Well since I think I am about the only guy in the world to suggest a
square barrier mic I guess I have to comment.
Measure from your ear around your head and you will see you are
closer to square than you are round. But the real reason I built a
square barrier is the ease in use. You can set it on a picnic table,
and just mount it anyware and it sticks. Round objects roll and move
and fight you and square ones don't.
The Sass needs to be modified because it was designed for a loud
environment. It is great for a full chorus of Christians ready to
save all your souls. But is weak for a lone bird on a quest for one
other. So I keep a sass for recording that bolt of lightning ready
to strike you down, and use the blockhead to record the whispers in
the wood.
--- In "bbystrek" <> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> In reading back posts regarding stereo imaging, why does everyone
> appear to be looking to "modify" Crown Audio's SASS product (use
only
> their enclosure) instead of also using the PZM mics they offer with
> it? Is it that most of you already own better quality microphones,
> or is there something not desirable about the PZM's for certain
types
> of nature recording situations? Or "C", none of the above?
>
> I follow the concept of the rubber or foam block simulating a
> binaural experience, but my head's not square (at least last time I
> checked in the mirror). I would of guessed the dummy head variety
> would provide a more realistic recording (perhaps this is not
> necessarily the goal for everyone).
>
> It seems that in order to capture the amplification benefits of the
> reflected energy, the microphone's element must be nearly (to a
> minuscule dimension for high frequencies on a wavelength basis) at
> the interface in order to benefit and avoid comb filtering boundary
> effects. I'm not sure a microphone assembly with embedded capsule
> allow the reflective surface to get close enough to the energy
> coupling region of the capsule. What do you suppose the test setup
> consists of to look for comb filtering in the frequency response?
Is
> it just a matter of getting a calibrated sound source and sweeping
a
> tone? Probably exploring the spacial relationships also.
>
> One thing about the SASS concept that sort of confuses me,
regarding
> reflected energy amplification, is that how can it be so small
> relative to a parabola, when we need large parabolas in order to
> capture low frequencies effectively?
>
> Brian Bystrek
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|