> > Do microphone manufacturers ever already have (or perhaps be willing
>> to provide as "typical" data) test data for mics at low SPLs? I
>> guess what's really important would be frequency response and
>> sensitivity which would be different than the published numbers at
>> much higher music and voice levels.
I don't know that the sensitivity or the frequency response are any
different at low levels for any mike. Of course there's the point
where the noise mike and/or preamp noise masks the stimulus, but
otherwise it's a linear function.
> > I suspect frequency response characteristics under low amplitude is
>> what leads people to talk about a mic's "reach" of far sounds
> > relative to near sounds.
I think directivity and sensitivity/noise characteristics are what
makes the difference.
>It would see to me that other than
> > directional aspects, a different mic placed into the same
> > environment, would react simply to the distance squared.
Once you get beyond the distance where proximity has an effect, i.e.
the curvature of the wavefronts flattens out.
>It seems
> > the definitive measure would be SNR at an appropriate reference level
>> somewhere between the near and far sound pressure level. Perhaps
>> frequency response further adds to the mystery as "reach" probably is
>> prone to frequency response affects when we operate near the lower
>> end of the sensitivity range.
Again, I don't believe that that happens.
-Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|