At 8:40 AM -0700 8/27/10, Eric Benjamin wrote:
>
>It turns out to be a good idea to put the microphone capsules on the
>surface of
>a rigid sphere. Imagine something about the size of a baseball, although y=
ou
>would probably want to use something easier to work with than a
>baseball. There
>is a pretty large technical literature on this subject. I'd say that there
>have been several dozen technical papers describing various aspects
>of it in the
>last five years. Most of them are full of things like Bessel functions and
>Hankel functions that really aren't friendly to the typical nature recordi=
st.
>But you don't need to know that stuff to actually build and use a micropho=
ne
>array.
H Eric--
Good summary of the limitations in the basic directions we have to
pursue and develop. Omnis and boundaries do seem to present some
promising plusses for diffuse field surround recording. The 5100
sounds like its lineage of boundary mic theory. Charlie Fox used
spaced 4060's for years and has since made and patented a very
similar oblong sphere-like array where the capsule locations can be
adjusted in the horizontal plane.
I'm seeing a key difference in surround array designs as some model
ways human bodies organize spatial experience and others envision
capturing sound pretty evenly from 360 degrees. The arrays end-up
looking quite different and can be employed differently in the
soundscape. Rob D.
--
|