Even if you can afford a good comercial wind screen, there are
plenty of reasons to learn to make your own wind screens:
perhaps the microphone arangement you are usng wont fit in the
comercial screens; maybe you are experimenting with new
tecniques; perhaps you own a comercial windscreen but it is not
adequate for the conditions you will be recording in.
One reason for taking the time to experiment is to learn what
useful materials are readily avialable in your area. For nature
sound recordists, like us, the sooner we start experimenting, the
better prepared we will be for solving future wind noise
problems.
Not all fake fur is the same. Just because it looks just like the
stuff on the expensive comercial model, that does not mean it
will work well. You might end up with a bunch of remnants that
did not work out - save these remnants for your sasquatch suit.
-John Hartog
--- In "Rich Peet"
<> wrote:
>
> --- In Walter Knapp
<>
> wrote:
> > From: "Rich Peet" <>
> >
> > >
> > > I never said that.
> > > I have hundreds of hours experimenting with different
designs and
> > > most are in the trash. I have shared some good stuff that
didn't go
> > > there.
> >
> > That's where a lot of my designs end up too. I rarely mention
things
> > that did not work. Even some that work I won't mention as
that too can
> > be a hassle. Witness mentioning that I use MKH mics and
commercial wind
> > protection systems and what that got me.
> >
> > If it's a crime in these parts to use top notch equipment that
works
> > very well, then I'm guilty. And I have no remorse about it at all.
>
> The crime is only if we indicate that is the only path when a
new
> recordist wants to stay within a small budget. Good recordings
can be
> made with a $200 budget but is close to impossible without
seeing some
> options from people that have trashed a lot and to be aware of
what
> there limitations will be with any first setup.
>
> >
> > > I did post a recommendation that can be made in a few
hours and does
> > > work well and does cost next to nothing. This was based
on a lot of
> > > work and prototypes and I still feel a corragated design is
better
> > > than any made today, but no I am not going to rehash that.
> >
> > A while back now, I tried three different models of shop vac
filters,
> > and one model of hot tub filter (it's longer, so matches
shotguns
> > better). Similar to yours and with variations. A few comments,
take
> them
> > as you wish, I've moved on:
> >
> > The corrugated outside, sharp edges on ends, and kitchen
strainers all
> > make noise in the wind as they induce turbulence. You can
find a
> > direction in the wind where this will be the lowest, but a one
> direction
> > windscreen is not useful. To work well, to my mind, this
design must be
> > covered with fur or whatever. Check out Marty's comments on
smooth
> airflow.
>
> Marty's comments on our knowledge of physics was also
negatively taken
> by me. All of my filter designs run a smooth cover. Either xtra
large
> womens knee high nylons, fake fur, knit hats, or womens
see-through
> swimsuit material made mostly of spandex. Sometimes more
than one of
> these materials.
>
> You would not have the noise of the corragation if you run a
cover and
> for a possitive you eliminate the resonance bumps.
>
> >
> > I destroyed one filter in a moment while walking through the
brush. One
> > twig caught it. Filter paper is not the most durable thing. Yes,
it's
> > cheap to get another filter, but it costs time and can only be
done
> > where there are stores carrying them.
>
> I would put the filter up against a rycote zep for durability. And
> when they both fail all lumber yards stock the item and you can
not
> say that for rycote.
>
> >
> > I noticed changes in the polar patterns as a result, primarily,
of the
> > support structure of the filters. They form a barrier disk. Only
way
> for
> > this to be fairly well avoided is with a omni held vertically in a
long
> > enough filter. You'll still get some reflection from the end, but
it's
> > tolerable.
>
> I didn't think my support structures were as large as rycotes? I
will
> look again. Now I am not sure we are talking about the same
filter
> elements. Want it longer then silicone two together.
>
> >
> > The structure is quite large. Bigger even than my M/S MKH-80
pair in
> > it's Rycote stereo windscreen. One of these would not fit in
the bin in
> > which I carry all three of my M/S setups with their
windscreening.
> > Whatever advantage it might have over the commercial
windscreening may
> > be simply due to the much larger size.
>
> Bigger is better. Another reason why it is better than rycote. I
> would like a larger one yet. You just need a bigger bin. I use
> plastic storage tubs. Doing a lot of laptop multi-channel and
large
> parabolic recording I do not travel light either.
>
> >
> > As a internal baffle the corrugated paper element may
possibly have a
> > advantage over standard straight layers, I don't have enough
info to
> > tell. I do not think it all that viable as a outer layer.
> >
>
> I think so.
>
> > > We have a lot of good people here with a lot of good
windshields.=20
> > > But this is a very small group and growing very slow.
> >
> > It would be nice to see more of those designs in photo form.
> > Particularly ones that folks make and use over the long term.
Though
> > even ones that turned out to not be so hot are interesting to
check out.
>
> Agreed I always enjoy seeing home made stuff.
> For me trying to do some good multi-channel recording costs
are
> quickly multiplied for me. With my very limited budget I need to
spend
> what I have on just getting to the field. I just found a 30 year old
> RV with 75,000 original miles for $1,500 and can not even pop
for
> that. I would love to turn an rv into a natural sound recording
studio.
>
> >
> > Walt
> >
>
> Rich
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|