If I understand right, the idea of the triplet is to get better s/n.
Someone please correct me if that's wrong.
Somewhat related to your "ear" thought, I've done some tinkering with
small ear-like structures placed immediately behind various mic
capsules. In most cases I've noticed some slight attenuation of sounds
coming from behind the array, which what what I was after. The
trade-off seemed to be exaggerated upper-mid frequencies, which I do
not want. My feeling right now is that it's not worth pursuing further.
Curt Olson
Lou Judson wrote:
> Could there be merit to the thought that the triplet is about as wide
> as an ear is that might contribute to the effectiveness? And that gets
> me thinking if you put the center one forward or back (in the
> direction of the sound source) what would it do the the imaging?
>
> Just idle thoughts...
>
> <L>
>
> Lou Judson =95 Intuitive Audio
> 415-883-2689
>
> On Jan 26, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Curt Olson wrote:
>
>> this idea of forward-facing omnis in close proximity to smallish
>> head-spaced barriers gives excellent localization, amazing
>> spaciousness and solid mono compatibility on even very small budgets.
>> From my experience, I'd say that the key factors in getting it right
>> are -- in order of importance: 1) setback from the leading edge of
>> the barriers; 2) orientation of the barriers to each other (parallel
>> vs. angled inward vs. angled outward); 3) distance between the mic
>> capsules; 4) size of the barriers. Of course, all these will vary
>> depending on the specific mics used.
>>
>> Any thoughts about the impact of various barrier shapes?
>>
>> Curt Olson
|