Hello,
Just wondering, do you or anyone know how the Aquarian Audio
hydrophones compare with the DolphinEar ones?
Cheers,
Hector
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 5:58 AM, picnet2 <> wrote:
>
>
> Its been a while since I tinkered with Hydrophones, but last year I was
> quite busy and documented most of the work via my blog:-
>
> http://urlme.net/blog
>
> There you will find a few different hydrophone examples:
>
> Including the Construction Guides
>
> - http://www.urlme.net/blog/?page_id=435
> and 2nd part - http://www.urlme.net/blog/?page_id=456
>
> This, http://www.urlme.net/blog/?p=380 Snows the various DIY hydrophones ive
> made.
>
> An electret mic covered with a thin layer of silicone will work underwater.
>
> Polymer electret hydrophones:-
> http://www.urlme.net/blog/?p=478
>
> PVDF: http://www.urlme.net/blog/?p=498
>
> My best advise would be to buy one from Aquarian Audio.
>
> BR,
> Mike.
>
>
> --- In "jasonpudd" <> wrote:
>>
>> Patrick,
>>
>> From a practical perspective only, I am not the best person to ask
>> technically about sound engineering but maybe someone else is in the group.
>> If you used an air filled enclosure like this where I am from (British
>> Columbia) you would have considerable build-up of condensation. This is
>> caused by the colder temperature of the water in relation to the ambient
>> above water. You may develop some problems with the unit due to this. If you
>> had a small leak, even a drop, and this went un-noticed even for a short
>> time, this would cause considerable corrosion from the salt water. Up here
>> we pack our underwater stobe connections with silicon to stop this from
>> happening and shorting our the contacts and causing corrosion. This works
>> really well. The same problem happens in other climates with cold water
>> temperatures.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> --- In ". m u r m e r ." <murmer@>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > and while i'm out of lurk mode...
>> >
>> > i posted this question to the phonography list, but got no response, so
>> > i thought i'd try here. any thoughts about this?
>> >
>> > i've been fiddling with building a simple hydrophone for awhile now.
>> > i'd made several attempts with hollow cavities filled with vaseline,
>> > poster tack, oil, or nothing. i'd read that a hydrophone ought to be
>> > filled with oil, something about it having a similar density to water
>> > and therefore letting the soundwaves travel through the cavity to the
>> > piezo inside. working with oil is messy, however, and it's very
>> > difficult to reliably seal the cavity without any air bubbles inside. i
>> > managed one though, but i also had an identical one which i'd sealed
>> > with an empty cavity. i compared them, and both work great, and sound
>> > remarkably similar, if not identical. so what i wonder is: why do i
>> > think the cavity needs to be full of oil? what does that provide that
>> > my empty one does not have? anyone have any insight?
>> >
>> > best,
>> > patrick
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > ||| www.murmerings.com |||
>> >
>>
>
>
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|