You haven't mentioned what recorder you will use, and if it has PIP.
Generally I think 2 capsules each side in a SASS is about as much as
the better recorders can power. The ultrasonic EM258s sound
interesting! I wonder how their sound compares with EM172s when used
for general recording, birdsong etc.?
On 26/02/2018, at 7:50 AM, [naturerecordists]
> It's looking like I might have a chance to travel to Austin, Texas,
> some time this summer. There are some great opportunities to record
> Mexican freetail bats while I'm there (Congress St. Bridge, Bee
> Caves, etc.) but I don't have much in the way of ultrasonic-capable
> We only have one very rare species of bat where I live here in
> Hawaii, so I haven't had much of a need for ultrasonic mics. I'm
> more than willing to build some, but I don't want to pour a lot of
> effort into a mic I'm going to use for a week, and then not need
> again for years, if ever.
> While I was looking at some of the capsules Nick Roast has on micbooster.=
> , a thought occurred to me: I've got all the bits and pieces to
> build a dual-capsule EM-172 SASS similar to the one Vicki Powys
> describes on her web site: https://caperteebirder. com/?page_id=3D284
> If I picked up four EM-258 capsules and either wired them in with
> the EM-172 caps, or ran a completely separate set of wires, I could
> potentially build a dual-range SASS (20Hz-20kHz on the EM-172s
> and ???-96kHz on the EM-258s). The EM-258 capsules wouldn't raise
> the cost of the build by that much, and in the end I'd still have an
> SASS I could use in my largely bat-free environment here once I'm
> back from Austin. This would also help solve the issue of luggage
> space since I'm going to Austin for a conference and really can't
> pack gobs of recording gear for the trip.
> My thought is to cluster four capsules for each of the two wings on
> the SASS: two EM-172s and two EM-258s. I haven't worked through the
> packing densities in CAD, but I should be able to keep everything
> pretty close together.
> Does this seem reasonable? Or am I barking up the wrong tree with
> this idea?