At 8:09 AM -0700 9/30/10, Scott Fraser wrote:
>
>
><<As theory predicts and the tests I've done have confirmed,
>phase-related problems arising from stereo mics separated no more
>than a couple of feet would be _above 500 Hz_ because wavelengths
>under 500Hz wrap around the largest baffles we use and sum on both
>channels.>>
>
>Thus a good argument for near-coincident & against widely spaced mics.
>The good news with wide spacing is that the phase of everything except
>the very longest wavelengths is random & confused, rather than out of
>phase. The bad news is that nothing is really in phase, & the imaging
>is incoherent. But better random phase than out of phase.
>
>Scott Fraser
Hi Scott-
"Wide" like 14-3/4" Jecklin or like 400 feet? :-)
I'm not sure what you mean by, "..that nothing is really in phase, &
the imaging is incoherent?"
Are you suggesting there's a phase performance advantage with
near-coincident arrays vs 14- 3/4" spaced arrays that near-by
reflection management can't address? Rob D.
--
|