1. You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.

Astatic 636L vs. stock Cobra Mic.

Discussion in 'CB and Export Equipment and Accessories' started by Steve H, Nov 10, 2010.

  1. Steve H

    Steve H
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    I listened to myself talking on my Cobra 129 ltd with the stock mic. compared to the Astatic mic. I used a tape recorder, sitting next to a walkie-talkie at home while I drove around.

    There is a noticeable difference. The stock Cobra mic. sounded loud and overmodulated, while the aftermarket Astatic was clear. I'm actually enjoying listening to the difference over and over.

    I guess there is something to be said for good microphones. I'll keep the stock Cobra mic. for a spare, but it just doesn't compare to the Astatic.


     

  2. TonyV225

    TonyV225
    Expand Collapse
    W9WDX Amateur Radio Club Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Messages:
    5,821
    Likes Received:
    278
    Just remember each radio is different just keep that in mind ;)
     
  3. jessejamesdallas

    jessejamesdallas
    Expand Collapse
    Sr. Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    125
    If you liked the Astatic 636L...You'll love the Ranger SRA 198 Noise Canceling Mic! There about the same price range as the 636, and cheaper than a RK 56...

    The first batch of Ranger SRA 198's that came out back first of the year were horrible to say the least. But after numerous complaints to Ranger about the Mic's, Ranger went in and did some modifications like adding a resister and Cap to the Mic element, and the second run of the SRA 198's are great.

    Nice heavy Mic that feels like it should cost a small fortune, but cost around what a 636 will run you...
     
  4. Steve H

    Steve H
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'll keep that in mind, jessejamesdallas. But I'm the kind of person that doesn't like to mess with success. This Astatic sure does sound good...but I have to admit it feels/looks a little plain. It's not a power mic, so it's not heavy.
     
  5. jessejamesdallas

    jessejamesdallas
    Expand Collapse
    Sr. Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    911
    Likes Received:
    125
    No, their not a Power Mic. And neither is the SRA 198. One thing that makes the Ranger Mic feel better to handle is it has weights inside that gives it that feel of the older Mics that were built back in the 70's.

    And if you take the back off and look at the element on the SRA 198's theres allot more to it than what is on the 636's and Road Kings. They also look allot different than what your use to seeing...

    Ranger SRA-198 Noise Cancelling Microphone Review
     
  6. ButtFuzz

    ButtFuzz
    Expand Collapse
    Anti-BS Advocate

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    22
    I have always thought that Astatic Should make a non-noise cancelling, non-power "stock" replacement microphone. One reason the 636L has "low mod" on AM is because of the way the microphone is made (duh), and it is a mechanical problem to solve. It is not an electrical problem, because the 636 has no circuitry inside for the "noise cancelling" part.

    To make the 636 "noise cancelling", they simply put a plastic cover over the mic element to prevent "noise" being heard by the element except of spoken directly into the front/middle of the mic. Think of a small dome with a hole in the top. Now take that mini-dome and place it over the face of the mic element. Boom! You've got a 636L.

    I have, with success, removed this dome and modified it to essentially be nothing more than a ring holding the mic element in place. This makes the 636's performance on AM outstanding for a non-power mic.

    YMMV, but if you talk AM most times and don't want to fool with an expensive, battery-eating power mic, you may wish to give this a try.
     
  7. DTB Radio

    DTB Radio
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    998
    Likes Received:
    27
    I don't generally have that problem (low AM modulation) with the 636, with a very few exceptions (the new Uniden 680/880/980 radios). I find that if the radio is properly tuned, the 636 works well. I do run into the odd instance where teh customer's voice just doesn't go well with the 636 for one reason or another, but that's not the norm from my experience.
     
  8. ButtFuzz

    ButtFuzz
    Expand Collapse
    Anti-BS Advocate

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    22
    I think the "L" is for "L"ittle hole.
     
  9. DJboutit

    DJboutit
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    17
    I am using this diesel microphone I also have 4 over version of this micorpohone. I have test it vs a 636L I got 4 or 5 reports that the diesel microphone sounds better I got rid of the 636L

    https://flic.kr/p/oaNem6
     
  10. 2RT307

    2RT307
    Expand Collapse
    Sr. Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,590
    Likes Received:
    331
    My experience has been all over the place. Some rigs sound great with a stock mic, others don't. I have tried just about all the newer hand mics out there. The Ranger SRA-158 has been the happiest with all the rigs I have tried it on. The 636L works great on some rigs, not so good on others. It can depend on the rig, the tune, and the individual's voice. If it works great for you, keep using it!

    73,
    Brett
     

Share This Page