How Ya Are? Audio Crew ESSB NEWS PR-40 Vs RE-20 Microphone Wars Service Manuals The ESSB Audio Forum Where all your Hi-Fi Audio Questions are Answered

WZ5Q's Studio "X" The Pro Audio "Racks" "My Chilrens"

               PR-40 Vs RE-20     

I have been using the RE-20 Dynamic Microphone for a long while.
It has a Tonal quality that really appeals to Me, especially in the way it reproduces the Upper Mid and High Frequencies.
It was designed very Flat in its Frequency Response, and normally requires external processing equipment to adjust the Frequency Response of the Audio to match the subjects voice characteristics.
As You have probably read in other parts of this website, I am a Strong Harmonics Advocate. I use allot of External Processing in My Transmitted Signal. Not because I "Need It" or because I "Have To", but because I like the way it sounds. And to Me, that is all that matters.
I just LOVE that LOW END.....Not to mention all the Blinky Lights!!

Bob Heil of Heil Sound has made a Terrific Dynamic Microphone with the PR-40.
The Frequency Response is extraordinary, and this Mic is built very well.
High Quality Materials were used in its construction, and the Fit/Form is very precise.
A very nice feature of this Mic, and one of the reasons for it's delayed introduction, is the Mounting Provisions. The PR-40 will fit into the Electrovoice Model 309A Shock Mount perfectly. This is the Shock Mount made for the RE-20.
You can see it mounted in the picture above....Sexy, aighnt it?

These findings were accomplished using My Voice and the Equipment that I have in My home.
I am deffinitly NOT a Professional Reviewer or Analyst. All that I can give you are My Opinions, or Views as an Amateur.
There are so many variables involved with testing and reviewing equipment.
The Equipment and Settings that work best here in My Shack may not work in yours. So ALWAYS make up your own Mind. Don't EVER let anybody else make it up for you.

The PR-40 has an advertised Frequency Response of 28 to 18,000 cps.
The RE-20 has an advertised Frequency Response of 45 to 18,000 cps.
All the other Mic specifications can be acquired from the Internet.

The following information came from My comparison of the PR-40 with the RE-20 using Raw, Unprocessed Audio.
The Bellari RP-520 Mic Preamp was the only External Processing Equipment used for this comparison.
This Audio was then sent directly to the Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS Soundcard of the Computer for analysis.

The RE-20's Frequency Response of My voice was used as a baseline.
SpectraLAB software and My ears were used as the measuring devices.
Cool Edit Pro was the software used for the recordings.

The PR-40 has a high "Proximity Effect".
It also has a tendency to "POP" and pick up "Breath Noise" if operating to close to it.
(This tendency was reduced when using the Front Mic Jack of the Transmitter due to the Low Frequency roll off of the internal mic amps.)
Proper Mic Technique and a "Pop Filter" go a Hell of a long way into preventing this.
In My application, I have found the best solution to these problems was talking at a distance of about 3" from the front of the PR-40, and using the "VAC-RE20 - Popless Voice Screen".
As fortune would have it, The Mic was positioned exactly 3" behind the Pop Filter when the PR-40 was mounted in the 309A Shock Mount.
You do loose some of the forcefulness, aggressiveness, and energy of the Audio being this far from the Mic. But it makes up by being more Balanced, Cleaner, Clearer, and Breath/Pop free.

The PR-40's Frequency Response matches the RE-20 closer than I would have believed. The only marked differences were in the Low and High Frequency areas.

Click to hear PR-40 Vs RE-20 Unprocessed Mic Audio

My Opinion:

In the Low Frequency area:
I think the PR-40 is a little "tighter" and is shaped better at 160cps which removes almost all hints of "Boxiness" or "Muddiness".

In the Mid Range Frequency area:
They are so close that I could not tell a difference.

In the High Frequency Area:
The PR-40 deffinitly has more Top End "Clarity" and "Brilliance".

Overall:
The PR-40 wins in this Battle.
Without using any External Processing Equipment, The PR-40 has a better Balance of the High and Low Frequencies than the RE-20. It sounds more "Natural", is more "articulate", and does not have the "Cotton Mushmouth" sound the RE-20 has.
For just a "Stand Alone" Dynamic Microphone, I think the PR-40 is quite Impressive.

Unprocessed Mic Audio Transmissions

Here are some comparisons between the PR-40 and RE-20 Microphones, as their Unprocessed Mic Audio is Transmitted and Received thru the Ether.

I've done 2 Phases of testing with the Unprocessed Mic Audio.

Phase 1 - will be with the Microphone Audio going Straight into the TS-850s Front Mic Jack, using 2.7Kc and 3.5Kc TX Filter Settings. Both Filter Settings will be compared using the "High Boost" function of the Transmitter, and without it.
Absolutely NO External Processing Equipment will be used.

Phase 2 - will be with the Microphone Audio going into a Bellari RP-520 Preamp to bring it to Line Level, then straight into the DSP-100 of the TS-850s. The TX Filter Settings will be at 2.7Kc, 3.5Kc, and 6Kc.
The Bellari RP-520 Microphone Preamp is the only piece of External Processing Gear that was used.

The Transmitter used for these comparisons, was a Kenwood TS-850s. This Rig has been completely modified for ESSB. It also has an INRAD 4Kc Filter installed in the 8.83Mc IF. This Filter starts to Roll off at about 3.5Kc.
Accompanying this TS-850s, is its DSP-100, which has also been Modified for ESSB.

I received these Transmissions with another Modified TS-850s/DSP-100 combo. This Receiver's IF was set up to receive at 6Kc for all the comparisons.

BackGround Noise -
In My Recordings, You will hear a very low level receiver background noise that sounds like dual tones. They are at 1.356Kc, and 2.308Kc. This comes from My DSP-100 Processor when I have all the Attenuation engaged, and the RF Gain turned up significantly on the TS-850s Receiver.
I have found that this is a problem common to all three of My DSP-100's, regardless of which TS-850s they are connected to.

My Opinion:

The PR-40 has more High Frequency "Clarity" and "Sharpness" than the RE-20. I attribute this to the Pre-emphasis in the Upper Mid and High Frequency Range of the PR-40.

The PR-40 has a Clean Low End due to the Cuts in the Low Frequency Amplitude, especially in the 160cps area. This removes the "Muddy" and "Boxy" sound that is present with the Unprocessed RE-20, not to mention most other Microphones.

In the RE-20's defense, I'll reiterate what I said above.
It was designed very Flat in its Frequency Response, and normally requires external processing equipment to adjust the Frequency Response of the Audio to match the subjects voice characteristics.

Overall:
I am very impressed with the PR-40's ability for this "Stand Alone" Fidelity.
Its like the Microphone has a built in EQ set up for the 2.8Kc - 3.5Kc Bandwidth.
I personaly like the way this Mic sounds at 3.5Kc.

Processed Mic Audio Transmissions

These are some comparisons between the PR-40 and RE-20 Microphones, using Processed Audio from the "Rack".
By using the External Processing Equipment of the "Rack", I can change the Frequency Curve of the Mics to anything I want. So, comparing Frequency Response or Curves is redundant.
Instead, I will compare how they "Sound" (Resonance, Clarity, Frequency Seperation, etc.).

All of My Rack's External Processing Equipment was used for this comparison.

The Transmitter and Receiver used for these comparisons, were the same Kenwood TS-850s/DSP-100's used in the Unprocessed Audio Comparisons above.

I will state again, that these comparisons were accomplished using My voice and equipment.
The RE-20's Frequency Response of My voice was used as a baseline.
SpectraLAB software and My ears were used as the measuring devices.
Cool Edit Pro was the software used for the recordings.

My Opinion:

This was the Closest Comparison yet.

After the PR-40 and RE-20 Microphones have their Audio Processed, You can see and hear that there is not that much of a difference between them.
The bigest differences, and they were'nt all that big, was...

#1 - The slightly more Low End "Resonance" that the RE-20 had over the PR-40.

#2 - The slightly more "Frequency Seperation" that the PR-40 had over the RE-20.

Overall:
Both of these Microphones sound Terrific after the processing.
The difference in Audio Quality is almost neglidgable for Hammy Radio.
The main differences between each Microphone's EQ Setting were mainly concentrated to the High and Low Frequencies. The Mid Frequencies were almost the same.

I feel that this Mic will revolutionize the sound of the Amateur Radio Community. Bob Heil has made yet another leap forward with this Microphone.
Think about it....For the average "Joe Ham" to just go purchase a Mic, plug it into the front of his TS-870s, and actually get some Fidelity......this is Great!!
For the People that like to Play with "Rack" gear, I think the PR-40 is a great Dynamic Microphone. Its Audio characteristics are real close to the RE-20, and at about half the cost.

Well I hope You enjoyed my feeble attempt at being a Review Analyst.
If You see any mistakes or have some questions, shoot me an email.

And Remember.....
ALWAYS make up your own Mind. Don't EVER let anybody else make it up for you.

Oh....Who Won the Microphone WAR?
Well...I'll let you be the one to decide that!

Sooooooooooooo....
From Deep Down in the Dark Dismal Swamps of the Calcaseau...
Asta La Tacos!
WZ5Q