[Sean B]

Hi,

I'm wondering if anyone can tell me the voltage ratio that the two signals from a typical back-to-back cardioid large-diaphragm condenser capsule, in order to synthesize a super-cardioid response.

Thanks!

Sean B

[Sean B]

Insert: "need to be combined in" after the word "capsule".

[Phil Allison[_4_]]

Sean B wrote:

-----------------


I'm wondering if anyone can tell me the voltage ratio that the two
signals from a typical back-to-back cardioid large-diaphragm
condenser capsule, in order to synthesize a super-cardioid response.



** A dual diaphragm condenser consist of two, back to back cardiod capsules.

Normally, the two diaphragm are connected in parallel so signals from each are automatically combined. To have any signal, one or both diaphragms must be polarised with a DC voltage.

It works like this:

1. Polarise one diaphragm with a high DC voltage and you have a cardioid mic.

2. Polarise the other instead and you have a cardioid mic facing the opposite way.

3. Polarise BOTH diaphragms the same and you have an omni pattern mic.

4. Polarise one capsule with the opposite DC voltage to the other and you have a figure 8 mic.

5. If you polarise on capsule at about 20% the DC voltage used for the other and of reverse polarity, you get a supercardiod.




..... Phil

[Scott Dorsey]

Sean B wrote:

I'm wondering if anyone can tell me the voltage ratio that the two signals from a typical back-to-back cardioid large-diaphragm condenser capsule, in order to synthesize a super-cardioid response.

That depends what your idea of supercardioid really is. Anything between
cardioid and omni is "supercardioid" and that is a large range. If I were
building a mike, I'd start about halfway between the two.

Unless you're one of those people like AKG who use the word "supercardioid"
to mean something about halfway between hypercardioid and figure-8.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Sean B]

I thought the terms "sub-cardioid" and "wide-cardioid" referred to the range between omni and cardioid. And "super-cardioid" is between cardioid and figure-8, with hyper-cardioid being closer to figure-8 than super-cardioid.



http://www.proaudioland.com/wp/wp-co...r-patterns.jpg

[geoff]

On 3/08/2017 9:07 AM, Sean B wrote:
I thought the terms "sub-cardioid" and "wide-cardioid" referred to the range between omni and cardioid. And "super-cardioid" is between cardioid and figure-8, with hyper-cardioid being closer to figure-8 than super-cardioid.



http://www.proaudioland.com/wp/wp-co...r-patterns.jpg



I would have super-cardioid somewhere between cardioid and hyper-cardioid.

I must have too many AKG cos I call Scott's super-cardioid
"wide-cardioid". And I love it.

geoff

[Trevor]

On 3/08/2017 7:42 AM, geoff wrote:
On 3/08/2017 9:07 AM, Sean B wrote:
I thought the terms "sub-cardioid" and "wide-cardioid" referred to the
range between omni and cardioid. And "super-cardioid" is between
cardioid and figure-8, with hyper-cardioid being closer to figure-8
than super-cardioid.

http://www.proaudioland.com/wp/wp-co...r-patterns.jpg


I would have super-cardioid somewhere between cardioid and hyper-cardioid.

I must have too many AKG cos I call Scott's super-cardioid
"wide-cardioid". And I love it.

In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with a
*wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how many
examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are too many.

Trevor.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 22:28:14 +1000, Trevor wrote:

On 3/08/2017 7:42 AM, geoff wrote:
On 3/08/2017 9:07 AM, Sean B wrote:
I thought the terms "sub-cardioid" and "wide-cardioid" referred to the
range between omni and cardioid. And "super-cardioid" is between
cardioid and figure-8, with hyper-cardioid being closer to figure-8
than super-cardioid.

http://www.proaudioland.com/wp/wp-co...r-patterns.jpg


I would have super-cardioid somewhere between cardioid and hyper-cardioid.

I must have too many AKG cos I call Scott's super-cardioid
"wide-cardioid". And I love it.

In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with a
*wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how many
examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are too many.

Trevor.

In my book the sequence goes:

Omni
Subcardioid
Cardioid
Supercardioid
Hypercardioid
Figure 8

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with a
*wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how many
examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are too many.

It used to be common, but again because of this I am reluctant to use the
word at all. Better to call it a "wide cardioid" or "narrow cardioid".
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Trevor]

On 3/08/2017 11:24 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with a
*wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how many
examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are too many.

It used to be common,

I'll have to take your word for that, certainly was never the case here.


but again because of this I am reluctant to use the
word at all. Better to call it a "wide cardioid" or "narrow cardioid".
And those two would be different animals surely? A super-cardioid here
has always been a "narrow (pattern) cardioid". The only confusion has
really been between the definition of super-cardioid and hyper-cardioid,
or cardioid and wide-cardioid, especially when actual polar plots are
not provided. Personally I always consider the terms pretty meaningless
without a polar plot at various frequencies anyway. Otherwise they are
just omni or directional!

Trevor.

[David Hammer]

On Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 9:24:32 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote:
In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with a
*wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how many
examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are too many.

It used to be common, but again because of this I am reluctant to use the
word at all. Better to call it a "wide cardioid" or "narrow cardioid".
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


AKG specs for the current 414 show polar patterns as:

"Polar Patterns
Cardioid, Figure of eight, Hypercardioid, Omnidirectional, and Wide Cardioid"
http://www.akg.com/Microphones/Conde...s/C414XLS.html

Same thing on Neumann's description of the 5 polar patterns on the U89:

"Polar patterns
In addition to the usual directional polar patterns: omnidirectional, cardioid, and figure-8, we have added a hypercardioid and wide-angle cardioid characteristic. When compared to the standard cardioid pattern, the hypercardioid characteristic suppresses sound from the side more efficiently. The wide-angle polar pattern is especially useful to record large sound sources."

https://www.neumann.com/?lang=en&id=..._descriptio n


Schoeps uses "supercardiod" as a synonym for "hypercardiod" €“ same pattern by a different name:

http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/ca...s/mic_capsules

DPA follows Shoeps, using Supercardiod instead of Hypercardiod, but again the same pattern. They do make things a little fuzzy though when they get to there shotgun capsule, where they describe it as:

"It is equipped with a highly-directional hypercardioid pickup pattern; obtained using a supercardioid design with an interference tube that provides excellent off-axis rejection."

http://www.dpamicrophones.com/access...ophone-capsule

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 22:28:14 +1000, Trevor wrote:

On 3/08/2017 7:42 AM, geoff wrote:
On 3/08/2017 9:07 AM, Sean B wrote:
I thought the terms "sub-cardioid" and "wide-cardioid" referred to the
range between omni and cardioid. And "super-cardioid" is between
cardioid and figure-8, with hyper-cardioid being closer to figure-8
than super-cardioid.

http://www.proaudioland.com/wp/wp-co...r-patterns.jpg


I would have super-cardioid somewhere between cardioid and hyper-cardioid.

I must have too many AKG cos I call Scott's super-cardioid
"wide-cardioid". And I love it.

In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with a
*wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how many
examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are too many.

Trevor.

In my book the sequence goes:

Omni
Subcardioid
Cardioid
Supercardioid
Hypercardioid
Figure 8

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



There's a formula for the polar plot of each so it's not difficult to
sort them

http://www.montana.edu/rmaher/ee417_...%20HANDOUT.pdf


--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

Trevor wrote:
On 3/08/2017 11:24 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor
wrote:
In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with
a *wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how
many examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are
too many.

It used to be common,

I'll have to take your word for that, certainly was never the case
here.


but again because of this I am reluctant to use the word at all.
Better to call it a "wide cardioid" or "narrow cardioid".
And those two would be different animals surely? A super-cardioid
here has always been a "narrow (pattern) cardioid". The only
confusion has really been between the definition of super-cardioid
and hyper-cardioid, or cardioid and wide-cardioid, especially when
actual polar plots are not provided. Personally I always consider the
terms pretty meaningless without a polar plot at various frequencies
anyway. Otherwise they are just omni or directional!

Trevor.



The formulae for the polar plots is more or less based on 1,2,3,4 at
various points within the formula. I put up a link for some
common ones.

I always wondered why "order" wasn't a thing in mic polar
patterns; it reminds me of the order of filters also being 1,2,3...

Of course those are models, not the actual performance of a mic.

--
Les Cargill

[Phil Allison[_4_]]

Les Cargill wrote:

-----------------------


There's a formula for the polar plot of each so it's not difficult to
sort them

http://www.montana.edu/rmaher/ee417_...%20HANDOUT.pdf


** The graph for the hypercardioid case is wrong - one for a supercardiod appears instead.

The response should be -6dB from the rear, like this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...rdioid.svg.png


...... Phil
...... Phil

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Fri, 4 Aug 2017 21:20:06 -0500, Les Cargill
wrote:

Trevor wrote:
On 3/08/2017 11:24 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor
wrote:
In fact I've never heard any manufacturer refer to something with
a *wider* pattern than cardioid as "super-cardioid". I wonder how
many examples Scott can provide? I'd be surprised if there are
too many.

It used to be common,

I'll have to take your word for that, certainly was never the case
here.


but again because of this I am reluctant to use the word at all.
Better to call it a "wide cardioid" or "narrow cardioid".
And those two would be different animals surely? A super-cardioid
here has always been a "narrow (pattern) cardioid". The only
confusion has really been between the definition of super-cardioid
and hyper-cardioid, or cardioid and wide-cardioid, especially when
actual polar plots are not provided. Personally I always consider the
terms pretty meaningless without a polar plot at various frequencies
anyway. Otherwise they are just omni or directional!

Trevor.



The formulae for the polar plots is more or less based on 1,2,3,4 at
various points within the formula. I put up a link for some
common ones.

I always wondered why "order" wasn't a thing in mic polar
patterns; it reminds me of the order of filters also being 1,2,3...

Of course those are models, not the actual performance of a mic.

That's the big thing. Unless the frequency response of the pressure
and velocity elements is identical, the pattern - and particularly the
all-important angle of the nulls - is all over the place. And since
those two sensing modes have different resonance frequencies, that
will inevitably be the case.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Trevor]

On 5/08/2017 12:20 PM, Les Cargill wrote:
Trevor wrote:
On 3/08/2017 11:24 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
but again because of this I am reluctant to use the word at all.
Better to call it a "wide cardioid" or "narrow cardioid".

And those two would be different animals surely? A super-cardioid
here has always been a "narrow (pattern) cardioid". The only
confusion has really been between the definition of super-cardioid
and hyper-cardioid, or cardioid and wide-cardioid, especially when
actual polar plots are not provided. Personally I always consider the
terms pretty meaningless without a polar plot at various frequencies
anyway. Otherwise they are just omni or directional!

The formulae for the polar plots is more or less based on 1,2,3,4 at
various points within the formula. I put up a link for some
common ones.

I always wondered why "order" wasn't a thing in mic polar
patterns; it reminds me of the order of filters also being 1,2,3...

Of course those are models, not the actual performance of a mic.

And there's the rub. Proper polar plots at a number of frequencies
eliminates most guess work about it's actual directionality.

Trevor.