On 15/09/2018 16:12, hacklava wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 14:52:03 +0100
Chris Woolf <ch...@chriswoolf.co.uk> wrote:
How open these sort of products can be in terms of internal architecture
and calibration is another (commercial) problem. At least some secrecy
is essential to their business model, to avoid making reverse
engineering too easy... and therefore losing the mass market that their
product has to be based on.
I read your "it's the economy, stupid" argument. Now there's a market.
Hallelujah. Consumers of the world, praise secrecy.
Put it this way; I understand how the audio market works, having been a
designer for bits of it over the decades. Personally I love the artisan
aspect, but I have to accept that patents and keeping some things hidden
has been what has paid my for my bread crusts over the years.
My point is that all the hardware is available to build an Ambisonics
microphone,
But selling you 4 matched capsules as an individual, and selling them as
part of a finished ambisonics recorder, is a very different commercial
matter.
... There's probably more plastic than anything else in this microphone.
Oh, don't dismiss plastic! It can be a far better material than metal,
used in the right place. Nor is it cheap to design and tool - it is just
cheap as a part, when you make 100,000. I have countless arguments about
the use of foam i n windshields, which people assume must be cheap
because they see something like it in packaging. They never realise how
hard it is to engineer on a 3-axis high speed CNC.
Like sound, reality have directional components; we're in 2018, not in 1980,
and there's alternatives.
There are....
Chris Woolf
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_______________________________________________
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.
