At 6:13 AM -0700 4/19/04, umashankar wrote:
>i have not heard the 418, but have looked at the
>specs, and i think sennheiser came up with a clever
>solution to the side signal.
>
>the side mic does not have the specs of the mid mic
>because it does not have to. i saw the math somewhere,
>but when the m in the ms mic is a shotgun, you need a
>very small contribution from the s mic before the
>image breaks up. and when you need a small signal
>(compared to the m signal) its noise figure can easily
>be much worse without effecting the over all decoded
>left right output.have i got that right?
>
>umashankar
>
Not for my applications. I often pan m-s recordings wide so the side
mic holds up most of the image. With a 30/40 mkh combo, I hear the
additional noise put out by the 30 compared to the 40.
I think Senn had a great product idea and maybe they felt it was okay
to compromise the unit in targeting it for film/video folks. If it
was up to standards, the 418-S would undercut their established
prices for other M-S combos. Yes, some film people will go for it
because of size/ease. Don't you think Senn knows they're hemmed-in
on the marketing of this product? There's an opportunity here for
somebody delivering a compact m-s unit with parts from mics like the
Rode NT1A/CAD179-- for a lot less $. I see in the CAD review that the
capsules do come out pretty easily. Rob D. =3D =3D =3D =3D
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|