[George's Pro Sound Company]

I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications
Thanks
George

[Mike Rivers]

On Oct 6, 9:48 am, "George's Pro Sound Company"
wrote:

I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yeah. Shotguns aren't as "shot" as you want them to be, but often more
"shot" than an audience member expects. Either you'll need someone to
aim the mic to each talker or you'll need to get the talkers withing
range. Experiment first, learn the limitations and "safe" pickup area
of the mics, and make sure that they're always pointing in the right
direction.

Generally for this application, short shotguns aren't any more
effective than plain old cardioids. They may reduce some of the
background noise, but they aren't likely to give you any more gain
before feedback without some human intervention. No magic bullets
here.

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
...
On Oct 6, 9:48 am, "George's Pro Sound Company"
wrote:

I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yeah. Shotguns aren't as "shot" as you want them to be, but often more
"shot" than an audience member expects. Either you'll need someone to
aim the mic to each talker or you'll need to get the talkers withing
range. Experiment first, learn the limitations and "safe" pickup area
of the mics, and make sure that they're always pointing in the right
direction.

Generally for this application, short shotguns aren't any more
effective than plain old cardioids. They may reduce some of the
background noise, but they aren't likely to give you any more gain
before feedback without some human intervention. No magic bullets
here.

That's why I bought two long ones and two short ones
the first few times out I will still deploy my 16 audience mics, but they
pick up so much air handeler and paper shuffing, coughs, people blowing
thier noses
plus the added hour on set up and hour on strike
I am hopeing to find some combination that gets what I need, without
deplying a mic to each table in the audience, maybe I should go PXM feeding
a wireless transmitter
I got 6 of the crown pcc 160's
but I am getting a fair wage(550/dayraw recordings only,no post) so I want
the product to be the best it can be
George

[Steve King]

"George's Pro Sound Company" wrote in message
...
|
| "Mike Rivers" wrote in message
| ...
| On Oct 6, 9:48 am, "George's Pro Sound Company"
| wrote:
|
| I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions
in
| hotel confrences
| are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
| performance for this applications
|
| Yeah. Shotguns aren't as "shot" as you want them to be, but often more
| "shot" than an audience member expects. Either you'll need someone to
| aim the mic to each talker or you'll need to get the talkers withing
| range. Experiment first, learn the limitations and "safe" pickup area
| of the mics, and make sure that they're always pointing in the right
| direction.
|
| Generally for this application, short shotguns aren't any more
| effective than plain old cardioids. They may reduce some of the
| background noise, but they aren't likely to give you any more gain
| before feedback without some human intervention. No magic bullets
| here.
|
| That's why I bought two long ones and two short ones
| the first few times out I will still deploy my 16 audience mics, but they
| pick up so much air handeler and paper shuffing, coughs, people blowing
| thier noses
| plus the added hour on set up and hour on strike
| I am hopeing to find some combination that gets what I need, without
| deplying a mic to each table in the audience, maybe I should go PXM
feeding
| a wireless transmitter
| I got 6 of the crown pcc 160's
| but I am getting a fair wage(550/dayraw recordings only,no post) so I want
| the product to be the best it can be
| George

I prefer hyper-cardioids for this purpose. They are almost as directional
as shotguns. And, they are typically more directional at lower mid-range
frequencies than shotguns, which means that room reflections don't tubby up
the sound so much. All that said, for your purposes the shotguns will work
fine if they are pointed in the right direction and placed close enough to
the speaker. Many people mistakenly believe that a shotgun can be many feet
from the speaker. It ain't so;-)

Steve King

[Scott Dorsey]

George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. They don't work for that. Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen
--scott

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

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. They don't work for that. Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your
situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen

I think I did not post properly
I will not be sending this to reinforcement
the pick up of audience questions is only going to the recording, feedback
will not be a issue

I had been placeing a AT 4051 on each table but the ambient room leaking
into the recording was unacceptable IMO
I do not feed the reinforcment system, this is recording ONLY
george
--scott

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

[apa]

On Oct 6, 11:02 pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:

I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. They don't work for that. Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen
--scott

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

What do they do then? That's kind of what I assumed they might be good
for but I've never had my hands on one to listen to.

[Mike Rivers]

On Oct 7, 10:07 am, apa wrote:

What do they do then? That's kind of what I assumed they might be good
for but I've never had my hands on one to listen to.

They can suppress some background noise, which is not the same as
acoustic ambiance. If you're interviewing someone on the street at
normal face-to-face distance, it will reduce traffic noise. If you're
shooting a film and you have to keep the mic far enough away so that
it's out of camera range, it will reduce the pickup of noise on the
set (camera noise, for example). But if the mic is ten feet away from
your source, your recording will still sound like you're ten feet away
from the source.

[Powell]

"George's Pro Sound Company" wrote

I think I did not post properly I will not be sending this to
reinforcement the pick up of audience questions is only
going to the recording, feedback will not be a issue

This technique (shotgun miking) is commonly used in
small scale EFP and should work fine for your situation.
Much of the ambiance will be eliminated if you use a
foam windscreen. Highly directional handheld
microphones have the disadvantage that small rotational
hand movements can cause annoying up and down
volumes. A good fishpole operator can place a
microphone on a subject much faster too.

[Scott Dorsey]

George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. They don't work for that. Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your
situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen

I think I did not post properly
I will not be sending this to reinforcement
the pick up of audience questions is only going to the recording, feedback
will not be a issue

Yes, but ambience IS the issue. You do not want everything sounding
hollow.

I had been placeing a AT 4051 on each table but the ambient room leaking
into the recording was unacceptable IMO

The shotgun will be no better, and it will definitely be worse than the
4051 with the 4053 capsule put on it.

I do not feed the reinforcment system, this is recording ONLY

Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they just
make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

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

[George's Pro Sound Company]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. They don't work for that. Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a
listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your
situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen

I think I did not post properly
I will not be sending this to reinforcement
the pick up of audience questions is only going to the recording, feedback
will not be a issue

Yes, but ambience IS the issue. You do not want everything sounding
hollow.

I had been placeing a AT 4051 on each table but the ambient room leaking
into the recording was unacceptable IMO

The shotgun will be no better, and it will definitely be worse than the
4051 with the 4053 capsule put on it.

I do not feed the reinforcment system, this is recording ONLY

Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they just
make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

then look for my ebay listings shortly :-)
george

[Moonrocket]

On Oct 7, 5:14*pm, "George's Pro Sound Company"
wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message

...



George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. *They don't work for that. *Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. *Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a
listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your
situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen

I think I did not post properly
I will not be sending this to reinforcement
the pick up of audience questions is only going to the recording, feedback
will not be a issue

Yes, but ambience IS the issue. *You do not want everything sounding
hollow.

I had been placeing a AT 4051 on each table but the ambient room leaking
into the recording was unacceptable IMO

The shotgun will be no better, and it will definitely be worse than the
4051 with the 4053 capsule put on it.

I do not feed the reinforcment system, this is recording ONLY

Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. *The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. *For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they just
make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

then look for my ebay listings shortly :-)
george- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hey George, I'm a bit of a noob here when it comes to audio...trying
to read and learn here... I do many corporate conferences and I
sometimes record the presenters along with Q&A . I run post on my
mic's and only pot up my mics when a question is getting ready to be
asked. So instead of having my mics potted up all the time and
recording ambient noise, etc., I get only "noise" from the mics that I
pot up. I would maybe split the board and have 2 operators run the
mics (I read you somtimes have up to 16 mic's)

[George's Pro Sound Company]

Hey George, I'm a bit of a noob here when it comes to audio...trying
to read and learn here... I do many corporate conferences and I
sometimes record the presenters along with Q&A . I run post on my
mic's and only pot up my mics when a question is getting ready to be
asked. So instead of having my mics potted up all the time and
recording ambient noise, etc., I get only "noise" from the mics that I
pot up. I would maybe split the board and have 2 operators run the
mics (I read you somtimes have up to 16 mic's)

I am doing this under contract for another who has asked i keep all the mics
open all the time
, the audio quality was to diffrent between open and muted,I do not do the
post production, I record to a marantz 671 flash recorder thru either a
yamaha 01v/96 or behringer ddx3216

I also can not "anticiptate" when a question will be asked

so I just try to get everything
the digital desks give me a good assortment of tools with comps and
parametrics on every channel

I tried gateing but it was not good enough and sounded choppy

I tap the PA system feed from the hotel AV for the panel
but the audience was getting a mic for each 6 people

I am trying to cut down on the set up/tear down/ and ambient noise

I go in with my standard set up friday, plus I will deploy my new shotguns

I ahve up32 ch in both my digital mixers

I monitor on sennheiser 580 cans and will mix cardiods and shotguns as my
ears dictate
george

[Moonrocket]

On Oct 7, 5:54*pm, Moonrocket wrote:
On Oct 7, 5:14*pm, "George's Pro Sound Company"
wrote:





"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message

...

George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
George's Pro Sound Company wrote:
I have just bought 4 shotgun mics
two AT 8015's and two rode ntg2's
I will be useing either a pair or all 4 to capyure audience questions in
hotel confrences
are there any "gottcha's" I ought know about or tricks to get the best
performance for this applications

Yes. *They don't work for that. *Shotguns don't do what you think they
do. *Sit down with the mike and a pair of headphones and give it a
listen.
You'll find if room ambience is the problem (which it is in your
situation),
that you will usually be better off with a conventional hypercardoid.
Use your ears and listen

I think I did not post properly
I will not be sending this to reinforcement
the pick up of audience questions is only going to the recording, feedback
will not be a issue

Yes, but ambience IS the issue. *You do not want everything sounding
hollow.

I had been placeing a AT 4051 on each table but the ambient room leaking
into the recording was unacceptable IMO

The shotgun will be no better, and it will definitely be worse than the
4051 with the 4053 capsule put on it.

I do not feed the reinforcment system, this is recording ONLY

Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. *The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. *For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they just
make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

then look for my ebay listings shortly :-)
george- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hey George, I'm a bit of a noob here when it comes to audio...trying
to read and learn here... *I do many corporate conferences and I
sometimes record the presenters along with Q&A . *I run post on my
mic's and only pot up my mics when a question is getting ready to be
asked. *So instead of having my mics potted up all the time and
recording ambient noise, etc., I get only "noise" from the mics that I
pot up. *I would maybe split the board and have 2 operators run the
mics (I read you somtimes have up to 16 mic's)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

and sorry,for clarification, I only pot up the mics that are only
going to be used right then and there...

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they just
make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

One way to look at is ... "Our *most-directional* mics are very much like
fish-eye lenses". The EV Model 643 was used for many years to pickup
questions from reporters at Presidential news conferences. The 643 is
about seven feet long and weighs about 12 pounds. They worked well for the
purpose, but required operators on someone's payroll.

Here's mo http://www.coutant.org/ev643/index.html

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

[Richard Crowley]

"Roy W. Rising" wrote ...
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they just
make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

One way to look at is ... "Our *most-directional* mics are very much
like
fish-eye lenses". The EV Model 643 was used for many years to pickup
questions from reporters at Presidential news conferences. The 643 is
about seven feet long and weighs about 12 pounds. They worked well for
the
purpose, but required operators on someone's payroll.

Here's mo http://www.coutant.org/ev643/index.html

Those photos all seem "naked".
Didn't they have some sort of windscreen (something like the
zepplins used today)? I have vague recollections of seing them
in presidential press conferences where there was one on either
side of the press corps. They looked bigger (larger in diameter)
as I recall. I thought it was because of the windscreen.

[[email protected]]

On 2008-10-07 said:
Hey George, I'm a bit of a noob here when it comes to audio...trying
to read and learn here... I do many corporate conferences and I
sometimes record the presenters along with Q&A . I run post on my
mic's and only pot up my mics when a question is getting ready to be
asked. So instead of having my mics potted up all the time and
recording ambient noise, etc., I get only "noise" from the mics
that I pot up. I would maybe split the board and have 2 operators
run the mics (I read you somtimes have up to 16 mic's)

I tried the rent a couple shotguns approach for conferences
years ago, and found that I had to have a boom op a la film
sound for best results. WAs easier to mic different places
in the room and just ride herd on the mixer. I found that
without a boom op the shotguns didn't work all that well.
THis meant one for each shotgun.



Richard webb,
replace anything before at with elspider

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--- Benjamin Franklin, NOvember 1755 from the
Historical review of Pennsylvania

[[email protected]]

On 2008-10-07 said:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does.
The Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it,
but ten minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it
out. For the most part, shotguns will help with external noise
outside but they just make room ambience problems worse indoors.
then look for my ebay listings shortly :-)
I find scott's right on the money. I tried them for
recording conferences years ago, as I commented in an
earlier post, and found that teaming each shotgun with a
boom op was the only effective method.
THis brings up another question. Have you checked out those
automatic mixers such as the sHures or the DAn DUgan
product? I've been reading good things about the Dugan
product recently. THis might be an effective use of such a
thing.

Regards,


george


Richard webb,
replace anything before at with elspider

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--- Benjamin Franklin, NOvember 1755 from the
Historical review of Pennsylvania

[George's Pro Sound Company]

wrote in message
. ..

On 2008-10-07 said:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does.
The Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it,
but ten minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it
out. For the most part, shotguns will help with external noise
outside but they just make room ambience problems worse indoors.
then look for my ebay listings shortly :-)
I find scott's right on the money. I tried them for
recording conferences years ago, as I commented in an
earlier post, and found that teaming each shotgun with a
boom op was the only effective method.
THis brings up another question. Have you checked out those
automatic mixers such as the sHures or the DAn DUgan
product? I've been reading good things about the Dugan
product recently. THis might be an effective use of such a
thing.

Regards,

way out of the buget for a contract worth about 4k a year
george

[Chris Hornbeck]

On 08 Oct 2008 00:37:01 GMT, Roy W. Rising
wrote:

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does.

One way to look at is ... "Our *most-directional* mics are very much like
fish-eye lenses".

I hope that my stripping away of the rest of your post doesn't
change the import of the remaining sentence. It's very powerful,
and I'm trying to assimilate it.

Our eyes are actually fish-eye lenses, and all of our visual
world is a computed reconstruction of an imagined geometry,
with color added in a separate processing engine. But probably
this human-perceptual stuff isn't what you're meaning.

A cardiod mic *does* have an included (call it maybe -6dB or
something like that) angle of a difficult-to-make-and-expensive-
if-glass-and-not-a-pinhole extremely wide angle camera lens.

But:
Our *perception* makes our vision seem to have telescopic powers,
and maybe our perception is also all that gives us our telescopic
hearing ability - the same conundrum that makes recordings sound
different from "being there". (Still a great movie, BTW, and on
topic, yikes! Hal Ashby was way ahead of our time too.)


Very cool beans; much thanks, as always, and God bless America
for a good Presidential debate,
Chris Hornbeck

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 23:20:41 -0500, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

A cardiod mic *does* have an included (call it maybe -6dB or
something like that) angle of a difficult-to-make-and-expensive-
if-glass-and-not-a-pinhole extremely wide angle camera lens.

Re-thinking this, (when I should be asleep), a pinhole camera
is a much better model/comparison to a microphone. "Acoustic
lenses" sorta exist, but the definition requires a large
latitude of language and belief (and high losses).

The pinhole camera analogy is as full of holes as any other
visual/auditory analogy, but has the virtue of being
a surface *directly* exposed to excitation. (And our eyes
are very good analogies to the pinhole camera, optically).

Our hearing is not a "pinhole microphone" but plugging one
ear with a finger and pretending that the other ear is one *works*
when trying to hear like a microphone - so our hearing is
sorta-kinda a pinhole (in each ear) -ish.

Film is fundamentally "omni", and film cannot be "exposed in an
opposite polarity on the reverse side", so no analogies to
conventional microphone structures can exist.


But maybe the worth of the analogy is simply that - that like our
hearing, all microphones are really very much "omni" with only a
slight gloss or vernier of directionality. The comparison to a
real (! large WRT wavelength and low-loss) lens would be very
difficult in acoustic terms.

Insane babbling, as usual,
CH

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 06:01:08 GMT, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

Film is fundamentally "omni", and film cannot be "exposed in an
opposite polarity on the reverse side", so no analogies to
conventional microphone structures can exist.

Separate films summed later. Color film of all kinds. My
argument is full of holes.

Sorry, Nite,

Chris

[[email protected]]

On 2008-10-07 said:
...
On 2008-10-07 said:
THis brings up another question. Have you checked out those
automatic mixers such as the sHures or the DAn DUgan
product? I've been reading good things about the Dugan
product recently. THis might be an effective use of such a
thing.
way out of the budget for a contract worth about 4k a year
Hmmm DIdn't know what kind of price tag was on those
guys, as I said, have only read about them in the film sound
group recently.

IF it were me I'd tell the client that for best results I
need to mute unused channels until they're used and just
figure for a busy day with hands on the console g. That
or a couple of boom operators.



Richard webb,
replace anything before at with elspider

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
--- Benjamin Franklin, NOvember 1755 from the
Historical review of Pennsylvania

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 19:06:44 -0400, George's Pro Sound Company wrote
(in article ):

I tried gateing but it was not good enough and sounded choppy

A shure FP410 adjusted properly doesn't sound choppy. Put the dip switches in
"Last mic remains open" or only moderate turn down and it's noisier, but
smoother, but definitely better than all up.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 19:55:07 -0400, Moonrocket wrote
(in article
):

and sorry,for clarification, I only pot up the mics that are only going to be

used right then and there...

That should work. I usually leave em all at 25% +/- in case someone speaks up
without notice. I still get a bit of them as I fade up.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

"Richard Crowley" wrote:
"Roy W. Rising" wrote ...
(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does. The
Focal book on microphones does a good job of explaining it, but ten
minutes with a pair of headphones and you'll figure it out. For the
most part, shotguns will help with external noise outside but they
just make room ambience problems worse indoors.
--scott

One way to look at is ... "Our *most-directional* mics are very much
like
fish-eye lenses". The EV Model 643 was used for many years to pickup
questions from reporters at Presidential news conferences. The 643 is
about seven feet long and weighs about 12 pounds. They worked well for
the
purpose, but required operators on someone's payroll.

Here's mo http://www.coutant.org/ev643/index.html

Those photos all seem "naked".
Didn't they have some sort of windscreen (something like the
zepplins used today)? I have vague recollections of seing them
in presidential press conferences where there was one on either
side of the press corps. They looked bigger (larger in diameter)
as I recall. I thought it was because of the windscreen.

Indeed, the 643 was equipped with a foam windscreen setup. It's diameter
matched the "rings" at the ends of the waveguide(s). It is shown in Fig. 1
and in the photo on the data sheet. The element at the rear was surrounded
by two conical foam screens.

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

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

Chris Hornbeck wrote:
On 08 Oct 2008 00:37:01 GMT, Roy W. Rising
wrote:

(Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Once again, the shotgun mike does not do what you think it does.

One way to look at is ... "Our *most-directional* mics are very much
like fish-eye lenses".

I hope that my stripping away of the rest of your post doesn't
change the import of the remaining sentence. It's very powerful,
and I'm trying to assimilate it.
[snip]
Chris Hornbeck

Not at all. The wavelengths of sound lead to great difficulty making a mic
directional at lower frequencies. A 100 Hz wave is about 11 feet long.
The seven foot long EV 643 is, at best, only cardioid at 100 Hz.

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

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
I find scott's right on the money. I tried them for
recording conferences years ago, as I commented in an
earlier post, and found that teaming each shotgun with a
boom op was the only effective method.
THis brings up another question. Have you checked out those
automatic mixers such as the sHures or the DAn DUgan
product? I've been reading good things about the Dugan
product recently. THis might be an effective use of such a
thing.

The Dugan mixers really do work very well. Shure also has a system
where they have a cardioid mike and an omni mike at each station, one
keying the automatic mixer and the other being used for the audio. That
also works remarkably well. You can hear the noise floor moving around
but not outrageously if it is done well and still has some human intervention.
--scott

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

[David@liminal]

On Oct 8, 7:01*am, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 23:20:41 -0500, Chris Hornbeck

The pinhole camera analogy is as full of holes

hee hee

Chris, check out this interview with Marshall McLuhan from 1961 in
playboy magazine (I'm no aficionado on playboy magazine but I'm
guessing this article is something of an anomaly!!). He gives a
really nice explanation of his notion of acoustic space. Nothing to
do with microphones of course, but a fascinating mediation on looking
vs hearing.

DP

[David@liminal]

On Oct 9, 11:13*pm, "David@liminal" wrote:
On Oct 8, 7:01*am, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

On Tue, 07 Oct 2008 23:20:41 -0500, Chris Hornbeck
The pinhole camera analogy is as full of holes

hee hee

Chris, check out this interview with Marshall McLuhan from 1961 in
playboy magazine (I'm no aficionado on playboy magazine but I'm
guessing this article is something of an anomaly!!). *He gives a
really nice explanation of his notion of acoustic space. *Nothing to
do with microphones of course, but a fascinating mediation on looking
vs hearing.

DP

sorry, forgot the URL:

http://folk.uio.no/gisle/links/mcluhan/pb.html

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Thu, 9 Oct 2008 15:16:55 -0700 (PDT), "David@liminal"
wrote:

On Oct 9, 11:13*pm, "David@liminal" wrote:
On Oct 8, 7:01*am, Chris Hornbeck
wrote:

Chris, check out this interview with Marshall McLuhan from 1961 in
playboy magazine (I'm no aficionado on playboy magazine but I'm
guessing this article is something of an anomaly!!). *He gives a
really nice explanation of his notion of acoustic space. *Nothing to
do with microphones of course, but a fascinating mediation on looking
vs hearing.

http://folk.uio.no/gisle/links/mcluhan/pb.html

Thanks for the link. 1969 was a long time ago, but only yesterday.
Well, not really; just riffing on McLuhan. Arf. We certainly live in a
post-McLuhan world, and all for the better, IMO. A truly funny guy:

"Of his own work, McLuhan has remarked: 'I don't pretend to understand
it. After all, my stuff is very difficult.' " - from the lead-in.

Much thanks, as always,
Chris Hornbeck

[Michael Beacom]

In article ,
Roy W. Rising wrote:

--snip--


Here's mo http://www.coutant.org/ev643/index.html

Thanks for the link!
I spent way too much time exploring the site.

Cheers
mike