[Top] [All Lists]

1. Re: parabolic mics

Subject: 1. Re: parabolic mics
From: "diesel33dsl" diesel33dsl
Date: Thu Jun 16, 2011 1:45 am ((PDT))
Thanks all dudes!

Most of your answers can be synthesized with a 'try it and see' basis.
Thats what I'll be doing then, once I have gear and mikes enough to make co=
mparisons (and software and measurement tools too, we could give some words=
 here also about what tools you use).

It is a pleasure to read your debates and opinions, specially now I am star=
ting to take it seriously.

About using parabolas, i guess my decision is to gather some coins and try =
to ask one of those swedish to send me a telinga set :)

Positioning a shotgun mic in a parabola seems quite an unexpected go since =
I'd be combining two different caption ideas (thanks David B.) and probably=
 locating the capsule in the focus is not easy due to mike size and so on..=
. I guess the same happens when trying to locate there two isolated mics fo=
r a stereo take of a distant element.

Thanks Raimund also, your Goshawk take makes worth the try with my approach=

What's clear is that small/light mikes will fit best there and omnis pointi=
ng to reflected sound are best choice...
i guess the Telinga sets include good mikes on them, specially designed for=
 better performance, but has anyone of you got better results by swapping d=
efault Telinga mikes with others?
Or, is my choice to get a Telinga set (dish, handle, mount) without mikes a=
nd put some specific models there?
Which models/brands go well here?


--- In  "Avocet" <> wrote:
> > Question 2:
> Is the parabola approach designed to be used with JUST omni mics?
> Are other caption patterns allowed, or is it senseless to use
> directional mics here?
> Dani,
> As a supplementary answer, try any mic with a parabola and see what it
> does. However, bear in mind that a double mic or a gunmic will be
> wider or longer than the high frequency focus of the parabola so the
> basic parabola theory won't apply.
> > Does this enhance directivity for a shotgun?
> You would be combining two very different directional principles and
> it is unlikely that they would reinforce each other's characteristics
> but try it. And it is likely that they would reinforce each other's
> disadvantages.
> BTW I regard the MKH 416 one of the most useful mics available and
> can't see how it can be improved on except for the MKH 816 (still
> available second hand). If you have a bottomless pocket there is the
> MKH 8070 which has an amazing spec but I can't afford two of them for
> stereo. :-) I think the law of diminishing returns would act here,
> money-wise.
> Going to basic parabola theory:
> a) The focus is finer at higher frequencies and virtually non-existant
> at low freqencies.
> b) An omni mic will pick up both direct sound and reflected sound and
> at some frequenies these will tend to cancel out, but for most wanted
> frequencies the reflected sound swamps the direct.
> c) A cardioid theoretically avoids cancellation effect type b) but
> other diffraction effects still apply. A cardioid is always more
> susceptible to wind and handling noise. Take your pick on
> disadvantages.
> d) Stereo with a parabola is only possible using two points just
> off-focus on either side. The theory behind this is complex so trial
> and error is the best method of finding out what works.
> David
> David Brinicombe
> North Devon, UK
> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce

<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