Jump to content

John Blankenship

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won



About John Blankenship

  • Rank
    Sonic Curatorem
  • Birthday June 30

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
  • About
  • Interested in Sound for Picture

Recent Profile Visitors

7,611 profile views
  1. Have you looked in the manual to determine what is on each pin of the connector?
  2. Not able to help much there -- the main software I use is a calculator. The internet has a wealth of info on room acoustics and design. A Google search will reveal all manner of resources. Also visit: https://auralex.com/acoustics-101/
  3. Joel, Do you know for sure you need bass traps? They're for diminishing standing waves in specific frequencies or ranges. You left out what is one of the most critical aspects of the drawing -- the dimensions: length, width, height, and also the variation of the angled wall. Is the box-shaped foyer open? If so, then those dimensions matter, too. Once you have a plot of the room, it'll become clearer how to proceed with interior acoustics -- a whole different thing than the sound transmission issue this thread addressed. Naturally, being in the room and plotting it thoroughly with proper gear is by far the best approach, but it's still good to have specific measurements on paper, to know what you may be dealing with standing-wave-wise. Other than two speakers on stands, your diagram doesn't address how sound reinforcement will be handled -- that figures into the equation. Many smaller speakers can distribute sound more evenly and require less sound volume from the main ones which might be part of the culprit where the neighbor's issue is concerned.
  4. Forgive me as I become pedantic for a moment -- and then, hopefully helpful. Not disagreeing with anyone else, just adding to the info pool: "Soundproofing" is a term this is often misunderstood and even more often misused, although applied here it's closer to its real meaning. "Soundproof" is similar to the term "waterproof." Few things are absolutely waterproof as it depends upon so many qualifying factors, be it amount of immersion, pressure, exposure duration, etc. What we're talking about here is sound attenuation, and not unlike the more appropriate analogy "water resistance" it's a matter of degrees. Sound reflection, sound absorption, and sound dispersion are an entirely different matter (although still related) that deals with how frequencies bounce around within a room and interact with each other. Quite often, when someone asks about "soundproofing" these internal acoustic characteristics are actually what the person is talking about -- however, not is this case. To attenuate low frequencies the two prime principles are mass and decoupling -- ideally, both. For high frequencies it's blocking air flow. All the frequencies in between those extremes are on a continually sliding scale. In a case like this it's often low frequencies that tend to make its way through structures, the frequency range of offense rising appreciably through windows (lacking the mass). Yes, you need to have mass in your church to help solve this issue (ohh -- bad pun alert... too late!). Decoupling is requiring the offending frequencies to pass through one surface with a given type of attenuation and then through another surface with a different one. Think: thick wall / air space / another thick wall. So here: thick panel / air space / thick panel -- sealed from any air flow. Maybe this helps.
  5. That sounds like a camera setting that burns in the time code. The solution for the future is: 1) Know your settings. 2) Do a full-on workflow test prior to shooting. If you want it to not be on your current footage, your main solutions are either a graphic that covers it or to crop the image.
  6. What Eric said -- a proper lav. Then, add to that a bit of compression as you guessed and you'll sound just as bad as most newsfolk. (Bad in this case compared to clean and natural sound as Jeff referenced.)
  7. If you haven't yet, see my post on these alternate Lemo style connectors:
  8. I'm not sure how you got that from what I said. The Schoeps sounds great at 1m or at 10m, but the ratio of direct to reflected sound changes, so getting what you want depends upon a good understanding of that relationship, the room acoustics, and the effect of those acoustics. In any room you're dealing with wave reflection, absorption, and diffusion, taking into account that each of those varies by frequency, and is different throughout the room. Then there's the whole issue of what are your expectations. So, yes, the Schoeps sounds great, but it's a tool, not a magic wand.
  9. As you have discovered, the ME66 is not really suitable for anything in the realm of quality professional audio. Its predecessor in the budget world, the ME80, sounded notably better, albeit with a rather high noise floor. My first choice here would definitely be a Schoeps colette series mic with an MK41 capsule coupled with a CMC1 or CMC6 preamp. The smoothness of the Schoeps' off-axis response makes it one of the most natural sounding mics available. With its excellent smoothness, the Schoeps will likely yield more intelligible and consistent dialog than most other choices. However, if you expect a distant room microphone to give you a tight close-miked sound, it makes one wonder if your experiments defy the laws of physics as you are expecting your audio to do.
  10. The naturalness of an MK41 capsule, as well as the smoothness of its off-axis pickup is awesome. You will no doubt learn to appreciate it even more over time as it proves stellar in so many different situations. GEEKINESS: Worthy of note is the fact that the MK41 capsule is a Super-Cardioid design, which is between a Cardioid and a Hyper-Cardioid. This results in a pickup pattern that is tighter than a cardioid and has less of a rear lobe than a Hyper-Cardioid. In some cases an MK41 appears to have a wider pattern than it actually does as its smooth off-axis maintains the high frequencies in a more linear fashion than do many other directional mics that tend to exhibit more of a narrow cone effect in the highs. Enjoy!
  11. I'm not saying this relates directly to Ken's particular situation, but worthy of note: In any modern device, when replacing an internal clock backup battery, I strongly suggest lightly burnishing both the battery surface and machine contacts, followed with a drop of contact solution (such as Deoxit D5 Contact Cleaner and Rejuvenator) at the contact points. Internal clock backup circuits draw such minimal current that any corrosion or oxidation at the contact points can be an issue.
  12. On the topic at hand, if I'm feeding a camera with a mini-jack input, I agree with Philip -- they should be happy they're getting any kind of audio at all into their compromised choice.
  • Create New...