[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 30 Mar 2012 10:32:14 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Matt Faunce wrote:
On 3/30/12 1:25 AM, Don Pearce wrote:

As for the proximity effect. It genuinely IS absent at 90 degrees from
the microphone as the velocity component is (near as dammit) zero from
that direction, and only the pressure response is available. Sure you
lose highs from the side - diaphragm geometry sees to that. But that
is not the same thing as bass boost through proximity effect.

Okay, I'll buy that argument. I guess it's something we never really notice
since the response off-axis is usually so wonky. I know that with an SM-7
when you speak up close parallel to the diaphragm you still get a massive
bass boost (but reduced popping) and a lot of broadcast guys like doing that.


Yes, but when you are up close, 90 degrees just isn't possible. Sound
emerges from the whole front of your face - not just your mouth. So
the bass boost is still going to happen.

Since normal listening is at a distance, and highs get absorbed in the
air, won't the sideways position give you a more realistic tone?
Especially if listening to playback with headphones? I've always
imagined that sound engineers might angle their cardioid mikes closer to
the side as they move from within a foot to even closer to the source,
especially if the source comes from a tight area like a small speaker.

Could be, but then you have all the other response problems that come from
being off-axis. If you want a realistic tone up close, either use an omni
or use equalization. There's no crime in using equalization, especially if
you have a mike with a built-in compensation filter.
--scott

No crime? I'd say it is pretty much mandatory.

d