I wrote:
> Walt Knapp wrote:
>
>> Posted by: "Rob Danielson"
>>
>>> It seems the boundary aspect of Curt's rig is quite a bit closer to
>>> the SASS than the Jecklin. His wood extends infron providing
>>> attenuation though different Hz affect than the foam baffle. The
>>> SASS mics are at a wider angle but both designs are fairly
>>> front-facing.
>>
>> When I first looked at Curt's experiments it did look like he was
>> reinventing the SASS. Some of his other experiments duplicate other
>> boundary mic experiments.
>
> Call my rigs anything you want. Here's the background:
>
> I used Crown PZMs extensively during my years working in music and
> live concert production. Crown's literature on boundary mics is full
> of interesting ideas, and I tried a number of them back then in
> addition to most of the other standard micing techniques, using a
> fairly wide range of both high-end and modest mics. I developed a
> reasonable working knowledge, but my level of real understanding was
> not very deep. (I suspect this is often the case in pro audio, though
> few will admit it.)
>
> Thankfully over the last couple years I've been able to slow down
> enough to do some serious "tinkering in the garage" with various
> stereo mic rigs in order to better understand what really happens with
> this or that type of array. And of course it's all been based on
> concepts that have been out there for decades. There are only so many
> ways to make stereo. It shouldn't surprise anyone that similar ideas
> turn up again and again in one form or another. I figure that truly
> original "breakthrough" thoughts are extremely rare, and I certainly
> haven't had any on this subject. But I think I understand much better
> what I'm hearing and doing now than I did a few years ago.
Incidentally, I should add that I consider this list to be a huge
positive factor. Thanks especially to Rob, Walt, Rich Peet and a few
others here for your critiques and your encouragement. I value it all!
Curt Olson
|