umik-1 for my laptop and HT (5.2)...excited about this product. 

People mention HDMI out on their soundcard...now, I have an HDMI out on my laptop...and can play video and sound through it, would that be sufficient? Soundcard is Realtek HD...

Also, would I just choose any hdmi in on my A/V receiver? I use a Denon 2309...

Thanks guys, and it has been a good read going through this thread!

Cheers,

McStyvie


----------



## monomer

Yes, just pick any HDMI input and when you're ready switch your AVR over to it. Be sure to download your UMIK calibration file and also download one of the free USB ASIO drivers (here's a link to one ASIO4ALL is a good free universal driver) then start REW. Click on "Preferences" and on the drop down under Drivers, select ASIO and you should now see a button ASIO Control Panel (go in there and select your card)... you can now select individual channels (making a selection under "Output" and another selection for "Timing Reference Output" will allow you two channels at a time) Channel 4 should be your sub. Can't remember for sure right now but I think REW automatically finds the UMIK and selects it and loads the calibration file in for you... if not, you can just select the Mic/Meter tab (you're still on the Preference screen) and select the Z weight radio button and browse to the location of the calibration file and your done. Click on "Measurement" and enjoy... with REW you will begin to feel empowered as you start to discover so many things about your acoustical space and how your equipment interacts within it.

EDIT: Also if you should find you only have 2 channels to select from under Output then go into your sound card properties and change from stereo output to 7.1 channel sound. HDMI keeps it all-digital and makes selecting speakers and combination of speakers as simple as selecting from a drop-down.

I just got around to playing with my miniDSP yesterday (yesterday was the first free time I've had all to myself in weeks) and all I can say is WOW! is it *powerful* yet it's *very simple* to operate PLUS you can immediately verify every change right after you make it with REW... keep both programs opened at the same time and switch back and forth between windows, that miniDSP is AMAZING!


----------



## Nitrofreakman

I was up until the wee hours if the morning trying to figure this out..do I need to calibrate my sound card on my iMac to use the UMIK-1 with REW ? If so, do I just plug the headphone jack into the mic jack? 

I've read so much that my head is going to explode lol. Thanks in advance.


----------



## monomer

I've read several times on this forum that USB mics really don't need to have sound card calibration performed however if you really want to do it... if I remember correctly from the days when I was using my RS SPL meter, you loop line in and line out... you'll need adapters to isolate a single channel from the stereo jacks (I usually pick the right channel and then select it in REW) then you need to select the correct Output and Input in REW and that can sometimes be difficult to do (at least it was for me) try every combination Inputs and Outputs until the graph looks right (similar to the one in the help files).


----------



## Nitrofreakman

Oh buddy, I hope you're right..I would prefer not to have to do that( I would have to hits one kind of input interface to do it like you described )

The reason I thought I needed to do it, is because REW prompts me to do it when I push the 'Measure' button. 

I would really like to skip it altogether but I'm not sure that my measurements would be accurate if I skip that step.


----------



## Phillips

I use to use a Laptop Soundcard calibration until John (REW creator) basically said not to.


----------



## Nitrofreakman

That's music to my ears. I did try calibrating the sound card at 44.1, but I'm not sure about my results. Now the issue I ran into was when the Umik was connected, REW would pop up a message about the sound card being calibrated at 44.1, and the Umik being 48k, which will give inaccurate results. 

Now I can switch my input to Soundflower(2ch), I can use the Umik with 44.1 but I'm wasn't sure if that was ok. The easiest would be to not have to calibrate the sound card.


----------



## snowmanick

Just an FYI for those waiting, I got my shipping notice yesterday, order was placed 2/22 (right before they went on hold). I don't know if they are shipping all back-orders or not, or chronologically, but they're shipping none-the-less.

Looking forward to playing with this, its my first foray into calibrated mics.


----------



## McStyvie

Thank you very much monomer, that is excellent info, can't wait to get this kit!

I want to use this to calibrate my two subs running from my .1 channel (so Mono, witha Y-splitter). What is the best way to do this? One at a time? Both together (where do I point the mic, if I do it this way?) And which plugin would be the best for that? At first, I am not interested in using this for my mains...I am pretty happy with Audyssey for that.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## monomer

Realize that your miniDSP will become the splitter. You take the AVR's pre-amp output and connect it to Input1 on the miniDSP. Then connect miniDSP Output1 to one sub and Output2 to the other sub. You now have the ability to select delay(phase) and gain independently for each sub... keep verifying the results in REW after each change.

I have a more complex situation than yours... two mid-bass subs and two ULF subs to integrate into a 9.1 system and finding the best compromise across 8 listening positions spread over two tiers of seating. 

I suggest the following:
You first of all turn Audyssey OFF then take individual measurement readings for each sub (you can mute whichever output you desire in the miniDSP) and set delays and gains appropriately for each... if you have more than one listening position then take one measurement at each position and in REW on the "All SPL" screen "average the responses"... now go to and open "EQ" (its the box selection at the upper right of the main screen) ...within the EQ screen select the radio button "miniDSP" from the drop-down "Equaliser" menu and now click on "EQ filters" at the top of the screen. In that window use as many drop-downs as you think it needs, under "Type" select PK (stands for peak) and select freq/gain/Q values to try to level the graph to your target. Next is to input those values into the miniDSP plug-in... use the "Parametric EQ" output box *AFTER* the "4-way Cross-over" box that corresponds to the output your sub is connected to... I tried the "Import REW file" function using the miniDSP plug-in but for some reason it doesn't recognize the file format so in the end I inputted each peak filter one at a time (its no big deal and takes very little time to do). Once you've done one sub "mute" it and un-"mute" the other and repeat the process. Then un-"mute" both subs and now run Audyssey. After Audyssey go back and verify that because of Audyssey's distance selections that the delay/phasing still look correct, now if you'd like to you can adjust the over-all (meaning with both subs un-"mute") freq response the same way you did it for the individual subs except this time both subs will be playing so now you will make your "Parametric EQ" adjustments within the big box that's *BEFORE* the "4-way Cross-over" box. That's it! Trust me, it reads more complicated than it is to actually do it.

Have fun...

Oh, I forgot... the direction you point the mic in doesn't really matter that much since the frequencies are all so low they will be omni-directional. I personally just point it somewhat in the direction of the sub I'm measuring and in the middle when both subs are active. And I would recommend the Mono 4-Way Cross-over Advanced plug-in (which is the one I based the above procedure on). You should order it now so you can download it and play around and get familiar with it before your miniDSP arrives and you will immediately see what I'm talking about in the procedures I outlined above.


----------



## McStyvie

Thanks Monomer, that is a great explanation, and I downloaded the 4-way and it makes perfect sense when you are looking at it! Looks like I just need the delivery then I am ready to go!


----------



## McStyvie

Monomer- Since my unit is still stuck in Customs, and they refuse to hurry it up...could you maybe let me know how you would go about rolling off my 10" sub at 30Hz? What I mean is, I would like it to stop putting out at that level and let my 15" er take over all the frequencies below that. Is that an easy thing to do with the mini dsp?

Thanks in advance,
McStyvie!


----------



## monomer

Yes, just put in your desired cross-over values for each sub. Your plug-in will have 4 cross-over sets available (one for each output). You can select the desired slope, frequency and type of filter for both high-pass and low-pass for each output... use it anyway you want, however you will need to verify by taking measurement readings in REW just so you can maintain a balance between the two subs. 

In my case I'm running my mid-bass units and my ultra-low frequency units as if they were a 2-way sub speaker system... meaning I use the miniDSP to control the cross-over between the subs. I utilize a high-pass only on my mid-bass units as I allow the AVR to cross-over with the mains... and I only use a low-pass for my ULF units and let the natural roll-off deal with the bottom end. I'm also using a 48dB/oct slope to minimize any issues in the cross-over region by keeping it small.


----------



## McStyvie

Ok, thanks again Monomer! Now if customs would just get off their bums...


----------



## Scubasteve2365

So what's the final result here? Is the UMIK-1 not a good choice if you want to EQ subs below 20Hz?

I think I'm going either UMIK-1 or the UMM-6. Of course, at the moment neither are readily available.


----------



## Infrasonic

I’m also leaning towards the UMM-6 Steve for that reason; I also just don’t feel the UMIK-1 results can be trusted (at least the ones being shipped now).

Hopefully Cross-Spectrum Labs will have them available soon.

Btw, are you the same Scubasteve who made the demo disc? If so good work and thank you very much!


----------



## Scubasteve2365

Infrasonic said:


> I’m also leaning towards the UMM-6 Steve for that reason; I also just don’t feel the UMIK-1 results can be trusted (at least the ones being shipped now).
> 
> Hopefully Cross-Spectrum Labs will have them available soon.
> 
> Btw, are you the same Scubasteve who made the demo disc? If so good work and thank you very much!


Yes, that would be me. I made two actually, if you didn't get the newer one (the one that prompts you for widescreen or scope at launch) you should definitely get it.

I'm going with the UMM-6 as well. There's no point in really taking the risk from what I can tell.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Scubasteve2365 said:


> So what's the final result here? Is the UMIK-1 not a good choice if you want to EQ subs below 20Hz?
> 
> I think I'm going either UMIK-1 or the UMM-6. Of course, at the moment neither are readily available.


Not sure if there is a consensus on this, but my personal opinion at this point is "whatever is available through Cross Spectrum with their calibration," considering pre-cal mic-to-mic variation, recent events, etc.


----------



## Phillips

What would be interesting is someone to send a UMIK to Cross Spectrum for calibration and then compare the Minidsp file.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> What would be interesting is someone to send a UMIK to Cross Spectrum for calibration and then compare the Minidsp file.


When compared to my EMM-6 the response appeared near identical, so I've got to believe there would not be much value to a Cross-Spectrum calibration above 20Hz HOWEVER it sure would be nice to have the calibration data for below 20Hz.

I really like the miniDSP, its a simple yet powerful tool that impresses me every time I play with it. Just last night I happened upon an updated "beta plug-in" that had quietly replaced the old 4-way plug-in that had been in my "downloads" box. This new beta was never announced and if I'd not happen to read a thread discussing miniDSP issues over at AVS I'd have not been aware there was one out nor would I have any inkling as to what all it is supposed to fix as there is no "changes" or "fixed" list that comes with it (**see my EDIT below). Sigh... I love their products but the customer support side of things leaves a whole lot to be desired.

I'd say if you have (or think you'll ever have) the need to observe below 20Hz in-room response and desire some bit of accuracy (I mean be able to trust in what REW is graphing below 20Hz) then better steer clear of the UMIK-1... the DevTeam has been totally ignoring the thread and postings over on their own help forum where we keep asking if they will release below 20Hz data. They haven't responded in over a month despite the fact that all posters to a thread get an email copy of every new posting and since DevTeam has posted in that thread you KNOW they are getting copies of every one of these postings begging for some sort of response from them... so basically we UMIK-1 owners are just being ignored... which tells me they don't intend to do any thing about it otherwise we'd surely have been told something by now.

As much as I love my 2X4 miniDSP and will recommend it to people, I surely wouldn't if there were any competitive alternative product out there at its price... and though I think this UMIK-1 is a wonderful quality USB mic, I just couldn't recommend it based upon the lousy (nearly non-existent) customer support by the manufacturer and the miniDSP DevTeam. Go with the Cross-Spectrum calibrated UMM-6... I sure wish I had done that now.


**EDIT: Okay I just found a "bug fixed" list for the new beta plug-in in my downloads area... I could have sworn I didn't see one there when I first saw it.


----------



## dRwOOD73

I'm also in the deciding mode of what to go with.. UMIK-1 or UMM-6, I've had REW for a couple months and have yet to actually use it.. mostly doing online research on the components I need to tinker with it.. I do keep coming back to the "plug-&-play" aspect of the UMIK-1..

Also trying to decide between the DSP1124(old, I know) or a miniDSP - i read the whole thread on dsp1124 v1.3 MIDI issues as well as this one.. threw me for a loop so I am up in the air, just want it all to play nice with REW

Hey ScubaSteve, I frequent AVS as well - I think I got your 5 disc set(or is it 4) on my PC, I've only burned one so far though.. very nice work


edit; UMM-6 not EMM-6


----------



## Phillips

> When compared to my EMM-6 the response appeared near identical, so I've got to believe there would not be much value to a Cross-Spectrum calibration above 20Hz HOWEVER it sure would be nice to have the calibration data for below 20Hz.


I think to compare with the same actual mic would be better, and also USB side of things.



> I really like the miniDSP, its a simple yet powerful tool that impresses me every time I play with it. Just last night I happened upon an updated "beta plug-in" that had quietly replaced the old 4-way plug-in that had been in my "downloads" box. This new beta was never announced and if I'd not happen to read a thread discussing miniDSP issues over at AVS I'd have not been aware there was one out nor would I have any inkling as to what all it is supposed to fix as there is no "changes" or "fixed" list that comes with it (**see my EDIT below). Sigh... I love their products but the customer support side of things leaves a whole lot to be desired.


Sounds like it. Doesn't put alot of confidence in people for all their products. 
How is their support for their other products that you know off?



> I'd say if you have (or think you'll ever have) the need to observe below 20Hz in-room response and desire some bit of accuracy (I mean be able to trust in what REW is graphing below 20Hz) then better steer clear of the UMIK-1... the DevTeam has been totally ignoring the thread and postings over on their own help forum where we keep asking if they will release below 20Hz data. They haven't responded in over a month despite the fact that all posters to a thread get an email copy of every new posting and since DevTeam has posted in that thread you KNOW they are getting copies of every one of these postings begging for some sort of response from them... so basically we UMIK-1 owners are just being ignored... which tells me they don't intend to do any thing about it otherwise we'd surely have been told something by now.
> 
> As much as I love my 2X4 miniDSP and will recommend it to people, I surely wouldn't if there were any competitive alternative product out there at its price... and though I think this UMIK-1 is a wonderful quality USB mic, I just couldn't recommend it based upon the lousy (nearly non-existent) customer support by the manufacturer and the miniDSP DevTeam. Go with the Cross-Spectrum calibrated UMM-6... I sure wish I had done that now.
> 
> 
> **EDIT: Okay I just found a "bug fixed" list for the new beta plug-in in my downloads area... I could have sworn I didn't see one there when I first saw it.



What advantages (outside UMIK issues) does the UMM-6 have over UMIK?
I know which calibration i wouild trust in general, guess?


I am currently trialing a Antimode 2.0 Dual Core, very interesting.
Have been using it on my Mains (Energy Veritas 2.3i Floorstanders).
My room has got a mode at 37hz that has been dealt with + other issues.
Very versitile to date, auto calibration up to 80hz or 150hz or 350hz or 500hz, with manual PEQ for full range. Also other setups that i have not approached.


----------



## AudiocRaver

dRwOOD73 said:


> Also trying to decide between the DSP1124(old, I know) or a miniDSP - i read the whole thread on dsp1124 v1.3 MIDI issues as well as this one.. threw me for a loop so I am up in the air, just want it all to play nice with REW


Wouldn't it be nice if life was so simple?:bigsmile:


----------



## monomer

dRwOOD73 said:


> I'm also in the deciding mode of what to go with.. UMIK-1 or UMM-6... ...I do keep coming back to the "plug-&-play" aspect of the UMIK-1...


Plug-n-play is nice but really its only a few more mouse clicks to get a UMM-6 going... it should not be a deciding factor. I suspect most people who have the interest and money to be using REW and EQs and installing room treatments etc to improve in-room response, will usually have a subwoofer (or two) with sub-20Hz capability and thus below 20Hz calibrated response should definitely be a concern. I think it may be a bigger concern than plug-n-play since you can always get the UMM-6 to function with just a few more mouse clicks. (I believe the UMM-6 calibration file doesn't come with a sensitivity factor so... For most applications you don't need a calibrated SPL but if you did then you'd need to purchase or borrrow an SPL meter). If the UMIK-1 below 20Hz calibration data ever gets released then I would recommend it but 'til then I've got to say go with the UMM-6.




dRwOOD73 said:


> ...Also trying to decide between the DSP1124(old, I know) or a miniDSP...


Back in 2006 I first downloaded REW and it soon inspired me to get a BFD1124 to tame the room modes and other accoustic anomilies I'd become aware of (thanks to REW)... I was unlucky as I had the dreaded hum that couldn't be tamed (and I spent quite a lot of money, time, and effort in the attempt)... in addition to that issue I swear I could also hear added distortion and I found it quite distracting, all in all I wasn't too pleased with it and after a few months of struggling with it and trying so hard to like it, I finally gave up in frustration and disappointment in its performance. Though the miniDSP is almost twice as expensive it has many capabilities the 1124 doesn't... in fact I wouldn't even consider it direct competition. I guess it will depend upon what you're looking to do with it but the miniDSP is very powerful in how it can be used, whether you choose to use all of those functions or not may well decide it the extra expense will make it worth it for you. In my complex situation its a Godsend... my system's in-room response has never sounded this good in so many seated locations and the miniDSP made it possible.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> I believe the UMM-6 calibration file doesn't come with a sensitivity factor so


I believe it comes with the Dayton mic itself but Herb doesn't give it out with the mic because he hasn't measured it.

No harm in asking Herb.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> ...How is their support for their other products that you know off?...


I only own two of their products but that alone has given me the occasion to visit their help forum a number of times in the last month and a half and the observation I've made is that the DevTeam (don't know if this "Team" consists of more than one person or not) doesn't visit very often and much less so as of late. Appears to maybe drop in once a week, if that. to answer three or four posts and that's it. I THINK they are somewhat responsive to glitches on the programming side of things but again doesn't communicate well... stuff just appears when it appears. So far I've not been too impressed with that help forum, that's for sure...



Phillips said:


> ...What advantages (outside UMIK issues) does the UMM-6 have over UMIK?...


I wouldn't be the one to answer this since I don't own a UMM-6 but I would suggest that there no advantages over the UMIK except that its calibration file contains below 20Hz data... down to 5Hz to be exact... but that is a pretty important advantage really when you get to thinking about what most of us are trying to accomplish in our theaters.



Phillips said:


> ...My room has got a mode at 37hz that has been dealt with + other issues.
> Very versitile to date, auto calibration up to 80hz or 150hz or 350hz or 500hz, with manual PEQ for full range. Also other setups that i have not approached.


Ah but will it do crossovers? high-shelf, low-shelf filters? allow you to tailor the in-room response yourself through tweaking of PEQ, delays, gains, for each of 4 or more outputs? I really don't know anything about the Antimode but I thought it was a push button operation... if so, I believe I would much prefer to have the control over the process.


----------



## Raser

I have Umik and Macbook pro, when i use the Spl meter somehow the readings are odd to me.
In a room with no music playing the meter is somewhere near the 60db, that cant be right. Or is there something that im missing.


----------



## Phillips

Only seen the basics so far.



> Ah but will it do crossovers?


Yes



> high-shelf, low-shelf filters?


Yes



> allow you to tailor the in-room response yourself through tweaking of PEQ, delays, gains, for each of 4 or more outputs?


Yes, the PEQ (16 x filters per channel) is very powerful, but only pays to use in moderation anyway.



> I really don't know anything about the Antimode but I thought it was a push button operation... if so, I believe I would much prefer to have the control over the process.



Also has a Auto calibration which is very accurate.

Also has Multiple Measurement/Calibration options.


----------



## Phillips

Raser said:


> I have Umik and Macbook pro, when i use the Spl meter somehow the readings are odd to me.
> In a room with no music playing the meter is somewhere near the 60db, that cant be right. Or is there something that im missing.



Not saying there is not a problem with the reading.

Have you got access to a SPL meter that you can borrow to give you an idea?

Do you live in a main road (sometimes we can't hear).

Mics etc are alot more sensitive more than our ears.


----------



## monomer

Okay you got me curious enough that I went to the dspeaker website and read a little about it. WOW is that thing pricey? Too rich for me... whew. 

This dual-core model appears to be for a two channel set-up only... the last time I remember reading about the Antimode it was the 8033 model that apparently had a single channel that most people used to tune in their sub... so this thing is something new to me. Seems to do a lot of stuff... so how good is it?


----------



## monomer

Raser said:


> ...is there something that im missing.


This is from the last DevTeam communication over on the miniDSP UMIK help forum... it was posted about a month ago... make of it what you will.

*"many tests later, we can confirm so far that the sensitivity data is correct (-21dBFS for second batch). So what was initially thought to be a calibration file issue doesn't seem like it. That sensitivity data is indeed correct and can be reproduced by reading the dBFS reading from the USB Audio driver @ 1kHz 94dBSPL. 

What's yet to be investigated is why the respective SPL reading is incorrect in REW (6dB difference). We're now in talks with John (Author of REW) to understand what's happening behind the scenes. We'll update the community once we hear back. 

In the mean time, if you want to make an accurate SPL reading with SN 190~480, you should clear the calibration file and you'll get a reading that's quite close." *


----------



## Phillips

> Okay you got me curious enough that I went to the dspeaker website and read a little about it. WOW is that thing pricey? Too rich for me... whew.


Not cheap but in comparison with others over here, not bad at all. Cheaper than what i paid for the SVS ASEQ-1, this only dealt with subs as you probaly know.



> This dual-core model appears to be for a two channel set-up only


Sitting currently in my Yamaha Z9 receiver operating my mains, but can also operate subs as Stereo or Mono.



> Seems to do a lot of stuff... so how good is it?


Yes it does and i have only touched on the basics.

So far i am impressed with the results and manual PEQ capibilties.
My wifes listening test said that the sound was more *"natural and clean". *I had absolutely no influence on what she said.


----------



## Infrasonic

Phillips said:


> My wifes listening test said that the sound was more *"natural and clean". *I had absolutely no influence on what she said.


I agree. While I only have the 8033C it made a huge difference in evening out the response of my sub in my room. When I got it awhile back I didn't want to mess with a mic, amp, EQ's and REW for hours but since these USB mics have come out I want to see exactly what is happening in my room. I ended up ordering the UMM-6.


----------



## Doctor X

I haven't read the entire thread but the gist of it is that this mic is inaccurate for BELOW 20 hz response? So Cross Spectrum could calibrate it to be accurate throughout the frequency response, including down deep?


----------



## monomer

Doctor X said:


> I haven't read the entire thread but the gist of it is that this mic is inaccurate for BELOW 20 hz response? So Cross Spectrum could calibrate it to be accurate throughout the frequency response, including down deep?


Yes, but if you are budget conscious then there are other cheaper alternatives than purchasing a UMIK for $95 (that includes shipping) and then a Cross-Spectrum calibration for $55-$75 (which doesn't include shipping to their facilities) which would work out to a total of $155-$175... most people might feel they could do better for cheaper.


----------



## monomer

About the UMIK's sensitivity factor in the calibration file... 

Last night I got a little bored and so I decided to play around with setting up my miniDSP again (I love creating new EQ filters to match my targets... the more I do this the better I get at it and the more I'm learning about how to properly integrate my subs)... 

Anyway, at one point I got to doing a comparison between the SPL meter in REW verses what Audyssey sets the levels at and also what my RS SPL meter reads... the conclusion I've come up with is if I lower the UMIK's calibration file sensitivity factor by -9 or -10dBs everything agrees and the noise floor stays solid in the forties which is also reasonable.


----------



## Doctor X

monomer said:


> Yes, but if you are budget conscious then there are other cheaper alternatives than purchasing a UMIK for $95 (that includes shipping) and then a Cross-Spectrum calibration for $55-$75 (which doesn't include shipping to their facilities) which would work out to a total of $155-$175... most people might feel they could do better for cheaper.


Hi. Basically I'm looking for a "plug and play" solution. I don't want to buy a separate phantom power unit, and a separate sound card. The UMIK is nice because it's self-contained. 

Are there any alternatives to the UMIK that are better and also self-contained? As I understand it, all I need to do measurements is the UMIK and my notebook. I don't want additional hardware.


----------



## monomer

As far as I know, the UMIK is the only "plug-n-play" USB option out right now... however it really isn't any more than a few mouse clicks to get a UMM-6 working in REW but what you get is below 20Hz calibration data. If you have a capable subwoofer you'll soon realize just how important that is when you don't have a file that goes below 20Hz and that's the real problem with the UMIKs currently... definitely worth a few extra mouse clicks to set-up an UMM-6 in REW (you'll only need to do it the first time). The only difference besides the below 20Hz response is that the UMIK supplies a sensitivity factor in its calibration file that the UMM-6 doesn't, however there is no disputing that that factor is incorrect and the current discussion centers around by how much... so that sort of neutralize that advantage, and besides for most of what your are intending to do a calibrated SPL isn't going to be important. I own a UMIK and I want so much to like it and for most everything I'm doing I really do like it however the one short-coming (no below 20Hz calibration data) is a major one I believe. Hopefully in the future the UMIK manufacture will release that data and then it will be best choice out there but 'til then I can't recommend it.


----------



## Doctor X

But correct me if I'm wrong, the UMM-6 requires additional hardware to run? So it's not just a few mouse clicks, it's a few other things as well, right? 

But you are telling me that if I bought the UMIK and had it calibrated by Cross Spectrum then all would be fine? It just would be a little pricey? I had my Galaxy CM-140 calibrated by them. I just want a solution that is simple to use and accurate. I don't mind paying more ... assuming the results would be accurate down low but I absolutely don't want a couple of things to lug around with me when I want to do a room measurement, hence why the UMIK seems like a good idea.

If price wasn't an issue, would you have anything against having it calibrated by Cross Spectrum?


----------



## monomer

No, they are both USB mics and therefore get their power thru the USB connector. You might be confusing it with the EMM-6 which does require phantom power... the U in the UMM-6 model designation I'm pretty sure must stand for USB. I have an EMM-6 (got it on sale from Parts Express, I think $29) and an Art USB dual pre-amp (got it offa eBay, one channel was busted for $36 shipped) that together cost me less ($65 total) than my UMIK did ($95)... of the two, I prefer using the UMIK.



Doctor X said:


> ...If price wasn't an issue...


If price were not an issue? hard for me to imagine... but really cost is the only downside I can see.


----------



## Doctor X

So basically the UMM-6 is sort of plug and play ... and has better accuracy below 20 Hz. The UMIK is a little easier to use but to get the response as accurate below 20 Hz will end up costing quite a bit more than the UMM-6 as it would need a calibration.

I think I understand. : )


----------



## Phillips

> So basically the UMM-6 is sort of plug and play


The UMM-6 mic is plug and play, you might have to the *first time *only click a extra couple of times but then after that it would be the same as the UMIK.



> ... and has better accuracy below 20 Hz.


Absolutely



> The UMIK is a little easier to use


Where do you see that the UMM-6 is more difficult to use?



> but to get the response as accurate below 20 Hz will end up costing quite a bit more than the UMM-6 as it would need a calibration.


Because you have a SPL meter that is calibrated i would personally go with the UMM-6 and calibrate the UMM-6 SPL with the SPL meter (you would haver best of both worlds).

Personally i would trust the calibration form Cross - Spectrum.

Your choice

1. UMIK that is calibration down to 20hz with SPL data that at this stage is inconsistent, and you would use the SPL meter to calibrate the mic anyway.

or

2. UMM-6 that is calibrated down to 5hz, then you calibrate the SPL with your SPL meter. 

Hope this helps

Do you plan in getting any EQ?


----------



## Doctor X

Phillips said:


> Because you have a SPL meter that is calibrated i would personally go with the UMM-6 and calibrate the UMM-6 SPL with the SPL meter (you would haver best of both worlds).


I don't know to what frequency my SPL meter was calibrated. I just know the levels are accurate, but I don't know if response below 20 Hz is reliable or not. Have the CM-140 with the verified calibration from Cross Spectrum.


----------



## Doctor X

Phillips said:


> Do you plan in getting any EQ?


I plan on using XT32.  But I may decide at a later stage to get a dedicated sub EQ like the anti-mode. No manually adjustable EQ for me.


----------



## Doctor X

Phillips said:


> UMM-6 that is calibrated down to 5hz, then you calibrate the SPL with your SPL meter.


Is there is a guide on using the UMM-6 with Room EQ wizard? How easy would it be to calibrate the SPL with my SPL meter? I've never used a dedicated condenser mic before.


----------



## Phillips

Doctor X said:


> I don't know to what frequency my SPL meter was calibrated. I just know the levels are accurate, but I don't know if response below 20 Hz is reliable or not. Have the CM-140 with the verified calibration from Cross Spectrum.



Off the top of the head:
Use the SPL meter and Generator (signal) PN Noise centered at 1000hz (in REW) turn up the volume on the Amp/Receiver to say 80db with your SPL Meter then adjust the SPL (REW) to 80db then click Calibrate, done your SPL is now calibrated. 

I suggest reading the SPL in REW help files which goes through the process more thoroughly than i have above.

Hope this helps


----------



## Doctor X

So is 80 dB supposed to represent what? Reference level? Would I not want to set the levels to 75 dB's? I don't understand why 80 dB's is the number. Perhaps you could explain. Thanks!


----------



## Phillips

Doctor X said:


> So is 80 dB supposed to represent what? Reference level? Would I not want to set the levels to 75 dB's? I don't understand why 80 dB's is the number. Perhaps you could explain. Thanks!



I tend to use 80 because a little noisy around here and to make sure.

You can use 75 if you want.

Have you downloaded REW?


----------



## Doctor X

Phillip said:


> Have you downloaded REW?


I downloaded REW months ago.  It's been sitting patiently in my notebook, so I haven't used it yet. I'm just deciding whether I should go for the UMM-6 mic or the UMIK but you guys are making it sound like the UMM-6 is the far better option right now. Think I'm going to pull the trigger.


----------



## Doctor X

Just another quick question. Would there be any point in having the UMM-6 calibrated by Cross Spectrum? What exactly would improve, in terms of accuracy?


----------



## Phillips

Doctor X said:


> Just another quick question. Would there be any point in having the UMM-6 calibrated by Cross Spectrum? What exactly would improve, in terms of accuracy?


Absolutely

1. Accuracy over the whole response
2. Calibrated down to 5hz


----------



## Doctor X

Phillips said:


> Absolutely
> 
> 1. Accuracy over the whole response
> 2. Calibrated down to 5hz


Okay, but then what would be the difference between the UMM-6 and the UMIK if both were calibrated by Cross Spectrum? Sorry for asking all these silly questions.


----------



## Phillips

Doctor X said:


> Okay, but then what would be the difference between the UMM-6 and the UMIK if both were calibrated by Cross Spectrum? Sorry for asking all these silly questions.


Price i guess, post or email to Herb he would be happy to help.

Thats fine.


----------



## turboman

See this announcement from miniDSP regarding the UMIK-1
http://www.minidsp.com/forum/2-announcements/8607-umik-1--10hz--spl-readings-in-rew


----------



## Doctor X

Phillips said:


> Price i guess, post or email to Herb he would be happy to help.


I guess I'm having difficulty understanding why the mic must be calibrated for accurate results if a calibration file could also achieve accurate results. So, for example, if the UMIK corrects the issue with consistency and enables us to measure down to 10 Hz (according to the link provided by turboman) is there still a reason to have it calibrated by Cross Spectrum afterwards?


----------



## AudiocRaver

Doctor X said:


> I guess I'm having difficulty understanding why the mic must be calibrated for accurate results if a calibration file could also achieve accurate results. So, for example, if the UMIK corrects the issue with consistency and enables us to measure down to 10 Hz (according to the link provided by turboman) is there still a reason to have it calibrated by Cross Spectrum afterwards?


Some users might be in a "wait and see" mode regarding the UMIK-1 directly from miniDSP, waiting for verification by other users and/or Cross Spectrum Labs and/or other testers that their 10 Hz data is trustworthy.


----------



## Scubasteve2365

Doctor X said:


> I guess I'm having difficulty understanding why the mic must be calibrated for accurate results if a calibration file could also achieve accurate results. So, for example, if the UMIK corrects the issue with consistency and enables us to measure down to 10 Hz (according to the link provided by turboman) is there still a reason to have it calibrated by Cross Spectrum afterwards?


As I understand it, both come calibrated. There is no extra charge to have a UMM-6 calibrated from Cross Spectrum. There is a premium calibration service provided by Cross Spectrum but it appears to be for the non-USB mic. That premium service gets you additional information in the report such as noise floor.

Neither is calibrating the mic physically to change it's response but rather plotting it's factory shipped response against a known reference microphone. This results in the calibration file that REW will use.

If the UMIK has an accurate calibration file down to 10Hz, then it should be fine. The Cross Spectrum is calibrated down to 5Hz and comes with the response at 45 degree and 90 degree angles. Plus the UMM-6 is actually handled by a human being who personally generates the report as opposed to just coming from the OEM.

Granted I've used neither, but to me the UMM-6 seems like a no-brainer decision over the UMIK.


----------



## monomer

turboman said:


> See this announcement from miniDSP regarding the UMIK-1
> http://www.minidsp.com/forum/2-announcements/8607-umik-1--10hz--spl-readings-in-rew


Yes, but now there is a new problem... my two files (old and new) do not match... in fact they are not even close to being the same files. Its as if I just got some other UMIK file by mistake. Example: there is a 4.4dB difference between file calibration values at 20Hz which become a 2.7dB difference by the time it get to 40Hz... basically there is no resemblance between my two files. Something is seriously wrong here... I noted this in a posting over on their UMIK help forum and eagerly await their response before I attempt to use any of their calibration data at this point.

I do know the older file seems to sync with my EMM-6 so I suspect the bogus calibration file is the new one just released.


----------



## Phillips

AudiocRaver said:


> Some users might be in a "wait and see" mode regarding the UMIK-1 directly from miniDSP, waiting for verification by other users and/or Cross Spectrum Labs and/or other testers that their 10 Hz data is trustworthy.



Agree, Cross - Spectrum already has the reputation.

Matter of intersst how will other people know it is accurate, each mic will be different?

Really to be real confident you would want to send to Herb to test?


----------



## Phillips

Scubasteve2365 said:


> As I understand it, both come calibrated. There is no extra charge to have a UMM-6 calibrated from Cross Spectrum. There is a premium calibration service provided by Cross Spectrum but it appears to be for the non-USB mic. That premium service gets you additional information in the report such as noise floor.
> 
> Neither is calibrating the mic physically to change it's response but rather plotting it's factory shipped response against a known reference microphone. This results in the calibration file that REW will use.
> 
> If the UMIK has an accurate calibration file down to 10Hz, then it should be fine. The Cross Spectrum is calibrated down to 5Hz and comes with the response at 45 degree and 90 degree angles. Plus the UMM-6 is actually handled by a human being who personally generates the report as opposed to just coming from the OEM.
> 
> Granted I've used neither, but to me the UMM-6 seems like a no-brainer decision over the UMIK.


Well put


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> Yes, but now there is a new problem... my two files (old and new) do not match... in fact they are not even close to being the same files. Its as if I just got some other UMIK file by mistake. Example: there is a 4.4dB difference between file calibration values at 20Hz which become a 2.7dB difference by the time it get to 40Hz... basically there is no resemblance between my two files. Something is seriously wrong here... I noted this in a posting over on their UMIK help forum and eagerly await their response before I attempt to use any of their calibration data at this point.
> 
> I do know the older file seems to sync with my EMM-6 so I suspect the bogus calibration file is the new one just released.


If i remember both mics were lined up very close to each other?

I think you are rught incorrect file is the new one, possibly show them in a REW graph?


----------



## snowmanick

monomer said:


> Yes, but now there is a new problem... my two files (old and new) do not match... in fact they are not even close to being the same files. Its as if I just got some other UMIK file by mistake. Example: there is a 4.4dB difference between file calibration values at 20Hz which become a 2.7dB difference by the time it get to 40Hz... basically there is no resemblance between my two files. Something is seriously wrong here... I noted this in a posting over on their UMIK help forum and eagerly await their response before I attempt to use any of their calibration data at this point.
> 
> I do know the older file seems to sync with my EMM-6 so I suspect the bogus calibration file is the new one just released.


Interesting. I just downloaded the 10hz cal file, and from 20hz and up it is exactly the same for me (7000508). My sens factor is still a bit high compared to my SPL meter with the HTS correction values (by about 3db), but it looks to be pretty consistently 3db different, so it is an easy fix on my end. 

Did you double/triple check that you are looking at the same S/N? I can't tell you how many times I've transposed a digit or fat fingered a number. 

If not, it'll be interesting to see what MiniDSP's response is. Especially since you have confirmed the the old cal file versus your EMM-6.


----------



## monomer

snowmanick said:


> ...Did you double/triple check that you are looking at the same S/N?...


Yes, my files were copied correctly... you can view them for yourself, its serial #7000275. I looked at yours and sure enough you must be one of the lucky ones as your files do indeed match. I looked at several other random serial numbers yesterday to compare old and new files (picked numbers between 200-400) and all have the same weirdness as mine... yours however is quite different and appears to be correctly done.... so that even deepens the mystery of what's going on. Zajac just posted a graph of his UMIK files over in the manufacturer's UMIK help forum... check it out, looks bizarro like mine.


EDIT: I think I see the difference between our files... yours never goes negative even down to 20Hz where as both mine and Zajac's file are in negative territory prior to 20Hz... the new files by contrast have the graphs going quite positive instead of negative... so if I had to guess, I'm thinking the error in the algorithm has to do with how negative signs handled.


----------



## monomer

Here is a graph of both of my UMIK calibration files. As you can plainly see, there is something really wrong with the new file.


----------



## sachn

This is the comparison plot for SN 7000370, looks similar to monomers. The files surely have difference. Is there really an issue ? Or is it that the new file is better than the old one ?


----------



## Phillips

sachn said:


> This is the comparison plot for SN 7000370, looks similar to monomers. The files surely have difference. Is there really an issue ? Or is it that the new file is better than the old one ?


At a guess i would say the old one, as a poster has said it corresponds with his EMM-6 measurements.

I thought it was only the bottom end not from 9400-1000hz?

As paying customers you require progress reports. In all honesty how can you trust your measurements when nothing is coming through.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> ...In all honesty how can you trust your measurements when nothing is coming through.


Well, you are right and I don't blindly trust any of these calibration files. I am fortunate in that I do have my EMM-6 to compare against. As long as the two mic responses in REW (using their respective calibration files) do not diverge by more than a dB then I guess I'll have to trust the file is correct. Since the 'old' calibration file does this, I will have to go with it as being the 'correct' file and say something went horribly wrong in the algorithm during the recalculation of the values below 1000Hz in the 'new' file.

What's odd is that the last time they released a bogus file (those very first files they released on the second batch mics) the bad values started at 802Hz (and below) but this time around it appears to be beginning at 990Hz... so are they just randomly changing calibration reference points with each iteration? Also both times the error was soooo obvious its shocked me that someone either at miniDSP or their mic supplier, where these files are being generated, didn't pick up on how crazy it looked but instead just went ahead and released the files without first trying to verify a single one of them. Its almost as if no human sees these new files until a UMIK owner downloads them. Apparently no one bothers to even just look at a graph of the files before releasing the links to them on the miniDSP website. Does not speak well for the mic supplier but also reflects poorly upon miniDSP... I'm just not sure they realize the kind of serious damage it does to their reputation as a quality supplier of product.

This is the kind of thing that will spill over onto all their other product offerings as these problems become identified with miniDSP and not the mic supplier, (the mic manufacturer is anonymous and doesn't need to worry about establishing a reputation with the buying public... in fact it wouldn't surprise me if it isn't the exact same mic facility that produces the EMM-6). It's miniDSP's reputation that's on the line and suffering because of these series of calibration file boondoggles and if it were me, I'd be beating up on the mic manufacturer and literally checking up on them daily trying to get this situation fix correctly once and or all ASAP instead of letting it linger on for week after week and turning into months (yes, it's been 2 months now since the second batch of UMIKs started shipping out)... they've apparently sold well over 300 of these second batch UMIKs so far. 

I'm actually surprised anyone is still purchasing these things... apparently they are either not aware of all the bogus data in the calibration files or don't care.


----------



## JohnM

Today is a public holiday in Hong Kong which is likely to delay replies from MiniDSP, and I imagine they will need to have more discussion with the supplier to understand what has happened this time - unfortunately the holiday in China is 3 days, April 4th - 6th (Qing Ming Jie, meaning Chinese Memorial Day/Tomb Sweeping Day/All Souls Day).


----------



## monomer

JohnM said:


> Today is a public holiday in Hong Kong which is likely to delay replies from MiniDSP, and I imagine they will need to have more discussion with the supplier to understand what has happened this time - unfortunately the holiday in China is 3 days, April 4th - 6th (Qing Ming Jie, meaning Chinese Memorial Day/Tomb Sweeping Day/All Souls Day).


Nutz! I just sent them an email yesterday about this in case they've not been looking at the thread in their own UMIK help forum. I've waited this long for below 20Hz calibration data from them I can surely wait another week... after all, what other choice do I have? JohnM, thanks for that heads up. I realize in the end it does all boil down to getting the manufacturer/supplier to make it a priority... sigh. I'm sure its an easy fix, they just need to get someone to do it.

Hey JohnM, as long as I've got you here, any idea what's up with the sensitivity factor they are using in those calibration files? Those factors are obviously wrong but I understand you've been in discussion trying to determine where the 'disconnect' may lay (software issue or some glitch on the manufacturer's side of things)... care to share any of that info with us UMIK owners?


----------



## Phillips

I am sure that MiniDSP are looking into this but not communicating that well.

I think that the communication is the key, which can make all the difference.


----------



## Chisas

Waiting for my new UMIK-1 mic to arrive, all I can say is THANK YOU monomer for taking the time and effort to provide clear feedback, and do only your best to reach solutions for everyone here.

You said it all, can't add anything to your last post. It's just the perfect situation synthesis.
I'm following your particpation in all related forums, and kindly ask you not to give up on this struggle! :clap:

Perhaps on the THIRD time they try to make a correct calibration file... finally we're going to get the promised results?


Regards.


----------



## sachn

Phillips said:


> At a guess i would say the old one, as a poster has said it corresponds with his EMM-6 measurements.
> 
> I thought it was only the bottom end not from 9400-1000hz?
> 
> As paying customers you require progress reports. In all honesty how can you trust your measurements when nothing is coming through.


Thanks Phillips for the reply.

I have a question on the REW's SPL using UMIK-1 
The REW's SPL meter reads 65 dB and around 53 dBFS on Win7 64 bit laptop in my queit room, playing nothing. The Input volume is set to 100 %. I am using HDMI for output. I've read in some posts that UMIK-1 is quite sensitive and can measure upto 130 dB. Does that mean that the SPL would always be measured high since the mic can measure very high SPL. Why is the SPL reading in a quiet room so high? For non-USB mics one can calibrate REW's SPL with, say RS SPL meter. However for UMIK-1 there's no way to be sure on the SPL reading. Its only the cal. file? I am confused on the exact SPL reading that is displayed on the REW SPL meter. This will also be reflected on the FR graphs.


----------



## Phillips

sachn said:


> Thanks Phillips for the reply.
> 
> I have a question on the REW's SPL using UMIK-1
> The REW's SPL meter reads 65 dB and around 53 dBFS on Win7 64 bit laptop in my queit room, playing nothing. The Input volume is set to 100 %. I am using HDMI for output. I've read in some posts that UMIK-1 is quite sensitive and can measure upto 130 dB. Does that mean that the SPL would always be measured high since the mic can measure very high SPL. Why is the SPL reading in a quiet room so high? For non-USB mics one can calibrate REW's SPL with, say RS SPL meter. However for UMIK-1 there's no way to be sure on the SPL reading. Its only the cal. file? I am confused on the exact SPL reading that is displayed on the REW SPL meter. This will also be reflected on the FR graphs.


I think i red that this was getting looked at for the next version of REW?

Can you get access to a SPL meter to check the SPL, you can adjust manually in REW?


----------



## monomer

snowmanick said:


> Interesting. I just downloaded the 10hz cal file, and from 20hz and up it is exactly the same for me (7000508). My sens factor is still a bit high compared to my SPL meter with the HTS correction values (by about 3db), but it looks to be pretty consistently 3db different, so it is an easy fix on my end.
> 
> Did you double/triple check that you are looking at the same S/N? I can't tell you how many times I've transposed a digit or fat fingered a number.
> 
> If not, it'll be interesting to see what MiniDSP's response is. Especially since you have confirmed the the old cal file versus your EMM-6.


Hey Nick, I had some time today and decided to graph your UMIK's response. Without careful examination I had just assumed it was correctly done until I actually started looking at the below 20Hz data just now... Looking at the graph I'm convinced something is not right. Imagine if you'd extended that drop off down to 5Hz??? It'd probably be -38 dB if that slope holds!!!! Perhaps even lower than that if it doesn't!!!! Then if you look at the composite calibration file data from the first batch of UMIKs... even that's looking impossible but for the opposite reason, those are waaaay too flat to be off by only -3dB or less going down to 5Hz, its simply not believable. In fact if you account for that 'jag' in the freq response at 20Hz then it would appear all 188 UMIKs in the first batch fall into a +/- 2.5dB variance all the way down to 5Hz... that's so totally fake. So apparently none of the below 20Hz data for either batch is correct... what is going on :huh:

Apparently the UMIK uses the same Panasonic capsule as the ECM8000 but looking at the composite cal files from Cross Spectrum Labs for their calibrated ECM8000s only going down to 20Hz the variance is far greater yet those look more believable. In their example file for the ECM8000 posted on their website... it is down -6dB by 10Hz and down -13dB by 5 Hz... I assume they selected a middle-of-the-road cal file to use as their example cal file... if so, then none of these UMIK cal files bear any resemblance what-so-ever to the ECM8000, even accounting for differences in housing effects.

And then there is still that sensitivity factor mystery with high noise floors being reported, also those mystery 1kHz spikes (and overtones), etc...

I hope they can get to the bottom of all this soon and straighten the mess out... Until then, I don't recommend anyone looking to get a USB measurement mic even consider this UMIK!

Phillips... if this goes on much longer without resolution I may just have to take your suggestion and "bite the bullet" and send my UMIK in to Cross Spectrum for a *real* calibration by professionals... and if that's what it ends up coming down to to get a reliable calibration file for my UMIK I'm going to be upset.


----------



## ack_bak

monomer said:


> Hey Nick, I had some time today and decided to graph your UMIK's response. Without careful examination I had just assumed it was correctly done until I actually started looking at the below 20Hz data just now... Looking at the graph I'm convinced something is not right. Imagine if you'd extended that drop off down to 5Hz??? It'd probably be -38 dB if that slope holds!!!! Perhaps even lower than that if it doesn't!!!! Then if you look at the composite calibration file data from the first batch of UMIKs... even that's looking impossible but for the opposite reason, those are waaaay too flat to be off by only -3dB or less going down to 5Hz, its simply not believable. In fact if you account for that 'jag' in the freq response at 20Hz then it would appear all 188 UMIKs in the first batch fall into a +/- 2.5dB variance all the way down to 5Hz... that's so totally fake. So apparently none of the below 20Hz data for either batch is correct... what is going on :huh:
> 
> Apparently the UMIK uses the same Panasonic capsule as the ECM8000 but looking at the composite cal files from Cross Spectrum Labs for their calibrated ECM8000s only going down to 20Hz the variance is far greater yet those look more believable. In their example file for the ECM8000 posted on their website... it is down -6dB by 10Hz and down -13dB by 5 Hz... I assume they selected a middle-of-the-road cal file to use as their example cal file... if so, then none of these UMIK cal files bear any resemblance what-so-ever to the ECM8000, even accounting for differences in housing effects.
> 
> And there is still that sensitivity factor mystery with high noise floors being reported, also those mystery 1kHz spikes (and overtones), etc...
> 
> I hope they can get to the bottom of all this soon and straighten the mess out... Until then, I don't recommend anyone looking to get a USB measurement mic even consider this UMIK!
> 
> Phillips... if this goes on much longer without resolution I may just have to take your suggestion and "bite the bullet" and send my UMIK in to Cross Spectrum for a real calibration by professionals... and if that's what it ends up coming down to to get a reliable calibration file for my UMIK I'm going to be upset.


Thank you so much for the info, I am in the same boat. I just don't trust my results with this mic and don't want to spend extensive time and effort tweaking things if the measurements are not reliable. If you go down the path of sending the mic to Cross Spectrum, let me know. Perhaps if enough of us go down this path Cross Spectrum will give us a discount (and Minidsp should refund us!). What a mess.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> Hey Nick, I had some time today and decided to graph your UMIK's response. Without careful examination I had just assumed it was correctly done until I actually started looking at the below 20Hz data just now... Looking at the graph I'm convinced something is not right. Imagine if you'd extended that drop off down to 5Hz??? It'd probably be -38 dB if that slope holds!!!! Perhaps even lower than that if it doesn't!!!! Then if you look at the composite calibration file data from the first batch of UMIKs... even that's looking impossible but for the opposite reason, those are waaaay too flat to be off by only -3dB or less going down to 5Hz, its simply not believable. In fact if you account for that 'jag' in the freq response at 20Hz then it would appear all 188 UMIKs in the first batch fall into a +/- 2.5dB variance all the way down to 5Hz... that's so totally fake. So apparently none of the below 20Hz data for either batch is correct... what is going on :huh:
> 
> Apparently the UMIK uses the same Panasonic capsule as the ECM8000 but looking at the composite cal files from Cross Spectrum Labs for their calibrated ECM8000s only going down to 20Hz the variance is far greater yet those look more believable. In their example file for the ECM8000 posted on their website... it is down -6dB by 10Hz and down -13dB by 5 Hz... I assume they selected a middle-of-the-road cal file to use as their example cal file... if so, then none of these UMIK cal files bear any resemblance what-so-ever to the ECM8000, even accounting for differences in housing effects.
> 
> And then there is still that sensitivity factor mystery with high noise floors being reported, also those mystery 1kHz spikes (and overtones), etc...
> 
> I hope they can get to the bottom of all this soon and straighten the mess out... Until then, I don't recommend anyone looking to get a USB measurement mic even consider this UMIK!
> 
> Phillips... if this goes on much longer without resolution I may just have to take your suggestion and "bite the bullet" and send my UMIK in to Cross Spectrum for a real calibration by professionals... and if that's what it ends up coming down to to get a reliable calibration file for my UMIK I'm going to be upset.



Have you posted your comparison EMM6 vs UMIK measurement?


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> Have you posted your comparison EMM6 vs UMIK measurement?


Way back in post #322 in this thread. It was actually off by about 2-3 dBs in places but reversed itself at around 30Hz. All in all it didn't look that bad from 20-20KHz but then the EMM-6 calibration file was NOT from Cross Spectrum Labs either but rather done by the mic manufacturer, who could well have been the same manufacturer that does the UMIK. There's no way to know since they are basically anonymous to the public. Its file also stops at 20Hz.



ack_bak said:


> ...Perhaps if enough of us go down this path Cross Spectrum will give us a discount (and Minidsp should refund us!)...


I would be willing to try and get a large enough group of us UMIK owners together to attempt a discount for a group buy of Cross Spectrum calibration services... though I would be highly skeptical that miniDSP or their mic supplier would help defray any of these additional costs. We could try though... I'd first like to give miniDSP a few days to see if they can begin to sort out these issues. I'm thinking its just a case of sorting out the raw data by correctly matching it up but I'm certainly no expert in how this is all done... after all we paid them to be the experts didn't we?


----------



## rmalak

I wish this info was out before I bought my UMIK!!


----------



## rmalak

How much does calibration from Cross Spectrum cost?


----------



## monomer

rmalak said:


> How much does calibration from Cross Spectrum cost?


For the basic calibration cost is $55 which includes return shipping, however you must pay get it shipped to them first. There is also a premium calibration option which is $75. You can get more details on their calibration methods here.


----------



## monomer

For those who may be interested in the back story on this second batch of UMIKs, go here In some ways it makes me feel better to know what was really going on but in the end we'll still need a fix.


----------



## Phillips

> EMM-6 calibration file was NOT from Cross Spectrum Labs either but rather done by the mic manufacturer


My opologies i thought it was calibrated by CS.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> For those who may be interested in the back story on this second batch of UMIKs, go here In some ways it makes me feel better to know what was really going on but in the end we'll still need a fix.


Great you got an answer.

Just a question why don't they post on this thread, that would automatically update more people?

It would be easy, or they would have to do is copy and paste.

Is there alot more posters on their website, still a concern people who are out there that is not aware of whats going on?


----------



## snowmanick

monomer said:


> Hey Nick, I had some time today and decided to graph your UMIK's response. Without careful examination I had just assumed it was correctly done until I actually started looking at the below 20Hz data just now... Looking at the graph I'm convinced something is not right. Imagine if you'd extended that drop off down to 5Hz??? It'd probably be -38 dB if that slope holds!!!! Perhaps even lower than that if it doesn't!!!! Then if you look at the composite calibration file data from the first batch of UMIKs... even that's looking impossible but for the opposite reason, those are waaaay too flat to be off by only -3dB or less going down to 5Hz, its simply not believable. In fact if you account for that 'jag' in the freq response at 20Hz then it would appear all 188 UMIKs in the first batch fall into a +/- 2.5dB variance all the way down to 5Hz... that's so totally fake. So apparently none of the below 20Hz data for either batch is correct... what is going on :huh:
> 
> Apparently the UMIK uses the same Panasonic capsule as the ECM8000 but looking at the composite cal files from Cross Spectrum Labs for their calibrated ECM8000s only going down to 20Hz the variance is far greater yet those look more believable. In their example file for the ECM8000 posted on their website... it is down -6dB by 10Hz and down -13dB by 5 Hz... I assume they selected a middle-of-the-road cal file to use as their example cal file... if so, then none of these UMIK cal files bear any resemblance what-so-ever to the ECM8000, even accounting for differences in housing effects.
> 
> And then there is still that sensitivity factor mystery with high noise floors being reported, also those mystery 1kHz spikes (and overtones), etc...



Hey Monomer,

Sorry I missed this. Well, here I was thinking I may have been the lucky one.....Thanks for graphing that for me. Its been on my to-do list, but with a baby due in less than two months, its priority has been repeatedly usurped.

I also read the background post from the DevTeam. IMHO, you deserve a lot of credit for pushing the issue with MiniDSP. I think they may have addressed it eventually (I like to give people the benefit of the doubt), but I don't know if they would have either done so as quickly or posted the issue as clearly without your efforts. So, thank you again.

It'll be interesting to see what our "final" calibration files will look like, assuming the issue is correctable. I think if they correct their reference mic/script then it should be doable without anything other than just posting up the cal files. At least, I hope that is the case. I'll be ticked off if the solution for my "calibrated" mic is to send it to another shop at my cost to get calibrated.


----------



## rmalak

Here's what my calibration file looks like from the MiniDSP website. I just got my mic today.


----------



## Phillips

They must be confident they can still send out mics with data that *may* not be accurate and fix later, this must be good news.

If they couldn't they would stop shipping/purchases of these mics.


----------



## rmalak

I don't think that is a sound assumption.


----------



## fuzz092888

I posted over at AVS, but I'll say it here as well. If you ordered one of the original mics and still have your cal file, for the love of whatever don't lose it. I just clicked on the link in one of the e-mails they sent me way back when for the cal file to one of my UMIK's and the cal file is completely different. Every value for every frequency is different and the newer cal file is only rated down to 20hz where the old one was good down to 4.6hz. I have no idea why the old cal files got changed as well.


----------



## Mattcc22

fuzz092888 said:


> I posted over at AVS, but I'll say it here as well. If you ordered one of the original mics and still have your cal file, for the love of whatever don't lose it. I just clicked on the link in one of the e-mails they sent me way back when for the cal file to one of my UMIK's and the cal file is completely different. Every value for every frequency is different and the newer cal file is only rated down to 20hz where the old one was good down to 4.6hz. I have no idea why the old cal files got changed as well.


I tried asking about the first batch over on the minidsp forums but never got a reply. It definitely appears that the first batch original data was correct. Not sure why they changed it. New data is completely different.


----------



## fuzz092888

Mattcc22 said:


> I tried asking about the first batch over on the minidsp forums but never got a reply. It definitely appears that the first batch original data was correct. Not sure why they changed it. New data is completely different.


I have two mics from the first batch and the cal files rocked. I have measurements of a pair of my towers taken quasi-anchoic by the designer and I compared the quasi measurements I took with the UMIK against those and they were very very close. I'm a little afraid to download the new file and see how much different it really is.


----------



## monomer

It would be best to pose your questions over on miniDSP's help forum where you may stand a chance of getting an official response (though no telling exactly when that would be). 

The initial cal files released for the second batch of UMIKs were determined (it was obvious actually) to be bogus and a new set of files were generated, I believe it was at this time that the first batch cal files were changed . It was stated by the DevTeam that below 20Hz data was considered not to be reliable by the mic supplier and thus was the reason the new files stopped at 20Hz... miniDSP also then changed the specs for the UMIK to 20-20kHz +/- .5dB... apparently this applies to the first batch of UMIKs as well because they limited those files also. It was also stated that the calibration methodology was somehow improved over the original but no details were ever given, only that it was now better and so they apparently applied to the first batch cal files as well. After some badgering by a few of us over on their help forum, they released new cal files for the second batch UMIKs with data down to 10Hz, however turns out it too is bogus (also very obviously incorrect, especially when compared to the earlier released cal files) so... they've now admitted to having cal file issues that are currently being worked on and that is where it stands as of right now. 

This saga has been ongoing for over 2 months now and still hasn't been resolved... miniDSP puts the blame squarely on their mic supplier but is taking some of the responsibility since they forced the manufacturer to change incorrect calibration procedures and that in turn has apparently cause much of these changing files over the last two months. You should visit their UMIK help forum and read up on the last 4 or so threads to get a sense of what's been transpiring lately with the second batch UMIKs because I believe it holds the answers that you're seeking to explain what's gone on with the first batch files. 

I'm glad you believe those first cal files were correct because I, personally am not sure of anything at this point, including the accuracy of the first batch files. In fact, I've concluded that the data below 20Hz cannot possibly be correct on those first batch files but hey, if you're completely satisfied with it, then that's all that counts.

Then there's the whole thing about sensitivity... but that's a topic on another bunch of active threads going on over there... sigh.


----------



## fuzz092888

I can believe they may have fixed something to do with the sensitivity since that seems to be off with the first batch of cal files, but the correction down below 20 seems decent. I compared both UMIK's against my calibrated Behringer ECM and it looked pretty close. I should probably try the new cal file and see how it rates comparatively.


----------



## Phillips

fuzz092888 said:


> quasi -anchoic measurements I took with the UMIK



How did you do this if you don't mind me asking?

What was the procedure?

Thanks in advance


----------



## fuzz092888

To take a quasi anechoic measurement you get a mic stand or something of that nature and aim it at the tweeter of the speaker you are measuring. Usually about 1M from the speaker, but it should really be at the distance where all the drivers sum. I used REW and ran a basic measurement from 300hz-21000hz at the shortest time span. Doing all of this should keep the measurement relatively free of room reflections and therefore give you a quasi anechoicish measurement. 



Phillips said:


> How did you do this if you don't mind me asking?
> 
> What was the procedure?
> 
> Thanks in advance


----------



## Phillips

fuzz092888 said:


> shortest time span



Thank you

Where can i find "shortest time span".

How can i find the sum of all drivers?

Thanks again


----------



## rmalak

Well I have sent my mic off to Cross Spectrum to be calibrated. I will post my results once I receive it back.


----------



## AudiocRaver

We can hardly wait!


----------



## rmalak

Me either! I'm really interested to see how they will compare.


----------



## Phillips

rmalak said:


> Me either! I'm really interested to see how they will compare.


You can safely EQ/setup with confidence with accuracy.


----------



## monomer

FYI... apparently there is now a third batch of UMIKs now shipping and they supposedly have all the 'kinks' worked out as far as the spurious 1kHz and high noise floor issues. Also a reworked board is being prepared for owners of the second batch UMIKs that will be a solder-in replacement for those of us with DIY skills and they will probably offer to do it for those who are non-DIYers. The UMIK manufacturer is working on a revised script that will correct the errors in the current calibration files... hopefully there will be a fix sooner rather than later. Finally... the sensitivity issue will be solved with the next installment of REW. All this is according to the DevTeam over on the UMIK help forum... I believe I can now see a light at the end of the tunnel, let's just hope its not another train.


----------



## m R g S r

Reading through this, I decided to send my UMIK to cross spectrum. 
Cross Spectrum responded within 5 mins! 

$55 for on axis calibration, includes return shipping within USA. And 24-48 hour turn around. Worth it to me, I'm shipping it out Monday morning.


----------



## rmalak

monomer said:


> FYI... apparently there is now a third batch of UMIKs now shipping and they supposedly have all the 'kinks' worked out as far as the spurious 1kHz and high noise floor issues. Also a reworked board is being prepared for owners of the second batch UMIKs that will be a solder-in replacement for those of us with DIY skills and they will probably offer to do it for those who are non-DIYers. The UMIK manufacturer is working on a revised script that will correct the errors in the current calibration files... hopefully there will be a fix sooner rather than later. Finally... the sensitivity issue will be solved with the next installment of REW. All this is according to the DevTeam over on the UMIK help forum... I believe I can now see a light at the end of the tunnel, let's just hope its not another train.


Is there any way to tell which version of this microphone we have? If mine needs to be repaired I don't want to calibrate it until it's fixed.


----------



## monomer

rmalak said:


> Is there any way to tell which version of this microphone we have? If mine needs to be repaired I don't want to calibrate it until it's fixed.


I asked the question over there today but don't really expect a response until late Sunday when they get back from the weekend (it will be Monday afternoon their time). I suspect what they are calling RevB is the second batch of UMIKs and if so then those are the ones targeted for the revised board... I don't believe it will affect calibration response, only input sensitivity, though it wouldn't hurt to ask, send them an email.


----------



## Phillips

I would look at the following

1. Email Herb from Cross-Spectrum and ask him, he might know if it will effect the calibration.
2. If in doubt wait until the new board is sorted out, then send for calibration.


----------



## rmalak

Phillips said:


> I would look at the following
> 
> 1. Email Herb from Cross-Spectrum and ask him, he might know if it will effect the calibration.
> 2. If in doubt wait until the new board is sorted out, then send for calibration.


Well it's already on the way to be calibrated so no luck there. I will bring it up with him.


----------



## Phillips

rmalak said:


> Well it's already on the way to be calibrated so no luck there. I will bring it up with him.



I think that is a good idea

It could be just the sensitivity that will be effected.


----------



## monomer

rmalak said:


> Well it's already on the way to be calibrated so no luck there. I will bring it up with him.


I'm relatively sure your mic is from the third batch with the revised board, what they are calling Rev C. I just looked up your UMIK serial #0634 and its on the main calibration file download page and goes down to 10Hz... those of us with a second batch UMIK have our files stop at 20Hz, we have to go to another special download page to get our 10Hz file... so I'm pretty sure yours is a Rev C and if that's the case then you've got nothing to worry about as yours will not need the board replacement.

Please show us the two calibration files (miniDSP and the CSL) when you get your mic back from CSL... I'm very curious to see what the two files look like, especially below 20Hz. I may end up having to do the same, we'll see.


----------



## monomer

rmalak... I got to looking carefully at your calibration files this morning and noticed two things... first, your values look entirely believable (unlike mine and others I've seen with serial numbers in my range like 200-500) and second, your sensitivity factor is 10 dB greater than mine (yours is -8 dB whereas mine is -18 dB). So now I'm thinking they got the third batch correct as the DevTeam alluded to for the first time yesterday. 

The fact is I wasn't even aware there was a third batch manufactured, let alone that they had already been shipping, until it was mentioned yesterday over there. So out of curiosity I decided to located at what serial number this calibration file (both sensitivity factor change and having normal 990Hz-10Hz values) change happened. It is at serial #540, it and all subsequent UMIKs I believe now are correctly calibrated and it probably had something to do with the board revision that the DevTeam alluded to yesterday. That was a hundred serial numbers ago!!! which now begs the questions of "How long ago had they known there was a problem and had a fix for it?" and "Why didn't they tell us second batch UMIK owners about it?"... this now explains the looooong silence from them on the UMIK help forum that lasted for over a month. Oh, they were working on a fix all right, but it was for the NEXT batch of UMIKs that they quietly began to ship out... seems now after finally selling a bunch of the third batch UMIKs, we owners of second batch UMIKs finally are being told now that they are soon going to have a revised board manufactured that will replace what we currently have in our mics. This makes me wonder if that was really the plan all along or if this was only a response to the pressure applied by the continued badgering and nagging from the small number of us second batch owners who knew something wasn't right and didn't let up posting about it on the UMIK help forum and over here? If no one had said anything would they even have a plan now to manufacture a revised board for us? And how does this reflect upon any first batch UMIKs? who knows since those owners haven't complained or even noticed what's been transpiring with this second batch of UMIKs. Tends to make one think the DevTeam's lack of communication and failing to supply any progress updates was intentional all along... one has to now wonder if they were just hoping the complaints from the second batch UMIK owners would just go away and then so too would the cost needed to deal with fixing the issues?

Now the question becomes can these second batch UMIKs be re-calibrated from across the ocean(s)? and if so, then why hasn't it already been done? The third batch appear to have quite reasonable calibration files, so why wasn't the same script used to quickly regenerate those 10Hz files for the second batch at the time the third batch files were being uploaded? Or perhaps this was done and the current bogus looking 10Hz calibration files are the result from this?!! Which then raises the question of exactly how are these new revised boards different... the 1kHz spikes and overtones, high noise floor, we know these issues are addressed but is there something else changed that affects the freq calibration data as well? or is it that something after the "calibration" of the second batch was changed in the calibration methodology or in the test rig on the factory floor? Something has to explain why we second batch UMIK owners haven't gotten a realistic calibration file yet when they already exist for third batch owners... I'm starting to get a little hot under the collar now. They apparently knew all this when they made the conscious decision to remove the below 20Hz data and then change the frequency specs for the second batch of UMIKs... so it was all a smoke screen to hide a botched manufacturing run that they knew about at the time yet made the decision to still ship them out to customers anyway.


----------



## rajacat

My serial# is 7000220 and the sens factor is -24.158. Does this mean that I'm one of the unlucky ones? I just became aware that there was an issue, having the UMIK1 for over a month before I just downloaded the calibration files and just started to read this forum. Now what? I'm not that hip to all the technical issues. I really don't want to get involved in the tall weeds, I just want to have basic functionality without having to become an expert.


----------



## monomer

rajacat said:


> My serial# is 7000220 and the sens factor is -24.158. Does this mean that I'm one of the unlucky ones? I just became aware that there was an issue, having the UMIK1 for over a month before I just downloaded the calibration files and just started to read this forum. Now what? I'm not that hip to all the technical issues. I really don't want to get involved in the tall weeds, I just want to have basic functionality without having to become an expert.


Yes, you have a second batch UMIK. If you don't care about below 20Hz response then I think you should be fine using it with the current file for most stuff, however I'd suggest you might be happier if you reduced your sensitivity factor down to at least -18 and all those numbers after the decimal point is way overkill considering the factor is a bogus value anyway.


----------



## rmalak

monomer said:


> I'm relatively sure your mic is from the third batch with the revised board, what they are calling Rev C. I just looked up your UMIK serial #0634 and its on the main calibration file download page and goes down to 10Hz... those of us with a second batch UMIK have our files stop at 20Hz, we have to go to another special download page to get our 10Hz file... so I'm pretty sure yours is a Rev C and if that's the case then you've got nothing to worry about as yours will not need the board replacement.
> 
> Please show us the two calibration files (miniDSP and the CSL) when you get your mic back from CSL... I'm very curious to see what the two files look like, especially below 20Hz. I may end up having to do the same, we'll see.


Will do monomer. That's good to hear.


----------



## AudiocRaver

monomer said:


> Also a reworked board is being prepared for owners of the second batch UMIKs that will be a solder-in replacement for those of us with DIY skills and they will probably offer to do it for those who are non-DIYers.


A note of wariness on my part when I read this. It could be quite easy, true, and I hope for all concerned that it will be. I have been inside a tube-construction mic before, and consider myself fairly good at the electronic and mechanical side of projects like that, and I could never get it back together satisfactorily. It would be good to see step-by-step photos and tool requirements before commiting to do that job oneself. It would be a shame to have a few "now it doesn't work AT ALL" cases come out of this.


----------



## rmalak

AudiocRaver said:


> A note of wariness on my part when I read this. It could be quite easy, true, and I hope for all concerned that it will be. I have been inside a tube-construction mic before, and consider myself fairly good at the electronic and mechanical side of projects like that, and I could never get it back together satisfactorily. It would be good to see step-by-step photos and tool requirements before commiting to do that job oneself. It would be a shame to have a few "now it doesn't work AT ALL" cases come out of this.


From reading on the MiniDSP forums it sounds like they are planing to either have a new board available or a return and exchange deal for those affected by a faulty board.


----------



## Phillips

rajacat said:


> My serial# is 7000220 and the sens factor is -24.158. Does this mean that I'm one of the unlucky ones? I just became aware that there was an issue, having the UMIK1 for over a month before I just downloaded the calibration files and just started to read this forum. Now what? I'm not that hip to all the technical issues. I really don't want to get involved in the tall weeds, I just want to have basic functionality without having to become an expert.



My opinion is that you have paid for a calibrated microphone (accurate) so you should get that.


----------



## Phillips

rmalak said:


> From reading on the MiniDSP forums it sounds like they are planing to either have a new board available or a return and exchange deal for those affected by a faulty board.



Matter of interest would the exchange be totally no charge including freight?

Understanding both sides, economics and customer service this should of happened awhile ago.
For ongoing business it's still is a concern that most people are totally unaware of this problem (# of mics vs complaints).


----------



## rajacat

monomer said:


> Yes, you have a second batch UMIK. If you don't care about below 20Hz response then I think you should be fine using it with the current file for most stuff, however I'd suggest you might be happier if you reduced your sensitivity factor down to at least -18 and all those numbers after the decimal point is way overkill considering the factor is a bogus value anyway.


Thanks for the reply.

How do I reduce the sensitivity factor down to -18?


----------



## monomer

AudiocRaver said:


> A note of wariness on my part when I read this. It could be quite easy, true, and I hope for all concerned that it will be. I have been inside a tube-construction mic before, and consider myself fairly good at the electronic and mechanical side of projects like that, and I could never get it back together satisfactorily. It would be good to see step-by-step photos and tool requirements before commiting to do that job oneself. It would be a shame to have a few "now it doesn't work AT ALL" cases come out of this.


I hear ya... there are currently a couple of guys that have soldered in big old radial capacitors onto these boards and I was wondering how the they got it all back together. There is also a resistor mod that's the DevTeam has suggested and I'm told the SMDs are 0603... awhile back I replace a couple 0805 resistors on an amp board and that's my limit. As far as doing modding individual components on a board, that's a bit too small for me but to replace a whole board? how hard can that be really? I'm thinking its just soldering a couple wires right? and the physical board should be the same so it 'should' just slip back into the housing. I've never done this before but I'm imagining most anyone with a soldering iron should be capable. DevTeam mention getting some pictures and instruction posted on doing the mod. They've also hinted twice now that they will do the work for anyone who isn't a DIY kinda guy... I'm going to assume that they will pick up the tab for shipping BOTH ways, though that hasn't been mentioned. Not cheap to ship to Hong Kong, not to mention the lengthy time getting through customs... I could see it taking weeks to get a mic back unless its through Speed Post which is quite expensive. It would be better if they set up some sort of exchange system. Of course this is all just pre-mature speculation as they've yet to even get these revised boards manufactured for us and who knows how long that will be. They also promised to notify all second batch UMIK owners by email when this does happen... that will be a first (I mean the part about emailing UMIK owners informing them of anything that's been going on).


----------



## rajacat

Phillips said:


> Matter of interest would the exchange be totally no charge including freight?
> 
> Understanding both sides, economics and customer service this should of happened awhile ago.
> For ongoing business it's still is a concern that most people are totally unaware of this problem (# of mics vs complaints).


It would be great if they could just issue a new calibration file that you could download but since each mic is unique how would they do that?

Otherwise I'd just soon send my mic back and be sent a new one that works right.


----------



## monomer

rajacat said:


> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> How do I reduce the sensitivity factor down to -18?


Just open up the file in any text editor, like Notepad for instance and change the number... then save the file and that's it.


----------



## monomer

rajacat said:


> It would be great if they could just issue a new calibration file that you could download but since each mic is unique how would they do that?
> 
> Otherwise I'd just soon send my mic back and be sent a new one that works right.


The mic manufacturer has the 'raw' calibration data from the factory floor test bed... a calibration file is then generated from this using a script that uses a reference mic so theoretically they don't need to measure your mic again to correct errors in the script. Their claim is that the reference mic was improperly measured and they seem confident that they can produce a corrected file by revising the script. Supposedly these revised boards shouldn't affect the measured frequency calibration data but all this remains to be seen. At this point I don't feel confident about anything they are saying... they've disappointed me too many times already. They've shown in the past that they are not willing to share all pertinent information and will keep quiet about some things they are doing. I'm just really bothered by the fact that the third batch UMIKs have reasonable calibration files and yet the second batch UMIKs do not... I'm certain they used the same script to generate the 10Hz calibration files for both batches of UMIKs and yet they end up vastly different... there is something we are NOT being told about those revised boards and that bugs me. 

This stuff just leaves me weary, why can't they make it simple?

I'd like to just send them back my UMIK and have them cross ship me a third batch UMIK so I don't have to wait forever and wonder if they sent it back to the factory to be remeasured or not... then they can rework and recalibrate that one and sell as fourth batch UMIK to some future customer.


----------



## AudiocRaver

monomer said:


> I hear ya... there are currently a couple of guys that have soldered in big old radial capacitors onto these boards and I was wondering how the they got it all back together. There is also a resistor mod that's the DevTeam has suggested and I'm told the SMDs are 0603... awhile back I replace a couple 0805 resistors on an amp board and that's my limit. As far as doing modding individual components on a board, that's a bit too small for me but to replace a whole board? how hard can that be really? I'm thinking its just soldering a couple wires right? and the physical board should be the same so it 'should' just slip back into the housing. I've never done this before but I'm imagining most anyone with a soldering iron should be capable. DevTeam mention getting some pictures and instruction posted on doing the mod. They've also hinted twice now that they will do the work for anyone who isn't a DIY kinda guy...


Here is what I am trying to visualize. The mic capsule has a pair of wires, probably twisted, going to the circuit board. That twisted pair has to be long enough to be stretched out so the circuit board can be pulled out all the way so the connection point for that pair of wires is exposed, so they can be unsoldered and resoldered to the new board. All this without removing the mic capsule which is - glued? pressed? screwed? - into place, and hopefully without accidentally breaking one of the connections at the capsule, which would be impossible to get at to repair without removing the capsule and the tiny screen over it, if it even can be done safely and without special tooling, and then re-screwing/gluing/pressing it into place (plus the screen, however it is retained). Then you have the extra wire to get pushed back into the tube - how was it originally arranged at factory assembly, folded back and forth? stretched along the circuit board? nicely coiled? is it even possible to duplicate the original arrangement/positioning of the wire without duplicating the entire assembly process? does it matter? is any kind of capacitive coupling a concern, with possible affect on high-frequency response if that extra wire positioning is done "poorly," whatever that may be? Then the extra wire is pushed back into the tube by the new circuit board as it is re-inserted. Is there anything it might catch on, causing it to be pulled out of proper position/pushed into a bad position/break a connection/get pinched and broken/get pinched and have conductor exposed to short against the outer tube/get pinched and jam the circuit board so it cannot be inserted or removed without damage? Or what if the extra wire gets balled up wrong and holds the board from sliding in all the way easily, is it OK to push a little? how hard?..... I could go on.

All this and when the DIY repairer is done, she/he expects to have a precision instrument that meets factory specs and is reliable and performs within a fraction of a dB of the curve that was measured at the factory.

Granted, my one experience opening a tubular-construction condenser mic was 99% negative, and I was a bit obsessive about getting it back together _just right_ (which never happened, it is still in pieces), and maybe the UMIK-1 design will be easy to work with, but based on my experience and having a bit of an idea how mics like that are constructed... I would not sign up to do that work without knowing a lot of detail about how it should go and what it should look like when done.

I am not trying to be an alarmist, only a realist about how tricky the job could be. I hate to think of my HTS mates hollering about nightmare repair jobs &/or unsatisfactory results.


----------



## boxerdog

I am also waiting for a final solution from DSP having a second gen UMIC ser 387 but i have a question about sensitivity between the 20 db and the new 10 db calibration file. They both look exactly the same on measurement but are 5 db apart in sensitivity, one showing sensitivity factor -24.2721 for 10 hz the other -21.1 for the 20 hz file. Which measurement is correct.

Thanks for any help 
New to rew trying to learn.


----------



## Phillips

AudiocRaver said:


> Here is what I am trying to visualize. The mic capsule has a pair of wires, probably twisted, going to the circuit board. That twisted pair has to be long enough to be stretched out so the circuit board can be pulled out all the way so the connection point for that pair of wires is exposed, so they can be unsoldered and resoldered to the new board. All this without removing the mic capsule which is - glued? pressed? screwed? - into place, and hopefully without accidentally breaking one of the connections at the capsule, which would be impossible to get at to repair without removing the capsule and the tiny screen over it, if it even can be done safely and without special tooling, and then re-screwing/gluing/pressing it into place (plus the screen, however it is retained). Then you have the extra wire to get pushed back into the tube - how was it originally arranged at factory assembly, folded back and forth? stretched along the circuit board? nicely coiled? is it even possible to duplicate the original arrangement/positioning of the wire without duplicating the entire assembly process? does it matter? is any kind of capacitive coupling a concern, with possible affect on high-frequency response if that extra wire positioning is done "poorly," whatever that may be? Then the extra wire is pushed back into the tube by the new circuit board as it is re-inserted. Is there anything it might catch on, causing it to be pulled out of proper position/pushed into a bad position/break a connection/get pinched and broken/get pinched and have conductor exposed to short against the outer tube/get pinched and jam the circuit board so it cannot be inserted or removed without damage? Or what if the extra wire gets balled up wrong and holds the board from sliding in all the way easily, is it OK to push a little? how hard?..... I could go on.
> 
> All this and when the DIY repairer is done, she/he expects to have a precision instrument that meets factory specs and is reliable and performs within a fraction of a dB of the curve that was measured at the factory.
> 
> Granted, my one experience opening a tubular-construction condenser mic was 99% negative, and I was a bit obsessive about getting it back together _just right_ (which never happened, it is still in pieces), and maybe the UMIK-1 design will be easy to work with, but based on my experience and having a bit of an idea how mics like that are constructed... I would not sign up to do that work without knowing a lot of detail about how it should go and what it should look like when done.
> 
> I am not trying to be an alarmist, only a realist about how tricky the job could be. I hate to think of my HTS mates hollering about nightmare repair jobs &/or unsatisfactory results.




Exactly

What if the DIY ends up wrecking etc the mic does the DIY get a refund or new mic?

Wouldn't it be in the interest of DSP to admit there faults and just replace the mics concerned?

Economics would say sending a new mic to the owners better than sending the old ones back to get repaired then freight (there and back). Their cost price would determine this.


----------



## fuzz092888

At what number does batch 2 start? I have one that is definitely batch 1, but I'm not sure if my other one is batch 2. 

Today I did a little experiment with my batch 1 mic and compared the response with the original cal file against the newer cal file. The two plots look nearly identical, which makes me feel pretty good about all the measurements I've taken with the old cal file.


----------



## monomer

fuzz092888 said:


> At what number does batch 2 start? I have one that is definitely batch 1, but I'm not sure if my other one is batch 2.
> 
> Today I did a little experiment with my batch 1 mic and compared the response with the original cal file against the newer cal file. The two plots look nearly identical, which makes me feel pretty good about all the measurements I've taken with the old cal file.


First batch UMIKs end at the serial #188 and second batch UMIKs are serial #190-539... there is no serial #189 :huh: appears third batch is serial #540-??? 

I suspect the biggest difference you'll find between files in the first batch is below 20Hz response. With the second batch it is any thing below 990Hz and basically gets worse the lower you measure but there are other issues with these UMIKs beyond just the crazy calibration file.


----------



## fuzz092888

monomer said:


> First batch UMIKs end at the serial #188 and second batch UMIKs are serial #190-539... there is no serial #189 :huh: appears third batch is serial #540-???
> 
> I suspect the biggest difference you'll find between files in the first batch is below 20Hz response. With the second batch it is any thing below 990Hz and basically gets worse the lower you measure.


I've only tested one of the two I have so far, although it appears both are from batch one. From what I'm looking at there is only a slight difference in the lower octaves. The old cal file seems to bring the response down a bit.


----------



## monomer

There must be some confusion here... I'm not sure which two files you are referring to. Your old file should have gone down to 5Hz, whereas the new file that replaced it only goes down to 20Hz. Both files you've plotted above appear to go down to 10Hz. What's the serial numbers on your UMIKs?

The second batch UMIKs have a wicked climb to like 4dBs or so above the older calibration and then plummets to absurd levels by 10Hz... where the old files just ended at 20Hz. Its at the point now where even if they suddenly decided to change the calibration files this time to something that looked reasonable I couldn't bring myself to trust it wasn't just some shenanigans. If they could have generated a good file honestly don't you think they would have done so by now?... after all they did it for the third batch UMIKs, so why not with the second batch using the same script. I think these second batch UMIKs need to have the reworked board assembled into the mic housing first and THEN measured on the factory floor (same rig as the third batch UMIKs)... until that happens I won't believe any new files that just magically turn up with yet another explanation of how its fixed. I paid for my UMIK back in January and so that make it now 2 and half months and three calibration files and numerous postings later and still I have not gotten what was being promised back when I paid for it. Yet they have the nerve to make and be shipping out third batch UMIKs without mentioning to us. By doing a serial # count there are 350 of us second batch UMIK owners who are getting taken advantage of... I can't believe there isn't more outrage being shown.... what? is it cognitive dissonance?


----------



## fuzz092888

This was done with a first batch UMIK, serial number 024. The green line is with the original cal file ending at 4.6hz and the yellow or gold line is with the newer cal file which ends at 20.3 I believe.

I haven't tested the old cal file vs new cal file on my other UMIK, serial number 145 yet.

The above measurement was of a subwoofer, 1m away, no smoothing.


----------



## watson b

monomer said:


> First batch UMIKs end at the serial #188 and second batch UMIKs are serial #190-539... there is no serial #189 :huh: appears third batch is serial #540-???


They must have grabbed #189 from the top of the stack as the "reference mic".  I'm certainly glad I went with the UMM-6 from CSL


----------



## Phillips

_



I paid for my UMIK back in January and so that make it now 2 and half months and three calibration files and numerous postings later and still I have not gotten what was being promised back when I paid for it. Yet they have the nerve to make and be shipping out third batch UMIKs without mentioning to us.

Click to expand...

_It has been 2.5 months, so why aren't they sending the third batch to replace the problem second batch mics? Didn't you ask this from them?

I see that Herb has received several UMIKs, saw on a thread.
So some people have sent and known of the problems which is good news.


----------



## minidsp

Dear All,

As mentioned above in my last email few weeks ago, I very rarely go on forums due to time constraints. Sonnie just mentioned that I should follow up what's going on here so just had a quick look today. The following announcement is actually a post which has been in preparation for some quite some time now (see the length..) It summarizes issues discovered over time and the best way to deal with them if you're affected. Hoping this answers most of your questions. 
http://www.minidsp.com/forum/18-umik-questions/8868-umik-1-update

As a general note, please consider miniDSP forum as a the official channel for communicating with us. Our team receives a lot of daily request (emails/forums)and we're happy to answer all of them. However we're unfortunately unable to also allocate resources for all forums. 

So if you have a question/concern, feel free to send it our way as our team is happy to help clarify potential misunderstandings/misinterpretations. 

Best Regards
Tony


----------



## Birdie

//Birdie


----------



## monomer

fuzz092888 said:


> This was done with a first batch UMIK, serial number 024. The green line is with the original cal file ending at 4.6hz and the yellow or gold line is with the newer cal file which ends at 20.3 I believe.
> 
> I haven't tested the old cal file vs new cal file on my other UMIK, serial number 145 yet.
> 
> The above measurement was of a subwoofer, 1m away, no smoothing.


Ah yes, I get it now. I guess I wasn't paying close enough attention. 

I've really been extremely busy this week and so haven't had time to post much.

Choice in scaling can make a big difference in the appearance of things on a graph so one needs to concentrate on the actual numbers when viewing graphs. Most REW graphs tend to use a 45dB to 105dB scale covering a 60dB span... just makes it a little easier to decipher the differences. Looking up your current file for #700-0024 it would appear your UMIK is down 4dB at 20Hz and will default to 0dB for anything below 20Hz... since I don't have access to your old file I'll have to use the graph to ascertain those values (however you obviously still have the old file). From your graph it would appear it was about -3 down at 10Hz since it can clearly be seen that your new file is 3dB above the old file. If you look at the CSL composite (which only displays to 20Hz) you'll see the majority of those mics being -3 to -4dB down at 20Hz... these are most common values for the ECM8000 on that composite graph. Now if one is to go by the example calibration file on the CSL website and assume they selected a 'typical' ECM8000 response to use as their example then at 10Hz down -6 to -7dB would be quite normal. That would be 3dB down from your old calibration file and 6 to 7 dB down from the new calibration file. But the difference grows exponentially if you now go down to 5Hz... the first batch UMIK composite show the responses get no worse while the CSL has response dropping to around -13dB down at 5Hz, so... Which seems more reasonable to you? I tend to believe the CSL calibration trend which would make a 10dB difference from your old calibration file (if I go by the UMIK composite graph) and 13dB difference from your new calibration file at 5Hz which is defaulted (@0dB).

Realistically I'm guessing most of us do not have subs with 'useable' SPL available at 5Hz... more likely 10Hz is enough and for many of us 15Hz would suffice. So looking at your graph there is a 3 dB (possibly 4 dB) difference between your old and new calibration files and a 6 or 7dB difference between CSL sample file and your new file. Consider this... to get a 3dB increase you'll need a 10X increase in power... the difference between 100-watts and 1000-watts... or the addition of another identical sub. When one does such upgrades, it is noticeable... however that's now your "slop factor" between your old and new files. Now consider twice that to 6dBs if you believe the CSL sample is a typical, more believable calibration file for those Panasonic capsules.

I feel these UMIKs calibration files are pretty accurate for above 20Hz system measurement work but if you are interested in below 20Hz, because of the way these capsules appear to drop off below 30Hz, in my opinion, it is not trustworthy at all for below 20Hz measurements. With the second batch UMIK files, the new files are obviously bogus but looking at the differences between first batch new vs old files I can't tell you which would be the more accurate above 20Hz and that's the problem right now. Which do you trust? Can you really trust either of them? I don't know. If you are satisfied they are similar enough for your purposes then problem solved... take your pick and go with it.


----------



## monomer

watson b said:


> They must have grabbed #189 from the top of the stack as the "reference mic".  I'm certainly glad I went with the UMM-6 from CSL


Yes, I believe you are right... once you pointed it out I can see how that really makes sense. Unfortunately that "Golden" mic was flawed according to the DevTeam explanation of what went wrong... sigh.


----------



## monomer

Phillips said:


> It has been 2.5 months, so why aren't they sending the third batch to replace the problem second batch mics? Didn't you ask this from them?...


I've been trying to give them the benefit of the doubt all along and taking their word about earnest efforts being made to fix all the defects because I really wanted this UMIK to be a good purchase but after seeing that they'd been shipping third batch UMIKs with reasonable calibration files and revised sensitivity and no 1kHz spikes for a couple weeks and had yet to tell us second batch UMIK owners there was a fix, that just burned me and pushed me over the edge. I PMed them with an ultimatum back on Sunday. I demanded an exchange for a third batch UMIK or I'd start "second batch UMIK" threads on every audio forum I belong to, outlining all the issues concerning these UMIKs and what has transpired... and then I put a deadline on this 'threat' of Thursday (Wednesday Hong Kong time). Two days later (Tuesday) they respond with their current offer to accept returned UMIKs from the first two batches for a FULL refund. (This should also put minidsp's posting above into perspective, I'm referring to the part about their forum being the only "official channel for communication".)

As far as I'm concerned that is an acceptable offer and the honorable thing to do... for that I will applaud them. I actually would have accepted an exchange for a bonafided third batch UMIK. I realize I could still do that by returning my second batch UMIK for a full refund and then ordering another UMIK ...*EXCEPT* that I'm sure they will take these second batch UMIKs and replace the board at their facility, give them a new serial # and then resell them again without an expensive trip back to the factory for recalibration... I'm just afraid they will not send them back to the factory floor test rig to be recalibrate as a new completed assembly and thus the files will still be untrustworthy however with a new serial # no one would be the wiser. I do notice there has already been a few responses over there seeking an exchange to a third batch and I would assume they are getting many more emails in privately inquiring about doing the same thing. Personally I would be leery of any UMIK purchase once those older batch UMIKs begin flowing back into their facilities... it becomes a craps-shoot at that point as to which batch UMIK and file you'll actually be receiving. Also they have stated that all calibration will only go to 20Hz so I assume that will mean all files will get truncated to 20Hz. For those of us that are not willing to accept results that could be off by 6dBs or more below 20Hz, these UMIKs would have to then be professionally calibrated which would add another $60 or so to the cost.

In the end, I believe the best I can do at this point is to just return my UMIK for full refund and then purchase a UMM-6 (with 5Hz professional calibration file) from CSL... in hind sight, its what I should have done 2-1/2 months ago and I could have avoided all the drama, inconvenience and wasted time. This has been a very frustrating experience to say the least.


----------



## dRwOOD73

monomer said:


> purchase a UMM-6 (with 5Hz professional calibration file) from CSL...


I've been laying in the weeds monitoring how this would get resolved and with all the returns that would logically be going back and thus creating unidentified "refurb" mics in the not too distant future.. I think this lends itself for an easy decision - unfortunately, I think of those customers completely unaware of this situation... thanks for all your efforts and staying on top of it ~ it has been greatly appreciated.


----------



## Mattcc22

I have a first batch Mic and while I know its probably better than the second batch I think I'm going to return it also and go with the CSL umm-6. They just can't seem to give any straight answers over there. I do love my miniDSP though!


----------



## AudiocRaver

I also applaud MiniDSP for "manning up" to their difficulties and accepting returns of the older UMIK-1 mics for full refund, as stated in the update on their forum. It is the right move, and a good start to restoring overall confidence in the brand.

Edit: The following post answers quite clearly any question about MiniDSP's intentions to dispose of the returned mics and not refurbish them. MiniDSP is doing all the right things to correct the UMIK-1 situation.


----------



## minidsp

@ monomer,

I appreciate that you're upset and you've been a bit of a "voice" of this thread, however there are some wordings and some misinterpretations that you're making on our company that I'd like to point out for the sake of communicating with the HTshack community. I've been blamed by some of you to not respond to this thread and being silent. Truth is much simpler, I don't have much time for forum readings these days and my team really uses the miniDSP forum as a way to communicate for all issues. If there is some issues/questions you'd like to raise, easiest is to contact miniDSP directly. We're more than happy to answer all inquiries as we've done since the company's inception. Thanks for your understanding. 

1) The talks of product recalls have been made for quite a while. People in the know our board of advisors (including John @ REW), management team and the microphone supplier can tell you as much. For you to imply that we only responded to your threat is a bit of an overestimation I guess... It took long for a simple reason, because we were trying to see if we could work something out with our supplier. That's really ALL there is to read here I'm afraid. 

2) We proposed complete refund, including all shipping cost. In other words, this story will not cost you a cent. I'm really not sure what else at this point we can do to help? Did you send you request for a refund yet? Your previous email mentioned that you wanted a new mic instead... 

3) The statement that you're making that we're "refurbishing" microphone is so far of that it's quite offensive to our standards. For the past 4 years that this startup operates, we haven't shipped a SINGLE product that is refurbished. Not One. You're more than welcome to come for a visit if you'd like to see by yourself . The ONLY reason why we're asking the microphone body to be returned (in a padded envelope if you read the thread correctly so very much prone to damage in other words) is because we want the mics to not end up being resold in the field. I don't see how that's not standard practice for any manufacturers to ask a product to be returned? That's ALL there is to read here once again. Microphones will be trashed when returned as we don't wan't to pay for additional cost. Little to know for most of you is that this product runs with very low margins. We really did it to help the miniDSP and REW community get an affordable microphone. Anybody with a bit of math, electronic and manufacturing knowledge can do the math on the tiny profit we did here. Doing a "refurb" doesn't even make sense. 

As always, we're happy to answer any questions you have but I'd appreciate if you would first try to please not misinterpret some facts and such as "UMIK-1 will refurbished". We're happy to tell you why that will not be the case, just ask..It's a bit counter-intuitive to get ask by HTshack moderators to get involved in this thread, yet when we read the comments and misinterpretations, it's hard to keep our cool... :unbelievable:

That's all for today, wishing you all a good week end, 

Best Regards
Tony 
MD @ miniDSP


----------



## monomer

This matter has been settled for the most part with your offer of a full refund. I have not 'applied' for one just yet only because I've been quite busy this week. I teach for a living and we are winding up the semester, that is a time of increased work load for me. Suffice it to say I will send in my request this weekend but will not be able to actually go to the post office until Thursday next week. I am pleased you are offering a full refund to your customers as I believe it is the right thing to do. I had no idea you were planning this for a while now since you don't tell us these things, they just spring up seemingly out of nowhere. I believe it was mere coincidence that just so happened to follow my terse email to you... but you should be able to understand from my perspective of how this all looked. What you don't seem to grasp is the position you place your customers in when you don't respond regularly to emails and postings in your own help forums. What else are we to do? You have our money, there are major issues with the product you sent to us... we waited patiently so long that any recourse of dispute through the credit card company or paypal has since expired... you've basically got us over a barrel. We are out the money and didn't get what we paid for and can't get anyone to respond... surely you can see how frustrating that is. All that's left at our disposal is to make some noise on the Internet. To find out that you've been shipping what seems to be properly working UMIKs (at least 100 of them so far) without addressing the defective ones we have been forced to hang on to doesn't sit well with me and I had to do something, thus I sent you that threatening email with a deadline and it just so happens that was exactly before you released the resolution options publicly. You can see how that looks don't you? and why I misinterpreted it to mean I forced your hand. My mistake as you apparently had already planned to do this. I apologize.

During this whole issue with these second batch UMIKs I chose to use postings both here and on your UMIK help forum to make you aware of the problems and in seeking answers... only three times have I resorted to direct emails. The first email was only paritally answered (having to do with below 20Hz response) the other question about a return wasn't address by you at all. The second email went unanswered. The final email, the one I sent Sunday, I got a reply directing me to your just released announcement of a refund option. And for that I thank you.

We are all busy people and have jobs to do but in your case answering your customers in a timely fashion IS your job... or I think at least it should be viewed as such. If you see it the same way, then there really are no excuses... and failing to do so can lead to misunderstandings... so who is to blame if that turns out to be the case? your customers?

I specifically added a section entitled "My Thoughts" to that posting over on your help forum seeking to find out if it was your intention to 'recycle' the UMIKs you receive... do you remember your response? did you deny it then? did you make your intentions for those UMIKs known? This is what I'm talking about... only after the fact, when you are forced into a corner do you offer up information that your customers would like to know and need in order to make decisions. I apologize since recycling those UMIKs was apparently not your intention after all but I did make the effort to find out first. So what you are saying is first and second batch customers could get a full refund on their returned UMIKs and then place an order for another UMIK and receive a properly calibrated third batch UMIK guaranteed? If so, then why didn't you simply offer to cross-ship an exchange in the first place? ...remember? this was what I asked for. Its very confusing... so if I make statements that you don't agree with then you need to respond with a correction when I ask the question otherwise what else am I to think?

I don't wish for this discourse to go on any further as it can only harm any working relationships you might have with sponsors etc and that was never my intention... I only wanted a properly calibrated and working UMIK within a reasonable amount of time. I'm very sorry it had to turn into all of this unpleasantness and the kicker is I'll never know if I was responsible for speeding up the process or not. The only thing any of us have to go by is what you tell us... when you decide to tell us that is. If you wish to continue this conversation, let's agree to do it through the PM system or through email... you've got my address. Now that there is a resolution recourse we should be able to put this all behind and move forward.


----------



## minidsp

Greg,

I guess that it seems like we won't be able to answer all your needs no matter how we try. We're sorry about this... :sad:

Sometimes we don't answer to all details raised in a thread, that's very possible.... Some of the people answering our forum just don't know how we plan to manage the company, future of product recall. My post above just wanted to clarify that we never planned to recycle any boards and never made that assumption. That's all there is to read as we're not being "cornered" and changing our mind... Not sure how you're thinking we're that evil! :devil: I can treat you for a beer at a next tradeshow if you'd like to see that we're not out to get you!! 

Anyway, as you mention, I indeed believe that it's best that we close the issue. Email us when you get a chance and we'll proceed to the complete refund as promised. 

Have a good week end, 

Tony


----------



## Phillips

> I appreciate that you're upset and you've been a bit of a "voice" of this thread, however there are some wordings and some misinterpretations that you're making on our company that I'd like to point out for the sake of communicating with the HTshack community. I've been blamed by some of you to not respond to this thread and being silent. Truth is much simpler, I don't have much time for forum readings these days and my team really uses the miniDSP forum as a way to communicate for all issues. If there is some issues/questions you'd like to raise, easiest is to contact miniDSP directly. We're more than happy to answer all inquiries as we've done since the company's inception. Thanks for your understanding.


As a business probally would make sense to make time and understand/learn customer/service needs?


----------



## rajacat

I just received my refund for the UMIK-1. I'm VERY satisfied with the customer support for the recall and will probably do business with this company in the future.


----------



## monomer

rajacat said:


> I just received my refund for the UMIK-1. I'm VERY satisfied with the customer support for the recall and will probably do business with this company in the future.


Okay, so how did you get it over to them? I just got back from our local post office. They said it would cost $25 to ship it by registered mail!!! $12.50 to ship it to Hong Kong from Michigan and ANOTHER $12.50 to send it registered!!! Then they also tell me it can't be send by registered mail in a padded envelope, must be in a cardboard box!! this apparently is USPS rules on sending registered packages. Since miniDSP is asking for it to be send registered and in a padded envelope and the shipping cost to be less than $20, I'm stymied. How were you able to meet their requirements for the return? What's the secret?


----------



## monomer

Okay, NOW I think I know what the deal is...

This is from their website: 
c) In an effort to prevent a faulty microphone to stay in the field, the old microphone body (not accessories) must be shipped back to us before the refund is processed. It must be send via standard *registered* airmail (e.g. USPS, AirMail) in a padded envelope. You should take a picture of the receipt for the postage cost (used for refund). In some countries, cost of shipping will not make sense (e.g. higher than 20USD). We ask you to contact us in that case. 

This is from their email:
STEP2: Ship the microphone back to us using standard AirMail. In a padded enveloppe, using the local post (E.g. USPS), the shipment cost should be cost effective knowing that the microphone is less than 200gm weight. If the cost is higher than 20USD, please get in touch with us since we it will not make financial sense to get the microphone back. We will provide steps to discard the microphone.


Upon closer inspection I now notice there's been a change from what's on the website and what's in the email they sent me... I bolded the difference. Apparently they have dropped the requirement of sending it as a registered package. So... I'm off on another trip back to the post office... wish me luck.


----------



## rajacat

Yes, it's not necessary to send it registered airmail. It's funny but they credited my paypal account just a day after I sent it back. I emailed them a photo of the shipping receipt and followed their direction completely. I was very surprised to get my refund before the package could have been delivered. The shipping charge was about $15.


----------



## monomer

rajacat said:


> Yes, it's not necessary to send it registered airmail. It's funny but they credited my paypal account just a day after I sent it back. I emailed them a photo of the shipping receipt and followed their direction completely. I was very surprised to get my refund before the package could have been delivered. The shipping charge was about $15.


Thanks for the feedback. I just got back from the Post Office... its now in the mail, on its way to Hong Kong. The desk clerk *estimated* it would take 6-10 days to get there but you know the Post Office, there are no guarantees. Cost was $1.49 for the padded envelope and $12.75 for the shipping, I stuck copies of the receipts in the envelope with the UMIK and just now sent them an email with the attached scanned copies of the receipts... it sounds redundant but its what they are requesting... I will post back here the moment I get confirmation of a refund into my PayPal account.


----------



## Nitrofreakman

That's sounds like good service to me..what we as consumers have to understand is that there is a lot of effort going on in the background that we are completely unaware of, and many companies simply don't have the time of manpower to update us every step of the way..it's tougher than it looks from our perspective. 

I will likely send my mic back, and order a 3rd generation mic if that's a viable option..I haven't had time to email MiniDSP to find out, but it's on the list.


----------



## sub_crazy

I have one of the first generation UMIK-1's with the original calibration file and it to the best of my knowledge has worked OK. Are they asking for all the UMIK's back for a refund or only the second generation?


----------



## monomer

sub_crazy said:


> ...Are they asking for all the UMIK's back for a refund or only the second generation?


This is not a recall... they are not asking for returns of UMIKs. If you are satisfied with your UMIK's performance then do nothing. What they are offering is an option to return your UMIK for a refund if you are not satisfied with its performance... there is another option for those with a "noisy" UMIK, you can alternatively choose to receive an upgraded board that you simply solder in replacing the original board. This is for first batch and second batch UMIKs as third batch UMIKs already have the revised board design. Again this is NOT a recall, if you are satisfied with your UMIK then you do nothing. These measures were implemented to satisfy those of us who've had an issue.


----------



## sub_crazy

I have never measured my downstairs system which has a sub with variable tuning from 18hz to 35hz so I thought this would be a good place to check the accuracy of my UMIK-1. Turns out it does not make much of a difference at all, the UMIK is not measuring correctly down low, my SMS-1 is picking up the different tuning points though. Now I know that my friends Omni-mic was the one that was more accurate when we were comparing, I thought my UMIK-1 was because of the 5hz calibration.

I have went ahead and contacted MiniDSP for a return.......blahhhh


----------



## monomer

I've been made "whole" again... just been notified of a full refund back into my Paypal account. Thank you, miniDSP.

Note: I do own a miniDSP and love it.


----------



## Phillips

monomer i think that everyone on this thread has *you *to thank for this problem solving, communication from MiniDSP would have been non existent if not for you as far as i could see.


----------



## AudiocRaver

Indeed, thanks is in order to all who made contributions of their time and energy getting to a full understanding of the issues and communicating with MiniDSP. And appreciation to MiniDSP for going all out to be sure all UMIK-1 users are satisfied. Hopefully this ends up a happy ending (win-win) for all concerned.


----------



## rmalak

I forgot to add this after I received my UMIK from CSL but better late than never. Here are the two cal files overlaid. The dark line is CSL (0 degree narrow band) and the light one is Mini DSP.


----------



## Phillips

rmalak said:


> I forgot to add this after I received my UMIK from CSL but better late than never. Here are the two cal files overlaid. The dark line is CSL (0 degree narrow band) and the light one is Mini DSP.



Interesting

Good thing is you can load the CSL file into every measurement you have saved (when measuring with the UMIK), to get the up to date accurate measurement.


----------



## redsandvb

rmalak said:


> I forgot to add this after I received my UMIK from CSL but better late than never.


Wait, he's got them for sale already? Can't find them on the website. Or was that privately done?


----------



## sub_crazy

Big thanks to this thread and for everyone who helped on it. I would have never known my calibration file down to 5hz was off on my first gen Umik and just received my refund from MiniDSP.

That's really good customer service from them and they will continue to get my business in the future. 

A little off topic but has anyone used there OpenDRC products? I was particularly interested in the Analog version that has actual XLR inputs and outputs and comes as a more complete version than the normal MiniDSP balanced. Just looking for DSP control over my subs for an LT and such without the hassles of finding the right power supply and hooking up phoenix connectors.


----------



## rmalak

redsandvb said:


> Wait, he's got them for sale already? Can't find them on the website. Or was that privately done?


No this was privately done. I bought my UMIK from MiniDSP and then sent it to CSL.


----------



## redsandvb

Ahh, Ok. Thanks.
I'm hoping to be able to get one when they're available from them.


----------



## Anechoic

redsandvb said:


> Ahh, Ok. Thanks.
> I'm hoping to be able to get one when they're available from them.


I'm going to try my best to make this happen sooner rather than later, especially since I'm no longer selling the ECM8000.


----------



## redsandvb

Anechoic said:


> I'm going to try my best to make this happen sooner rather than later, especially since I'm no longer selling the ECM8000.


That'll be just Great! Hope I don't miss the announcement! :sn:


----------



## JonP

sub_crazy said:


> I have one of the first generation UMIK-1's with the original calibration file and it to the best of my knowledge has worked OK. Are they asking for all the UMIK's back for a refund or only the second generation?


I also have an earlier one (#95) and am not certain what the options are. Have an email in to miniDSP, but am going on vacation and probably won't easily get mail for a week...

I have a drastically different new cal file, compared to my old one, haven't had the time to check noise level for the noise problem. I'm wondering why I and others I've seen posted, have a large peak now around 10khz, where the old file is pretty flat up there. Had been getting the impression that this is just a low end issue. Bothers me that they're so different you'd think completely different mic's....

OTOH, our example of a CSL cal'ed mic, and a lot of other small capsule based ones, have that high end peak. So, it's likely real. Maybe. I really can't say... So can I trust the new cal? That's the problem. :scratch:

Let's see if the pic link works: Aha.. it does, but I need to up the pic size... You can always follow the link if you cant read it. Dark is original 5hz file from around January, lighter Blue is current file from a couple days ago...







[/URL] Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/IMG]


----------



## monomer

JonP said:


> ...am going on vacation and probably won't easily get mail for a week...


In that case you'd better hurry up and make up your mind on what you are going to do because there is a deadline on taking advantage of those options miniDSP is offering... its May 16th I believe... that's like next week.


----------



## uncola

Doh, I almost ordered a Umik-1, glad I saw this thread. Does anyone know when the third generation will be available to order?


----------



## Anechoic

Anechoic said:


> I'm going to try my best to make this happen sooner rather than later, especially since I'm no longer selling the ECM8000.


Okay, commitment time.

I'll open up orders on the site sometime on Monday here (page not active yet), prices to be determined, but will be in the ballpark of the UMM-6. $5 discount for HTS. I'll hopefully be able to start shipping early next week as well, and be up to speed by the end of the week.

FYI, I only have 24 mics right now, as I mentioned earlier, I only get what MiniDSP can spare for the moment.


----------



## rajacat

uncola said:


> Doh, I almost ordered a Umik-1, glad I saw this thread. Does anyone know when the third generation will be available to order?


+1

I've returned mine and got PP credited. I haven't given up on the UMIK-1 yet and will probably order the next generation if its well received by others. I won't be the guinea pig.


----------



## redsandvb

Anechoic said:


> Okay, commitment time.
> 
> I'll open up orders on the site sometime on Monday here (page not active yet), prices to be determined, but will be in the ballpark of the UMM-6. $5 discount for HTS. I'll hopefully be able to start shipping early next week as well, and be up to speed by the end of the week.
> 
> FYI, I only have 24 mics right now, as I mentioned earlier, I only get what MiniDSP can spare for the moment.


That's exciting news. I forgot to ask earlier, calibration will be same as for the UMM-6? 5Hz - 25kHz, etc., etc.?


----------



## snowmanick

Anechoic said:


> Okay, commitment time.
> 
> I'll open up orders on the site sometime on Monday here (page not active yet), prices to be determined, but will be in the ballpark of the UMM-6. $5 discount for HTS. I'll hopefully be able to start shipping early next week as well, and be up to speed by the end of the week.
> 
> FYI, I only have 24 mics right now, as I mentioned earlier, I only get what MiniDSP can spare for the moment.


Excellent!

Are you planning on keeping the sens info in the calibration file? Its not a game changer by any means, but it is nice to have (if accurate).


----------



## Mattcc22

Anechoic said:


> Okay, commitment time.
> 
> I'll open up orders on the site sometime on Monday here (page not active yet), prices to be determined, but will be in the ballpark of the UMM-6. $5 discount for HTS. I'll hopefully be able to start shipping early next week as well, and be up to speed by the end of the week.
> 
> FYI, I only have 24 mics right now, as I mentioned earlier, I only get what MiniDSP can spare for the moment.



Would you be able to tell us the serial number range of the ones you have so we can determine which batch they came from?


----------



## Anechoic

redsandvb said:


> That's exciting news. I forgot to ask earlier, calibration will be same as for the UMM-6? 5Hz - 25kHz, etc., etc.?


Yep. Basic+ level only thought, no sensitivity or polar measurements.



snowmanick said:


> Are you planning on keeping the sens info in the calibration file? Its not a game changer by any means, but it is nice to have (if accurate).


Short answer is "no." I'm not measuring sensitivity on my own because I'm still not convinced I can do it accurately (I get different results depending on OS, I'm not convinced I know what the Window control panel volume setting does, etc). With the phantom-powered ECM8000 and EMM-6, I can hook the mic to a known accurate sound level meter or voltmeter and determine the exact output voltage per input pressure and that gives me a canonical value I can trust. I don't have that option with USB mics and rather than delivering a number I'm not confident in, I'd rather not do it at all.

I could take the factory number and put it in the file, but I'm afraid that while it might work for REW, other programs that don't recognize that number might freak out and leave me to deal with support emails/phone calls. For that reason, I'm just going to punt. Sorry.



Mattcc22 said:


> Would you be able to tell us the serial number range of the ones you have so we can determine which batch they came from?


Looks like the serial numbers of the units I have are in the 700-05xx range. The rep said that this was a new revision that addressed the noise floor issue (I have not confirmed).


----------



## Mattcc22

Thanks for all the responses! I just got my refund and will try to grab one from you on Monday. 

I would say if you want the sensitivity data, just download the original minidsp file and cut and paste into the new file, trying to match up the frequency as much as possible.


----------



## Anechoic

FYI, it is now Monday on the east coast.


----------



## Mattcc22

Anechoic said:


> FYI, it is now Monday on the east coast.


Just ordered one. Thanks!


----------



## dRwOOD73

Just ordered one myself, thanks for providing this calibration service :clap:


----------



## jriola

Link is still not working. Am I missing something?


----------



## Anechoic

jriola said:


> Link is still not working. Am I missing something?


Try clearing your browser cache and reloading the page. I know it's working because this is the only place I've linked the page and I have a bunch of orders already (but only a few have left your HTS username, don't forget to leave it for your discount).


----------



## jriola

Ok. Couldn't get the link to work in HTS iOS app, but through the Internet browser it worked and I got one ordered. Thanks Anechoic.


----------



## Lonx

I've spent a little time getting around to this and was looking at the UMM-6.... but the UMIK looks like the go. Order placed & thank you for providing the additional calibration mate. Very much appreciated & can't wait to get system sorted again (moved from carpeted apartment to wooden floor house.... lol).


----------



## W3Rman

Anechoic said:


> Okay, commitment time.
> 
> I'll open up orders on the site sometime on Monday


:spend: ordered mine (UMIK-1 & CM-140) I just barely missed all the drama with these ... :hsd: ... thanks!


_"I want it louder, More power, I'm gonna rock ya till it strikes the hour"_


----------



## shepjk01

Ordered mine over the weekend it should be arriving today. I will report some results over the weekend.


----------



## proudx

*Best Output Option*

I just purchased a UMIC-1 microphone from the CSL link. I am looking for the most accurate way to measure response, do I need hdmi output or would analog rca out or spdif output from my soundcard work just as well?

I have a delta audiophile 24/96 soundcard with dual rca analog output and input jacks. It also can output coax spdif. 

Since, I have read that there is no way to calibrate soundcards when using usb mics I was leaning towrads purchasing a hdmi video card. So should I juist purchase a hdmi video card and use hdmi out or is it just as good to use the spdif or rca analog coax output on the audiophile?


Also, The microphone cable will be connected with a 32ft active usb extension cable from the pc.


----------



## vann_d

Got mine today from CSL! Did a couple measurements. The sensitivity thing is throwing me off a little. Factory cal file says -8.4 dB. CSL cal file does not include. Input signal is well below the output signal when setting levels. SPL cal was done with a RS meter and afterwards says max SPL is 105 dB. Mic is supposed to be good to 130 dB so I'm thinking I need to add the factory sensitivity to the cal file?


----------



## W3Rman

vann_d said:


> Got mine today from CSL!


 Did you receive an email for shipping and how many days did it take from the time you ordered? I just ask because it was said that supply was limited and wondering if I will get mine any time soon. 

Also, how about some screen shots of the calibration files to compare against. 

I understand that for now the Sensitivity data will not accompany the CSL cal. file due to issues with potential conflicts of other accoustic analysis software and some other details. So, SPL should just be calibrated as you did with your RS meter against REW's SPL software meter


----------



## Lonx

W3Rman said:


> Did you receive an email for shipping and how many days did it take from the time you ordered? I just ask because it was said that supply was limited and wondering if I will get mine any time soon.


Hi mate, mine was posted the day after I ordered (and I'm in Aus but having it delivered to CA). Estimated delivery is the 17th


----------



## W3Rman

Good to know ... thanks!


----------



## Anechoic

W3Rman said:


> Did you receive an email for shipping and how many days did it take from the time you ordered? I just ask because it was said that supply was limited and wondering if I will get mine any time soon.


I'm completely caught up on UMIK-1 orders (and almost caught up on EMM-6/Galaxy orders, I should get through my backlog by tomorrow). If you ordered one but haven't received an email from USPS with your tracking information, PM or email me and I'll send your tracking number. 

As for limited supplies, disregard that, the miniDSP rep informed me that they have enough stock built up to allow me to reorder.


----------



## Anechoic

vann_d said:


> Got mine today from CSL! Did a couple measurements. The sensitivity thing is throwing me off a little. Factory cal file says -8.4 dB. CSL cal file does not include. Input signal is well below the output signal when setting levels. SPL cal was done with a RS meter and afterwards says max SPL is 105 dB. Mic is supposed to be good to 130 dB so I'm thinking I need to add the factory sensitivity to the cal file?


According to miniDSP, newer mics have a default attenuation of -12 dB (that should show up when you select the microphone in the input device settings of REW or whatever program). If you are getting a max SPL of 105 dB, 105 dB + 8.4 dB (factory sensitivity) + 12 dB (default attenuation) gives 125.4 dB, which is pretty close to the 130 dB spec.


----------



## vann_d

W3Rman said:


> Did you receive an email for shipping and how many days did it take from the time you ordered? I just ask because it was said that supply was limited and wondering if I will get mine any time soon.
> 
> Also, how about some screen shots of the calibration files to compare against.
> 
> I understand that for now the Sensitivity data will not accompany the CSL cal. file due to issues with potential conflicts of other accoustic analysis software and some other details. So, SPL should just be calibrated as you did with your RS meter against REW's SPL software meter


Yes, but it seems to limit my measurement capabilities (SPL). I think I'm going to try and add the factory sensitivity cal to the CSL cal file. I can still verify with my RS meter.

Wait, maybe that SPL limit just has to do with clipping. It's been a while since I've done this. Need to play around a bit. 

Anyway, the notification I got was from USPS and it arrived two days later. I will try to post curves in a bit.


----------



## vann_d

Here is a graph comparing calibration files I received with my UMIK-1. Factory cal looks pretty good but would give you optimistic low frequency results compared to CSL's files and could be inaccurate up high depending on microphone orientation. Also to note is the factory cuts off at 10 Hz and 20 kHz compared to 5 Hz and 25 kHz for the CSL file.


----------



## CaseyH71

Ordered today! Thanks for your dedication to get these out Herb!

Casey


----------



## redsandvb

vann_d said:


> to add the factory sensitivity to the cal file?


Was wondering...In order to add the MiniDSP sensitivity number to the CSL cal file, do I just copy-n-paste the "Sens Factor =-#dB" line to the top? Do I need the quotes? And will it throw anything off?

Thanks


----------



## Phillips

redsandvb said:


> Was wondering...In order to add the MiniDSP sensitivity number to the CSL cal file, do I just copy-n-paste the "Sens Factor =-#dB" line to the top? Do I need the quotes? And will it throw anything off?
> 
> Thanks


Copy and paste what ever is in the Minidsp file into the top of the CSL file (first line).

All it does is adjust the SPL, to be close to absolute.

If you have a SPL meter you can double check.


----------



## redsandvb

Phillips said:


> Copy and paste what ever is in the Minidsp file into the top of the CSL file (first line).
> 
> All it does is adjust the SPL, to be close to absolute.
> 
> If you have a SPL meter you can double check.


Thanks, I suspected that would do it. Just wanted to be sure. :sn:


BTW, do you guys use the little foam windscreen that came with the mic?


----------



## Phillips

redsandvb said:


> Thanks, I suspected that would do it. Just wanted to be sure. :sn:
> 
> 
> BTW, do you guys use the little foam windscreen that came with the mic?



I don't for my other mic.

I would email or post Herb, depends if he used it when he calibrated it. I would doubt that he would off.


----------



## Anechoic

Phillips said:


> I don't for my other mic.
> 
> I would email or post Herb, depends if he used it when he calibrated it. I would doubt that he would off.


I don't use the windscreen when making the measurements. It basically makes a roughly 0.5 to 1 dB difference above 15 kHz or so:


----------



## redsandvb

Phillips said:


> I don't for my other mic.
> 
> I would email or post Herb, depends if he used it when he calibrated it. I would doubt that he would off.





Anechoic said:


> I don't use the windscreen when making the measurements. It basically makes a roughly 0.5 to 1 dB difference above 15 kHz or so:


Thank you for the info, good to know that.

Herb, thanks for the mic and your cal. service! :sn:


----------



## Phillips

Anechoic said:


> I don't use the windscreen when making the measurements. It basically makes a roughly 0.5 to 1 dB difference above 15 kHz or so:



The purpose of windscreen, other than protection?


----------



## Anechoic

Phillips said:


> The purpose of windscreen, other than protection?


Ostensibly to reduce turbulence-induced noise if the mic is used in windy conditions. However, it's so small I doubt it would offer any real protection (although I haven't tested it).


----------



## monomer

I kinda thought it was also to reduce breathing noises from humans that are speaking/singing directly into the mic... which is also turbulence related.


----------



## Anechoic

monomer said:


> I kinda thought it was also to reduce breathing noises from humans that are speaking/singing directly into the mic... which is also turbulence related.


For vocal mics (which the UMM-6/UMIK-1/EMM-6/ECM8000 are _definitely_ not) true, although again, the one that comes with these low-cost measurement mics are so small I doubt they would provide any benefit.


----------



## Mightywetfoot

I am really disappointed I ordered mine from miniDSP and not CSL ( was before they sold them). After my order was placed I contacted CSL and found out they were going to provide calibrated UMIK-1, what a bummer. It's not cost effective to send mine in for a calibration at $55. :no:


----------



## AudiocRaver

Phillips said:


> The purpose of windscreen, other than protection?


Protection is the only reason. The mic is certainly calibrated without windscreen in place. With a calibration mic, breath noise is not an issue, and wind noise is not an issue unless making speaker measurements outside to escape room effects.

I would leave it on, though, for a little extra protection from dust and gunk, and from me accidentally bumping or dropping it on a klutzy day. The minor rolloff above 10 KHz is annoying but of little actual consequence. My 2 cents worth.


----------



## Phillips

AudiocRaver said:


> Protection is the only reason. The mic is certainly calibrated without windscreen in place. With a calibration mic, breath noise is not an issue, and wind noise is not an issue unless making speaker measurements outside to escape room effects.
> 
> I would leave it on, though, for a little extra protection from dust and gunk, and from me accidentally bumping or dropping it on a klutzy day. The minor rolloff above 10 KHz is annoying but of little actual consequence. My 2 cents worth.


Agree

Probably a good idea would be to take measurements with on and off and see the difference with your individual mic and keep that in mind for future measurements.

Depending on measurement frequency targets e.g. 15 - 500hz use the windscreen vs 500 - 20.000hz remove the windscreen.


----------



## Phillips

Mightywetfoot said:


> I am really disappointed I ordered mine from miniDSP and not CSL ( was before they sold them). After my order was placed I contacted CSL and found out they were going to provide calibrated UMIK-1, what a bummer. It's not cost effective to send mine in for a calibration at $55. :no:


Depends what batch you have.

Maybe you can send back to MiniDSP if the deal hasn't expired?

If it has i would email them and explain you were not aware of the problem until now etc, plead your case carefully.
Worth a go.


----------



## Mightywetfoot

I don't feel right sending it back, it works fine. Maybe I'll see if I can Sweet talk CSL and see if they can work a deal if I have them calibrate my mic and C-140.


----------



## Phillips

Mightywetfoot said:


> I don't feel right sending it back, it works fine. Maybe I'll see if I can Sweet talk CSL and see if they can work a deal if I have them calibrate my mic and C-140.


I'm sure it works, but if it is calibration issue you could still try.

There might be other issues that should be fixed by MiniDSP.

Your first point of call should be MiniDSP, if you want to of course.


----------



## WongKN

Anechoic said:


> Okay, commitment time.
> 
> I'll open up orders on the site sometime on Monday here (page not active yet), prices to be determined, but will be in the ballpark of the UMM-6. $5 discount for HTS. I'll hopefully be able to start shipping early next week as well, and be up to speed by the end of the week.
> 
> FYI, I only have 24 mics right now, as I mentioned earlier, I only get what MiniDSP can spare for the moment.


Hi,
I have just made my order for the UMIK-1 but before I saw your post above. I don't recall any option for me to identify myself as a HTS member when I made the order (been a lurker for some time now). Anyway as I also paid in full just now, that means I missed out on the discount. It's OK, hope I will get my unit soon (the page says will ship out next week). Have been using the XTZ Room Analyzer and want a better measurement system so looking forward to getting the mike soon.

Best Regards,
WongKN


----------



## WongKN

Many thanks Anechoic for your PM and your prompt action. Great customer service.


----------



## Began

WongKN said:


> Many thanks Anechoic for your PM and your prompt action. Great customer service.


+1, couldn't agree more. Send him a PM yesterday and he reply immediately.

I'm placing mr order today too.

Cheers
Began


----------



## Anechoic

Began said:


> +1, couldn't agree more. Send him a PM yesterday and he reply immediately.


I just like to note for the record that instant replies only happen when I'm home, and there are going to be plenty of periods over the next two to three months where it may take a couple of days to get back to folks (business travel, ugh).

I also want to remind HTS folks that you are eligible for discounts on all the products I currently sell. The way the process works is that you purchase the item at full price, leave your HTS user name in the "Instructions to merchant" field on the PayPal order page (or send me a follow-up email) and I'll refund the discount amount. Yeah, I really need to institute a coupon system, but I just don't have the wherewithal to do that at the moment.


----------



## rajacat

I placed my order last night and sent an email requesting the discount. 
My PP account was credited today for the discount. Nice to see fast service.


----------



## luke202

Anechoic said:


> I just like to note for the record that instant replies only happen when I'm home, and there are going to be plenty of periods over the next two to three months where it may take a couple of days to get back to folks (business travel, ugh).
> 
> I also want to remind HTS folks that you are eligible for discounts on all the products I currently sell. The way the process works is that you purchase the item at full price, leave your HTS user name in the "Instructions to merchant" field on the PayPal order page (or send me a follow-up email) and I'll refund the discount amount. Yeah, I really need to institute a coupon system, but I just don't have the wherewithal to do that at the moment.


Thanks Anechoic,

I just got my calibrated UMIK-1 mic and Galaxy cm-140 today. This should be fun.


----------



## Began

Dear Anechoic,

Thanks I placed my order yesterday and got my discount credited same day.

I ordered 6 pcs and the stocks is running low. Those who's are sitting on the fence better order fast before it run out of stock.

Cheers
Began


----------



## Anechoic

Too late. This group sold out faster than the original stockpile. I put in another order, but since it's coming from Asia it's going to be a couple of weeks.


----------



## Began

Wow,

That fast. Only 2 days ago you told me 11 pcs left and now all gone.

Began


----------



## Anechoic

Yep. I'm guessing graduation season is over, summer has begun and folks are looking toward tweaking their audio systems.


----------



## WongKN

Anechoic,

I hope I put in my order early enough to make it. Really looking forward to using the UMIK with REW in place of my current XTZ Room Analyzer.

Best Regards,
WongKN


----------



## Anechoic

WongKN said:


> Anechoic,
> 
> I hope I put in my order early enough to make it. Really looking forward to using the UMIK with REW in place of my current XTZ Room Analyzer.


Yes, your order made it. If folks try to order now, they'll get a message that it's sold out.


----------



## WongKN

Thanks for your confirmation. Good to know that.


----------



## Skylinestar

Does the UMIK1 sold in CSL comes with the correct files so it act as a calibrated SPL meter (when used in REW) too?
I'm not sure if my old RS SPL meter is accurate anymore...therefore I hope the UMIK1 can kill two birds with one stone. (as a mic in REW and SPL meter too).


----------



## rajacat

+1. I was wondering about that too.:scratch:
Will this UMIK have all the features that the UMIK offered by minidsp in the original version?


----------



## Anechoic

I don't make sensitivity measurements for USB mics (at least for the moment), I'm not convinced I can do them correctly. You should be able to download the factory sensitivity info from miniDSP and add that to the cal files I generate to measure absolute SPL.


----------



## WongKN

Sorry to hijack this thread a bit. I have been doing a bit of research on what else I will need for using REW with my notebook (laptop) besides the UMIK mike. Will still continue the research but I thought it might be more effective to ask the forum here. 

The REW 'manual' suggests I might possibly need to also get an external soundcard as I am not able to run my notebook's internal soundcard in loopback mode in order to calibrate it. Without calibration of the (headphones) output, the REW measurements will not be accurate. Is this correct ? Has anyone tried using REW with a notebook/laptop without an external soundcard ? Is there a way to do it ?


----------



## JohnM

WongKN said:


> Sorry to hijack this thread a bit. I have been doing a bit of research on what else I will need for using REW with my notebook (laptop) besides the UMIK mike. Will still continue the research but I thought it might be more effective to ask the forum here.
> 
> The REW 'manual' suggests I might possibly need to also get an external soundcard as I am not able to run my notebook's internal soundcard in loopback mode in order to calibrate it. Without calibration of the (headphones) output, the REW measurements will not be accurate. Is this correct ? Has anyone tried using REW with a notebook/laptop without an external soundcard ? Is there a way to do it ?


If you use a USB mic soundcard loopback calibration is not relevant.


----------



## WongKN

OK, I understand. Summarizing. So I will skip that step (calibration of the soundcard). I need to get my (new) UMIK mike's sensitivity from the miniDSP website and add that into the CSL calibration file instead of calibrating the SPL level separately. Then input the updated CSL calibration file into REW. That's it. I read one thread saying a notebook/laptop headphone output can be used. So all I need is the notebook/laptop, REW, my new UMIK mike and I am all set.

Hope the summary above is correct. Thanks for the help.

I will be checking the response of both my hifi system plus those of my friends once I get the mike. Depending on my friend's feedback, I will post the findings on HTS for anyone who might be interested.


----------



## Phillips

WongKN said:


> OK, I understand. Summarizing. So I will skip that step (calibration of the soundcard). I need to get my (new) UMIK mike's sensitivity from the miniDSP website and add that into the CSL calibration file instead of calibrating the SPL level separately. Then input the updated CSL calibration file into REW. That's it. I read one thread saying a notebook/laptop headphone output can be used. So all I need is the notebook/laptop, REW, my new UMIK mike and I am all set.
> 
> Hope the summary above is correct. Thanks for the help.
> 
> I will be checking the response of both my hifi system plus those of my friends once I get the mike. Depending on my friend's feedback, I will post the findings on HTS for anyone who might be interested.


REW will ask for the Calibration file when you start the program with the UMIK plugged in.

Yes add the Sensitivity info, but also double check with a SPL meter to confirm/check, probably will be a little difference.

You will need a splitter at the receiver/amp.


----------



## WongKN

Thanks for the tip to double-check with an SPL meter. Will do that.

Connection of REW and the XTZ seems to be nearly identical. Would be interesting to compare the results of XTZ versus REW. My reason for going to REW is its much greater versatility - XTZ doesn't give adjustable response curve averaging for e.g. only 3 pre-selected curve for 'anechoic', 'ambient', and actual measured 'raw' data.


----------



## Phillips

WongKN said:


> Thanks for the tip to double-check with an SPL meter. Will do that.
> 
> Connection of REW and the XTZ seems to be nearly identical. Would be interesting to compare the results of XTZ versus REW. My reason for going to REW is its much greater versatility - XTZ doesn't give adjustable response curve averaging for e.g. only 3 pre-selected curve for 'anechoic', 'ambient', and actual measured 'raw' data.


With the XTZ do you have the new (separate pre/soundcard & normal looking mic) or old mic?


----------



## WongKN

There are two versions of the XTZ Room Analyzer kit. 

The basic one comes with a mike with an attached 'base' with a USB connector. This base contains the ADC for the mike plus the soundcard to generate the test signal. I.e. other than plugging the mike into a USB port on my computer, there is no other connection to the computer. The output test signal is taken from the (single, mono) RCA plug on the mike attachment. So a mono-stereo adaptor or the Y-splitter is needed to connect to the preamp/receiver.

The XTZ 'Pro' comes with a 'professional' XLR mike, much like the Behringer ECM-8000 (actually I suspect it is the ECM-8000). That one comes with a separate module which has XLR connectors to plug the mike into. The module has a USB cable to plug into the computer. And again the output test signal is taken from a separate mono RCA connector on the module meaning the Y-splitter is again needed.

The same control software can be used for both basic and pro version of the XTZ. It is a nice nifty kit, especially for people who doesn't know computers much and wants a no-hassle, 'plug and play' kind of kit. Just download the software from the XTZ website, go through a standard Windows install process, start up the software, plug in the mike/module and one is good to go. But as I work in the I/T line, the simplicity doesn't make a difference to me. I got my kit a couple of years ago when USB mikes like the miniDSP UMIK are not popular yet. At that time, I already had REW downloaded but the need to hunt for a preamp mike with phantom power and an external soundcard was a bit of a hassle. So when someone has a used XTZ Room Analyzer kit for sale at a relatively cheap price, I just bought it.

Now that we have professionally calibrate USB mikes, and I have a need for better analysis of the test data, I have decided to upgrade to REW. Features wise, the XTZ control software contains maybe 60% the functionality of REW but I will know more when my UMIK comes and I start to use REW.


----------



## Phillips

WongKN said:


> There are two versions of the XTZ Room Analyzer kit.
> 
> The basic one comes with a mike with an attached 'base' with a USB connector. This base contains the ADC for the mike plus the soundcard to generate the test signal. I.e. other than plugging the mike into a USB port on my computer, there is no other connection to the computer. The output test signal is taken from the (single, mono) RCA plug on the mike attachment. So a mono-stereo adaptor or the Y-splitter is needed to connect to the preamp/receiver.
> 
> The XTZ 'Pro' comes with a 'professional' XLR mike, much like the Behringer ECM-8000 (actually I suspect it is the ECM-8000). That one comes with a separate module which has XLR connectors to plug the mike into. The module has a USB cable to plug into the computer. And again the output test signal is taken from a separate mono RCA connector on the module meaning the Y-splitter is again needed.
> 
> The same control software can be used for both basic and pro version of the XTZ. It is a nice nifty kit, especially for people who doesn't know computers much and wants a no-hassle, 'plug and play' kind of kit. Just download the software from the XTZ website, go through a standard Windows install process, start up the software, plug in the mike/module and one is good to go. But as I work in the I/T line, the simplicity doesn't make a difference to me. I got my kit a couple of years ago when USB mikes like the miniDSP UMIK are not popular yet. At that time, I already had REW downloaded but the need to hunt for a preamp mike with phantom power and an external soundcard was a bit of a hassle. So when someone has a used XTZ Room Analyzer kit for sale at a relatively cheap price, I just bought it.
> 
> Now that we have professionally calibrate USB mikes, and I have a need for better analysis of the test data, I have decided to upgrade to REW. Features wise, the XTZ control software contains maybe 60% the functionality of REW but I will know more when my UMIK comes and I start to use REW.


With the XTZ do you have the new (separate pre/soundcard & normal looking mic) or old mic?

If you have the new pro mic have you tried the mic pre/soundcard with REW?


----------



## WongKN

Ah, sorry, I now understand your original question, english is not my first/main language so sometimes I misunderstand what others say. 

I have the so-called 'old' mike, the USB one. I have not tried it with REW before though I believe it will work. But I won't have the calibration file for it as it comes shipped with built-in calibration (not sure how they do it, maybe in the ADC). In fact, I will go and try it now and see whether they work or not.


----------



## WongKN

I just tried and as I expected/suspected, REW works fine with the XTZ supplied USB mike. The XTZ mike appears in Windows as 'XTZ' and there is both an XTZ for input and output, the output one corresponding, I suppose, to the soundcard used to generate the test signal. So in REW, I just click on preferences and select XTZ as the input. 

XTZ says their software has been specially calibrated to work with the supplied mike so I suppose the calibration is hard-coded into the software. Hmmm... maybe I will go dig around the XTZ install folders to see if there is something which looks like a mike calibration file...


----------



## WongKN

Last update. I could not find any calibration files in the install folder. In fact there are only a few items in the folder. It looks like the calibration has been hard-coded into the software.


----------



## druf2000

Just a bit of warning, my several month old UMIK-1 (from the new batch, I had to wait a few weeks while they sorted things out) died unexpectedly after it's second use. It's probably a bad USB port or USB electronics, as it doesn't show up on computers and the light doesn't illuminate on the mic.

The worse part is after attempts to contact them via their website, I've yet to get a response.


----------



## Anechoic

druf2000 said:


> Just a bit of warning, my several month old UMIK-1 (from the new batch, I had to wait a few weeks while they sorted things out) died unexpectedly after it's second use.


To be fair this is something that can happen with any of the mics in this class (ECM8000, EMM-6, UMIK-1, UMM-6, RTA-M, etc). It's the price we pay for living in the low end.

On the other end, a $200 Class 1 pre-amp died on me after a couple of months, so I guess it's a price we pay on the high-end as well


----------



## Phillips

druf2000 said:


> Just a bit of warning, my several month old UMIK-1 (from the new batch, I had to wait a few weeks while they sorted things out) died unexpectedly after it's second use. It's probably a bad USB port or USB electronics, as it doesn't show up on computers and the light doesn't illuminate on the mic.
> 
> The worse part is after attempts to contact them via their website, I've yet to get a response.


Email them.


----------



## rajacat

Phillips said:


> Email them.


+1 I found them to very responsive via email. They handled the return and refund of my UMIK -1 in a very businesslike manner.


----------



## druf2000

They've responded, and are sending a replacement. I got a little nervous, since I first emailed 4 days ago with no response, but once they did, I'm pleased with the support.

I find support for products over there either really good or really bad. I have a few products that failed where the manufacturer won't respond (like Lian-Li), or I get "email box full" message. I'm glad Mini-DSP isn't one of them!


----------



## enossified

I clicked on the sponsor link for *minidsp* and landed on a URL not found page. Anybody know what's up?


----------



## Mightywetfoot

Have you tried going to MiniDSP. Com?


----------



## wmb

I am having the same problem (can't access the minidsp website), so it isn't just you. It worked for me as recently as 2 days ago, but is not working now. I have tried two different browsers via different ISPs.

I hope it is just a transient problem.


----------



## Mightywetfoot

Very odd, I was on there a few hours ago. Likely just temporary.


----------



## enossified

5 hours later, tried it again and got through OK.


----------



## cubiclecrusher

Can someone elaborate on the differences between the UMIK-1 offered by miniDSP and the one offered by Cross Spectrum?


----------



## wmb

As I understand it, Cross Spectrum recalibrates it, supposedly more carefully than the factory.


----------



## monomer

cubiclecrusher said:


> Can someone elaborate on the differences between the UMIK-1 offered by miniDSP and the one offered by Cross Spectrum?


An accurate calibration file that you can actually trust... speaking of CSL of course.


----------



## cubiclecrusher

Thanks. I'd assume that the extra $20 is worth the improved calibration....
...but since CSL is out of town until next week, I'll sit on my decision and pull the trigger at that time.


----------



## Phillips

monomer said:


> An accurate calibration file that you can actually trust... speaking of CSL of course.


+ 1 absolutely correct.

When you might be EQing, accuracy is extremely important, don't want to eq something that might not be there.


----------



## Phillips

cubiclecrusher said:


> Thanks. I'd assume that the extra $20 is worth the improved calibration....
> ...but since CSL is out of town until next week, I'll sit on my decision and pull the trigger at that time.


Extremely small price to pay for accuracy and great customer service.


----------



## Dwight Angus

Agreed. I will be EQing and will order the Umik from CSL. Its got to be accurate or EQing is a waste of time.


----------



## tesseract

OK, I haven't read this entire thread, but am aware of the problems. I finally got around to opening my mic (#700-0161) and realized that my calibration file has changed. The new one doesn't go below 20 Hz. 

I didn't save the first one, just the numbers on an MS Notepad. Previous calibration went to 4 Hz. I can't use a mic that only goes down to 20 Hz. Any suggestions before I try to return this?


----------



## Mightywetfoot

Any idea how much variations there are between calibration from from files?


----------



## tesseract

First Cal:
4.6758 1.231 -3.57 
20.396 -0.3124 -0.81 
31.4549 -0.1217 -0.84 
40.7919 -0.1468 -0.77 
97.0201 0.0938 1.03 
1006.5565 0 -3.31 
10442.738 -0.1356 -30.22 
19152.066 -1.4403 -60.94 

Second Cal:
20.396	-0.260969317
31.4549 0.578932595
40.7919 0.588880754
97.0201 0.868686606
1006.5565 0.000160291
10442.738 3.815920532
19152.066 0.117766008


----------



## Phillips

> I didn't save the first one, just the numbers on an MS Notepad. Previous calibration went to 4 Hz. I can't use a mic that only goes down to 20 Hz. Any suggestions before I try to return this?


Personally I wouldn't waste time and contact MiniDSP, time is of the essence.

I thought they had a deadline to return these mics, but if you explain.


----------



## tesseract

The mic is brand new, never been used. Hopefully I can return it and get a CSL mic.

Email sent.


----------



## Phillips

tesseract said:


> The mic is brand new, never been used. Hopefully I can return it and get a CSL mic.
> 
> Email sent.


Have you posted on their website forum, there was a note from MiniDSP to post on their own one if there were problems.

Best you can do is explain that you weren't aware of the problem because of no communication etc.


----------



## Anechoic

tesseract said:


> The mic is brand new, never been used. Hopefully I can return it and get a CSL mic.
> 
> Email sent.


If you can't return it, I'd be willing to give you a $60 credit toward one of my UMIK-1's in exchange for the mic.


----------



## tesseract

Anechoic said:


> If you can't return it, I'd be willing to give you a $60 credit toward one of my UMIK-1's in exchange for the mic.


Very cool, thank you!


----------



## swingin

Question about the UMIK-1, will this mic mount to a universal camera tripod? If not, could you please advise on new mount, Thank you very much..


----------



## Anechoic

swingin said:


> Question about the UMIK-1, will this mic mount to a universal camera tripod? If not, could you please advise on new mount, Thank you very much..


You need a 1/4-inch to 3/8-inch adapter to use the UMIK-1 mount (or ECM8000/EMM-6/UMM-6) mount with a camera tripod, they're available on eBay, Amazon (this for example) etc for not much money.


----------



## swingin

Anechoic said:


> You need a 1/4-inch to 3/8-inch adapter to use the UMIK-1 mount (or ECM8000/EMM-6/UMM-6) mount with a camera tripod, they're available on eBay, Amazon (this for example) etc for not much money.


Thank you very much for the links. :T


----------



## Mightywetfoot

Doah! I wish I would have known this yesterday. I ended up buying a Mic stand.


----------



## WongKN

Anechoic,

Want to say that I received my CSL UMIK mike and I am completely happy with it. Have used it a few times already. For the quality of service and peace of mind (accuracy ensured), I have no complaints at all and if it was eBay, I would have given full marks in every category. Thanks. (I am posting here so that others will know of your good service).


----------



## Began

Hi Anechoic,

I received my 6 mics and thanks for your excellent service.

Began


----------



## WongKN

Hi,

UMIK mikes has a gain of 12dB and I remember reading instructions in this thread about how I can edit the supplied calibration file to include the compensation for this gain. At the moment, everytime I run a measurement, REW warns me that the levels are too low but the result comes out OK. I tried searching through this thread but couldn't find the instructions in question. Anyone remembers how to do this ? I remember it is a simple matter of adding a line to the beginning of the calibration file which is in text format anyway, specifying the gain. But I need to know the syntax.

Thanks for all and any responses and best regards,
WongKN


----------



## JohnM

WongKN said:


> At the moment, everytime I run a measurement, REW warns me that the levels are too low but the result comes out OK.


Are you using REW V5, or V5.01 beta? The Beta version 'knows' about the UMIK and should not give warnings about levels unless they are very low.


----------



## WongKN

I am using REW V5. Looks like I should just upgrade to the beta version. Thanks for the advice.


----------



## pdxrealtor

Hi - 

I recently got the UMIK-1 from CSL. I have a couple questions and Herb referred me here. 

1) I am using REW beta 5.1 (thanks for the great program) and a laptop with HDMI. I used the setup guide from over on AVR put together by Austin Jerry. 

I keep getting different floor levels when plugging min my mic, without changing the level input in Windows. Sometimes it will be ~40, others 9, and others in the 15s. Is there something wrong with my mic that the floor level keeps changing? 

Unless the floor level is ~40 I can't calibrate the SPL meter in REW without having to set the volume so high that REW tells me I'm clipping. Lately I've just been skipping the calibration and setting the AVR at -10 and input level at 25 to keep the DB level consistent in my subwoofer FR testing. However I would like to have an accurate SPL reading that is identical every time (for identical graphs, etc), via the SPL calibration tool. 

This brings me to question two. 

Using the UMIK-1 and REW as an SPL meter. This is possible, right? Do I need the sensitivity line in my cal files from Herb? 

Thanks for any light you all can shed. 

1st time poster! Woo Hoo.....!!


----------



## Dwight Angus

pdxrealtor said:


> Hi -
> 
> I recently got the UMIK-1 from CSL. I have a couple questions and Herb referred me here.
> 
> 1) I am using REW beta 5.1 (thanks for the great program) and a laptop with HDMI. I used the setup guide from over on AVR put together by Austin Jerry.
> 
> I keep getting different floor levels when plugging min my mic, without changing the level input in Windows. Sometimes it will be ~40, others 9, and others in the 15s. Is there something wrong with my mic that the floor level keeps changing?
> 
> Unless the floor level is ~40 I can't calibrate the SPL meter in REW without having to set the volume so high that REW tells me I'm clipping. Lately I've just been skipping the calibration and setting the AVR at -10 and input level at 25 to keep the DB level consistent in my subwoofer FR testing. However I would like to have an accurate SPL reading that is identical every time (for identical graphs, etc), via the SPL calibration tool.
> 
> This brings me to question two.
> 
> Using the UMIK-1 and REW as an SPL meter. This is possible, right? Do I need the sensitivity line in my cal files from Herb?
> 
> Thanks for any light you all can shed.
> 
> 1st time poster! Woo Hoo.....!!


I just got my UMIK-1 from CSL and it also does not include the sensitivity data. What I did was go the Minidsp site and pulled up the cal file for my SN. Then cut and paste the sensitivity data to the top line of Herbs CSL calibration file. Thats it. Mine seems to work fine.


----------



## pdxrealtor

Dwight Angus said:


> I just got my UMIK-1 from CSL and it also does not include the sensitivity data. What I did was go the Minidsp site and pulled up the cal file for my SN. Then cut and paste the sensitivity data to the top line of Herbs CSL calibration file. Thats it. Mine seems to work fine.



Thanks! That's great. 

Herb mentioned that but suggested I check here first. So what line of the cal file did you add it to? I have several cal files. The logical thing would seem to be add the sensitivity data to each cal file, but I want to be sure I do it right.

Upon trying to open one of my cal files I've found it won't open because it's a FRD file. 

Or, now that I'm talking this out, is the sensitivity file added to the list of cal files and automatically assessed by REW each time you fire it up?


----------



## Dwight Angus

I inserted the "Sens factor line" on the top line of the cal file exactly like Minidsp shows it. I then compared spl with my spl meter and both measurements were within 1 db.


----------



## pdxrealtor

Did you do it for all your cal files? I have six files, three narrow band and three third_octave band. 

Also, how did you open the cal files to insert the Mini DSP data? Note pad or??


----------



## pdxrealtor

And did you include your mics serial number in that sens factor line?


----------



## Dwight Angus

I only included the sensitivity data in the one file "zero band response zero degrees" as thats the file I was using for room measurement using REW and I am pointing the mic directly at the speakers being measured. If you are using all six files then load the sensitivity data into all 6 files.


----------



## Dwight Angus

pdxrealtor said:


> And did you include your mics serial number in that sens factor line?


Yes I loaded the SN into the Sens factor line.


----------



## pdxrealtor

Dwight Angus said:


> I only included the sensitivity data in the one file "zero band response zero degrees" as thats the file I was using for room measurement using REW and I am pointing the mic directly at the speakers being measured. If you are using all six files then load the sensitivity data into all 6 files.


Got it. One last question, I'm a bit nervous because I don't want to mess up a cal file. 

Did you use a text editor like word pad to add the file?


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> Got it. One last question, I'm a bit nervous because I don't want to mess up a cal file.
> 
> Did you use a text editor like word pad to add the file?


Pass me a paddle buddy cause I'm in the same boat with you :coocoo: I have the file, I just dont know how to add it, Thanks..

I did it, when you hit, file save as, then hit the drop down box and save it as a text file, that worked for me. REW said something when I tried to load it but it still loaded. Good luck... I could not get this file and the 0 degrees file to load at the same time though..

Save it to your desktop, then open REW and you can load it..


----------



## pdxrealtor

HA! Glad I'm not alone. Someone will come along and set us straight!


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> HA! Glad I'm not alone. Someone will come along and set us straight!


:T


----------



## Phillips

REW will accept FRD, TXT files. You can just load the file that Cross Spectrum produce.

Best thing to do is make a copy/s then there if a mistake is made you have spares quickly.

From the original (MiniDSP) UMIK file, copy the first line (SN + Sens Factor)

Insert a row in the Cross Spectrum UMIK file then paste 

File > Save

Done


----------



## pdxrealtor

Phillips said:


> REW will accept FRD, TXT files. You can just load the file that Cross Spectrum produce.
> 
> From the original UMIK file, copy the first line (SN + Sens Factor)
> 
> Insert a row in the Cross Spectrum UMIK file then paste
> 
> File > Save
> 
> Done


Thank you sir! While it seems I have set my windows machine to open the cal files with word pad it seems they are still labeled as .FRD files. 

Sounds like either way it will not be an issue. Again, thanks guys. I will post results, but it may be a bit.


----------



## Anechoic

Phillips said:


> Best thing to do is make a copy/s then there if a mistake is made you have spares quickly.


Even if you somehow mess up the original file, I have copies of the cal files I produce, so just email the mic serial number and I can send you the original cal files.


----------



## swingin

Phillips said:


> REW will accept FRD, TXT files. You can just load the file that Cross Spectrum produce.
> 
> Best thing to do is make a copy/s then there if a mistake is made you have spares quickly.
> 
> From the original (MiniDSP) UMIK file, copy the first line (SN + Sens Factor)
> 
> Insert a row in the Cross Spectrum UMIK file then paste
> 
> File > Save
> 
> Done


Maybe I didn't get it right, Sorry. Phillips, or anybody for that matter, could you post some screen shots of the process when you have the time. It's not letting me save anything when trying to copy & paste from the "Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896". This is the folder I saved to my desktop with original cal files. 

"Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896"

10.054	-6.214461668
10.179	-6.041088351
10.306	-5.870899851
10.434	-5.703954414
10.564	-5.54013152

These are the first few lines of the files they have for my mic, above. Sorry I'm so computer illiterate.


----------



## Anechoic

pdxrealtor said:


> I keep getting different floor levels when plugging min my mic, without changing the level input in Windows. Sometimes it will be ~40, others 9, and others in the 15s. Is there something wrong with my mic that the floor level keeps changing?
> 
> Unless the floor level is ~40 I can't calibrate the SPL meter in REW without having to set the volume so high that REW tells me I'm clipping. Lately I've just been skipping the calibration and setting the AVR at -10 and input level at 25 to keep the DB level consistent in my subwoofer FR testing. However I would like to have an accurate SPL reading that is identical every time (for identical graphs, etc), via the SPL calibration tool.


Sorry for not responding to your email about this (it's been a rough couple of days, we had to put out dog to sleep on Friday and things have gone downhill since). I haven't looked into noise floor issues that closely with the UMIK-1 but on first glance that does sound a bit unusual, although perhaps others can speak to their experience. The first question I would ask: is there something on your USB bus or something running in the background of your machine (anti-virus, etc) that correlates with the noise floor irregularities?


----------



## pdxrealtor

Anechoic said:


> Sorry for not responding to your email about this (it's been a rough couple of days, we had to put out dog to sleep on Friday and things have gone downhill since). I haven't looked into noise floor issues that closely with the UMIK-1 but on first glance that does sound a bit unusual, although perhaps others can speak to their experience. The first question I would ask: is there something on your USB bus or something running in the background of your machine (anti-virus, etc) that correlates with the noise floor irregularities?


Sorry to hear about your dog.. we have two we call our kids, so I understand how hard that must be. 

My USB bus consists of the UMIK-1, a logitech wireless mouse adapter, and the USB stick that came with the MIC. I have no antivirus running, except for the software that come with Windows 8. 

I even make sure the HVAC is turned off as it does add a few DB.

The only difference is two of my USP ports are 3.0 and one is 2.0. I used to think I had to use the 2.0, but it turns out the 3.0 is working just fine, and I've seen the different floor levels on the 3.0 as well.

I thought maybe it had to do with that sensitivity file, but it's not sounding that way. 

Swingin- I will let you know when I get my sens. data over to my cal file. I dont want to change it right now because I have very consistent results just setting my AVR at 10 and my mic level at 25. I'm in the middle of getting my subs FR as flat as possible so until that is done I don't want to change anything that might affect the tons of graphs I've done and plan to do shortly.


----------



## Phillips

swingin said:


> Maybe I didn't get it right, Sorry. Phillips, or anybody for that matter, could you post some screen shots of the process when you have the time. It's not letting me save anything when trying to copy & paste from the "Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896". This is the folder I saved to my desktop with original cal files.
> 
> "Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896"
> 
> 10.054	-6.214461668
> 10.179	-6.041088351
> 10.306	-5.870899851
> 10.434	-5.703954414
> 10.564	-5.54013152
> 
> These are the first few lines of the files they have for my mic, above. Sorry I'm so computer illiterate.



How was your birthday?

Attach the MiniDSP UMIK file + Herbs files and i will do it for you, then we can look at what is happening at your end.


----------



## pdxrealtor

FWIW- if you right click on a cal file and select 'open with' from the drop down menu, then select the word pad program you will get a list of cal numbers. 

Simply copy and paste your sens data from the minidsp site, and paste to the very top line. Then save. 

I just did it on a spare copy of cal files to make sure it works and it does, just fine. If you need anymore help let me know where you're stuck at.


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> Sorry to hear about your dog.. we have two we call our kids, so I understand how hard that must be.
> 
> My USB bus consists of the UMIK-1, a logitech wireless mouse adapter, and the USB stick that came with the MIC. I have no antivirus running, except for the software that come with Windows 8.
> 
> I even make sure the HVAC is turned off as it does add a few DB.
> 
> The only difference is two of my USP ports are 3.0 and one is 2.0. I used to think I had to use the 2.0, but it turns out the 3.0 is working just fine, and I've seen the different floor levels on the 3.0 as well.
> 
> I thought maybe it had to do with that sensitivity file, but it's not sounding that way.
> 
> Swingin- I will let you know when I get my sens. data over to my cal file. I dont want to change it right now because I have very consistent results just setting my AVR at 10 and my mic level at 25. I'm in the middle of getting my subs FR as flat as possible so until that is done I don't want to change anything that might affect the tons of graphs I've done and plan to do shortly.


I completely understand that, glad you got it figured out, thank you my man!!


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> FWIW- if you right click on a cal file and select 'open with' from the drop down menu, then select the word pad program you will get a list of cal numbers.
> 
> Simply copy and paste your sens data from the minidsp site, and paste to the very top line. Then save.
> 
> I just did it on a spare copy of cal files to make sure it works and it does, just fine. If you need anymore help let me know where you're stuck at.


Well this is what I have so far, I try and put up a screen shot but it's in an .rtf format and I cant change it. This is a copy and paste of what I've done. I only added the first few rows, did I do it right? Or do I need to remove some of that first line? If it's right I'll go ahead and do all of the files. This one is the narrow band 0 degree file. Thanks you guys, I really appreciate your help... :T

"Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896" 
4.33 -5.02 0
5.79 -2.96 0
7.24 -2.66 0
8.69 -1.6 0
10.14 -1.15 0
11.58 -0.53 0
13.04 -0.19 0
14.48 0.09 0


----------



## swingin

Phillips said:


> How was your birthday?
> 
> Attach the MiniDSP UMIK file + Herbs files and i will do it for you, then we can look at what is happening at your end.


Thank you Phillips, I did not have a good Bday, lol, but the next day made up for it :bigsmile: 

Well hopefully I have it right this time :dontknow: If I dont, I will send you both files. Thanks for being patient with me, I know you've already had enough of my ignorance. 

I'm still trying to figure out why they dont add this to the cal files in the first place??? and is it a necessary thing to do?? Again, thanks to you that are trying to walk me through this... :yikes:


----------



## Phillips

swingin said:


> Well this is what I have so far, I try and put up a screen shot but it's in an .rtf format and I cant change it. This is a copy and paste of what I've done. I only added the first few rows, did I do it right? Or do I need to remove some of that first line? If it's right I'll go ahead and do all of the files. This one is the narrow band 0 degree file. Thanks you guys, I really appreciate your help... :T
> 
> "Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896"
> 4.33 -5.02 0
> 5.79 -2.96 0
> 7.24 -2.66 0
> 8.69 -1.6 0
> 10.14 -1.15 0
> 11.58 -0.53 0
> 13.04 -0.19 0
> 14.48 0.09 0


Looks fine the *top line* should be the same as whats in the MiniDSP manufacturer original file if you want to check it, below that should be untouched.


----------



## Phillips

> Thank you Phillips, I did not have a good Bday, lol, but the next day made up for it :bigsmile:


Thats no good, but came right thats great.



> Well hopefully I have it right this time :dontknow: If I dont, I will send you both files. Thanks for being patient with me, I know you've already had enough of my ignorance.


Looks fine, no worries. You can send the files if you want just for peace of mind if you want to?
Its all good glad to help if i can.



> I'm still trying to figure out why they dont add this to the cal files in the first place??? and is it a necessary thing to do?? Again, thanks to you that are trying to walk me through this... :yikes:


Herb doesn't measure for this so he won't put it on there as he can't clarify if it is accurate for his high standards. 
But MiniDSP figures will be accurate enough so this can be added manually by the end user if they want to.

This is for Accurate SPL, so you can use it as a SPL meter as well. 

Hope this clears things up.


----------



## Phillips

> Thank you Phillips, I did not have a good Bday, lol, but the next day made up for it :bigsmile:


Thats no good, but came right thats great.



> Well hopefully I have it right this time :dontknow: If I dont, I will send you both files. Thanks for being patient with me, I know you've already had enough of my ignorance.


Looks fine, no worries. You can send the files if you want just for peace of mind if you want to?
Its all good glad to help if i can.



> I'm still trying to figure out why they dont add this to the cal files in the first place??? and is it a necessary thing to do?? Again, thanks to you that are trying to walk me through this... :yikes:


Herb doesn't measure for this so he won't put it on there as he can't clarify if it is accurate for his high standards. 
But MiniDSP figures will be accurate enough so this can be added manually by the end user if they want to.

This is for Accurate SPL, so you can use it as a SPL meter as well. 

Hope this clears things up.


----------



## swingin

Phillips said:


> Thats no good, but came right thats great.
> 
> 
> 
> Looks fine, no worries. You can send the files if you want just for peace of mind if you want to?
> Its all good glad to help if i can.
> 
> 
> 
> Herb doesn't measure for this so he won't put it on there as he can't clarify if it is accurate for his high standards.
> But MiniDSP figures will be accurate enough so this can be added manually by the end user if they want to.
> 
> This is for Accurate SPL, so you can use it as a SPL meter as well.
> 
> Hope this clears things up.


That is the exact way that I got it, so I did good? SWEET! Finally, lol.. I understand about Herb now, didn't know that part of the story. Thank you so much, Id send you the files, but I'm not sure how to go about that either, go figure.. I have both files saved to my desktop in a folder, one opens with wordpad, the other is, well you know.. Thanks again, both of you guys!!! :T

I tried to send you a PM but It's in the wrong format so it wont let me load it.. :rolleyesno:


----------



## pdxrealtor

swingin said:


> Well this is what I have so far, I try and put up a screen shot but it's in an .rtf format and I cant change it. This is a copy and paste of what I've done. I only added the first few rows, did I do it right? Or do I need to remove some of that first line? If it's right I'll go ahead and do all of the files. This one is the narrow band 0 degree file. Thanks you guys, I really appreciate your help... :T
> 
> "Sens Factor =-5.929dB, SERNO: 7000896"
> 4.33 -5.02 0
> 5.79 -2.96 0
> 7.24 -2.66 0
> 8.69 -1.6 0
> 10.14 -1.15 0
> 11.58 -0.53 0
> 13.04 -0.19 0
> 14.48 0.09 0



You only added the first few lines in this post? Or did you add the first few lines from minidsp? If that latter, you only want to add the top line, not replace any lines in the cal file from Herb. 

Sounds like you did it correct, just wanted to make sure.


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> You only added the first few lines in this post? Or did you add the first few lines from minidsp? If that latter, you only want to add the top line, not replace any lines in the cal file from Herb.
> 
> Sounds like you did it correct, just wanted to make sure.


No, just the first line of the file is what I added. The sens factor line. The copy and paste was just for reference. Thanks man!!


----------



## pdxrealtor

Awesome! 

Is your floor level always ~50?


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> Awesome!
> 
> Is your floor level always ~50?


No, it's more like 40..


----------



## pdxrealtor

Interesting..... mine was about 40 as well the first time I setup and used REW. It went to 99 at one point, and has shown 15 and now I've been down at 9 for days. 

Sounds like I might have an 'issue' with mic or my setup. Thanks for the info!


----------



## swingin

pdxrealtor said:


> Interesting..... mine was about 40 as well the first time I setup and used REW. It went to 99 at one point, and has shown 15 and now I've been down at 9 for days.
> 
> Sounds like I might have an 'issue' with mic or my setup. Thanks for the info!


Well let me tell ya, you dont want to ask me anything about this stuff :rofl: We all know what that will get ya, lol... Good luck!!

Maybe Phillips can help you out too.


----------



## e-t172

The following message was originally posted on the MiniDSP forums, but unfortunately I received no response in 4 days, so I'm posting it here hoping that someone can help me:

I'm definitely interested in buying one of those UMIK-1 microphones, but I've read a lot of concerns about their elevated noise floor (~50dB dBA, whereas other microphones in the same price range can do ~30dBA). To be fair this matches the specifications, which indicate max SPL at 133dB SPL and a noise floor at -74dBFS, which translates to an absolute noise floor of 59dB SPL. Nevertheless, I would appreciate being able to use the UMIK-1 to do THD measurements which require a clean, low noise floor. 

I have the following questions:

Last time I checked, there was an issue with the noise floor being dominated by a nasty spike at 1kHz followed by its harmonics. Apparently this was an issue with an early batch and should be fixed now. Could someone confirm this?
What are the numbers regarding the noise floor for the recent revisions of the UMIK-1? I would greatly appreciate if people who ordered one recently could post a screenshot of what an RTA looks like in a very quiet room.
Is the UMIK-1 well-isolated with regard to USB power noise or should I be careful what I plug this thing into?
Does increasing the recording volume (i.e. in Windows) as any effect on the *absolute* (i.e. in dB SPL) noise floor? At first glance I would guess that the volume control is digital so it wouldn't have any effect, but I would sure like a confirmation.
It appears that you can open the UMIK-1 and change the sensitivity using DIP switches. Depending on where the noise is coming from, increasing the sensitivity might, in theory, lower the absolute noise floor in the same proportion. I don't require low sensitivity (I would be fine with just 110dB max SPL), so that wouldn't be a problem.
Has anyone tried this? Does this tweak have any effect on the *absolute* (i.e. in dB SPL) noise floor?
Is it safe to do this with regard to altering the microphone - i.e. is there a risk of causing damage, screwing up the calibration, etc.?


Thanks in advance for your answers!


----------



## Phillips

e-t172 said:


> The following message was originally posted on the MiniDSP forums, but unfortunately I received no response in 4 days, so I'm posting it here hoping that someone can help me:
> 
> I'm definitely interested in buying one of those UMIK-1 microphones, but I've read a lot of concerns about their elevated noise floor (~50dB dBA, whereas other microphones in the same price range can do ~30dBA). To be fair this matches the specifications, which indicate max SPL at 133dB SPL and a noise floor at -74dBFS, which translates to an absolute noise floor of 59dB SPL. Nevertheless, I would appreciate being able to use the UMIK-1 to do THD measurements which require a clean, low noise floor.
> 
> I have the following questions:
> 
> Last time I checked, there was an issue with the noise floor being dominated by a nasty spike at 1kHz followed by its harmonics. Apparently this was an issue with an early batch and should be fixed now. Could someone confirm this?
> What are the numbers regarding the noise floor for the recent revisions of the UMIK-1? I would greatly appreciate if people who ordered one recently could post a screenshot of what an RTA looks like in a very quiet room.
> Is the UMIK-1 well-isolated with regard to USB power noise or should I be careful what I plug this thing into?
> Does increasing the recording volume (i.e. in Windows) as any effect on the *absolute* (i.e. in dB SPL) noise floor? At first glance I would guess that the volume control is digital so it wouldn't have any effect, but I would sure like a confirmation.
> It appears that you can open the UMIK-1 and change the sensitivity using DIP switches. Depending on where the noise is coming from, increasing the sensitivity might, in theory, lower the absolute noise floor in the same proportion. I don't require low sensitivity (I would be fine with just 110dB max SPL), so that wouldn't be a problem.
> Has anyone tried this? Does this tweak have any effect on the *absolute* (i.e. in dB SPL) noise floor?
> Is it safe to do this with regard to altering the microphone - i.e. is there a risk of causing damage, screwing up the calibration, etc.?
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for your answers!


I would put this in Cross-Spectrums thread, which is where you should purchase the mic from.

See this link http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...um-microphone-calibration-service-usa-30.html


----------



## e-t172

FYI: someone on the MiniDSP forum measured the noise floor of the UMIK-1 and found good results (29.1 dB(A), 43.1dB(unwheighted)). I guess that makes the warning on the Cross-Spectrum labs website about noise floor obsolete.


----------



## Anechoic

I got a noise floor of 35 dBA using ARTA and an external acoustical calibrator. The 1 kHz (and harmonic) spikes are definitely gone.


----------



## jbjb

Anechoic said:


> I got a noise floor of 35 dBA using ARTA and an external acoustical calibrator. The 1 kHz (and harmonic) spikes are definitely gone.


Good to know. I guess this is for the 3rd batch of mics from serial 700-0540 onwards?


----------



## Anechoic

The one I tested was 700-0699 but I presume the results would apply to the whole third batch.


----------



## NimaBeamer

Sorry I did not read the whole thread but does that mean one does not have to get the UMIK calibrated?


----------



## e-t172

NimaBeamer said:


> Sorry I did not read the whole thread but does that mean one does not have to get the UMIK calibrated?


No. Noise floor has nothing to do with frequency response. What we were discussing was that some early batches had elevated noise floor issues that have now been fixed. It shouldn't matter to you unless you're doing special measurements that are affected by noise floor, like harmonic distortion measurements.


----------



## akajester

I just ordered my UMIK-1 today. I'm excited to try it out with REW!


----------



## pdxrealtor

akajester said:


> I just ordered my UMIK-1 today. I'm excited to try it out with REW!



Congrats! Did you get it from Cross Spectrum or not?


----------



## akajester

I bought it direct from minidsp.com


----------



## chaluga

Got mine.and almost want to sell it now. Don't think I will need to use it for quote awhile


----------



## mlange

Just ordered mine - this will be interesting to compare to the bigger/older BK setup that I've used in the past.

Here's to reliable, new, & simpler 

Thanks Anechoic!


----------



## FunkBassPlayer

*Re: MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone setup issue*

I'm new to this forum so please bare with me. I recently purchased a UMIK-1 and can't seem to get it going. I posted my problem up on the minidsp forum site but haven't gotten any responses in a couple of days. 

I've calibrated the SPL meter in REW with an external SPL meter and all looked well but when I go to perform tests it seems my system needs to be much too loud to get -25 db input to REW. I've tried the set levels but my input from the UMIK seems much too low for the volume my speakers are putting out. When I get it loud enough at my listening position to satisfy REW's -25db input my system distorts badly from the wave that REW generates. I have a rather loud system that shouldn't have any problem hitting 75 db at the listening position. 

From the little bit of reading I've done in this thread I take it I should mention that I'm using the analog out of my laptop. I have an HDMI out but my system is analog only so I'm stuck with that.

Any ideas on what's going wrong?


----------



## e-t172

*Re: MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone setup issue*



FunkBassPlayer said:


> I've calibrated the SPL meter in REW with an external SPL meter and all looked well but when I go to perform tests it seems my system needs to be much too loud to get -25 db input to REW. I've tried the set levels but my input from the UMIK seems much too low for the volume my speakers are putting out. When I get it loud enough at my listening position to satisfy REW's -25db input my system distorts badly from the wave that REW generates. I have a rather loud system that shouldn't have any problem hitting 75 db at the listening position.


AFAIK the UMIK-1 volume control is purely digital, so it doesn't really matter what measurement level you end up with, as it makes no difference with respect to noise floor. -25dB in normal measurement conditions with the UMIK-1 seems normal to me considering the max SPL of the mic. Just ignore REW's warnings about measurement level, they don't really make sense when using a fixed-gain mic.



FunkBassPlayer said:


> From the little bit of reading I've done in this thread I take it I should mention that I'm using the analog out of my laptop.


I would strongly advise against that, as laptop analog outputs are among the worst imaginable.


----------



## JohnM

*Re: MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone setup issue*



FunkBassPlayer said:


> I recently purchased a UMIK-1 and can't seem to get it going.


Use the V5.01 beta version of REW from here, it will automatically recognise your mic and prompt you for the calibration file. USB mics operate at lower signal levels (to give them headroom for loud sounds), -25 dB is not required.


----------



## wildcrd

Ordered mine two days ago from Cross-Spectrum. I've been checking my inbox like a crack-addict waiting for a response. Anechoic, if you aren't traveling, do you have an eta on shipment? I thought some were available.


----------



## wildcrd

So, from reading the forum posts Cross-Spectrum will not test for sensitivity (I am waiting on my umik-1 to arrive). However, if I download the minidsp calibration tied to my serial # and cut-n-paste the sensitivity line from it to the one provided by CS, then the umik-1 will act as an SPL meter correct?

Or, do I need a separate SPL meter to get accurate SPL readings? I did buy a RS digital meter, but it was DOA, which launched me on the process of getting the umik-1. I'm hoping that I can simply return the RS SPL and just use the umik-1.


----------



## Phillips

> So, from reading the forum posts Cross-Spectrum will not test for sensitivity (I am waiting on my umik-1 to arrive). However, if I download the minidsp calibration tied to my serial # and cut-n-paste the sensitivity line from it to the one provided by CS, then the umik-1 will act as an SPL meter correct?



That should be fine


----------



## arttu

Cross Spectrum Lab web site says that Calibrated MiniDSP UMIK-1 microphones are sold out. I had already decided to go for one. Any ideas as to when these will be available again?


----------



## vidareje

I'm not sure if this has been asked before, but should the mic level in control panel (Windows7) be set to +12dB? I have done some RTA noise measurements and I got the impression that the SPL was wrong?
I guess when using the UMIK-1 one should not use any calibration file for the input sound card, only the mic calibration?
Finally should I use "adjust RTA levels" when measuring background noise?

Cheers
Vidar


----------



## JohnM

vidareje said:


> I'm not sure if this has been asked before, but should the mic level in control panel (Windows7) be set to +12dB? I have done some RTA noise measurements and I got the impression that the SPL was wrong?


Shouldn't matter, REW compensates for the Windows volume setting, but make sure you use REW V5.01 beta.



> I guess when using the UMIK-1 one should not use any calibration file for the input sound card, only the mic calibration?


Correct



> Finally should I use "adjust RTA levels" when measuring background noise?


No, that is to produce plots that are more easily compared with sweeps. Just read the SPL figure as shown top right, but bear in mind it is unweighted, or read the figure on REW's SPL meter with whatever weighting you select.


----------



## vidareje

Thank you very much for the reply
I use the latest version 5.01 beta. The volum seems to make differences.
The two attachments show the results from +24dB setting and -31dB?

Cheers
Vidar


----------



## JohnM

If you go all the way to +24 in a very quiet environment you will see the effect of the extra gain on the output noise level of the mic electronics.


----------



## vidareje

Thanks again
If you look at the 100Hz peak it varies from 25 to 40dB depending on the gain setting. Can this be explained by the increased noise on the output? The peak most likely comes from one of my aquarium pumps. Even though REW compensates for gain, what gain would you recommend?

Cheers
Vidar


----------



## JohnM

I generally leave it at 0 dB.


----------



## e-t172

The rationale being that above 0dB you can run into clipping (by software) if you're measuring loud signals. There is no downside to leaving it at 0dB, even if the measurement level is low, because the signal to noise ratio will always stay the same anyway.


----------



## vidareje

Thanks, then I leave it at 0dB for future measurments.

Vidar


----------



## Reefdvr27

*Re: MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone setup issue*



JohnM said:


> Use the V5.01 beta version of REW from here, it will automatically recognise your mic and prompt you for the calibration file. USB mics operate at lower signal levels (to give them headroom for loud sounds), -25 dB is not required.


 John or anyone, I have a mac book pro and a couple of new Mac desktops. Can you tell me what computer would be best to use and what exactly do I need to download for Apple Safari. Also, what do I need to buy to get started, the Umik? . I imagine the macbook pro would be fine. I would appreciate any help.


----------



## JohnM

*Re: MiniDSP UMIK-1 Microphone setup issue*



Reefdvr27 said:


> John or anyone, I have a mac book pro and a couple of new Mac desktops. Can you tell me what computer would be best to use and what exactly do I need to download for Apple Safari. Also, what do I need to buy to get started, the Umik?


You need to install the Java runtime if you don't already have it, then the REW OS X app bundle from this thread. Make sure Gatekeeper is set to allow installs from anywhere otherwise OS X will say the app bundle is damaged and tell you to trash it. If the macbook pro has a built-in mic you could use that just to confirm the REW runs OK, to make measurements you need either an SPL meter that can send a signal to a line in on whichever computer you choose to use, or a USB mic like the UMIK-1, or some other mic (ideally with a calibration file). Examples of equipment are listed in the Cabling and Connection Basics thread, which is the first entry in the Information Index sticky, which is recommended reading before jumping in.


----------



## Topend

Hi,

I'm going to use REW with my HTPC. Is it OK to use an extension USB cable so the UMIK-1 will reach my listening position?

I will use HDMI to my prepro and optical to my DAC/preamp combo. Is the optical out on my HTPC OK to use?

Thanks,
Dave.


----------



## JohnM

Topend said:


> Is it OK to use an extension USB cable so the UMIK-1 will reach my listening position?


MiniDSP suggest up to 5m should be OK, see http://www.minidsp.com/forum/umik-questions/7477-re-umik-max-cable-length



> I will use HDMI to my prepro and optical to my DAC/preamp combo. Is the optical out on my HTPC OK to use?


Sure.


----------



## Topend

Thanks,
Dave.


----------



## aboroth00

Hey all,

I'm just getting my feet wet with REW and plan on purchasing this mic as I only have a laptop and no external sound card. I plan on buying this microphone to use along with my laptop for REW. I am thinking I could use a usb dac to feed to my preamp and this would work fine? I also have an hdmi out on my laptop but I only have a 2ch setup and the hdmi would go to my tv and then optical out on the tv to the DAC? I would think the usb route would work better if REW could output the tones over USB. Any advice or tips for a newbie would be very helpful. I was just going to get the mic and start messing around with REW and figure it out that way.

Thanks


----------



## Phillips

EarlK said:


> John,
> 
> - Will there ever be a way ( & are you able to create a soft-patch within future releases of REW ) to use these new USB based microphones in conjunction with, REW's option to  *"Use loopback as a timing reference"* ?
> 
> Thanks <> EarlK


Hi John

Has there been any progress on this?


----------



## jazzcat

I'm interested in buying this mic. Since it runs on usb power alone, what is the maximum extension I can add considering it's rather short. Is it usb 1.0 or 2.0? thx


----------



## Esprit

Hi, I've bought nine (9) :spend: UMIK-1 and now I'm downloading the calibration files from the miniDSP site.

ALL, I rewrite, ALL the nine (9) files are the same calibration file. What changes is ONLY the serial number

It seems to me that "_All UMIK-1 are calibrated with a unique calibration file_" is a *wrong* statement "as minimum" and I don't want to write here what I am thinking...

What do you think of this behavior? :foottap:

Add: from #700-2572 to #700-2684 the files are identical, equal, the same...


----------



## Phillips

Esprit said:


> Hi, I've bought nine (9) :spend: UMIK-1 and now I'm downloading the calibration files from the miniDSP site.
> 
> ALL, I rewrite, ALL the nine (9) files are the same calibration file. What changes is ONLY the serial number
> 
> It seems to me that "_All UMIK-1 are calibrated with a unique calibration file_" is a *wrong* statement "as minimum" and I don't want to write here what I am thinking...
> 
> What do you think of this behavior? :foottap:
> 
> Add: from #700-2572 to #700-2684 the files are identical, equal, the same...


Have you contacted MiniDSP to see what they say?


----------



## Esprit

I've sent them this link...


----------



## Topend

I'm glad I purchased mine from Cross Spectrum. http://cross-spectrum.com/measurement/calibrated_umik.html

Dave.


----------



## draki

Hi

Can I use the HDMI output from the laptop _to TV_ (Panasonic Viera) and then use the SPDIF from the TV to Dac/Preamp (pre/pro)? Don't have HDMI inputs on my pre/pro.
Thanks.
Draki


----------



## JimP

Esprit said:


> Hi, I've bought nine (9) :spend: UMIK-1 and now I'm downloading the calibration files from the miniDSP site.
> 
> ALL, I rewrite, ALL the nine (9) files are the same calibration file. What changes is ONLY the serial number
> 
> It seems to me that "_All UMIK-1 are calibrated with a unique calibration file_" is a *wrong* statement "as minimum" and I don't want to write here what I am thinking...
> 
> What do you think of this behavior? :foottap:
> 
> Add: from #700-2572 to #700-2684 the files are identical, equal, the same...


My first reaction was "what the hell are they doing?" Man...the forum software has some interesting word substitutions. 

Second thought was since they're manufactured one right after the other in an assembly line, then maybe they would measure identically. Its not like you took 9 mikes all made at different times.

The proof would be to compare their response and see if there is any material difference.


----------



## Esprit

I've bought nine UMIK-1 from Cross-Spectrum.
I have nine different calibration files (from CS). All the mics are different.

There are more than one hundred UMIK-1 without the "individual calibration file" from MiniDSP, those who bought these microphones are using a wrong file and they are getting wrong measures.

The problem is that they don't know anything about this issue.

P.S. Anyone can verify this just change XXX with a number between 572 and 684 
http://www.minidsp.com/images/umik/7002XXX.txt
You will get columns that are perfectly identical


----------



## EarlK

Esprit said:


> I've bought nine UMIK-1 from Cross-Spectrum.
> I have nine different calibration files (from CS). All the mics are different.
> 
> There are more than one hundred UMIK-1 without the "individual calibration file" from MiniDSP, those who bought these microphones are using a wrong file and they are getting wrong measures.
> 
> The problem is that they don't know anything about this issue.
> 
> P.S. Anyone can verify this just change XXX with a number between 572 and 684
> http://www.minidsp.com/images/umik/7002XXX.txt
> You will get columns that are perfectly identical


If you still have any of the original 9 mics ( from CSL ) you could create your own ad-hoc calibrations ( by comparing acoustic results of good to bad & then changing "the bad calibration to match the good " / until the acoustic results match . This process will be somewhat tedious & time consuming , but it is still one way ( that is better than a "kick-in-the-pants", IMHO ) .

Re; the hundred users with so-called bad calibrations // one way to view that , is just how much of a placebo effect this whole question of calibration has actually become ( ie; it doesn't really matter since ones ears still end up being the final arbiter // at least for those of us who trust our ears ) .


:sn:


----------



## Esprit

Wrong, not bad.
I've paid a price, to MiniDSP, that includes the mic and their calibration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unique Calibration File Download
All UMIK-1 are calibrated with a unique calibration file. To download the calibration, look for the 7 digit Serial Number found on the body of the microphone.

1) Enter the serial number in the below form (700-XXXX format) to download the specific calibration file.

2) In your browser, click on File - > Save from your browser to save as a .txt extension.

Serial number: - 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## neo_2009

Is HDMI required to use with the UMIK-1?
According to the "UMIK-1 setup with REW" page, "Connect an audio output from your computer to your sound system. With most computers, you can use the line out or headphone output with a suitable cable. It is advisable to connect into your system at the preamp inputs, so that the preamp volume control can be used to manage the signal level from the computer"

source: http://www.minidsp.com/applications/...setup-with-rew

Can anyone please clarify?


----------



## JohnM

neo_2009 said:


> Is HDMI required to use with the UMIK-1?


No.


----------



## neo_2009

@JonhM, i'm from Europe, so i cant order from cross labs (with taxes if would cost 3x more).

From Europe, the best options are : 
- http://shop.dirac.se/products/116-umik-1-usb-measurement-microphone.aspx
- http://oaudio.de/MiniDSP/OmnesAudio-miniDSP-UMIK-1::5201.html

I dont know if the dirac version has a file calibration to be used with their software, or its calibrated to the specific mic.
The other i suppose it's the regular umic-1 calibration file.

I've also contacted iSEMcon GmbH, but they dont calibrate the umik-1.

I'm planning to use the MIC with REW, in order to calculate the PEQ filter for the Emotiva UMC200.
Do you think the dirac version, or the regular umik-1, are accurate enough for obtaining measures to calculate the PEQ filter for the Emotiva UMC200?


----------



## mannetti21

Esprit said:


> Hi, I've bought nine (9) :spend: UMIK-1 and now I'm downloading the calibration files from the miniDSP site.
> 
> ALL, I rewrite, ALL the nine (9) files are the same calibration file. What changes is ONLY the serial number
> 
> It seems to me that "_All UMIK-1 are calibrated with a unique calibration file_" is a *wrong* statement "as minimum" and I don't want to write here what I am thinking...
> 
> What do you think of this behavior? :foottap:
> 
> Add: from #700-2572 to #700-2684 the files are identical, equal, the same...





Esprit said:


> I've bought nine UMIK-1 from Cross-Spectrum.
> I have nine different calibration files (from CS). All the mics are different.
> 
> There are more than one hundred UMIK-1 without the "individual calibration file" from MiniDSP, those who bought these microphones are using a wrong file and they are getting wrong measures.
> 
> The problem is that they don't know anything about this issue.
> 
> P.S. Anyone can verify this just change XXX with a number between 572 and 684
> http://www.minidsp.com/images/umik/7002XXX.txt
> You will get columns that are perfectly identical



So I was just about to order one of these mics, but after skimming through the last few pages, it seems like these so-called individual calibration files are a hoax. I'm also a bit confused about the ones coming from Cross Spectrum Acoustics...are they actually calibrating the mics independent of MiniDSP?


----------



## Topend

mannetti21 said:


> So I was just about to order one of these mics, but after skimming through the last few pages, it seems like these so-called individual calibration files are a hoax. I'm also a bit confused about the ones coming from Cross Spectrum Acoustics...are they actually calibrating the mics independent of MiniDSP?


Yes, Cross Spectrum calibrate the mic and send it out with a USB drive containing cal files at 0, 45 and 90 degrees.

Dave.


----------



## JohnM

neo_2009 said:


> Do you think the dirac version, or the regular umik-1, are accurate enough for obtaining measures to calculate the PEQ filter for the Emotiva UMC200?


Yes.


----------



## neo_2009

Thanks


----------



## JohnM

mannetti21 said:


> So I was just about to order one of these mics, but after skimming through the last few pages, it seems like these so-called individual calibration files are a hoax.


That seems a bit strong, there seems to be a batch that have been supplied with the same cal file, which is clearly wrong and no doubt the subject of some tense discussion between MiniDSP and the supplier, but there are 2,500 other UMIKs that have individual cal data, including those with serial numbers after the batch that was identified in an earlier post.


----------



## neo_2009

JohnM said:


> ... there seems to be a batch that have been supplied with the same cal file, which is clearly wrong and ...


Is there a way to verify if the cal file received is the correct for the received mic?
For example contacting miniDSP, and send them the serial number and the calibration file?


----------



## JohnM

The mic serial number is in the cal file, would have to ask MiniDSP to find out what happened with the batch that had incorrect data.


----------



## Esprit

neo_2009 said:


> @JonhM, i'm from Europe, so i cant order from cross labs (with taxes if would cost 3x more).


I'm in Italy, I've bought (9) nine UMIK-1 from Cross Spectrum, perfect service, only 7 days to receive the goods.
I've paid less of 90€ (UMIK-1 + calibration service + shipping + VAT + customs duty).
I will order, in the future, for my friends other products from Herb. :T


----------



## Esprit

neo_2009 said:


> I dont know if the dirac version has a file calibration to be used with their software, or its calibrated to the specific mic.


All the UMIK-1 have a "calibration files" which can be downloaded from MiniDSP website. The UMIK-1 sold by Dirac is the same as the others.
P.S. The problem, my problem was/is (MiniDSP is trying to solve it...) that I need/want also the MiniDSP calibration file (in addition to those made by CS).


----------



## neo_2009

Thanks @Esprit.
My experiences with Portuguese customs are not that great, so i opted for ordering for German store.


----------



## neo_2009

neo_2009 said:


> Is HDMI required to use with the UMIK-1?





JohnM said:


> No.


When using the umik-1, is it better to use the jack outs, or a optical output?


----------



## JohnM

neo_2009 said:


> When using the umik-1, is it better to use the jack outs, or a optical output?


Can use either, analog outputs don't usually suffer from roll-off within the range of interest for audio measurements.


----------



## neo_2009

But is one better than the other?
Is analog preferred over the optical? Or the opposite?


----------



## minidsp

Dear All,

Following Chinese new Year break, an update is in order with regards to these 100 corrupted calibration files noticed in the previous post. We just had to wait for one week for our supplier to be back from their holiday break. As mentioned to Silvio (Esprit) separately, we're not trying to dodge the issue nor trying to sell a "hoax". Mistakes happen. 

The files are now updated correctly on the server and for those of you wondering what happened (before too many theories prop up..) here is a little summary.  
- Each UMIK-1 is calibrated on the factory floor at the last step in a quiet room. That's done from a measurement software similar to REW, just automated platform (AP). 
- A second step is required to build .txt files that are matching our proprietary format (sensitivity/freq..). That process is a script (code) that takes measurements files and turn them into properly calibrated files. The process is done as a whole batch. One by one would take days...  
- That's the last step where our supplier had a bug that caused the issue for 100 mics during batch of December. The good news is that it's a bug in the last step, it's not a bug in the measurement. 

On our side, our software team has now been putting in place some scripts to check each calibration files we receive and insure we don't have some issues (checking one by one not being valuable).

Hoping this clarify, thanks for your support as usual and have fun with REW! 

Tony
MD @ miniDSP


----------



## Esprit

Very well.


----------



## Tomegun

Keep in mind, the time difference and errors in translation, when you make a comparison between a Company in Asia and a Company in U.S. Not to mention the unknown number of employees dedicated to handle each operation and the unknown number of operations assigned to the unknown number of employees handling all the unknowns.


----------



## flamingeye

I need a adapter so I can mount the UMIK-1 to my camera tripod but do not know the thread size of ether the tripod or that mike clip thingy for the UMIK . can someone direct me to what adapter I need. (the tripod is mail and the mike clip thing is female) if that helps


----------



## Anechoic

flamingeye said:


> I need a adapter so I can mount the UMIK-1 to my camera tripod but do not know the thread size of ether the tripod or that mike clip thingy for the UMIK . can someone direct me to what adapter I need. (the tripod is mail and the mike clip thing is female) if that helps


Camera tripod threads tend to be 1/4-20. The UMIK-1 mic holder (as well as the UMM-6, ECM8000 and EMM-6 holders) are 5/8 with a 3/8 adapter. You can get 3/8 to 1/4-20 adapters from Amazon and eBay among other places.


----------



## flamingeye

thanks' I wasn't able to buy one from amazon for some strange reason I buy from them all the time but they wouldn't let me get that little gadget very strange but I did at ebay , again thanks' who would think such a little thing would be so important .


----------



## workingclass

Well I read the first 26 pages of this thread and also the last 4 pages.. I am just learning about REW and now I think I know a little about this UMIK-1
There is one thing I'm not clear on. 
I have a 2010 Macbook pro No HDMI..So I will need to use a Mic out from Mac to 2xRCA
What do I plug the RCA into on my AVR?
Also I'm wondering if I could use the Mini Display Port-to-HDMI Adapter? 

Thanks


----------



## sandworms

need help, I just installed everything per instructions, mini dsp umik1 , asio newest version , rew newest version , but when opening rew it does not see my mic, when running preference set up I set asio as my driver, asio4all as device, and in advanced I try to set umik1 up and it is not listed under any term? I'm using a windows 7 laptop?


----------



## workingclass

sandworms said:


> need help, I just installed everything per instructions, mini dsp umik1 , asio newest version , rew newest version , but when opening rew it does not see my mic, when running preference set up I set asio as my driver, asio4all as device, and in advanced I try to set umik1 up and it is not listed under any term? I'm using a windows 7 laptop?


Did you boot up w/ umik plugged in ? I know when I did it didn't work.
Do you have only one USB on PC? try using another maybe..Does LED on umik light up?
I just started using REW last week. I had to go through the settings multiple times before I got things going..
Good luck


----------



## sandworms

workingclass said:


> Did you boot up w/ umik plugged in ? I know when I did it didn't work.
> Do you have only one USB on PC? try using another maybe..Does LED on umik light up?
> I just started using REW last week. I had to go through the settings multiple times before I got things going..
> Good luck


I went to the Minidsp forum and found I wasn't the only one with this issue, seems you have to push really hard on the usb cable where it enters the mic until it clicks. So now my rew is seeing the mic, but when I do the next step in set up (per the umik1 set up guide w/hdmi) for the output dropdown, I don't have 8 channels to choose from, only 2, and when I hit the generate tab I get no sound through my onkyo 1010 with the hdmi hooked to it's front panel


----------



## workingclass

sandworms said:


> I went to the Minidsp forum and found I wasn't the only one with this issue, seems you have to push really hard on the usb cable where it enters the mic until it clicks. So now my rew is seeing the mic, but when I do the next step in set up (per the umik1 set up guide w/hdmi) for the output dropdown, I don't have 8 channels to choose from, only 2, and when I hit the generate tab I get no sound through my onkyo 1010 with the hdmi hooked to it's front panel


That happened to me also.. I just don't remember what I did to correct it. Double check and recheck all your settings is the best advice I can give.


----------



## toniok

Very simple question: Is there a difference in purchasing this mic from Cross Spectrum and miniDSP?

Thanks.


----------



## pdxrealtor

toniok said:


> Very simple question: Is there a difference in purchasing this mic from Cross Spectrum and miniDSP?
> 
> Thanks.



Yes- CSL calibrates the mic, and provides the calibration files. The CS is great! 

However, my AVR calibrated my system and my rat shack meter matched it - 75db exactly. But my UMIK and REW read 2-3 DB lower. But down low the UMIK and rat shack are a dead match. 

If it weren't for the fact the AVR was a dead match with the rat shack I wouldn't even question resetting to 75 db with the UMIK. 

In any event it's worth it to get it from Herb.


----------



## toniok

Got it, thanks!


----------



## GCG

sandworms said:


> I went to the Minidsp forum and found I wasn't the only one with this issue, seems you have to push really hard on the usb cable where it enters the mic until it clicks. So now my rew is seeing the mic, but when I do the next step in set up (per the umik1 set up guide w/hdmi) for the output dropdown, I don't have 8 channels to choose from, only 2, and when I hit the generate tab I get no sound through my onkyo 1010 with the hdmi hooked to it's front panel



Things to try:

Check the ASIO control panel. Make sure the HDMI output is selected and the normal audio device output is not. 
Recheck the sound properties in Windows and make sure the HDMI is setup for 7.1 output.
If that is not an available option you may need to enable multi-channel capability in the BIOS. 

Let us know how you do either way.


----------



## flamingeye

sandworms said:


> I went to the Minidsp forum and found I wasn't the only one with this issue, seems you have to push really hard on the usb cable where it enters the mic until it clicks. So now my rew is seeing the mic, but when I do the next step in set up (per the umik1 set up guide w/hdmi) for the output dropdown, I don't have 8 channels to choose from, only 2, and when I hit the generate tab I get no sound through my onkyo 1010 with the hdmi hooked to it's front panel


I have the same problem -no 8 channels to choose from and no sound out of my HT speakers but I do get sound out of the laptop speakers instead , did you ever figure out what the problem was?


----------



## flamingeye

^I'm still having this problem didn't anyone ever figure it out on what there problem was ? I sure would like to use REW +UMIK-1 + HDMI on my room


----------



## EarlK

flamingeye said:


> I have the same problem -no 8 channels to choose from and no sound out of my HT speakers but I do get sound out of the laptop speakers instead , did you ever figure out what the problem was?
> 
> 
> 
> flamingeye said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^I'm still having this problem didn't anyone ever figure it out on what there problem was ? I sure would like to use REW +UMIK-1 + HDMI on my room
Click to expand...

Why not post ( about your challenges ) in a more appropriate thread ? That would be the one called  *Using the UMIK-1 & REW with HDMI output*  

*Some Important Points :*

(i) HDMI ( multi-chnl ) output only works when REW is using ASIO mode ( & this is a Windows only option, btw ) .

(ii) One typically needs to have ASIO4ALL loaded onto ones computer ( & it must be setup properly ) to get signals into the HDMI outputs .

(iii) ASIO4ALL must be chosen as the ASIO driver ( from within REW's preferences window ) .


This ( & other important info ) is covered  *at the miniDSP link*  that is mentioned in Sonnie's sticky .

:sn:


----------



## sandworms

I did check all my settings, I even removed asio and reloaded it, booted, reloaded REW. I actually took 2 steps back. Now it doesn't see the mic ( umik ) nor does it acknowledge 8 channels. This is very frustrating, I get the emails from htshack touting their new relationship with minidsp and I figure they finally have the bugs worked out from a year ago when I first saw the umik1 thread. Apparently not


----------



## flamingeye

sorry I saw it being discussed here so thought this was a good place , I have gone through that link and all you have suggested and like sandworms I'm having the same problem has him, but I will start over over at the proper place the thread that you so kindly provided for me, thanks'


----------



## kutlow

I am having the same problem. This is a shitty system that does not work. wth


----------



## redsandvb

flamingeye said:


> I have the same problem -no 8 channels to choose from and no sound out of my HT speakers but I do get sound out of the laptop speakers instead , did you ever figure out what the problem was?


If REW and ASIO4ALL are configured properly, Does this help...?

If you're on WIN7 open the Control Panel-->Sound.
In Playback tab, if your computers Speakers are listed above your AVR try right-clicking them (computer's Speakers and/or any other entries listed above your revceiver) and clicking Disable.
Tip-also click Show Disabled Devices so they don't disappear.


----------



## Blueleader

Just ordered a UMIK from CSL. This is gonna be fun.






REW...REW...REW your Sound Boat, gently down the Audio Stream :whistling:


----------



## randyc1

Does'nt really sound simple like "Plug & Play" ??


----------



## Santy

My UMIK-1 order was just placed on CSL.
Can't wait to try it out!:T


----------



## FoSheezy

Hello all,
Learning more about REW and just ordered a UMIK-1.
Forgive me if i misunderstand, but is it possible to have any variance from one headphone jack output to another?
Since I am hooking up my laptop with headphone jack to RCA splitter to preamp, is it possible for the output jack to interfere with the signal? i.e. maybe the headphone jack doesn't output below 20hz or certain frequencies output differently?
If I use a different laptop, could I get a different measurement through REW, assuming all else is equal?

Just wondering, since I dont have the option of an HDMI out on my laptop.

Thanks!


----------



## Phillips

FoSheezy said:


> Hello all,
> Learning more about REW and just ordered a UMIK-1.
> Forgive me if i misunderstand, but is it possible to have any variance from one headphone jack output to another?
> Since I am hooking up my laptop with headphone jack to RCA splitter to preamp, is it possible for the output jack to interfere with the signal? i.e. maybe the headphone jack doesn't output below 20hz or certain frequencies output differently?
> If I use a different laptop, could I get a different measurement through REW, assuming all else is equal?
> 
> Just wondering, since I dont have the option of an HDMI out on my laptop.
> 
> Thanks!


You will enjoy the learning curve of REW and room interactions etc.

If your Laptop is Vista or Windows 7 aged you will be fine.
If you are really concerned (shouldn't be) borrow a newer machine and compare make sure the mic doesn't move.

Talking from experience with different laptops i went from a Vista aged machine to a XP (12 years old) and there was a difference, easy fix.

My way around this was to make a calibration file for the difference between the Vista and XP machine.

Generally computer soundcards are very good these days.


----------



## rcohen

It turns out that the delta between 0 degree and 90 degree measurements on UMIK-1s are extremely consistent, based on 10 measurement samples from Cross Spectrum Labs. So, I wrote a utility to translate the 0 degree calibration files from MiniDSP to 90 degree files.

If you need a 90 degree file to make measurements with the microphone pointed up, but only have the 0 degree individual calibration file from MiniDSP, give it a try (attached file).

If you haven't purchased the mic yet, it's worth it to spend the extra $20 to get an individual 90 degree measurement from Cross Spectrum Labs. If you already have the mic, this is a good alternative.

http://www.minidsp.com/forum/umik-questions/10088-translate-0-degree-calibration-to-90-degree


----------



## customaudioman

I would like to buy one of these for car audio tuning. what the best place to order one from?


----------



## rcohen

customaudioman said:


> I would like to buy one of these for car audio tuning. what the best place to order one from?


I'd recommend spending the extra $20 to get it from Cross Spectrum Labs with more measurement data.

I don't know much about car audio measurements, but my guess is that you'd use the 90 degree file with all those speakers, and it only includes a 0 degree file when you buy from MiniDSP.


----------



## customaudioman

okay thanks, just wanted to make sure I needed to buy from them.


----------



## Doctor X

Sorry, this is a noob question so please forgive me. Are there any benefits buying the UMIK-1 over the Dayton UMM-6 mic? Any drawbacks? 

I want to make up my mind, but those are the two choices I have. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## GCG

Cross Spectrum will ship the UMIK-1 to addresses in and out of the US. They only ship the UMM-6 to US addresses. I don't know why. Parts Express doesn't seem to have the same restriction on the UMM-6 but only includes the one 0° calibration file AFAIK.


----------



## Doctor X

GCG said:


> Cross Spectrum will ship the UMIK-1 to addresses in and out of the US. They only ship the UMM-6 to US addresses. I don't know why. Parts Express doesn't seem to have the same restriction on the UMM-6 but only includes the one 0° calibration file AFAIK.


Alright, and performance-wise? Is there any reason why the UMIK-1 is a better mic than the UMM-6 for REW, or is it much of a muchness? 

Is it true that these mics are plug and play for REW? No real tinkering of settings to get them to work properly? I guess I just want to know if there are any drawbacks to the UMIK so that I can make a more informed decision.


----------



## Phillips

Much the same depends on calibration.


----------



## GCG

UMIK was plug&play for me. I couldn't say on the UMM-6.


----------



## harlington

I am using the latest REW via hdmi and the cross spectrum umik-1. I don't have a spl meter. I am trying to measure my subs max output and REW gave me an overhead error when my MV above +5. Can someone help me to be able to measure above +5MV with accurate measurement? Thanks.


----------



## JohnM

harlington said:


> I am using the latest REW via hdmi and the cross spectrum umik-1. I don't have a spl meter. I am trying to measure my subs max output and REW gave me an overhead error when my MV above +5. Can someone help me to be able to measure above +5MV with accurate measurement? Thanks.


Turn down the input volume setting on the UMIK.


----------



## harlington

^^ thanks john. I assume the measured graphs still have accurate spl readings? Thanks.


----------



## JohnM

Yes, if you have the UMIK selected as the input device and Microphone (or similar) selected as the input and the cal file has the sensitivity figure as the first line.


----------



## harlington

^^ great. Thanks. I have all that.


----------



## harlington

After Audessey calibration, I ran sweep at reference MV and got about 105db average from 10-200hz for my subs. What is wrong as I suppose to get 115db at reference 0MV? I have a cross spectrum umik-1 and use REW hdmi4 output. Thanks.


----------



## GCG

Does your calibration file(s) have the sensitivity entry at the top like this:









The top line should start with '"Sens Factor ..."'. If it doesn't go to the MiniDSP site and download their Calibration file using the serial number from your mic. Copy and paste the first line of that file to the top line of *COPIES* of *ALL* the Cross Spectrum supplied files. Use Wordpad, not Notepad, as the files don't like Notepad for some reason.


----------



## harlington

^^ yes, I already did that.


----------



## Pander

I am collecting documentation for using UMIK-1 on Linux on github. Please submit additional information to this repository called umik-1 by PanderMusubi if you have it.


----------



## Sam Ash

*UMIK-1 and REW - Interesting*

Just got my UMIK-1 package and decided to try it out with the highly reputable REW software (Mac Version 5.01 Beta 24).

Once the UMIK-1 is connected and is recognised by REW, it asks for a calibration file. I downloaded the serial number associated calibration files from the MiniDSP site and I'm using the 90 degree version (for Mic pointing straight-up). Once that calibration file is located, REW takes it into consideration. I presume no further calibration is required, is that correct ?

I started with the SPL utility in REW to set my home theatre speaker levels, this is what I did:-

1) I used the pink noise function built into my pre/pro which allows activation of each individual speaker.
2.) I raised the volume of the pre/pro until the SPL utility read 70dB (Did this at night with no or minimum ambient noise).
3.) I set the levels of all the speakers to 70dB or close.

I later realised that I performed the above procedure using the z weighting instead of the C weighting which most people recommend when using an SPL meter.

Will my levels be wrong with z weighting ?

Does C weighting have any benefit over z weighting ?

Furthermore, I intend to use REW to ascertain my room response especially for the lows (20Hz-200Hz), I have a male to male headphone plugs cable that goes from the headphone interface of the macbook pro into an adapter that allows conversion to stereo RCA/Phono. I presume I have to connect one of the RCA connectors (either left or right) into the sub input on the processor. I use a powered sub which is connected to the pre/pro via sub pre-out. I want to perform tests with both pink noise and a sweep.

1.) How do I bypass the crossover setting (80Hz) ? - By setting the XO as high as possible e.g. 200Hz ?

2.) Can the sweep cause any damage to my subwoofer or speakers ? (My speakers are not full-range and have been configured to work with an XO of 80Hz).

Any help from fellow members will be appreciated.


----------



## jtalden

*Re: UMIK-1 and REW - Interesting*



Sam Ash said:


> I presume no further calibration is required, is that correct ?


That's correct.



> Will my levels be wrong with z weighting ?


The levels will be the same with either weighting selected in this case. REW only applies the C weighting curve outside the range of the calibration file. The UMIK-1 cal file is full range so there was no effect.



> Does C weighting have any benefit over z weighting ?


Z weighting is flat (No weighting). C weighting rolls off in the bass and treble. Wiki or other resources have good explanations. With REW C is used for handheld SPL Meters that do not have a cal file or Z Weighting. 



> 1.) How do I bypass the crossover setting (80Hz) ? - By setting the XO as high as possible e.g. 200Hz ?


The sub input bypasses the XO, but the LPF is still active. Its common to set the LPF off or as high as possible for SW only measurements and EQ the SW flat. There may be 10dB higher level on the SW that way? I never did it that way. I just use the mains inputs and allow the XO to be active. I then sweep with the SW only active, then with the main only active, and then with both the SW and main active for that channel. That way I can see how well they blend through the XO range. 

There are several procedures that work fine. Just find a procedure that will work for your setup and follow it.



> 2.) Can the sweep cause any damage to my subwoofer or speakers ? (My speakers are not full-range and have been configured to work with an XO of 80Hz).


It is recommended to test at 75-80dB level. That way there is no way to damage the SW, mains, or you ears.


----------



## Sam Ash

*Re: UMIK-1 and REW - Interesting*

Dear JTalden, thank you very much indeed for your kind and helpful input.



> The sub input bypasses the XO, but the LPF is still active.


Do you mean the sub input of the pre/pro ? I have switched-off the LPF on the SW as I find it easier to bass manage directly from the pre/pro. Hence, to work with REW, I'd like to connect via the pre/pro (SW input) as opposed to connecting directly to the SW because it is much easier for me to access my pre/pro.

Let me explain further, at first I thought I should connect the stereo RCA or phono from my laptop headphone out to one of the stereo inputs on my processor. However, my processor also has a set of 7.1 unbalanced phono inputs and I'm wondering if its better to connect one of the stereo phono connectors (either left or right) into the SW phono interface within the 7.1 inputs on the pre/pro.



> Its common to set the LPF off or as high as possible for SW only measurements and EQ the SW flat.


I will check to see if I can switch-off the LPF in the processor and if that is not possible then set it as high as possible. Is there a tutorial that shows how to EQ the SW flat ?



> There may be 10dB higher level on the SW that way? I never did it that way. I just use the mains inputs and allow the XO to be active. I then sweep with the SW only active, then with the main only active, and then with both the SW and main active for that channel. That way I can see how well they blend through the XO range.
> There are several procedures that work fine. Just find a procedure that will work for your setup and follow it.


The above information is very interesting but I don't fully understand what you mean. I will really appreciate it if you can explain it to me further. What do you mean by the mains inputs ?



> It is recommended to test at 75-80dB level. That way there is no way to damage the SW, mains, or you ears.


Well noted - I set my levels at 70dB using the SPL utility and even that was quite loud.


----------



## jtalden

Well you seem to be starting from basics rather than needing clarification on a few items.
I suggest you move to the REW forum and read all the sticky threads as well as REW help. There is lots of good info there on both setup for measuring and how to EQ to a house curve.

Your browser is also you friend as there are lots of other articles on how to setup a SW if that is your overall intent. *Here* is one example site with lots of good info.

Post any question you have in that forum as it the place to go for this kind of help.


----------



## Sam Ash

jtalden said:


> Well you seem to be starting from basics rather than needing clarification on a few items.
> I suggest you move to the REW forum and read all the sticky threads as well as REW help. There is lots of good info there on both setup for measuring and how to EQ to a house curve.
> 
> Your browser is also you friend as there are lots of other articles on how to setup a SW if that is your overall intent. *Here* is one example site with lots of good info.
> 
> Post any question you have in that forum as it the place to go for this kind of help.


Thank you, I appreciate it.


----------



## Sam Ash

Hi guys, I've had a bit of a strange experience and was wondering if someone may be able to shed some light. From what I understand the UMIK-1 does not need to be calibrated against a dedicated SPL meter.

*SETTING SPEAKER LEVELS OF MY 7.1 HT USING REW & UMIK-1*
I used the pink noise function in my processor and positioned the UMIK-1 so that it was in the main listening point (sweet spot) at ear level and pointing straight-up. I did not use any calibration file. I activated the SPL to start measuring and raised the volume on my processor so that it read about 60dB. I say “about” because that figure keeps shifting with the pink noise. I then activated each speakers including the subwoofer until I got more-a-less the same reading (60 dB). After this process, I performed a test with some movies and it sounded so much better but I had to intuitively raise the level of the subwoofer for better overall integration. By that I mean, the low frequency effects were eventually strong enough to give that nice low-end thump but not too much that it ruins the mid and high frequencies. I tested the new levels with some movies and they sounded nice. For music I had to set the Subwoofer levels a little lower to get a nice balance.

Then, after a few days, I performed the same procedure with the 90 degrees calibration file in effect. I noticed that people on the forums recommended a figure of 70 to 75 dB for measurements and so I raised the volume until I achieved 70dB in the REW SPL utility and re-calibrated speaker levels. To my surprise, it made things worse. Although, I set all the levels to around 70 dB, my side and rear speakers became far too pronounced and overshadowed my front speakers. Speech intelligibility has become a problem and there seems to be a bit of brightness in the sound not to mention that my subwoofer is not integrating as well as it was before. I guess the brightness is just a sensation created due to the incorrect levels.

Any idea what the problem could be ?


----------



## jtalden

Just a guess:
The pink noise used may have been full range instead of band limited? Channel level setting for mains is normally done on band limited noise containing only the mid frequencies. If the noise was full range the LF room modes would be excited. The higher SW levels used in the second setup may have corrupted the process in the mains to a greater extent.

I suggest:
Use the REW signal generator for "Pink Noise" and chose "Speaker Cal" to get a band limited noise for the mains. You could also turn off the SW if you want extra confidence, but that shouldn't be necessary. Set the mains levels using the REW meter set to "Slow" to help smooth out the fluctuation. This should work and should be consistent if repeated. The mains levels should be then correct. 

Then switch the signal to the "Sub Cal" setting and set the SW level. This is more problematic as the room modes and personal preferences make a significant difference. This is a good starting point however. After some listening experience you can then just adjust the SW level to taste as needed.


----------



## Sam Ash

jtalden said:


> Just a guess:
> The pink noise used may have been full range instead of band limited? Channel level setting for mains is normally done on band limited noise containing only the mid frequencies. If the noise was full range the LF room modes would be excited. The higher SW levels used in the second setup may have corrupted the process in the mains to a greater extent.
> 
> I suggest:
> Use the REW signal generator for "Pink Noise" and chose "Speaker Cal" to get a band limited noise for the mains. You could also turn off the SW if you want extra confidence, but that shouldn't be necessary. Set the mains levels using the REW meter set to "Slow" to help smooth out the fluctuation. This should work and should be consistent if repeated. The mains levels should be then correct.
> 
> Then switch the signal to the "Sub Cal" setting and set the SW level. This is more problematic as the room modes and personal preferences make a significant difference. This is a good starting point however. After some listening experience you can then just adjust the SW level to taste as needed.


Hi Jtalden, thank you for your kind input. Actually, for both times, I did not take the subwoofer into consideration because I realised that it is not quite effective without some manual tweaking pertaining to individual rooms and personal preferences as you correctly said.

My settings in the REW SPL were correct I think: Z weighted and slow.

I would not mind using REW's pink noise generator for "Speaker Cal" at all and appreciate that suggestion. However, I would have to connect and disconnect RCA connectors several times behind my AV processor to achieve that and that would certainly be a bit cumbersome.

One thing that I do remember that was different in the last level setting procedure, apart from using the 90 degrees calibration file, was the fact that the word "OVER" near the SPL value in the top right hand corner turned red. What does that indicate ?


----------



## JohnM

"OVER" means the input signal is clipping. You can clear that by clicking on the OVER indicator, but it means input levels are too high. Odd to have that on a UMIK-1 since it would indicate very high SPL.

UMIK-1 can only be used as a calibrated SPL meter with REW if you load the MiniDSP cal file for the meter or load a 3rd party cal file that has the sensitivity figure from the MiniDSP file added as the first line, without that sensitivity info REW doesn't have the information it needs to translate the signal level into SPL.

Use C weighting when setting speaker levels.


----------



## Sam Ash

JohnM said:


> "OVER" means the input signal is clipping. You can clear that by clicking on the OVER indicator, but it means input levels are too high. Odd to have that on a UMIK-1 since it would indicate very high SPL.
> 
> UMIK-1 can only be used as a calibrated SPL meter with REW if you load the MiniDSP cal file for the meter or load a 3rd party cal file that has the sensitivity figure from the MiniDSP file added as the first line, without that sensitivity info REW doesn't have the information it needs to translate the signal level into SPL.
> 
> Use C weighting when setting speaker levels.


Thank you very much indeed John, I downloaded the two calibration files from the miniDSP site by entering the serial number of my UMIK-1 mic and used the 90-degrees version as I have been pointing the mic straight-up at ear level at the sweet spot.

Here is the first line of my 90-degrees calibration file:-

"Sens Factor =0.1904dB, SERNO: 7004996" 

The "Sens Factor" value is the same in the 0-degrees calibration file.

I will try and set the levels again using C weighting as per your advice, I will do this with the 90-degrees calibration file in effect. Additionally, I may try and redo the procedure without the calibration file as I did initially and obtained much better results.


----------



## Pander

Can I use REW with my UMIK-1 to test if I have any faulty speakers or do I need other software for that? The speakers I want to test are eight identical ones from which I do not have specifications. However, I know some are faulty and comparing them amongst themselves I will be able to determine which are done and can be recycled and which I can keep on using. PS I am very new to REW. I could think of putting a sweeping sine through each of them and compare spectrograms but I am sure there must be something out there which is specially made for this.


----------



## e-t172

If you compare the speakers by measuring them with exactly the same setup each time (especially the position of the speaker and the position of the microphone), the measurements should be valid relative to each other (but not in an absolute way, because of room acoustics). From there it should be easy to see which ones have a frequency response that deviates from the others, or have abnormal harmonic distortion. Simply follow the standard REW measurement procedure.


----------



## Sam Ash

*Speaker Levels Calibration*

Jtalden / John - I am still trying to figure out and resolve the problem I am having with speaker level calibration using REW's SPL utility and UMIK-1. Have a look at the attached Acrobat PDF file containing screen shots. I have indicated some settings and have asked some questions. Your input will be appreciated. I am running REW on a MacBook Pro.


----------



## jtalden

Sam Ash,
Just to advise:
I will need to leave these questions to those that use a Mac and USB mics. I don't see a problem, but there could easily be one as I just don't have any experience with that setup to know.


----------



## JohnM

*Re: Speaker Levels Calibration*



Sam Ash said:


> Jtalden / John - I am still trying to figure out and resolve the problem I am having with speaker level calibration using REW's SPL utility and UMIK-1. Have a look at the attached Acrobat PDF file containing screen shots. I have indicated some settings and have asked some questions. Your input will be appreciated. I am running REW on a MacBook Pro.


The gain figure in the UMIK-1 device name comes from the device itself, it indicates an internal gain setting (which can be altered by opening the device should there be a need, would be unusual).

Use Audio Midi Setup rather than Sound preferences to set the input gain and set it to 0 dB (per the help).

Select the input for the UMIK in the REW soundcard preferences rather than leaving it as "Default Input", that allows REW to compensate for any changes to the input volume setting (if running the REW beta version).


----------



## j.rozsypal

Hello,
I ´ve just finished my first measurement via UMIK-1 and Wharfedale pacific evo II - 30
http://www.audio-occasion.qc.ca/pdf/Wharfedale EVO 2.pdf
There is something strange for me below 100Hz.

1. two gaps (55Hz, 95Hz) 
2. measured characteristics rises up below 50Hz, I expected falling down with my speakers...

What could be wrong ?


----------



## Blacklightning

j.rozsypal said:


> Hello,
> I ´ve just finished my first measurement via UMIK-1 and Wharfedale pacific evo II - 30
> http://www.audio-occasion.qc.ca/pdf/Wharfedale EVO 2.pdf
> There is something strange for me below 100Hz.
> 
> 1. two gaps (55Hz, 95Hz)
> 2. measured characteristics rises up below 50Hz, I expected falling down with my speakers...
> 
> What could be wrong ?


I do not see any thing wrong... your speakers response is not going to be flat and your graph is really zoomed out so it's going to look flat. 

I would start a new tread and post your file and the guys here will help you. I think you first need to know what you are looking at and understand that most people hear the room and not the speakers when it comes to bass.


----------



## gdstupak

Holy--Cow!!!
$20 shipping. Is this being shipped from the moon?


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt

China actually, which is close enough...

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## gdstupak

Thanks for the info Wayne,
I was thinking maybe I pushed a wrong button when ordering.

I apologize if this subject had been breached already but this thread was a bit long to go through.


----------



## planetnine

*UMIK-1 mic gain*



JohnM said:


> The gain figure in the UMIK-1 device name comes from the device itself, it indicates an internal gain setting (which can be altered by opening the device should there be a need, would be unusual).
> 
> Use Audio Midi Setup rather than Sound preferences to set the input gain and set it to 0 dB (per the help).
> 
> Select the input for the UMIK in the REW soundcard preferences rather than leaving it as "Default Input", that allows REW to compensate for any changes to the input volume setting (if running the REW beta version).



I'm struggling with this, John, I need to set the range to 0dB to allow higher SPL measurements in REW.

From the UMIK-1 datasheet: *Max SPL for 1% THD @ 1kHz - 133dB SPL @ 0dB gain setting *


I can clip the ADC running at only 95dBA pink noise. I'm presuming this is because of the 18dB mic-gain applied, but I can't find how to set it to the 0dB range.

"_Use Audio Midi Setup rather than Sound preferences..._" Is this in REW or an OS thing?
"_...per the help_" is this REW help, or from a UMIK-1 help file (which I don't have).

I'm on Win7-64.


I feel I'm missing something obvious...




>


----------



## JohnM

The gain is set by switches inside the mic, there is a thread on how to do that here.


----------



## planetnine

JohnM said:


> The gain is set by switches inside the mic, there is a thread on how to do that here.



Thank you once again John. 

I'd got to this understanding since my post, having wandered around the MiniDSP forums, but I didn't know the actual gain options and I hadn't seen any pictures. This is perfect -it makes me much happier to go exploring inside my own UMIK mic now. I want to analyse one of my PA rigs. I think I'm going to set it to 6dB after reading that thread, rather than 0dB.


I'm wondering if this gain is being set digitally by simple bit-shifting, as the steps are "6dB", ie a factor of two, one binary bit column. This wouldn't upset the capsule and analogue calibration, it would just be digital scaling -it would make sense as nobody seems worried about calibration issues while changing this sensitivity setting in the mic, including the manufacturer.


If this is the case, should we be amending the REW UMIK calibration sensitivity by 6.0208dB per step..? :nerd:


thanks once again...



>


----------



## JohnM

The gain settings in the mic are affecting the analog front end gain, to keep the REW levels displaying correctly the sensitivity figure in the cal file needs to be adjusted correspondingly - so if you set the switches for 6 dB instead of 18 dB for example, subtract 12 dB from the sensitivity figure.

The Windows volume control applies digital gain adjustment over a span of -31 dB to +24 dB (the span and resolution is set by the device itself). As long as the input has been selected in the REW soundcard settings (not just left as default) REW compensates for the effect of the digital gain so SPL readings are not affected by the volume control setting.


----------



## planetnine

That would explain why the input level graph seems to change while adjusting the Windows gain, but the SPL seems to correct itself once the gain slider stops changing.

It seems to be a good idea to not give this gain value any positive value to avoid eating into the signal-chain headroom. Is this correct?



>


----------



## JohnM

Yes, there isn't any benefit from using levels above 0dB since S/N isn't improved. By default REW sets the volume control to 0 dB.


----------



## planetnine

Just for clarification John, does REW change the actual value that the Windows mic level slider normally controls, or does it apply a correction value to it? I'm just trying to understand the signal chain/ logic of the USB mic input.

There seem to be option tickboxes in Win7 to allow applications to control levels, but the REW input level (dB FSD) suggests that doesn't happen and it is corrected afterwards. 

I have been prodding about with this REW/UMIK combination and already found in my case that adding the mic after the program is running can upset the correction logic, resulting in incorrect SPL values. I would like to understand the system and root out any pitfalls like these before I use it in anger -without a second SPL meter I wouldn't have been sure that I'd broken the level control/compensation.

Thanks for bearing with me...



>


----------



## JohnM

planetnine said:


> Just for clarification John, does REW change the actual value that the Windows mic level slider normally controls, or does it apply a correction value to it? I'm just trying to understand the signal chain/ logic of the USB mic input.


If the box is checked on the REW soundcard preferences to allow REW to control input volume and the volume setting is less than the 0 dB level REW will raise it to the 0 dB level when the input is first selected, otherwise it leaves it alone. Whether REW has set the volume or not, it monitors the volume setting and adjusts the SPL readings to suit.

It is best to plug in USB soundcards before REW starts up, Java only refreshes the audio device lists every minute or so. Make sure the cal file is still loaded.


----------



## planetnine

I think I follow now.

Explains why the REW input level meter seems to set, then dances around when I change the Win mic input level, but the SPL corrects. 

Much more confident in using this in front of a client for SPL and LEQ logging tests at a show now. Thank you for answering my pernickety questions John.



>


----------



## splatman2

Hi All,

I just received my MiniDSP and Umik-1 Mic. Very excited about this adventure and nervous at the same time. I plan to follow the guide listed here to the T yet I'm hooping that with this setup I can do some real time frequency response on the room in place of the sub-woofer crawl to find the best or smoothest response I can before starting with filters etc. Is that possible? The subs I chose to use are breasts and won't play well trying to sit them on a chair in the listening position. I'm also limited to placement behind the movie screen on a stage.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt

splatman2 said:


> I hooping that with this setup I can do some real time frequency response on the room in place of the sub-woofer crawl to find the best or smoothest response I can before starting with filters etc. Is that possible?


 Yes. Use the RTA feature. It will play a continuous pink noise signal. As you move the sub you’ll see the graph change in real time (hence the name Real Time Analyzer). :T

Regards, 
Wayne


----------



## splatman2

Thank y only hope I ordered the correct Plugin. 
2x4 Advanced
Date added:	06/01/2015
Date modified:	06/01/2015
Filesize:	3.55 MB
miniDSP 2x4 Advanced plug-in. Win&Mac build

2x4 advanced plug-in with matrix, Crossover, PEQ, compressor/Limiter..

V1.01 / Release date June 2015

I'm following this guide at this time
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-s...dual-sub-integration-using-minidsp-print.html

and there are 2) 2 way Advanced pluging on the MiniDSP page so I went with the one that said:
"Similar to all miniDSP plug-ins, this plug-in is fully compatible with Room EQ Wizard thanks to its tight integration with the Advanced biquad feature."
Hope this is the right one. But if not another $10 to go.:rolleyesno:


----------



## tputkonen

I received my UMIK-1 today and plugged it in, but couldn't figure out how to get REW to recognize it - no dialog box is shown when REW is started.

I'm running 32-bit Windows 7 and REW v5.12 with JRE 1.8.0_45. Device Manager / Sound devices does show UMIK-1 so I assume the mic is working fine.

My Soundcard is M-Audio Revolution 7.1 which is recognized by REW only when using ASIO drivers. If I select "Java drives" REW shows a warning "No input mixers available".

What I should try next?


----------



## tane0019

Hi, 

Had the x-spectrum miniDSP mic with me for quite a few weeks - but couldn't find time to try it out.
Partly because I'm totally new to REW & need a fair bit of reading up.
Finally drag myself to set it up & make some very rough measurements.
A few question on using the UMIK-1 USB mic with REW that really like the gurus here to advises if my steps were correct or not.

1) When loading in the mic cal file - which one to pick ?
[C weighted SPL Meter] or [Mic or Z Weighted SPL Meter] ??

2) When I plug in the mic, there is this warning, is there something wrong with the cal file provided ?
[The mic calibration file does not have sensitivity data (there is no Sens Factor line in the file), SPL readings will need to be calibrated against an external SPL meter.]
I make use of the [narrow_band_response_0_degree.frd] as per x-spectrum suggested instruction.

3) After which, I click the [Make Measurement] tab, adjust the start freq to [0 hz] and end freq to [24,000], level dB FS [-12.0], length to [256k], sweeps to [1].
Press the [Check Levels] and follow the instructions (keep increase my pre amp vol up till the level it say OK).

4) Press [Start Measurement] - then that is it.

Any specific step(s) that I might had missed out ?

Many thanks in advance.


----------



## JohnM

tane0019 said:


> 1) When loading in the mic cal file - which one to pick ?
> [C weighted SPL Meter] or [Mic or Z Weighted SPL Meter] ??


Mic or Z Weighted SPL Meter



> 2) When I plug in the mic, there is this warning, is there something wrong with the cal file provided ?
> [The mic calibration file does not have sensitivity data (there is no Sens Factor line in the file), SPL readings will need to be calibrated against an external SPL meter.]
> I make use of the [narrow_band_response_0_degree.frd] as per x-spectrum suggested instruction.


As the message says, the file does not have sensitivity data - Cross Spectrum don't include it. Download the miniDSP cal file for your mic and copy the first line from that file into the Cross Spectrum file.


----------



## tane0019

Many thanks John.

On my point 3), it is correct ? 
Or do I need to calibrate the SPL level to 75dB (both REW and another external SPL meter) first before executing point 3) check level ?


----------



## JohnM

SPL calibration would not be needed if the cal file has the sensitivity data and the UMIK is selected as the input for REW, so REW 'knows' a UMIK is the input source.

The levels check is to make sure the signal level is not too low to give a good measurement, it is not related to SPL as such - if you were very close to the speaker, for example, a low SPL could still have good signal levels. The levels check is not something that needs to be done often, if the levels are too low (or too high) REW will warn you when you measure anyway. If the levels are too low it is better to adjust the input volume settings rather than the replay volume. The measurement signal should never be uncomfortably loud.


----------



## tane0019

Thk again John.


----------



## mojogoes

HI GUY'S

If ones umik-1 mic cal number has rubbed off ones mic / plus i had to reinstall windows on my laptop and all my programs along with REW! So its no longer recognized , So how does one find the relevant calibration file to be able to use my mic again.

Regards 
Steve.


----------



## Landshark77

How do I add top line of minidsp cal file to cross spectrum 90 degree file? I am running this on a MacBook Pro.
Thanks


----------



## JohnM

Open the files in textedit and copy the first line of the miniDSP file to the top of the Cross Spectrum file.


----------



## critofur

rmalak said:


> I forgot to add this after I received my UMIK from CSL but better late than never. Here are the two cal files overlaid. The dark line is CSL (0 degree narrow band) and the light one is Mini DSP.


Hello, the photo link seems to be broken. Is it possible to upload the photo to the forum rather than host on another site? The offsite photo hosting always seems to break eventually 

EDIT: I kept looking, and see there are some images still working here: http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...-minidsp-umik-1-microphone-46.html#post603340


----------



## netroamer

Sorry if this is a dumb or previously answered question, however what is the advantage of the UMIK-1 vs the Genelec 8200A mic I have been using? Will the 8200A work with, and perform correctly with, the asio4all software? I am very interested in running independent sweeps of each of the 7.1 channels in my system. :help:


----------



## JohnM

If you can use the mic with REW's Java drivers it should also work with ASIO4All.


----------



## -Jim-

Hi John & all,

Great thread! I'm certain a lot of time and effort has gone into the matching of Room EQ Wizard and the MiniDSP UMIK-1 Mic. Thanks for that. 

I'm thinking of trying Room EQ Wizard on my systems, and if I get proficient with it, maybe those of my family & friends. So my focus will probably be in those areas here at HTS. Being married, I don't have lots of extra cash outside of the family budget to spend on expensive equipment, but I'd like to try to get the most out of what I have. I'm ready to order a MiniDSP UMIK-1 Mic as it fits my budget and what I've read suggests it will do the job although not down to the nether regions the most expensive Subs can achieve. (Mine tap out at about 25 Hz so I think I'm safe.) So I guess my first question is, is the UMIK-1 Mic still the right choice at this spec & price point to use with the latest REW software?

Thanks for the assist.

Regards,

Jim


----------



## JohnM

Yes, the UMIK-1 is still a great choice.


----------



## -Jim-

Thank you John. I'll order one this week


----------



## -Jim-

John & All,

The Canadian Distributor (Solen Online) has both the MiniDSP UMIK-1 & Dayton UMM-6 at ($114 & $104 respectively plus shipping & taxes.) I've seen posts on other sites where they think the Dayton is the way to go and others where the UMIK-1 is the choice.

If you had to choose, and the only thing you plan to use it for is Room EQ Wizard on a Windows platform, which way would you go?

Thanks for the assist.

Regards,

Jim


----------



## b bos37

Umik1


----------



## -Jim-

Thanks for the info b bos37.

I ordered one tonight.


----------



## JohnM

I'd go with the UMIK. The UMM-6 can be a bit fragile.


----------



## -Jim-

Glad I made the right choice Gentlemen.


----------



## Rick R

Me, I got one too this week UMIK1 that is. Only just tried it out briefly, but so far so much easier to use than a separate amp and Mic/SPL meter with calibration unknown or greatly suspect. Most important thing I did to start was download the cal files and save them and the serial number to disk and my backups archive. That now all being safe time to play:smile: and see what improvements I can make


----------



## -Jim-

Rick,

Glad to hear it's easier to use. I work on the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid  ) so if this Mic helps keep it simple => I'm all for that. The Canadian Distributor (Solen Online) said the delivery for the MiniDSP UMIK-1 would take between 1-5 days (I assume business days) so it should be here on Monday. I can hardly wait to try it out!


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Rick,
> 
> Glad to hear it's easier to use. I work on the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid  ) so if this Mic helps keep it simple => I'm all for that. The Canadian Distributor (Solen Online) said the delivery for the MiniDSP UMIK-1 would take between 1-5 days (I assume business days) so it should be here on Monday. I can hardly wait to try it out!


Hi Jim,
Mine from a dealer in London arrived overnight:smile:. I read another post somewhere where a forum members computer had a problem and the serial number had rubbed off the UMIK1 (sticky label type thing) he had lost everything and was asking how he could get that information (no serial number no cal files), which I don't know the answer to. So I think heeding my advice on backup of the cal files and serial number to at least a CD is probably a good idea, but me I'm daft about things like that and have most important things backed up (even the Denon 4520 settings file):nerd2:.

I have had a play but need to refresh my memory on some aspects of REW luckily the help files are good. But no need to calibrate the computer sound card, no loop backs required. Just plug in the UMIK1 (you may need to reboot REW the first time) wait for a few seconds or so for the message to come up select yes to use the UMIK1 a couple of seconds later it asks you for the cal file (which you should have copied somewhere on your PC there are two a point mic at object and a 90deg cal file for the mic to point at the ceiling for multichannel) set your levels and away you go. There are of course the main settings in REW to be done like sweep start and finish etc. etc. but basically if I have that right its that simple. One peculiar thing I did note with my Pioneer based system is that with the MCACC on I had a notch at 80Hz (crossover? some one else has seen this problem in another post) which was not there when I checked the speaker flat from the AVR with MCACC off the only reason I had put MCACC on at this point was to get the S/W working to do a full sweep. So lots of playing to do and proper learning curve:yikes: now I have the right kit.

Anyway to conclude, yep this seems to go along with the KISS principle :smile:and helps make a complex subject like room analysis just that little bit easier.

All the best in your endeavours when it arrives, but for sure there is plenty of help at the Home Theatre Shack if you need it

Rick


----------



## -Jim-

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the post. My MiniDSP UMIK-1 arrived to day but after work we had to go to the Canucks (Hockey) Game so I didn't get to play with it at all. I'll go grab the Box now and try to get the Serial number so I can download the Cal File. I probably won' get much time to play with this until the weekend but I may try to sneak in an hour or two.


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Hi Rick,
> 
> Thanks for the post. My MiniDSP UMIK-1 arrived to day but after work we had to go to the Canucks (Hockey) Game so I didn't get to play with it at all. I'll go grab the Box now and try to get the *Serial number *so I can download the *Cal File*. I probably won' get much time to play with this until the weekend but I may try to sneak in an hour or two.


Hi Jim
Great you got it. Have highlighted in your post above two points. *Serial Number* This is on a fairly substantial sticky on the thick end of the UMIK1 so no trouble finding that (unless it eventually wears off as has happened and why I have saved mine to CD). *Cal File* as I mentioned in my earlier post there are *two* a standard file for use when pointing at the object to be measured such as a stereo system or measuring a speaker. The other is a 90deg cal file typically from what I read for home theatre type calibrations and with this calibration loaded the microphone should be pointed at the ceiling (like most AVR calibration mics).

All the best
Rick


----------



## -Jim-

Hi Rick,

I grabbed both Cal files, and I took a screen snip of the serial number when I plugged it into the MiniDSP website. Then I emailed all 3 files to myself in Hotmail, and another email account, so I'd be sure to have them if I lose them on this computer.

If I really want another back up I'll email them to my Brother.

My son just bought the new Star Wars Movie and wants me to watch it tonight. So there goes a chance to play with the UMIK-1.


----------



## -Jim-

The Star Wars movie was good in Blue Ray. I finally got time Friday to play with the Mic & all. The UMIK-1 seems to work as advertised. (I'm now into the REW learning curve.) I've got a Camera Tripod that I hardly use which works for the Denon Audyssey Mic and of course won't fit the UMIK-1. I guess I'll try to make an adapter. I do remember seeing something about one on this forum (on eBay?). Perhaps I'll go find that thread again.


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> The Star Wars movie was good in Blue Ray. I finally got time Friday to play with the Mic & all. The UMIK-1 seems to work as advertised. (I'm now into the REW learning curve.) I've got a Camera Tripod that I hardly use which works for the Denon Audyssey Mic and of course won't fit the UMIK-1. I guess I'll try to make an adapter. I do remember seeing something about one on this forum (on eBay?). Perhaps I'll go find that thread again.


Hi Jim,
Not too impressed with that movie sound and video good, but to watch not too much different to the original so I was a little disappointed. 
The mic adaptor, strange I got a mic stand originially for the Denon Audyssey Mic and a standard camera mount adaptor to go onto the stand which screws into the Audyssey Mic fine, the Mic clip supplied with the UMIK1 fits that same adaptor perfectly.
Getting to grips with REW can be a trial but plenty of help on here look out for the REW + HDMI Output thread good starting point been looking for the link but can't find it. It is also on the MiniDSP UMIK1 site complete with download link for ASIO4ALL which you will also need. I actually have to cut and run going out to dinner tonight shortly and will suffer severe wrath if I am not ready.
Finally I wrote my UMIK1 serial number to text document using note pad and put it and the two calibration files, which are also text documents, on to a CD which is stored with all my other important software in a secure archive, to me that seemed the most secure way being physical storage rather than relying on emailed or other similar electronic copies. I just feel it is more secure than it being on a hard drive somewhere, they can crash or be inadvertently wiped. But that's just me I guess.

I found the link to REW + HDMI Output the link is in Sonnies post located here and takes you to the guide on miniDSP site http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...-using-umik-1-rew-hdmi-output.html#post676855


----------



## -Jim-

Thanks Rick,

I wasn't expecting much from a movie franchise that goes back almost 40 years. It's like a new Bond film, the bar has been set and I just go along with it. (That's why I said it was just Good and no higher.) It was really about seeing it with my son. He's well beyond his teenage years and we don't do that much together anymore, so it was important for him that he showed it to me. (He saw it in the Theater when released.)

I already found most of the links as I've been wading through what seems like hours of web pages. I found the MiniDSP site on the UMIK-1 + HDMI page after I struggled for a few hours and got it somewhat sorted without it. (I was using a PDF manual I'd found and the REW help files. The MiniDSP site would have made it so much simpler.)

My Tripod has the standard camera mount adapter at 1/4" 20 threads per inch which fits my Denon Audyssey Mic, whereas the UMIK-1 Mic clip came with a 3/8" 16 threads per inch mount. I tried to remanufacture a 3/8 bolt I had, but without a drill press, the hand drill bit wandered off center too much to even bother trying to tap it. So I'll head to a Camera store or Home Depot to see if I can find something suitable in the next few days.


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Thanks Rick,
> 
> My Tripod has the standard camera mount adapter at 1/4" 20 threads per inch which fits my Denon Audyssey Mic, whereas the *UMIK-1 Mic clip came with a 3/8" 16 threads per inch *mount. I tried to remanufacture a 3/8 bolt I had, but without a drill press, the hand drill bit wandered off center too much to even bother trying to tap it. So I'll head to a Camera store or Home Depot to see if I can find something suitable in the next few days.


Hi Jim 
Glad to hear you are getting pretty much sorted, the actual REW site is also a very good place to peruse with lots of helpful information.

Yes I understand now about your Star Wars viewing, I was really quite disappointed because all the time I knew what was coming, just a few different faces.

Anyway I must have had a cerebral shut down or a defrag is required lddude::dontknow:. I just checked the microphone stand and *right enough it's as you state above and fits the UMIK1 Mic clip perfectly * I had forgot the mic stand came with an adaptor for a camera mount which fits the Audyssey Mic. The stand cost me all of your equivalent to 12 bucks and has been worth every penny, short version about 39" tall with the cross arm fully adjustable around 30" inches long, great to get to the main LP and then the other measuring positions but also great for direct speaker measurements. I used a camera tripod initially but just too unwieldy, then I made a fixed height one and it was not flexible enough.

Anyway don't know how you have got on but I now have speaker plots and room plots for both systems. The main system though I could not have the room as normal with the door open for the room sweeps, wait till her indoors is out for the golf, but it does look as I suspected I have a bit of treble lift above 4kHz not too excessive but enough to be noticeable on some of the over compressed recordings around these days. I did run the Runrig album 'Mara' and that sounded great having been a decent recording with very clear treble from cymbals and clean deep bass and no noticeable lisp from the vocals which seems to suit my old hearing so I am unlikely to change much although I can experiment in the Denon's graphic mode, I don't have any other means of adjusting the frequency response so will have to do but what I want to do first is compare the speaker plots to the room plots to see what is really happening.

all the best
Rick


----------



## -Jim-

Hi Rick,

Sounds like you have the same issues with the Misses as I do.:heehee: Glad to hear you got some measurements done.

I didn't get to muck about last weekend but hope to this weekend. I finally solved the UMIK-1 Mic clip mounting issue on my Tripod yesterday (the standard camera mount adapter at 1/4" 20 threads per inch which fits my Denon Audyssey Mic, whereas the UMIK-1 Mic clip came with a 3/8" 16 threads per inch mount). I went to the local Camera store, and the manager there said I should head over to Long & McQuade (the largest chain of musical instrument retailers in Canada) as that's where he got his adapter. So a few days later off I go but when I get there the clerk says "I wish that guy would stop sending people over here as we don't stock them." He suggests I go to Home Depot as they have them. So another trip there, and scour the shelves for half an hour, but can't find it. I even get the "Hardware Specialist" to check and he advises they don't stock anything like that. 

So home I go thinking I'm headed to eBay or Amazon. But I decided to again try to make my own. I find a 3 inch piece of 3/8 16 threads per inch redi rod in an old tool box I haven't used in 20 years. I go to a smaller pilot hole than before (about 1/8"), and use a No.7 tap drill afterwards. I didn't have a tap handle so I improvised with a Crescent Wrench and got it done. I could cut it down so it just fits into the Mic clip but it works without it and gives a couple inches of height to the assembly.










I'll try it as is and see if I want to cut it down later. :wink2:


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Hi Rick,
> 
> Sounds like you have the same issues with the Misses as I do.:heehee: Glad to hear you got some measurements done.
> 
> I didn't get to muck about last weekend but hope to this weekend. I finally solved the UMIK-1 Mic clip mounting issue on my Tripod yesterday (the standard camera mount adapter at 1/4" 20 threads per inch which fits my Denon Audyssey Mic, whereas the UMIK-1 Mic clip came with a 3/8" 16 threads per inch mount). I went to the local Camera store, and the manager there said I should head over to Long & McQuade (the largest chain of musical instrument retailers in Canada) as that's where he got his adapter. So a few days later off I go but when I get there the clerk says "I wish that guy would stop sending people over here as we don't stock them." He suggests I go to Home Depot as they have them. So another trip there, and scour the shelves for half an hour, but can't find it. I even get the "Hardware Specialist" to check and he advises they don't stock anything like that.
> 
> So home I go thinking I'm headed to eBay or Amazon. But I decided to again try to make my own. I find a 3 inch piece of 3/8 16 threads per inch redi rod in an old tool box I haven't used in 20 years. I go to a smaller pilot hole than before (about 1/8"), and use a No.7 tap drill afterwards. I didn't have a tap handle so I improvised with a Crescent Wrench and got it done. I could cut it down so it just fits into the Mic clip but it works without it and gives a couple inches of height to the assembly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try it as is and see if I want to cut it down later. :wink2:


Hi Jim

Yup this Missus don't like funny noises, so I kick her out to play golf > that keeps the marriage sane.

Glad you got your adaptor resolved, neat bit of work on your behalf, amazing what you can find hidden away, I'm not a hoarder but I do keep (IMO) what I think might be useful. If I were you though, I would seriously look out for a cheap mic stand it really it so much easier, we have high backed clubman type chairs (really bad choice for audio, sit back and the sound stage becomes a bit constricted with reflections from the backs :frown but so easy to adjust the mic position I got mine from eBay for about £12 would probably cost you about the same in $. Very simple folds away with 3 legs and a boom with a threaded end that fits the UMIK1 adaptor good also for room calibration with the Audyessy mic.

Got some more sweeps done (now with the room door open which is our usual listening condition and the way I calibrate the AVR) direct from the MLP with the UMIK1 pointed at the speakers for stereo. They look reasonable, may be the bass looks a bit high but using ASIO4ALL with HDMI my AVR goes to multi channel (Denon) and I have made the sub woofer output level a bit hotter in the AVR in that mode to give a bit more bass on multi channel music (SACD/BD), but the treble is a lot closer to the mid range which makes me happy and confirms more or less what I am hearing. However got some strange results for phase which I need to look into. I have measured these speakers before, both close up for speaker response and from the MLP and the phase was OK, which it should be, they are Tannoy Revolution XT8F with the combined coaxial tweeter/mid driver and phase with these speakers really should not be a problem. So I will look into the instructions 'again' to see what I have done wrong or not done that I should have.

The main reason I bought the UMIK1 was to have a decent reference, after looking at the Audyessy results to confirm my suspicion that the room was probably a bit over damped, which it appears to be, but nothing much I can do about that, it is our living room and the furniture, pictures, paintings etc. in there need to stay. On the other hand I prefer that to a bright room, I do really like the sound I am getting and so do other people who hear the system, floor shaking bass in the movies and clean tuneful bass mid and upper for music. Now a fix for my ears :coocoo::help:lddude:

Next check will be sub woofer phase, once I have sorted the phase problem above, to see what I can achieve by tweaking it, it may make no difference but no harm in trying as I am a bit limited on location for that, but I think it is pretty much in the right place

Rick


----------



## FargateOne

-Jim- said:


> Thanks Rick,
> 
> I wasn't expecting much from a movie franchise that goes back almost 40 years. It's like a new Bond film, the bar has been set and I just go along with it. (That's why I said it was just Good and no higher.) It was really about seeing it with my son. He's well beyond his teenage years and we don't do that much together anymore, so it was important for him that he showed it to me. (He saw it in the Theater when released.)
> 
> I already found most of the links as I've been wading through what seems like hours of web pages. I found the MiniDSP site on the UMIK-1 + HDMI page after I struggled for a few hours and got it somewhat sorted without it. (I was using a PDF manual I'd found and the REW help files. The MiniDSP site would have made it so much simpler.)
> 
> My Tripod has the standard camera mount adapter at 1/4" 20 threads per inch which fits my Denon Audyssey Mic, whereas the UMIK-1 Mic clip came with a 3/8" 16 threads per inch mount. I tried to remanufacture a 3/8 bolt I had, but without a drill press, the hand drill bit wandered off center too much to even bother trying to tap it. So I'll head to a Camera store or Home Depot to see if I can find something suitable in the next few days.


Hope I am not too late.
Here is where I found mine:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Thread-Adapters-Fittings/ci/14722/N/3991602298


----------



## Rick R

FargateOne said:


> Hope I am not too late.
> Here is where I found mine:
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Thread-Adapters-Fittings/ci/14722/N/3991602298


Hi FargateOne
*Nice find*, hope Jim is looking at this. He has actually made one but he might find what you suggest better. I did suggest he should look seriously at a mic stand so much more convenient than a photo tripod (the legs get in the way for some locations) for doing AVR room calibrations and using the UMIK1 still need an adaptor for the Audyessy Mic, never know if I spell that rightonder:.

I did a quick search on that site for tripods and found one similar to what I use, so I will answer his post with the link there may of course be others cheaper but a good starting place


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Hi Rick,
> 
> Sounds like you have the same issues with the Misses as I do.:heehee: Glad to hear you got some measurements done.
> 
> I didn't get to muck about last weekend but hope to this weekend. I finally solved the UMIK-1 Mic clip mounting issue on my Tripod yesterday (the standard camera mount adapter at 1/4" 20 threads per inch which fits my Denon Audyssey Mic, whereas the UMIK-1 Mic clip came with a 3/8" 16 threads per inch mount).
> I'll try it as is and see if I want to cut it down later. :wink2:


Hi Jim,
I deleted some of your post to save a bit of space just left the relevant detail.

See the post above from FargateOne all sorts of adaptors on that link, really good of him to post it. 

So I had a look and then checked out tripods, eBay may still be cheaper but I did a search with a price range and this one came up which has been discounted similar to what I use but extends higher see it here http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...upport_15159_MC_40_Microphone_Boom_Stand.html should you be interested

All the best

Rick


----------



## -Jim-

FargateOne said:


> Hope I am not too late.
> Here is where I found mine:
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Thread-Adapters-Fittings/ci/14722/N/3991602298


Hi Gents,

I'm going to go with the one I made as it's in hand and seemed like it would work fine.

If it doesn't I may go for one of these. :wink2:


----------



## -Jim-

Rick R said:


> Hi Jim,
> I deleted some of your post to save a bit of space just left the relevant detail.
> 
> See the post above from FargateOne all sorts of adaptors on that link, really good of him to post it.
> 
> So I had a look and then checked out tripods, eBay may still be cheaper but I did a search with a price range and this one came up which has been discounted similar to what I use but extends higher see it here http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...upport_15159_MC_40_Microphone_Boom_Stand.html should you be interested
> 
> All the best
> 
> Rick


Thanks Rick,

That is a decent price for a stand. If my Tripod fails me maybe I'll try this instead. We'll see how it goes on the weekend. :wink2:


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Thanks Rick,
> 
> That is a decent price for a stand. If my Tripod fails me maybe I'll try this instead. We'll see how it goes on the weekend. :wink2:


Hi Jim
Looks good, just remember that whatever you are using for the UMIK1 you need to be able to position it both vertical and horizontal, some camera tripods may not let you do position it vertical depending on the camera mounting part, one of mine has a big square base which would prevent the UMIK1 going vertical. One other point if you go for a mic stand check out any additional shipping charges, I noted in my research particularly on eBay Canada shipping charges were quite high (and most were coming to Canada from the US) in some cases more than the actual stand :frown:

All the best and good luck with your measurements at the weekend

PS I think I sorted my phase anomalies but just need to check a little more, also my group delay problem has gone away must have been a rogue measurement, maybe extraneous noise or something the latest ones are just about ruler flat with a minor deviation at the lowest frequencies around 15 to 20 Hz, so pretty pleased with that.
Rick


----------



## -Jim-

Hi Rick,

I did a couple of sweeps but I messed up a Bit. I'll post about it over at the REW forum. 

My Tripod worked out quite well. Here's a couple of photos illustrating how it works with my "adapter".


----------



## Rick R

-Jim- said:


> Hi Rick,
> 
> I did a couple of sweeps but I messed up a Bit. I'll post about it over at the REW forum.
> 
> My Tripod worked out quite well. Here's a couple of photos illustrating how it works with my "adapter".


Hi Jim
Yeah that looks quite good you got all the orientation you need and as long as your adaptor doesn't mean you can't get it down to ear height looks like you are good to go. I did see your post on the REW forum but now there have been more so will have to do a search to pick it up, but I noted you were saying with the surrounds you could not do a sweep without the sub. It is maybe because the surrounds are set to small so your AVR is adding in the sub automatically, try setting the surrounds to large in the speaker setup menu that may alleviate the sub problem otherwise switch the sub off and adjust your sweep at the lower frequencies to match your surrounds frequency response.

I am getting some strange results on my sub using ASIO4all doing a direct sub only measurement (selecting display speaker 1.4) with quite high 2nd harmonic distortion at one frequency from memory I think it is about 90Hz, if however I run the main speaker with the sub and set my sweep 20Hz to 120Hz and set the Xover to 120Hz to just see the sub the 2nd harmonic distortion is way down less than 1% a bit weird so I may raise that as a question on the REW forum and see what folks think. I am wondering if it is something to do with ASIO4all or some other factor. The way I see it, at the moment, using the second method I am still measuring only the sub


----------



## FargateOne

Rick R said:


> Hi Jim
> Yeah that looks quite good you got all the orientation you need and as long as your adaptor doesn't mean you can't get it down to ear height looks like you are good to go. I did see your post on the REW forum but now there have been more so will have to do a search to pick it up, but I noted you were saying with the surrounds you could not do a sweep without the sub. It is maybe because the surrounds are set to small so your AVR is adding in the sub automatically, try setting the surrounds to large in the speaker setup menu that may alleviate the sub problem otherwise switch the sub off and adjust your sweep at the lower frequencies to match your surrounds frequency response.
> 
> I am getting some strange results on my sub using ASIO4all doing a direct sub only measurement (selecting display speaker 1.4) with quite high 2nd harmonic distortion at one frequency from memory I think it is about 90Hz, if however I run the main speaker with the sub and set my sweep 20Hz to 120Hz and set the Xover to 120Hz to just see the sub the 2nd harmonic distortion is way down less than 1% a bit weird so I may raise that as a question on the REW forum and see what folks think. I am wondering if it is something to do with ASIO4all or some other factor. The way I see it, at the moment, using the second method I am still measuring only the sub


I m not an expert (a lot of them in Rew threads better than me) but I did the same mistake and John, Rew's author, said that Asio4all channel 1.4 send only LFE signal which is by definition 0 to 120hz.
Jtalden said that to measure the sub, you have to make full range sweep 20 -20Khz and disconnect the speaker choosen in Asio4all lets say channel 1.1 = front left.


----------



## Rick R

FargateOne said:


> I m not an expert (a lot of them in Rew threads better than me) but I did yhe same mistake and Joh, Rew's author, said that Asio4all channel 1.4 send only LFE signal which is by definition 0 to 120hz.
> Jtalden said that to measure the sub, you have to make full range sweep 20 -2Khz and disconnecte the speaker choosen in Asio4all lets say channel 1.1 = front left.


Hi FargateOne,

That is a great reply, taken a load off my mind. Had all sorts of strange ideas the latest being maybe my .1 channel on the AVR was causing the problem and was going to sweep that this afternoon. So I was basically part way there. Just to confirm, you say a full range sweep 20-2kHz or should that be 20-20kHz which would be the normal definition of full range.

Again thanks for that very useful information.
Rick


----------



## FargateOne

Rick R said:


> Hi FargateOne,
> 
> That is a great reply, taken a load off my mind. Had all sorts of strange ideas the latest being maybe my .1 channel on the AVR was causing the problem and was going to sweep that this afternoon. So I was basically part way there. Just to confirm, you say a full range sweep 20-2kHz or should that be 20-20kHz which would be the normal definition of full range.
> 
> Again thanks for that very useful information.
> Rick


Sorry for the typo: 20hz to 20 000 hz of course. The full range sweep helps when you want to see how the sub helps or not the transition between the sub frequencies and the fronts at the xover region. So you need a full sweep for the front alone (sub main switch to off), a sweep for the sub alone (front disconnected) and a sweep for Front left and sub together.


----------



## Rick R

FargateOne said:


> Sorry for the typo: 20hz to 20 000 hz of course. The full range sweep helps when you want to see how the sub helps or not the transition between the sub frequencies and the fronts at the xover region. So you need a full sweep for the front alone (sub main switch to off), a sweep for the sub alone (front disconnected) and a sweep for Front left and sub together.


Thanks for taking the time to clarify, really appreciated, now I know where I am going:smile:.

Rick


----------



## welldun1

JohnM said:


> Mic or Z Weighted SPL Meter.



John, first off, thank you so much for this wonderful software program that you've created! 

I know that I'm digging up an old post, but I've searched for clarification and this is the closest that I have found...

I know now to set the initial setting to Z Weighted when we first setup the soundcard info with the Umik-1 USB Microphone. My question/observation deal with what happens afterward when Im just using REW's internal SPL meter function on it's own. It seems like even if I selected the Z weighted option initially, the default setting for the SPL meter is C Weighted. When I then switch it to Z weighted via the radio button, the noise floor(?) registers almost 10dB greater than C Weighted did. Since the instructions for measuring my setup call for me to raised the output signal level roughly 40dB above the noise floor of the room, using Z Weighted pushes my AVR to a much higher playing level (10dB higher) just to meet that spec. surprisingly, beyond the difference measured for the noise floor, when I play and measure the final signal, the levels appear to be the same for both C and Z weighted. 

So my questions is... does it make a difference if I leave the setting of the SPL to C weighted after having indicated that the USB Mic is Z Weighted?


----------



## JohnM

The mic setting tells REW what kind of device is connected. It is independent of the SPL meter weighting setting. With the SPL meter on Z weighting you will see the influence of very low frequency content which is de-emphasised using A or C weighting. However, "measure 40 dB above..." is not good advice. Measure at a comfortable listening level, 75 dB is more than sufficient.


----------



## welldun1

Thanks for the reply John. So based on your answer it sounds like either one (C or Z weighted) is fine and will give the same outcome once we go above the noise floor. currently the noise floor on a C-weighted reading is roughly 49-50dB. So when I set the tone generator to -12dbs and play pink noise, I should raise the volume up on the AVR until the SPL meter is reading 75dB, and that will be enough to properly measure the room/setup.


----------



## Rick R

welldun1 said:


> Thanks for the reply John. So based on your answer it sounds like either one (C or Z weighted) is fine and will give the same outcome once we go above the noise floor. currently the noise floor on a C-weighted reading is roughly 49-50dB. So when I set the tone generator to -12dbs and play pink noise, I should raise the volume up on the AVR until the SPL meter is reading 75dB, and that will be enough to properly measure the room/setup.


Good questions in your post and a good reply from John, made me think for a bit as I have never bothered to set the weighting to Z didn't even know the UMIK1 was Z rated, I have always left the SPL meter set at C weighting. I have been doing quite a lot of system sweeps recently for various reasons on both my systems but mainly to clean up the bass on the sub woofers (no possibility of room treatments) on the main system phase and filter settings together with some positional adjustment have reduced the 30Hz excess and a nasty 40Hz dip to less to IMHO acceptable levels less than 6dB for each with the system running flat (no enhancements like dynamic eq enabled).

What you propose above is exactly what I have been doing and 75dB is what I use 80dB and above is too high for me. I note your noise floor is roughly 50dB that is a little higher than mine which on a good day (wind in right direction so no aircraft) is around 41 to 43dB. I mention this because I find the higher the noise floor the more it affects the distortion results and on a bad noisy day with the noise floor above 50dB I can't get reasonable consistency for distortion results which can appear unacceptably high all around the lower quarter of the frequency response one minute and better the next. Today should be a good day and some sweeps are proposed the wind is in the South :smile: (we are on the Southern flight path) so should be no aircraft all will be approaching from the North.
Best of luck with your endeavours


----------



## welldun1

Rick R said:


> ...Today should be a good day and some sweeps are proposed the wind is in the South :smile: (we are on the Southern flight path) so should be no aircraft all will be approaching from the North.
> Best of luck with your endeavours


what a coincidence.. I live on Long Island NY close to Islip airport and Southwest Airlines' flight path is directly over my house. I have to do most of my measuring at night in order to avoid the loud planes interfering with the readings!


----------



## welldun1

John and others,

I'm not sure if this has been brought up already, but I figured I would share it anyway so that others can avoid frustration when using the acoustic time reference feature in REW with an AVR like mine. My issue was that I was not getting the timing reference signal even though I selected it. 

My AVR is a Pioneer Elite SC-99. when I plug in the HDMI cable from the laptop to the front port (HDMI 5), the signal is processed as PCM and the auto surround feature defaults to Dolby Surround which is their new decoder that was created with Dolby Atmos. For whatever reason, having Dolby Surround as the default was blocking the timing reference signal, and REW would sit there waiting indefinitely for the signal, if prior to the measurement I checked off the box that tells REW to wait for the timing reference signal. If I didn't check off that box, the measurement would take place but I would get a pop up notice from REW saying that the reference signal was not detected and the results would be inaccurate/ incomplete.
I spent a good deal of time researching to see if anyone else was reporting this as an issue, but I found nothing. I even reinstalled the software just to be certain that it wasn't a loading error of sorts. 

I tried several decoder modes to no avail, until I finally set the decoder to PURE DIRECT which removes all processing. Upon doing so, the reference signal became audible and REW was able to detect it. I switch back and forth between Pure Direct and the other modes and the outcome was the same everytime. 

So if anyone is having an issue with the timing reference signal, please check your AVR and make sure that it is set to Pure Direct or its equivalent on your AVR.


----------



## HiFiStereo

I have bought this microphone and made my first measurements. And it worked without any problems.

But now i have a bunch of measurements but need to analyze them?! Maybe need to start a new thread.


----------



## Blacklightning

HiFiStereo said:


> I have bought this microphone and made my first measurements. And it worked without any problems.
> 
> But now i have a bunch of measurements but need to analyze them?! Maybe need to start a new thread.


Great a tip that someone told me here was to do a measurement from the Listening position with the left speaker only and then the Right speaker only then both together. 

Also do not just post a pic of your measurements also upload the Mdat file we can load it into REW and pull data that you had no idea was there. Must people new to this this just look at the frequency response but that is not really that useful if you are trying to fix problems.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt

Yes, it’s typically best to start a new thread. Piggy-backing on someone else’s thread, the only people who get notified about new posts are those who replied in it. Those people may or may not have any good information for you.

Regards, 
Wayne


----------

