Klas:
The holes in the foam are there for a reason, so that there is some open sp=
ace
to the sides of the PZM capsules. The presence of that hole was not intende=
d for
mounting other capsules behind it. The hole is to open up the boundary to
incident sound at the edge of the PZM element.
As the mics get close to the nose of the SASS, the response varies such tha=
t
there will be more attenuation of the high frequencies and the polar respon=
se
will be changed as well. Hence the "muffled" quality of your rig. Had you
mounted your capsules in the exact spot=A0of the original PZM mic capsules,=
then
the response should be quite clear.=A0I believe that someone has just poste=
d the
link to the patent so that you can become familiar with the design paramete=
rs.
Do you have a second SASS with 3032s mounted? Can you send us a picture of =
their
mounting details? How about some some sound samples comparing that particul=
ar
rig to the SSM?
IMHO, I=A0think that it would be unwise=A0make the web page (that you sent =
us the
link for) public. The difference between "evaluate" and "hear the differenc=
e" is
slight. People can take that comparison different ways. Perhaps it's better=
not
to compare the SSM to anything else. I very much enjoyed the "mailman comin=
g"
clip, with the fluttering of the birds' wings. Let the SSM stand on its own=
.
I noticed that when I did the EQ to correct for the SSM's HF peaking that i=
t's
high end was very similar to that of the SASS. Of course, the localization =
was
different. BTW, some of the sound clips had some rather bad glitches at the=
beginning. What was the cause of this?
Well, I think that you have a fine product here and I wish you the best of =
luck
with it. The only improvement that I could foresee is a cost-reduced model =
for
those of us that are financially impaired.
Best regards,
Greg
|