On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Justin Glenn Smith wrote:
Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
i just looked up "pop filter" when seeing that word in cgc's reply, and it seems like it's a highpass filter, though it doesn't use those words in the description I read, but I guess it from what they say about clipping and aspirated plosives.
It is not so much a question of highpass vs. lowpass as it is a directional filtering - the pop filter attenuates the most direct path of the sound
Attenuation is normally not frequency-independent, unless it is designed to be so. So pretty much anything has an highpass and/or lowpass aspect to it unless you compensate it or you're just lucky...
I can't imagine studio mics doing things that favour the bounced-off waves at the detriment of the direct sound...
and if I am not mistaken they are designed to attenuate more with a higher energy burst of sound (this attenuation achieved via air turbulence),
Uh, wouldn't air turbulence would be a consequence (side-effect) of the filtering, not the cause of it?
This turbulence theory may be wrong, I looked for confirmation or denial online but my google skills are failing me.
In the case of sibilants, there is a turbulence going on inside of the mouth, but once it comes out of the mouth, it becomes just noise. Pretty much any large-scale natural [noise~]-like sound has to be generated by some kind of turbulence. Turbulence is normally a generator of noise, isn't it?
_ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801