> However, if my choices are to EQ out the effects of a heavy duty wind muf=
fle or not record at all, I'd really rather take the EQ and muffle.
Tom,
I'll buy that principle, Too often we concentrate on the Hi-fi but can
easily miss out on the real thing.
The problems I would foresee with a kite are turbulence and air flow.
Conventional windshields work well at most near-ground windspeeds, but it
takes wind to fly.
General principles I would suggest are;
Record at a lower level than you would normally do. With digital it is easy=
to bring up the level later with little or no loss.
Work on getting a basic stereo image and worry about quality later.
What you are up against with any directional mic array, mono or stereo, is =
a
high sensitivity to airflow compared to an omni mic. This is because the
"directional element" is generated by the equivalent of a figure of 8
component which is very sensitive to air movement which is largely cancelle=
d
out each side of an omni.
Spaced mono arrays will theoretically give binaural "phase" stereo but not=
directional "volume" stereo. They may give you something which gives an
effect on headphones, but not with conventional stereo LS playback.
The big enemy will be turbulence. Low level turbulent can be filtered with =
a
bass cut to avoid mic overloading (recording at a suitably low level of
course), and a lot can be done in post processing provided again that there=
is no non-linearity distortion. The trick is to avoid high frequency
turbulences like hiss or roar.
The basic function of any windshield is to smooth the windflow and to
prevent turbulent airflow, and generally, the larger the radius of curvatur=
e
presented to the airflow the higher the tolerable airspeed.
What type of kite? Can you use any part of the structure to reduce the
airflow near the mic rig? Single skin "traditional" kites tend to flap whic=
h
won't help but a Jalbert aeroflow type theoretically has pockets of srill
air.
As a radical suggestion, I would experiment (on the ground first or in the=
back of a pickup) with the microphone behind the kite material which may
buffer the airflow. I have in mind a Jalbert inflated cell, for instance.
The frequency response and sound level will take a hit, but at least some o=
f
this could theoretically be equalised out later provided that there is no
non-linearity.
If conventional kite materials are difficult to equalise out, would it be
possible to use a more acoustically transparent panel in front of the mic
rig such as close weave nylon?
Is a lighter-than-air craft possible? This could have a much smoother
airflow for a start. Another possibility could be to let a dirigible float=
free for a minute or so on a slack line where the mic would experience a
near zero airflow. A common comment with manned balloon flights is how much=
sound you can hear from the ground when the burner turns off.
Just some ideas for a start.
David Brinicombe
|