|
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! >
EV RE-10 element in an EV 606 shell
EV RE-10 element in an EV 606 shell
Page:
1
atty1chgo
460 posts
Sep 08, 2012
4:14 PM
|
I have a pristine (inside and out) Electrovoice 606 bullet mic, all original, but is sounds a little weak most of the time, at least for a Hi-Z mic. There isn't anything wrong with the element, just not the best. I just bought an Electrovoice RE-10 for parts only on the cheap, and I was thinking about dropping the RE-10 element into the 606 shell. The 606 has a sound entrance port which is a precursor to the sound entrance ports which allow for the cardioid effect in later designs. The RE-10 also has a sound entrance port around the top of the mic.
I am thinking that this 606 might sound awesome with a different element, especially an RE-10 element. The 606 diaphragm has a frequency response of 100 to 6000 cps (cycles per second), and the RE-10 diaphragm has a frequency response of 90-13,000 hz. (hertz). That would be quite a leap up.
These shells are known to fit just about any element. Any thoughts from the microphone experts? Of course, I would have it installed professionally.
Last Edited by on Sep 09, 2012 6:19 AM
|
didjcripey
377 posts
Sep 08, 2012
6:48 PM
|
Just yesterday I was looking at my 606, contemplating dropping another element in it (very weak thin tone too).
Due to the setup of the shell I believe it would be quite a job to put something else in; there would be some tricky metalwork to remove mounting brackets. I didn't even get as far as pulling out the old element as it looked like the element would be damaged in the process.
Certainly possible, but there are plenty of easier shells to work with; mine will stay a display piece.
Generally the type of shell will have little effect on the tone from an element; its mostly a matter of how far forward or back the element is mounted, style and ease of cupping and a certain amount of feedback resistance.
----------
Lucky Lester
|
SuperBee
552 posts
Sep 08, 2012
7:27 PM
|
Greg said much the same about the type of shell not impacting the sound much. I expect it's right. All I know is that my (cm-fitted) 605 is way way less sensitive to cupping technique than my JT 30s. I don't know why, i thought it may be because the element is "already cupped" to some extent by the shell. The shell is decidedly less open-fronted than a JT or GB. The 606 even more so, apart from that port on the side. Anyway...I dunno. Greg seemed to think it was just about the element and it's placement relative to forward/back.
I have heard from mic builders that these shells will indeed take many different elements but they are somewhat of a PIA to deal with. I believe they are sealed up with messy rubbery but sticky sealant which is resistant to cleaning. Tthe one I have, it is a real bitchin hot mic, but it doesn't come apart easy. Of course if you're determined anything can be done, but I haven't had the need to try opening it in the 5 years I've had it.
I think I've read about people modifying 606 shells; opened up on the front and sealed on the side, but it's all just vague memories of stuff I found trawling through the web. Anyway, this is probably all furphys. I've seen your mic inventory Atty1, I reckon you may be the resident EV expert. I expect you know more than I ever will about this
----------
|
Greg Heumann
1774 posts
Sep 08, 2012
11:38 PM
|
@atty1chgo - the EV10 has both an element and a transformer, which is embedded in epoxy in the slender barrel. If you figure out how to get it apart safely let me know. Not crazy about the 606 shell. That small hole up front, vent on side......
@SuperBee - You're right, I did say the shell doesn't matter .... MUCH. It matters more for rear-vented elements (most dynamic elements including CM and CR) than it does for crystal element mics where the element is not vented to the rear.
But a shell doesn't cup for you. Cupping is YOUR interaction with harp and mic that focuses as much of the sound pressure on the element as possible. That requires both a tight seal between rear of harp and front of mic, AND sealing the unplayed holes on the front of the harp.
With all that said it is likely that a shell with more space and/or larger atmospheric venting behind a dynamic element offers less "air spring" shock absorption for the diaphragm and therefore may respond differently to cupping than one with less.
----------
/Greg
Last Edited by on Sep 09, 2012 7:56 AM
|
SuperBee
553 posts
Sep 09, 2012
1:46 AM
|
Greg, yep I saw your comments are logical. Actually all made sense as I was writing that previous post. Just as you say.
----------
|
atty1chgo
462 posts
Sep 09, 2012
7:00 AM
|
Great points all around. When the old RE-10 comes in, I'll have to see what I am dealing with. The 606 I have popped right open, and is extremely accessible. The RE-10 is not so from what I have seen with my other one. Thanks.
Last Edited by on Sep 09, 2012 7:00 AM
|
Post a Message
|
