rock soderstrom
Tour de France
I think everyone who has been involved in building (and modifying) microphones knows the problem.
Microphones and their components react to low-frequency structure-borne sound much better than you would like.
Some microphones are so sensitive that unrestricted use (on stage, for example) is almost impossible.
Accordingly, a lot of effort is put into this area and more or less successful measures are taken, which is what this thread is about.
Everyone knows the typical microphone shockmounts (in Germany we call them colloquially "Spinne" => spider), an effective protection against rumble sound based on the elastic suspension of the microphone in rubber bands.
This is where the first questions arise. What characterises a good shockmount? How elastic must the suspension be and what is its relationship to the weight of the microphone? What is better, a rather soft or tight suspension?
The idea of the "spider" can also be used successfully in other places; it may be sufficient to simply suspend the capsule elastically. What are your experiences?
For example, I have modified this microphone and I love it but it is extremely sensitive to rumble, the microphone thinks it is an earthquake detector with incredible sensitivity, unfortunately not so good for my application.
Simple solutions like this one do very little to nothing. How can I optimize this?
What would be the best way to successfully suspend the capsule? Rubber bands or metal springs? Soft or tight suspension? Lightly dampen the suspended capsule with a felt damper? Does this help or should the capsule be able to swing freely (in the rubber bands)? Do I need to "tune" the damping system?
Not only capsules need physical isolation, tubes can also benefit from it. These mechanically rather delicate constructions also tend to resonate. That is one of the reasons why they are selected or even produced for this purpose.
Nevertheless, all tubes in microphones can benefit from mechanical decoupling. Which way do you go here?
I'm currently trying something like this, two DIY shock absorbers cut from the insulation of an XLR cable. It lasts forever, we'll see if it really works. What are your experiences?
In this context, it is also interesting to ask what is the benefit of a layer of rubber between the capsule and the holder? What would an additional layer of rubber between the holder and the body achieve?
Should the distance holder be designed as a shock absorber (as above)?
I've also noticed that the wire to sensitive components such as capsules and tubes should be flexible and light rather than heavy and rigid, as this seems to reduce the transmission of mechanical energy? What do you think?
There is another thing to consider from my point of view. High pass filters in the head amp circuit of the microphone should be dimensioned accordingly. It makes no sense to extend the corresponding filters excessively downwards (anode to xformer cap, 1G grid resistor...) because this only amplifies the existing problems. Of course, it is better to counter structure-borne noise events mechanically, but the electrical side is also part of the game.
What do you think? I appreciate any input.
Microphones and their components react to low-frequency structure-borne sound much better than you would like.
Some microphones are so sensitive that unrestricted use (on stage, for example) is almost impossible.
Accordingly, a lot of effort is put into this area and more or less successful measures are taken, which is what this thread is about.
Everyone knows the typical microphone shockmounts (in Germany we call them colloquially "Spinne" => spider), an effective protection against rumble sound based on the elastic suspension of the microphone in rubber bands.
This is where the first questions arise. What characterises a good shockmount? How elastic must the suspension be and what is its relationship to the weight of the microphone? What is better, a rather soft or tight suspension?
The idea of the "spider" can also be used successfully in other places; it may be sufficient to simply suspend the capsule elastically. What are your experiences?
For example, I have modified this microphone and I love it but it is extremely sensitive to rumble, the microphone thinks it is an earthquake detector with incredible sensitivity, unfortunately not so good for my application.
Simple solutions like this one do very little to nothing. How can I optimize this?
What would be the best way to successfully suspend the capsule? Rubber bands or metal springs? Soft or tight suspension? Lightly dampen the suspended capsule with a felt damper? Does this help or should the capsule be able to swing freely (in the rubber bands)? Do I need to "tune" the damping system?
Not only capsules need physical isolation, tubes can also benefit from it. These mechanically rather delicate constructions also tend to resonate. That is one of the reasons why they are selected or even produced for this purpose.
Nevertheless, all tubes in microphones can benefit from mechanical decoupling. Which way do you go here?
I'm currently trying something like this, two DIY shock absorbers cut from the insulation of an XLR cable. It lasts forever, we'll see if it really works. What are your experiences?
In this context, it is also interesting to ask what is the benefit of a layer of rubber between the capsule and the holder? What would an additional layer of rubber between the holder and the body achieve?
Should the distance holder be designed as a shock absorber (as above)?
I've also noticed that the wire to sensitive components such as capsules and tubes should be flexible and light rather than heavy and rigid, as this seems to reduce the transmission of mechanical energy? What do you think?
There is another thing to consider from my point of view. High pass filters in the head amp circuit of the microphone should be dimensioned accordingly. It makes no sense to extend the corresponding filters excessively downwards (anode to xformer cap, 1G grid resistor...) because this only amplifies the existing problems. Of course, it is better to counter structure-borne noise events mechanically, but the electrical side is also part of the game.
What do you think? I appreciate any input.
Attachments
Last edited:
