here is a plane and a car recorded with parabolic microphone 60cm diameter =
and mkh 40 in the focus with mic splitter for dual mono. To my ears ther is=
no rejection, only amplification, with the parabola of the plain and car s=
ounds.
Jos=E9
--- In Scott Fraser <> wr=
ote:
>
> <<Could you say more about directional mics? I'm not sure I understand wh=
at you are suggesting here. It sounds like you are saying that some mics ha=
ve better vertical rejection while retaining horizontal acceptance? Is that=
what you mean? That would be very useful in so many situations. Would that=
apply to the ME66 as well as the MKH-416 (which is way beyond my means)? M=
y problems with airplane noise have increased since I started recording wit=
h omnis in a home built sass/pbba type array. Getting a second used ME66 is=
doable and worth considering if you think that would help reduce noise fro=
m the sky.>>
>
> The problem with aircraft noise is that it doesn't just come from the sky=
. It arrives to our ears & microphones from all directions because we are i=
n a diffuse field, meaning the volume of the reflected sound is equal to or=
greater than the volume of the direct sound. In my experience there's only=
a marginal difference between aiming a cardioid mic away from or directly =
at a passing aircraft. Same with distant traffic, you get a few dB improvem=
ent at best by aiming away from the general direction of a highway. Having =
a big physical barrier, such as a hill, between you & that highway will do =
far more to attenuate traffic noise than merely aiming your mic the other w=
ay.
> A directional microphone does not have a horizontal nor vertical orientat=
ion. It picks up equally well above & below the horizon as it does to the s=
ides. Also realize that adding a second directional mic makes the resulting=
stereo array less directional than a single mic.
>
> Scott Fraser
>
>
|