new microphone approach - the horn is back

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

ioaudio

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
2,087
Location
vienna/austria
http://www.simpsonmicrophones.com

just listened to the samples (download takes forever) and i am quite impressed. maybe andy simpson finds his way here to explain a little about his time-domain approach.
 
This guy posts over at R|E|P and raises a few hackles...

Judgment reserved until I hear one. -I do note however that the initial image montage is lots and lots of pictures of the SAME microphone... same woodgrain 'fingerprint' on every single one... does even a second one exist?

Also, he started a whole thread on impulse/sustained excitation for mic capsules, which makes me wonder... I would guess that any 'reverse-horn' would have SERIOUS issues in the time domain... I mean, horn-loaded compression drivers certainly do, compared to direct-loaded (comparatively highly-damped) drive units.

Keith
 
HALLO THIS IS NOT THE BREWERY REGARDING SOME KIND OF SSL CLONE

these kind of assumptions without knowing ANYTHING turns me off really. is it couse he origins from poland?

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/hi-end-gear-pro-audio-conference-october-25th-27th-2007-cologne-germany/
 
[quote author="SSLtech"]

Judgment reserved until I hear one. -I do note however that the initial image montage is lots and lots of pictures of the SAME microphone... same woodgrain 'fingerprint' on every single one... does even a second one exist?[/quote]

lol.
 
[quote author="kubi"]SM58 + some wooden wardrobe cones for 1000GBP???[/quote]
If you don't need one right away then it could be an idea to wait for the clone from the joint effort from Behringer & Ikea :wink:
 
A microphone in a horn is similar to a loudspeaker in a horn, there will be improvements in efficiency and directionality with compromises due to non ideal horn mechanics. YMMV

JR
 
[quote author="jeffrey_burr"]"Mikrofoen" if you buy it at Ikea.[/quote]
:grin:

Surprisingly the small percussion intruments I once saw at Ikea were made of... plastic. They must have been co-operating with Uli's EU10-per-plastic-stompbox company then already :wink:
 
Keith O. Johnson once touted the idea of a mic that looked like a little Beveridge electrostatic loudspeaker, and may have even experimented with one. This was when I asked him for a suggestion of a preferred mic for recording chamber music---as usual he said there weren't any that really worked adequately :roll:

I had a pair of U47s on loan that I used initially. Later (after the owner of the 47s demanded them back when he was laid off from the family biz) I went over to a crossed pair of Pearl ones of some vintage. Then I had a falling out with the organization.
 
When I try to imagine what happens with the incoming spheric wave traveling into the horn, I see a lot of reflections which should give some nasty combfilter. What should be the benefit?
 
[quote author="jensenmann"]When I try to imagine what happens with the incoming spheric wave traveling into the horn, I see a lot of reflections which should give some nasty combfilter. What should be the benefit?[/quote]

Combfilter will be less nasty than in a straight tube used for directional mics.
 
[quote author="jeffrey_burr"]"Mikrofoen" if you buy it at Ikea.[/quote]
spadikea.jpg


Keef
 
Olsen's ribbon mikes often used horn-effect to tweak-up the top octave.

"PZM"s are often used on 2-surface and sometimes 3-surface "corners" to give support and some directivity in free space. These are conical horns.

By eye, these horns are ~6" across the mouth, without flange. They do nothing below 400Hz. Of course many mike flaws are above 400Hz. And specifically the flaws caused by finite diaphragm diameter and stick-mike case length.

I've seriously sketched large horn mikes for semi-fixed installation, 2 feet or more across the mouth. Polar plots may be estimated from similar speaker horn plots. Exponential is not really a virtue, the way I saw it, though I did not consider damping of the diaphragm. (At least he spells "damping" properly.) The Simpsons appear to be conical, at least near the mouth. If the flare cut-off must be within the audio band, conical has mild effects and exponential leverages itself into a catastrophe just below cutoff.

> the initial image montage is lots and lots of pictures of the SAME microphone...

Further down the page is shown two mikes in a case. The lighting is too casual to be PhotoChop.

> I would guess that any 'reverse-horn' would have SERIOUS issues in the time domain...

An infinite horn is a perfect acoustic transformer.

Getting "infinite-enough" is a practical problem.

A physical diaphragm is generally an inexact match to horn impedance. The mismatch can be used to good effect, but that causes other effects.

If you want an unfair experiment, remember Reciprocity Principle. Steal the horns and drivers off the top of a PA stack and wire to a mike input. Directivity is identical. Frequency response is complicated... there is an exact answer but I think you need the current-response (not voltage response) when worked as a speaker, to plot the response as a microphone. Whatever, you will want to EQ it to taste. Usable bass response may be much better as mike than as speaker. Accept that mikes are held to a higher standard than speakers are, so flaws which are accepted in speakers (like an early JBL2440's 11KHz ring/dip, and most horns' half-wave-mouth directivity bump) will be embarassing as a mike.

> When I try to imagine what happens with the incoming spheric wave traveling into the horn, I see a lot of reflections...

For "sane" mike technique, the wavefront should be plane for all practical purpose.

If you put a 6" mike at 6" from a small source, yeah, it'll be spherical.

Either way: I don't think reflections are an issue on a simple shape like this. If you trace all the rays it does not give "reflections" but a mild broadening, and only at the very top of the bandwidth implied by throat dimensions. That may be what the center spear is for.

Or eyeball it. Take his shape and mirrorize the inside. Put a bright orange disk at the throat. Stand on stage. What do you see? I believe you will only see the disk, no reflections in the walls.

I may be wrong on that.
 
I've chatted to this guy and he seems quite genuine. I listened to some wav recordings he's made with them and I didn't have anything bad to say about them certainly.

I suppose we should wait until we hear them.

Oh, Grampian had a horn attachment for their microphones by the way.
 
from the thread of klaus´ forum :


Hi all,

I am still in Germany (as Barry mentioned) recovering from the show with a brief stop in an internet cafe.
As seems to have been observed, there are pictures on the site & some description of the concepts.

I'll write a very quick overview here now and cover the thing in detail when I get to the UK in a few days.

Acoustic Impedance Matching.

By better matching acoustic impedance between the diaphragm and the air, the first thing we get is acoustic gain - between the band at which the 'horn' is efficient.

This gain is critical but not in and of itself (we can get plenty of gain electronically).

However, diaphragm resonance is also at this impedance, so relative to the gain of a 'direct loaded' (normal) microphone, the resonance is reduced by the same factor as the gain.

Increased damping WITHOUT increased impediment of freedom of movement of diaphragm.

To achieve the same amount of damping with usual friction methods would also impede the free movement of the diaphragm by the same amount and would negate the effect.

By increasing the damping without compromising freedom of movement we get a basic time-domain improvement (within the critical band). This means dynamics, resolution, timbre.....all facets of time-domain.

As Oliver has mentioned, the idea of using a horn for recording is not new IN ITSELF.

However, in those days the acoustic horn was used FOR GAIN and as soon as gain could be achieved any other way, the horn was dropped in favour of electronic gain.

The idea of using the horn FOR DIAPHRAGM DAMPING is NEW.

Regarding my samples, these are very basic 'worst case' recordings, made with entry level gear.

Best regards from Köln,

Andy

Simpson High Resolution Microphones, Poland

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/0/19896/16/0/#msg_19896
 

Latest posts

Back
Top