[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Machine Gun microphone

Subject: Re: Machine Gun microphone
From: "Michael Oates" msohooates
Date: Fri Sep 7, 2007 10:48 am ((PDT))

This is the main reason I am asking and although I did not mention the word=
 'comb', that
is what I meant (I should have said to be more clear). This is why I am thi=
nking of using
almost 3 times the number of tubes to help fill in the gaps. But as I don't=
 know just how
finely tuned each tube is, there could still be lots of comb filter effects=
 present, even
with the extra tubes, thereby spoiling the recording.

>From the article I gave the link to, this type of microphone appears to hav=
e high gain and
has a very narrow pickup pattern, even better than a parabolic reflector.

I called it a machine gun rather than a shotgun, as it looks more like a ma=
chine gun.
Clearly if one was to use it, covering the whole barrel is a good idea apar=
t from
protection from the wind, so it does not then alarm other people who think =
you are about
to create havoc in the countryside!



><<Has anyone every made and used a machine gun microphone.>>
>This is known as an interference tube microphone, or a rifle mic. I
>have not heard one in use, but I have heard that the reason these are
>not in favor is due to very bad comb filtering effects.
>Scott Fraser

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU