My Audient iD4 MkII has not got enough gain

[lotusmoon]

I have a Roland Rubix 22 interface and I've been using a tram lavelier microphone. The tram has a low volume and I need the interface turned up nearly to full to be heard properly. So I bought an audient ID4 mk11 because it has 58 dB gain which is higher than the roland Rubix but when using it, it is actually only has about half the gain of the Rubix22.
if anybody could possibly tell me why this is I would like to find out as I sent the first audient ID4 mk11 back so that I could get a replacement but the replacement is just the same.
I does not seem possible for me to up load an image sorry.

[Wonks]

Can you explain exactly how you are connecting the Tram lavalier to the Audient? Is it going into a radio transmitter, then to a receiver and then into the Audient (and if so what is the equipment used), or is it going into a Tram TR-79 or TR79+, something different?

[James Perrett]

It is perfectly normal to have to have the gain control turned up nearly fully up on many mic preamps. That's because the manufacturers have tried to save money by not including a pad switch so the whole gain range has to be controlled with one knob. You'll find that there is a big difference in gain over the top few degrees of adjustment.

The big difference between good and not so good preamps is the amount of noise at the highest setting. The Audient should be reasonably usable at its highest gain setting.

[Wonks]

The Tram spec sheet for the TramTR50 is lacking in some important areas. The sensitivity is simply listed as a meaningless -57dB, without giving any reference level.

Assuming that -57dB is referenced to 0dB = 1v/Pa, then the Movo LV8C has a lot more output at -38dB, 0dB = 1v/Pa. That's 19dB more signal than the Tram for the same input level. That's why the Movo is a lot louder than the Tram.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Assuming that -57dB is referenced to 0dB = 1v/Pa...

I think that's a reasonable assumption. In which case the Tram at -57dB re1V/Pa is a lot quieter than the Movo at -38dB re1V/Pa -- roughly 18dB quieter, in fact.

In numbers the rest of us might understand, the sensitivities of the two mics are roughly 1.5mV/Pa and 12mV/Pa.

So the Tram is very quiet compared to the Movo for the same acoustic sound pressure level.

But you also have to take into account the gain structure of the interface preamps.

The maximum mic input level for the Rubix is +2dBu whereas the Audient mic input can take +14dBu -- 12dB more -- before it clips. In other words for a given amount of gain, the Rubix will clip 12dB earlier or lower than the Audient, meaning it will appear to be 12dB louder for the same amount of preamp gain.

But the Audient has 58dB of gain available whereas the Rubix appears to have 48dB, so 10dB less.

Adding this lot up, the Rubix has 12dB more sensitivity but 10dB less gain than the Audient, meaning overall it will appear to be 2dB more sensitive than the Audient... which is negligible.

Consequently, the problem here is not the interfaces, which actually deliver a very similar real-world maximum gain. The problem is simply the raw sensitivity of the Tram, which is pretty darn low.

As the Tram is battery powered, you could use an inline gain booster to help out -- something like a Fethead, Cloudbuster, sE Dynamite/TNT, Royer dBooster, etc -- would raise the level from the Tram by around 20-25dB, giving it a level much more similar (in fact a little louder) than the Movo.

[ef37a]

I can personally vouch for the excellence of the FetHead. My son gets good results with one 1/2 mtr from acoustic guitar with an SM57 into a Behringer UMC204HD.

WHY he uses a 57 on acoustic guitar is another question!

Dave.

[Wonks]

The Tram output figure is probably just for the mic on its own, as it seems primarily designed for connecting to transmitters, so the final signal strength for that will depend on the complete package. The TR-79 or 79+ may change the output level as well, there is a balancing transformer, but if so, there is no indication of by how much.

[Mixedup]

WHY he uses a 57 on acoustic guitar is another question!

If it's good enough for Daniel Lanois...

[ef37a]

WHY he uses a 57 on acoustic guitar is another question!

If it's good enough for Daniel Lanois...

Indeed? The only video I can find of him on acoustic is with him strumming a steel strung using a pick and I cannot see the mic. Son was finger picking nylon.

To be fair to the UMC 204HD, with the gain flat out and the mic 150mm from guitar the SNR was not at all bad but clouting the mic was an ever present problem and you don't want to be that close to a classical guitar anyway.

Dave.

[Arpangel]

WHY he uses a 57 on acoustic guitar is another question!

If it's good enough for Daniel Lanois...

Wouldn’t be my first choice for an acoustic, Lanois is a top hero for me, but his working methods are not conventional, for many reasons.
I’ve got a couple of 57’s, no issue with gain, normally, fine on both my Behringer UMC's, if I want 57’s to give out stratospheric levels, I plug them into my Mike Skeet preamps, just turn them up to twelve o’clock and the meters are in the red.

[lotusmoon]

I have a Roland Rubix 22 interface and I've been using a tram lavelier microphone. The tram has a low volume and I need the interface turned up nearly to full to be heard properly. So I bought an audient ID4 mk11 because it has 58 dB gain which is higher than the roland Rubix but when using it, it is actually only has about half the gain of the Rubix22.
if anybody could possibly tell me why this is I would like to find out as I sent the first audient ID4 mk11 back so that I could get a replacement but the replacement is just the same.
I does not seem possible for me to up load an image sorry.

Here is a link to the pictures - https://www.holographic-breathing.com/1 ... icle&id=45

[lotusmoon]

Assuming that -57dB is referenced to 0dB = 1v/Pa...

I think that's a reasonable assumption. In which case the Tram at -57dB re1V/Pa is a lot quieter than the Movo at -38dB re1V/Pa -- roughly 18dB quieter, in fact.

In numbers the rest of us might understand, the sensitivities of the two mics are roughly 1.5mV/Pa and 12mV/Pa.

So the Tram is very quiet compared to the Movo for the same acoustic sound pressure level.

But you also have to take into account the gain structure of the interface preamps.

The maximum mic input level for the Rubix is +2dBu whereas the Audient mic input can take +14dBu -- 12dB more -- before it clips. In other words for a given amount of gain, the Rubix will clip 12dB earlier or lower than the Audient, meaning it will appear to be 12dB louder for the same amount of preamp gain.

But the Audient has 58dB of gain available whereas the Rubix appears to have 48dB, so 10dB less.

Adding this lot up, the Rubix has 12dB more sensitivity but 10dB less gain than the Audient, meaning overall it will appear to be 2dB more sensitive than the Audient... which is negligible.

Consequently, the problem here is not the interfaces, which actually deliver a very similar real-world maximum gain. The problem is simply the raw sensitivity of the Tram, which is pretty darn low.

As the Tram is battery powered, you could use an inline gain booster to help out -- something like a Fethead, Cloudbuster, sE Dynamite/TNT, Royer dBooster, etc -- would raise the level from the Tram by around 20-25dB, giving it a level much more similar (in fact a little louder) than the Movo.

Thank you for you in-depth answer. I am not sure the pictures that i provided were shown as two threads were joined. I have put them at the top now but also here below this text. the bottom picture shows that the audient seems to have about 1/2 the actual volume of the rubix. and then on top of that in the top picture shows that the tram has about 1/2 the actual volume of the movo.If you put them both together that means that I end up with about 1/4 of the actuak volume. the tram does have a battery but I power it from the phantom power on the interface. I would like to get a gain booster but I was told that that was not a good idea with a lavalier. could you possible give me some feed back on that.

The main thing that I am trying to check before i good forward do you thing any of my kit is faulty and should be sent back? here is a link to the pictures showing the actual volumes of everything -

[lotusmoon]

Can you explain exactly how you are connecting the Tram lavalier to the Audient? Is it going into a radio transmitter, then to a receiver and then into the Audient (and if so what is the equipment used), or is it going into a Tram TR-79 or TR79+, something different?

thank you
it is a tr50 just a straight XLR to XLR run on the phantom power of the interface I am just using it as a lavalier mic for webinars

[Wonks]

Can you explain exactly how you are connecting the Tram lavalier to the Audient? Is it going into a radio transmitter, then to a receiver and then into the Audient (and if so what is the equipment used), or is it going into a Tram TR-79 or TR79+, something different?

thank you
it is a tr50 just a straight XLR to XLR run on the phantom power of the interface I am just using it as a lavalier mic for webinars

The Tram TR50 won't run straight from phantom power, so you've probably got one with a TR79+ hardwired to the end of its cable.



Which means that a standard Cloudlifter or FetHead signal booster won't work with it (as they don't pass phantom power) unless you use a battery in the adapter. A lot of lavaliers with XLR connectors need phantom power as they don't have any battery capability, which is why they aren't generally recommended.

However the FetHead Phantom will pass phantom power, so is one option.

https://www.extinctaudio.co.uk/product/ ... d-phantom/

There may be other in-line boosters that pass phantom power, but most don't, and the FetHead is a good unit.