[genericaudioperson]

Hello,

I read Mr. Dorseys posts very carefully, because he is really smart.


If I understand him, he doesn't like shotgun mics all that much and
would try to get away with using a regular hypercardioid instead if
the circumstance permitted.


I'm not sure what the dividing line is when you have to abandon
"regular" mics and settle for the shotgun. If you don't have a lot
of ambient noise (like a noisey convention floor or a football game),
is 12 feet of distance too far away for a hypercardioid? (Assuming a
low- medium volume acoustic source like two acoustic guitars, two
vocals,
and a mandolin in a folk song environment). I'm talking about for
sound reinforcement where you are trying to capture the ensemble (and
you can't get the mic much closer).

What intrigues me about using a shotgun is the potential to "aim" the
mic very directionally. For example, if you needed to spotlight a
player in a group more than the others, you could point the mic at the
person. I don't think a typical mic can give you that aiming
specificity.



Shotguns seem expensive, with the industry standard ones $1200 and
up. But it's a fun idea to think you can really zoom in and target
the sound with a shotgun mic.

[Richard Kuschel]

On Dec 4, 9:40 pm, genericaudioperson
wrote:
Hello,

I read Mr. Dorseys posts very carefully, because he is really smart.

If I understand him, he doesn't like shotgun mics all that much and
would try to get away with using a regular hypercardioid instead if
the circumstance permitted.

I'm not sure what the dividing line is when you have to abandon
"regular" mics and settle for the shotgun. If you don't have a lot
of ambient noise (like a noisey convention floor or a football game),
is 12 feet of distance too far away for a hypercardioid? (Assuming a
low- medium volume acoustic source like two acoustic guitars, two
vocals,
and a mandolin in a folk song environment). I'm talking about for
sound reinforcement where you are trying to capture the ensemble (and
you can't get the mic much closer).

What intrigues me about using a shotgun is the potential to "aim" the
mic very directionally. For example, if you needed to spotlight a
player in a group more than the others, you could point the mic at the
person. I don't think a typical mic can give you that aiming
specificity.

Shotguns seem expensive, with the industry standard ones $1200 and
up. But it's a fun idea to think you can really zoom in and target
the sound with a shotgun mic.

Microphones are not telephoto lenses.
Even the most directional ones pick up lots of stuff you don't want
and probably won't pick up a bunch of what you do want.

Hyper cardioids tend to have much more consistant off axis response
than either cardioids or Line/gradient shotguns.

Though some companies make "zoom" stereo microphones, all that they
are doing is adding or decreasing the side pickup in relation to the
center mic in an MS Pair. the microphone isn't anymore directional
than the center mic and that is usually a cardioid, but it could be a
shotgun if you desire.

There are a lot of books out there that delve into how microphones
work and how microphone directionality is obtained. Learning to
interpret polar diagrams can also give you some insight into the
mysteries of microphones.

Specification sheets do not tell you what a microphone sounds like,
nor do they relate which microphone works best in any given situation.
Frequency response graphs are not consistent between manufacturers and
only a general idea of what is happening comparing two microphones
from the same manufacturer. About the only specification that has some
meaning might be the self noise level of a microphone and there are a
few different ways of measuring that so you may not be comparing
apples to apples.

The reasonable thing to do is get a DECENT preamp and try a bunch of
microphones. Don't expect to understand the differences immediately.
Learn to listen. Don't rely on memory to compare microphones, but
rather compare them in a side by side mode. Match the levels or you
may be tempted to always pick the loudest one as best. Which one
sounds the most natural? Is the top end hyped? is that desirable? Does
the microphone fiy your need/budget?

I thought that my Shure SM81's were pretty decent until I tried a
Neumann KM84, and that was my absolute favorite until I bought a set
of Schoeps CMC6/41's. I use all three these days, but for different
purposes. sometimes none of them give me what I am looking for and I
pull out a ribbon mic. Ribbons demand absolutely the best preamps with
very high gain but have a sound that is different than condensors.

Even the lowly SM57 might be the best choice at times and it is
necessary to know when that is.

Good luck.

[genericaudioperson]

Thank you Mr. Kuchel, Mr. Dorsey, and everyone else. I have learned
many things, and the collective wisdom of this group has successfully
pounded the idea out of my head that shotgun mics can be thought of as
telephoto lenses.

I'll have to take Mr. Dorsey's advice and rent a good shotgun when I
have some time. I think I've learned about as much as I can about
these things in abstraction. I'll have to see what this "horrible off-
axis" response stuff is all about. I don't get that at all.

You guys helped me avoid making a mistaken purchase. I was getting
ready to buy one of these things, until I learned that they are
problematical and do not function as telephoto zoom mics.

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

genericaudioperson wrote:
[snip]

I'll have to take Mr. Dorsey's advice and rent a good shotgun when I
have some time. I think I've learned about as much as I can about
these things in abstraction. I'll have to see what this "horrible off-
axis" response stuff is all about. I don't get that at all.

Take a close look at the polar response of a shotgun mic. It should help
you "get it".

EV 643 ~
http://archives.telex.com/archives/E.../643%20EDS.pdf

EV DL42 ~
http://archives.telex.com/archives/E...DL42%20EDS.pdf

EV 642 ~
http://archives.telex.com/archives/E.../642%20EDS.pdf

--
~
~ Roy
"If you notice the sound, it's wrong!"