At 1:24 PM +0000 3/13/10, David Michael wrote:
>
>
>Are the mic mounts we have been talking about better described as
>"parallel spaced boundary arrays"?
>
>D
The closest rig, physically, is the Phase Coherent Cardiod or PCC
made by Crown, but there many differences. The related SASS and wedge
micss, Bartlett classifies with spaced arrays as I recall-- I think
adding "head" to describe the actual spaced distance.
I know Curt wasn't crazy about using my using the term 'boundary" at
first, perhaps feeling the wood shapes were functioning more as
"barriers" (preventing sounds above ~900?Hz from one side getting
directly to the other).
When I experimented last year with bringing the capsule next to all
of those surfaces, it became perceptually apparent to me that the
coloration and directionality changes that happened with capsule
proximity were a large part of the "action" of the rigs. As I wrote,
however, there's not been that much formal study of or interest in
boundary mics. Rob D.
=3D =3D =3D
>
>--- In
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>=
m,
>Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>>
>> Hi--
>> In interest of keeping our term usage somewhat consistent, I'm pretty
>> sure that the wooden boundaries in David's rig would not be
>> technically described as "baffles." Baffles are used primarily to
>> absorb sound like the separator in a Jecklin Disk, and boundaries are
>> designed to reflect sound or create a pressure zone. The SASS and the
>> Curt's head-spaced arrays made of wood, are both "Boundary" arrays.
>> The SASS uses the pressure zone formed on the boundary surface with
>> flush mounted capsules. Curt's perpendicular to boundary capsule
> > mounting chiefly uses reflection. Rob D.
--
|