David, can you please elaborate on the term "pressure gradient sensitive?"=
=0D
=0D
Peter Shute=0D
=0D
=0D
--------------------------=0D
Sent using BlackBerry=0D
=0D
________________________________=0D
From: =0D
To: =0D
Sent: Tue Feb 19 05:44:47 2013=0D
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Re: Is my equipment outdated?=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
> For me, the LS-11, NT4 (with blimp) and SASS-type mic array make a=0D
> very good, basic recording kit for relatively little money. With any=0D
> luck this technology will still be relevant 20 years from now. It's=0D
> hard to see how it could improve much at this point, except maybe=0D
> for quieter preamps to become more affordable.=0D
=0D
John,=0D
=0D
I haven't had my hands on an NT4 but it looks like a useful general=0D
purpose mic.=0D
=0D
Theoretically you should be able to narrow the stereo object width by=0D
doing an R-L and L-R transform. Have you (or anyone else) got tracks I=0D
could try this on?=0D
=0D
The NT4 has a low output impedance. Has anyone tried a 1:2 transformer=0D
into what is usually a mid impedance input? I know transformers are=0D
unfashionable but they often work well. That would take the=0D
sensitivity up to 24mV/Pa into > 800ohms.=0D
=0D
BTW the idea of a rear capsule windshield is not the solution as=0D
cardioid mics have an pressure gradient sensitivity. That's why=0D
cardioids are also bad for handling noise, and why vocal mics are=0D
usually omni. There is no substitute for a large efficient blimp.=0D
Nothing is more frusttrating than to have wind ruin an interesting=0D
recording.=0D
=0D
David=0D
=0D
David Brinicombe=0D
North Devon, UK=0D
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
|