[Elecraft] Microphone Upgrade

[Paul Christensen]

> 666, the original "Buchannan hammer" (so named because Lou
> Burroughs, co-founder of the company, demoed its ruggedness by
> driving a nail with it) was one of the first variable-D mics. Both
> the 666 and it's lower priced cousin, the 664 are also great
> choices for the K3.

As is the EV 635A and they're plentiful on the used market.

http://www.electrovoice.com/documents/ev/635A_AB_EDS_Rev_D.pdf

They're light, and most of the time, they do not block visibility as do some 
of the other popular condenser and dynamic mics.  The '635A won't match the 
same low-end as that of these other mics, but for voice work, ~ 80 Hz 
represents a reasonable low-frequency roll-off point.  Few amateur SSB 
transceivers produce adequate power at that frequency, but some folks will 
try to push low-end content through hyper-EQ techniques.  I have yet to see 
a first fundamental lower than about 75 Hz on any male voice -- even from 
well-known voice-over personalities like Mitch Craig and Charlie Van Dyke. 
But that rare area in response between 75-85 Hz is what sets these guys 
apart from the rest of us.

I've noticed that when some ESSB ops try to force audio content below the 
first voice fundamental with many rigs, some really strange things start 
happening to ALC circuitry.  I would suggest to anyone (including the person 
who questioned the use of the TLM 103 with the K3), that they ensure 
adequate HP filtering when using any degree of ALC.   Most ESSB ops try to 
avoid operating into the ALC region of any transceiver, but that's not 
always possible without the use of additional post-mic processing (e.g., 
W2IHY EQ-Plus or a finalizing processor like the Behringer DEQ2496).

Many condenser mic manufacturers recognize the need for dual-purpose 
applications that include voice + music, and incorporate a switch-selectable 
70-80Hz HP filter.  So, if we deliberately keep our Tx's from producing 
power below ~ 80 Hz, then why go to the trouble of using a high-end 
condenser mic that has the propensity to create more trouble than it's 
worth?  Sure, some of these mics look pretty damn cool but they're usually 
associated with bragging rights.  I am more impressed with an op who 
understands some of these limitations and chooses a mic better matched to 
the application.

Paul, W9AC