Thinking outside of the box - mic treatment vs room treatment

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by TBman

What about a foam circular shield with the mic in the center like a collar for the mic, maybe with a foot to 18" diameter?

Nope, nada.

[runamuck]

Originally Posted by TBman

What about a foam circular shield with the mic in the center like a collar for the mic, maybe with a foot to 18" diameter?

I think that maybe what you're not understanding is that foam is effective in really only the higher frequencies and most of the trouble usually comes from mid and low frequencies bouncing around the room.

[Golffishny]

I have not tried this yet, but I have 2 tri-fold partitions. I thought about setting the 2 of them up a couple feet behind a mic and hanging a blanket over them to absorb sound. Has anyone tried this? Thought it may replicate a room with draperies and such. For more sound reflection the blanket could be removed.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by TBman

What about a foam circular shield with the mic in the center like a collar for the mic, maybe with a foot to 18" diameter?

Consider that Foam is used in almost no professional recording studios

Repeat ::::: Foam is used in almost no professional recording studios
Let that sit in front of the minds eye and sink in



If there is any foam used in a pro studio it is used to somewhat less lessen zingy high frequencies "only" as has been stated by some already.
In any professional studio there will also be bass and broadband absorption and probably diffusion (for which hard foam is also used)


Foam gives the illusion of helping because it will noticeably reduce the very "zingy" high end reflections BUT it is an illusion as the the rest of frequency range

Repeat as per Runamuck "Foam does little to nothing for mid and low frequency problems".

T add to Runamucks post ........LOW and MID frequency are usually far and away the most problematic
Using foam MAY help with about 10% to 15% of the problem
What one commonly hears when foam only is used, is lessing in high freq "zing" (which can be helpful )
But unfortunately also lessing in high frequency "air" and "presence" (which is definitely not helpful)
The other recognizable trait of Foam only approach (when there is also mid and low frequency problems present ) is the recordings typically lack depth (space ,or sometimes called 3D feeling to the sound) they sound very 2 dimensional (flat) and lack dynamics.


Unfortunately Foam marketed as effective room treatment is one of the biggest questionable trends in the audio recording industry.

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by TBman

What about a foam circular shield with the mic in the center like a collar for the mic, maybe with a foot to 18" diameter?

If you absolutely HAVE to, perhaps the "Eyeball"?

http://www.soundonsound.com/news/aes...aotica-eyeball

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Rudy4

If you absolutely HAVE to, perhaps the "Eyeball"?

http://www.soundonsound.com/news/aes...aotica-eyeball

Again it's targeted and a "Vocal microphone" and still questionable

[Sage97]

Originally Posted by TBman

I was thinking... yeah I know....

But.

What if, it isn't practical to treat a room, so instead treat the mic?

What if I made a funnel, like the one below, only out of some sort of foam (a thinner version of the foam used for sound panels) instead of paper (as shown for illustration) to treat the mic to stop the capture of unwanted sound reflections?

Have you tried recording with this set-up? Experimentation is part of the fun for me and I still have a few of the "wow that sure sounds different" recordings.

[Hot Vibrato]

Here's a suggestion - place a piece of that foam over your ear. Can you hear through it? So can your microphone.

[Mr. Paul]

Originally Posted by alohachris

Aloha Barry,

...

Here's how to build a broadband absorber:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lni_4HpwmZk


Here's why you need them:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mPR0q1KzqQ&t=34s

This is the answer you're looking for. Two panels that can be stowed in the garage or wherever.


Paul

[TBman]

How about......

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by TBman

How about......

That would no doubt eliminate all problem frequencies

[alohachris]

Aloha Barry,

Funny!

Eh, one way around an energy & money investment in Room Treatment is to mobile record yourself in larger, great sounding spaces.

When I was first getting into recording & experimentation, I had favorite churches, audio practice rooms at universities, auditoriums, & meeting rooms lined up that were perfect for the simple guitar & vocal tracks that I & most of us like to create. You can add the rest digitally if necessary. Some churches & museums sound absolutely great. Great sounding spaces are around you all over the place if you take a second look. Keeps ya from having to create your own.

Here's an extreme example of what a great space and player sound like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPfZVflJdp0

Just a suggestion, Ba! Eh, that padded mic picture still cracks me up. Ha! Eh, why not try a condom over the mic?!?

Oh, and again, stop the single mic in mono approach & record in stereo using two mic's. Immediate upgrade.

alohachris

PS: There are three great spaces that I used often for mobile tracking here in Honolulu: The stage at UH's Orvis Auditorium (early AM) the Honolulu Academy of Arts Learning Ctr. Gallery or entrance (late PM) which has high ceilings & lotsa old growth Douglas Fir, & the Big Island's 1816 All-Koa Imiola Church in Waimea (silent, perfect meeting house size)). All are different, but Oh So Natural & Wonderful Sounding. Can't find any digital plug-in, reverb or sample that could match those here.-alohachris-

[gfsark]

AlohaChris, a bit off topic, but that recording you posted is amazing! John Williams was always critiqued as being a little too mechanical in playing, but there are times when that's exactly what's called for.

And back to the topic of rooms, the above mentioned recording had almost too much natural reverb, but that discomfort lasted a few seconds and then I was swept away by the performance. Certainly the guitar came through loud and clear and undistorted.

And going further back to the OP's question, instead of 'treating the mic' treat yourself to a new mic: hthttps://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/VO4099G
Something like this picks up more guitar and less room than a lot of mics. But it's kinda pricey. Still I'd like to have one.

[Northward]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Unfortunately Foam marketed as effective room treatment is one of the biggest questionable trends in the audio recording industry.

I'm glad I read this thread. Could easily have been fooled here. I usually do extensive research on what I buy, but somehow this was something I'd missed. You clearly know what you're takling about. So if you where to purchase a particular product of panels that is working for all problematic frequencies, what would you pick? OR a great 'vocal shield'.
And I must add, if you had space limitations and aimed to set up something effective.
Freestanding shields or wall mounted panels?

Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Northward

I'm glad I read this thread. Could easily have been fooled here. I usually do extensive research on what I buy, but somehow this was something I'd missed. You clearly know what you're takling about. So if you where to purchase a particular product of panels that is working for all problematic frequencies, what would you pick? OR a great 'vocal shield'.
And I must add, if you had space limitations and aimed to set up something effective.
Freestanding shields or wall mounted panels?

Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well first off I am by no means an acoustical engineer of trained acoustician. It is an extensive field with a lot physics that are way beyond my knowledge.
I learned a few things from researching it for 14 years now.

What I have learned is there is not really one panel that will address all
problem frequencies. Also note that in many professional studio's there can be any combination of bass trapping, broad band absorption, diffusion, and scattering.

For the home recorder all of these can be useful but I I were to start with just on area to address it would be broad band absorption.

Personally I am not a fan of any kind of shield that enclose the area around the mic but that is just me.

Very generally as far as the more broad band absorption panels
As I and others have noted are often made from either Ownes Corning 703 (or similar) or Rock Wool, usually mounted in a wood or metal frame and covered with cloth.



Absorption panels often either 2 ft X 2 ft by either 2 inches deep or 4 inches deep --- Or more often 2 ft. X 4 ft. and either 2 or 4 inches deep (probably the most used over all are 2 ft X 4 ft. X 4 inches )

These are designed to either go on the wall and hang at the main reflection points OR they can also be designed or home built to be freestanding portable so they be a non permanent movable solution. If I did not want to mount anything on the walls. These free standing absorption panels is what I would use.

If you don't want to DYI Here is a company that makes great products or if you do want to DYI this company has great ideas for it.
http://www.gikacoustics.com/


In the portable free standing they have two solutions

one they make.


Or they also sell a bracket for a mike stand