First things first: Allthingstheatre I responded to your post, which followed the one that said I nailed it on the head, out of emotion and not logic. This was a mistake on my part, and I ask you to please forgive me.
But I wholeheartedly agree that anyone claiming a 58's
transformer is a] centre tapped and b] that centre is grounded, is wrong. Refer to previous comments as to why it would be unneccessary and it would mean that as noted you'd regularly blow up phantom supplies...
My bad. I haven't been inside an
SM58. I was taught, by someone I respected as an authority on the subject, that a center-tapped
transformer was how
dynamic balanced microphones worked. When I saw the schematic I thought the center tap was in the cartridge and it grounded itself to pin one through the cartridge case.
I still maintain the
transformer in the schematic would prevent
phantom power on pins two and three from reaching the cartridge (please correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it the positive side of
phantom power is applied to pins two and three, and the negative side is applied to pin one).
Philhaney, your red in amongst a David quote makes little to no sense.
Thanks for pointing that out. I apologize again, and have edited my post to remove it and (hopefully) make more sense.
...the jargonized hyperbole which is as meaningless to the reader as the writer.e.g. "out of
phase by 180 degrees" ...
Dillons explanation is ... so confusingly written as to be indecipherable and incoherent to any ordinary reader.
I wish Americans would follow the example ... of reducing a problem to basics, the direct opposite to the long winded pieces we so often see.
I'm not fond of long winded overly technical pieces either. On the other
hand, I'm a very technical person. My
explanation was originally four times larger. I condensed it down before posting it. "Houston, we're aware of the problem and are working to correct it."
Dillon's explanation made perfect sense and was not confusing or indecipherable.
"Out of
phase by 180 degrees" was not meaningless to the writer or most readers. I knew exactly what I meant when I wrote it.
If you think I have posted something in too technical a fashion, please (respectfully) tell me. I will edit my post to make it easier to understand (I will al least try).
"Phil, your post about _____ may be a bit too technical for some readers (or 'may be confusing to some readers'). Would you simplify it please?"
I can certainly respect a request or statement like that. On the other
hand, I have a hard time with, "
so confusingly written as to be indecipherable and incoherent," especially from someone who claims to want to make things simple...
One more thing, next time please say something like, "I wish people would..." instead of, "I wish Americans would..." You have every right to disagree with what a person posts, but do you really have to insult all the citizens of the country the poster comes from?