Steven Boardman <[email protected]> wrote: > My point about Harpex was; you tried to do ORTF with only one Octomic, and it > wasn?t good. > Did you try to do 3D ORTF with 2 Octomic, experimenting with positions, and > which position each Harpexed Octomic synthesises?
We tried ORTF with two OctoMics and it works great. You can see a photo of the array here: https://www.core-sound.com/OctoMic/OctoMic-ORTF-Array-cropped.jpg We have not yet tried ORTF-Surround nor ORTF-3D. We do have a fixture ready for both of them, using four OctoMics. You can see it here: https://www.core-sound.com/OctoMic/OM-ORTF-3D-1-cropped.jpg My conclusion from experimenting with Harpex to generate spaced arrays - based on comparing it to an array of mono mics - is that Harpex's plane wave decomposition function isn't quite ready for prime time. > PS don?t suppose you have a super-cardioid response of the Octamic? The CCM41 > capsules used in the 3D ORTF are excellent, with pretty dam good polar > response upto 16k. (Obviously they wouldn?t be anyway near the same in an > array being so close to each other:) > > https://schoeps.de/en/products/ccm/ccm-microphones/supercardioids/ccm-41.html We haven't generated a graph for first- and second-order supercardioids yet. You might want to compare that CCM41 graph to OctoMic's first- and second-order cardioid and hypercardioid graphs. They'll give you a good sense of how the supercardioid graphs would look. https://www.core-sound.com/OctoMic/2.php The second-order patterns are worth exploring. They offer some unique features. Len Moskowitz ([email protected]) Core Sound LLC www.core-sound.com Home of OctoMic and TetraMic _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list [email protected] https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
