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 <bosses...@gmail.com>:
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.
