New Style of Width Manipulation using differentiation.

[wlangfor@uoguelph.ca]

No, off-axis or axis-y configuration of a microphone dependent on polar pattern. This is usually only employed with dynamic condensor or dynamic mics.

There's many articles about the same thing.

Enjoy the reading.

[trogluddite]

No, off-axis or axis-y configuration of a microphone dependent on polar pattern.

I have never contradicted this, and it is implied multiple times already in my previous comments on the subject - my post regarding the effect of off-axis response in X/Y stereo pairs would make no sense otherwise (I even mentioned "polar response" explicitly). Given your imputed expertise on the subject, I'm very surprised that you didn't notice!

This is usually only employed with dynamic condensor or dynamic mics

I would hazard a guess that well over 90% of microphones in any engineer's mic cupboard would be dynamics (which technically includes ribbon mics) or condensers, so that's hardly surprising (I assume "dynamic condensor" is an editing typo, unless you have invented a new kind of microphone capsule which is both at once!) Besides novelty "lo-fi" effects or using peizo's as a last-ditch solution for bleed, carbon-granule or peizo mic's aren't a whole lot of use in a modern recording studio!

Enjoy the reading.

After over three decades of reading such books and articles and putting their advice into practice, I can safely say that I enjoy them very much!

[wlangfor@uoguelph.ca]

Yeah, well I like the condensor mic with the dynamic/cardoid style polar pattern.

I've lost some octaves and I find the stereo condensor dynamic polar patterns on My Roland Boss Br-80 because they increase the treble in My voice hehe.

Sorry for the mixup. I'm just usually in a rush Master Trog.

[trogluddite]

...condensor mic with the dynamic/cardoid style polar pattern...

...condensor dynamic polar patterns...

Again, this is word-salad made out of technical terms. "Dynamic" and "condenser" are mutually exclusive, and describe only the technical means for turning sound pressure changes into an electrical signal. "Polar pattern" is orthogonal to these, describing only the directional response, regardless of which microphone construction is used. There is no such thing as a generic "dynamic-style polar pattern" any more than there is a "condenser dynamic mic".

... on My Roland Boss Br-80

If Roland/Boss are using similar terminology, then they are being potentially confusing, too - though I imagine partly because they're using generic names as substitutes for other company's trade-marked product names (as does my Boss GT-10B for some settings.)

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm being too harsh on you; you seem a nice, generous guy, making some very cool (and very nice looking!) plugins, and I have no personal animosity towards you whatsoever. But in technical discussions, terminology needs to be applied consistently, for mutual understanding. Whenever anyone doesn't, then a correction is to be expected (though doing it too many times might lead some people to assume bluffing!). Folks come here looking for advice in some very technical fields, and it's reasonable of them to expect that what they find is both useful and technically accurate - an ongoing job for the whole community.

Sorry for the mixup

Not a problem! I have always believed that bearing grudges is a waste of time and energy - especially regarding geeky technical trivia! (As for me being a "Master"; when folks like tulamide, Martin Vicanek et al. post about their areas of expertise, I know when to keep quiet so that I don't spoil my reputation! )

[wlangfor@uoguelph.ca]

Yeah, well though there is a differentiation. A condenser mic can have different polar patterns.

The reason I said Dynamic is because the two mics aren't omni-directional. Otherwise they wouldn't have such a branding. I guess dynamic can mean something rather than just in regards to polar pattern; They did'nt teach that in the mooc's I took.

[adamszabo]

Yes, terminology is important in a technical forum and it should be consistent otherwise we wont understand each other. Dynamic microphones use wire coil to capture sound and is used to record loud sounds because the coil is less sensitive. Condenser mics use a very thin plate that is very sensitive. But I guess we all knew that.

[trogluddite]

I guess dynamic can mean something rather than just in regards to polar pattern; They did'nt teach that in the mooc's I took..

No, it ALWAYS means something rather than that! You had either had very poor teachers, or weren't paying enough attention in class! Here's an example of an omni-directional dynamic mic, for example, Audio-Technica BP4002.

[wlangfor@uoguelph.ca]

Mmhmm, thanks. Wire wound and thin plate.

[k brown]

WOW - This has become a cosmic gas-cloud of confusion. As a 20-year classical recording engineer and obsessive researcher of mic and stereo mic techniques, let me clarify a few things.

As Trog mentioned, dynamic and condenser mics can theoretically be made with any polar pattern; they just have different ways of converting vibrating air into electrical signals. The most famous omni dynamic is the Electrovoice 635A, which us oldsters will recognize as the most oft-used mic for news standups from the 60s thru the 80s. The most famous cardioid dynamic is the Shure SM58 about which no more need be said. Not only has there been condenser mics made with every possible polar pattern, there are models which can continuously adjust their patterns from omni thru sub-cardioid thru cardioid thru super-cardioid thru hyper-cardioid thru bi-directional (figure-8) - fweew ! The most famous vintage example being the Neumann M49 which was used on almost ALL Columbia pop vocal records from the late 50s to the mid 70s. A single knob on the power supply allowed dialing in any of these patterns and anything in between. The third mic operating type is the ribbon mic which has an inherently figure-8 pattern, but by controlling the amount of sound arriving from the rear of the ribbon there have been cardioid and even vari-pattern ribbon mics (the 'Larry King' mic was an RCA vari-pattern ribbon).

Concerning directionality vs frequency, this is almost entirely a result of the physical diameter of the mic's diaphragm - the larger, the more directional at lower frequencies; has nothing to do with whether the mic's a condenser or dynamic. The mic with the smallest diameter diaphragm will be the least directional at high frequencies. Even well-designed cardioids become less directional at low frequencies. Same is true of loudspeakers, for the same reasons - the smallest cone/dome will be the least directional at hi freq. This is all about the physical size of the wavelengths at different frequencies in relation to the diameter of the diaphragm/cone/dome.

I was never a studio engineer, but I've always understood de-essers to be a processor that artificially smooths high frequencies in a specific way to ameliorate distorted, spitty vocal sibilants either directly from a not-so-hot mic, poor mic technique or a 'dirty' recorded track. Has nothing to do directly with microphones per se. Even the singer themselves can have 'spitty' or harsh-sounding sibilants (on any mic), so the engineer will reach for the de-esser.

I don't quite follow what any of this has to do with Mid Side mics and de-essers. Any well-made MS mic is no more or less sibilant than a equivelent XY pair of cardioids. The only advantage of MS over XY is that one can adjust the effective stereo angle of MS, either after recording or remotely during recording without having to physically change the angle between an XY pair. One can record the M and S signals directly and do the L/R matrixing in post (or remotely during recording).

[wlangfor@uoguelph.ca]

Nowadays companies just mimic the polar patterns and name them what they're modeled after. I'm really not strict about this and don't entertain the notion due to the popularity of the idea however improper people might say it. But I respect the opinion that's stricter. You buy condensor mics that have selectable polar patterns of any type. And they name by an image depicting dynamic etc etc.

I'm the same way about over sampling I can't stand it.

And this implementation is to induce artificially re-created physics. It's a method of faking rarefaction and naturally ocurring compression while allowing two sets of EQ that can affect something like Mid side but without the phased left.

Due to rarefaction bass is heard later but early as effect; You know how it is; nice to add the bass after and this method offers a lot of options because the pseudo side is added after in serial. And because the pseudo side does not effect treble in such an extreme way it is very natural because only the mono would be at 24k +