Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 121, Issue 11

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

That is nearly 2 year old info, I found when reading one of the links.

I suspect there have been some Zylia product developement up to now.
Possibly also on the USB interface implementation.

If the MEMS noise level is acceptable and the stated MEMS advantages - long
term stability and very low difference between individual samples of MEMS
elements that they may have made an exellent choise of mic elements for a
ambisonic array.

But Listening to recording samples and mesurements will show the resulting
implementation quality, MEMS seems to be Electret microphones implemented
with a semiconductor process.
I found this very interesting, at least some MEMS have mechanical membrance
resonances at around 15 kHz. Older mems implentations referenced here

https://nepp.nasa.gov/docuploads/3832EB0E-2297-4CF5-B58AC8FC54DF9705/Seattle%20Presentation.ppt

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032405/

MEMS can be constructed using optical readout of data, then getting below
23dBA self noise - Electrostatic MEMS have appearently higher values, I
have not found how much And dont know what MEMS Zylia uses.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4032405/

This indicate that SNR values around 64 to 65 dBA might be typical of a
conventional MEMS microphone.
https://www.ama-science.org/proceedings/getFile/ZwZ2Zt==

Here is aRECENT summer 2017 press release from Infineon about their 2017
MEMS mic elements.  Seems there is a difference.
I am not a Mic designer so I do not know what a 70dB SNR ratio means in the
real world for performance.

https://www.infineon.com/cms/en/about-infineon/press/market-news/2017/INFPMM201707-064.html
extract below:
Current MEMS microphone technology uses a sound wave actuated membrane and
a static backplate.
Infineon’s dual backplate MEMS technology uses a membrane embedded within
two backplates thus generating a truly differential signal.
This allows improved high frequency immunity for better audio signal
processing and increases the acoustic overload point of 10 percent Total
Harmonic Distortion (THD) to 135 dB SPL.
The SNR of 70 dB is an improvement of 6 dB compared to a conventional MEMS
microphone.
This improvement is equivalent to doubling the distance from which a user
can give a voice command that is captured by the microphone.

Additionally, the analog and digital microphones have excellent
microphone-to-microphone matching (±1 dB sensitivity matching and ± 2°
phase matching) which is ideal for implementing in arrays.

Bo-Erik: I dont think this will be good enough for not having matched
elements in production if only a single standard A to B conversion is used?

Showing how to mount MEMS microphones for best performance!
https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-AN557_MEMS_microphone_mechanical_and_acoustical_implementation-AN-v01_01-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d4626102d35a01612d1e3bf96add

Any comments for further speculation welcome :-)

Bo-Erik

2018-08-16 23:03 GMT+02:00 Wim :

> I seem to remember the Zylia uses Primo electret capsules. And this post on
> the Prorecording list seems to confirm it:
> https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/prorecordingworkshop/
> zylia-microphone-t19409070.html
>
> And this AES publication confirms at least the electret part:
> http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17902
> "Zamojski, Jakub Affiliation: Zylia sp. z o.o ... a spherical microphone
> based on inexpensive electret capsules"
>
>
> Op do 16 aug. 2018 om 20:33 schreef Stefan Schreiber <
> st...@mail.telepac.pt
> >:
>
> > I don’t believe at all that they (Zylia) are using MEMS clusters...
> >
> > Otherwise very interesting thoughts in the cited mail below...
> >
> >   I also believe that noise of different capsules doesn’t add up (so I
> > agree with Bo-Erik, at least at first sight), but we can’t get below
> > the noise floor of a single capsule. MEMS type or not...
> >
> > Typical specifications (High performance MEMS audio sensor):
> >
> > https://www.st.com/resource/en/datasheet/mp23ab01dh.pdf
> >
> > (SNR: 65dB)
> >
> > I personally would be very interested in a PRO version of the Zylia
> > ZM-1 microphone, especially since even the current version seems to be
> > (quite? very?) nice. According to various personal reports
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> > - - - -
> >
> > Citando Bo-Erik Sandholm :
> >
> > > I agree with Len, we have not seen any technical spec of self noise
> level
> > >
> > >  of the MEMS (clusters?)  that are used in Zylia.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  Only text saying that in normal musical recording situations self
> noise
> > is
> > >
> > >  not disturbing :-).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  I have a personal theory that self noise of physical elements in an
> > >
> > >  ambisonic mic array is not directly additive.
> > >
> > >  The basis for my theory is that as we convert to B-format the noise
> from
> > >
> > >  all the physical elements are distributed over a spherical surface,
> > >
> > >  and the noise level for a virtual microphone in decoding do not 

Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 121, Issue 11

[Wim]

I seem to remember the Zylia uses Primo electret capsules. And this post on
the Prorecording list seems to confirm it:
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/prorecordingworkshop/zylia-microphone-t19409070.html

And this AES publication confirms at least the electret part:
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17902
"Zamojski, Jakub Affiliation: Zylia sp. z o.o ... a spherical microphone
based on inexpensive electret capsules"


Op do 16 aug. 2018 om 20:33 schreef Stefan Schreiber :

> I don’t believe at all that they (Zylia) are using MEMS clusters...
>
> Otherwise very interesting thoughts in the cited mail below...
>
>   I also believe that noise of different capsules doesn’t add up (so I
> agree with Bo-Erik, at least at first sight), but we can’t get below
> the noise floor of a single capsule. MEMS type or not...
>
> Typical specifications (High performance MEMS audio sensor):
>
> https://www.st.com/resource/en/datasheet/mp23ab01dh.pdf
>
> (SNR: 65dB)
>
> I personally would be very interested in a PRO version of the Zylia
> ZM-1 microphone, especially since even the current version seems to be
> (quite? very?) nice. According to various personal reports
>
> Best regards
>
> Stefan
>
> - - - -
>
> Citando Bo-Erik Sandholm :
>
> > I agree with Len, we have not seen any technical spec of self noise level
> >
> >  of the MEMS (clusters?)  that are used in Zylia.
> >
> >
> >
> >  Only text saying that in normal musical recording situations self noise
> is
> >
> >  not disturbing :-).
> >
> >
> >
> >  I have a personal theory that self noise of physical elements in an
> >
> >  ambisonic mic array is not directly additive.
> >
> >  The basis for my theory is that as we convert to B-format the noise from
> >
> >  all the physical elements are distributed over a spherical surface,
> >
> >  and the noise level for a virtual microphone in decoding do not have the
> >
> >  full sum of the added microphone noise levels.
> >
> >  Only coherent noise within the take up volume of the virtual microphone
> is
> >
> >  relevant in that directional microphones response.
> >
> >
> >
> >  But I am can be totally wrong in this mental visualization of the
> decoding
> >
> >  process. I have not done any mathematical research of this...
> >
> >
> >
> >  Bo-Erik Sandholm
> >
> >  Stockholm
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20180816/a534fc29/attachment.html
> >
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 121, Issue 11

[Stefan Schreiber]

I don’t believe at all that they (Zylia) are using MEMS clusters...

Otherwise very interesting thoughts in the cited mail below... 

 I also believe that noise of different capsules doesn’t add up (so I  
agree with Bo-Erik, at least at first sight), but we can’t get below  
the noise floor of a single capsule. MEMS type or not...


Typical specifications (High performance MEMS audio sensor):

https://www.st.com/resource/en/datasheet/mp23ab01dh.pdf

(SNR: 65dB)

I personally would be very interested in a PRO version of the Zylia  
ZM-1 microphone, especially since even the current version seems to be  
(quite? very?) nice. According to various personal reports


Best regards

Stefan

- - - -

Citando Bo-Erik Sandholm :


I agree with Len, we have not seen any technical spec of self noise level

 of the MEMS (clusters?)  that are used in Zylia.



 Only text saying that in normal musical recording situations self noise is

 not disturbing :-).



 I have a personal theory that self noise of physical elements in an

 ambisonic mic array is not directly additive.

 The basis for my theory is that as we convert to B-format the noise from

 all the physical elements are distributed over a spherical surface,

 and the noise level for a virtual microphone in decoding do not have the

 full sum of the added microphone noise levels.

 Only coherent noise within the take up volume of the virtual microphone is

 relevant in that directional microphones response.



 But I am can be totally wrong in this mental visualization of the decoding

 process. I have not done any mathematical research of this...



 Bo-Erik Sandholm

 Stockholm

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 121, Issue 11

[Justin Bennett]

http://www.zylia.co/zylia-zm-1-microphone.html

But yeah, you’re right, there are NO real technical specifications.

When it arrives, maybe I can get some students to do some measurements!

best, Justin


> On 16 Aug 2018, at 19:04, Len Moskowitz  wrote:
> 
> Justin wrote:
> 
> 
>> it's
>> http://www.zylia.co/
> 
> 
> Thanks, but I still can't seem to find a web page with its basic 
> specifications. Perhaps I'm missing an obvious link.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)Core Sound LLC
> www.core-sound.com
> Home of OctoMic and TetraMic

Justin Bennett

jus...@justinbennett.nl
www.justinbennett.nl
http://jubilee-art.org/



___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 121, Issue 11

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

I agree with Len, we have not seen any technical spec of self noise level
of the MEMS (clusters?)  that are used in Zylia.

Only text saying that in normal musical recording situations self noise is
not disturbing :-).

I have a personal theory that self noise of physical elements in an
ambisonic mic array is not directly additive.
The basis for my theory is that as we convert to B-format the noise from
all the physical elements are distributed over a spherical surface,
and the noise level for a virtual microphone in decoding do not have the
full sum of the added microphone noise levels.
Only coherent noise within the take up volume of the virtual microphone is
relevant in that directional microphones response.

But I am can be totally wrong in this mental visualization of the decoding
process. I have not done any mathematical research of this...

Bo-Erik Sandholm
Stockholm

2018-08-16 19:04 GMT+02:00 Len Moskowitz :

> Justin wrote:
>
>
> it's
>> http://www.zylia.co/
>>
>
>
> Thanks, but I still can't seem to find a web page with its basic
> specifications. Perhaps I'm missing an obvious link.
>
>
>
>
>
> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)Core Sound LLC
> www.core-sound.com
> Home of OctoMic and TetraMic
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 121, Issue 11

[Len Moskowitz]

Justin wrote:



it's
http://www.zylia.co/



Thanks, but I still can't seem to find a web page with its basic 
specifications. Perhaps I'm missing an obvious link.






Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of OctoMic and TetraMic
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.