In fact, we were informed that considerable time and expense went into the development of an encapsulation system that would defy identification of the contents as effectively as anything short of a booby-trap that would remove the hands of anyone who tried to pry into its inner workings. But there were also several little black boxesencapsulated modeules whose outer appearance gave no hint as to their contents except to make it clear that no conventional vacuum tubes were contained therein.ĪRC will shed no light on the contents thereof. The rest left no doubt about the nature of this beast: It is unabashedly solid-state, with what appear to be a couple of dozen (at least) output transistors in an efficient-looking heatsinking arrangement, and several smaller devices that are unmistakably bipolar transistors of conventional appearance. Most of its internal volume was occupied by four very fat filter capacitors and a massive power transformer. Of course, the first thing we did when we decartoned our first D-100 was to remove the top panel and take a gander at the innards. We are happy to say that we had the option to biamplify. We received two D-100s for testing, for a double-barreled reason: because new products tend, more often than not, to fail the moment Stereophile tries to test them and, barring such a likelihood, so that we could biamplify with them. Reactions to the D-100 have varied from ecstatic to strongly negative, with the ecstatics outnumbering the detractors by a small but definite margin, And curiosity about the new ARC equipment continues at an even higher level than before it reached dealers' showrooms, spurred by the company's Pentagon-style secrecy about their new circuitry.

Now that the first of the 'new breed' of ARC products has been out for a few weeksThis is being written in mid-October 1976it is making even bigger waves than the initial, highly provocative scuttlebutt. Preceded by rumors of 'a new kind of amplifying devicea cross between a tube and a transistor'the announcement of ARC's new power amp and SP-4 preamplifier elicited very mixed reactions from loyal ARC customers, some of whom gleefully anticipated a virtual revolution in audio electronics, others of whom felt betrayed by the company which, having originally convinced them that 'Tubes Are Better,' suddenly seemed to be doing an about-face and espousing the views of the Enemythe 'Soiled-State'forces.

Actually I liked the fact that I could pull the mic off and use it quickly in any situation.Īnyway, change your preamp selector switch to mic for a dynamic mic like SM58.We cannot recall when any new products have generated as much of a stir among perfectionists as the new solid-state equipment from Audio Research. That served as my shotgun for most of the shooting. Instead I used my Sennheiser e835 mounted to the camera using my wireless SK100. I had a similar scenario when my shotgun mic died when I was shooting overseas. Phantom power must be off for the SM58 and the selector switch set to mic. Perhaps either the SM58 is not terribly sensitive, or the mic pre's on the HD100 are not terribly powerful, or a combination of both. I'm not sure what the deal is, however the SM58 is plenty loud when connected to my Mackie 1202 mixer. Examining the audio in post revealed the same thing. I changed the 'INPUT2 MIC REF' to -60db and it helped a bit, however the signal for the SM58 was still way way low. While the ME66 was incredibly sensitive as usual, the SM58 was hardly picking up anything. Both inputs were set to mic with phantom power going to channel 1 only. I've never used the SM58 with any of my video cameras but figured, what the heck, I may as well put something on channel 2. I had my sennheiser ME66 plugged into channel 1, and my Shure SM58 plugged into channel 2.

I have a similar Shure SM58 experience I would like to share:

Sound reference dv 100 microphone