It is not difficult to get good clean sound just about anywhere, just use a highly directional mic with poor sensitivity, which is what headset mics and the mics journalists use for field work are. It may not provide an accurate representation of the speakers voice and much of the nuance may be lost but often it is good enough especially when the listener does not actually know what the person sounds like. Many of the mics sold for pod casting are of this sort.
back
1 comments
> It is not difficult to get good clean sound just about anywhere, just use a highly directional mic with poor sensitivity…
The "sensitivity" thing is a popular myth among podcasters. Headset mics use higher-sensitivity condenser mics, but because they're so close to your mouth, ambient and background noise is proportionately far quieter. More reading on this topic:
• Myth Busted – The Too Sensitive Condenser Microphone: https://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2009/12/30/myth-busted-the-t...
• 15 Popular Audio Myths (see section "Myth: Capacitor mics ‘pick up more of the room’ than dynamic mics"): https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advice/15-popular-audio-m...
• Top 8 Microphone Myths Exposed (see item 6, which also applies to dynamic vs. condenser): https://www.shure.com/en-US/performance-production/louder/to...
I was not talking about capsule types which you seem to be conflating with sensitivity.
The 1khz/1Pa test is nearly useless on its own and generally in the studio when the engineer says this mic is more sensitive than that one, he is not talking about the sensitivity measurement on the box, he is talking about the sensitivity measurement in context of of the pattern and frequency response for a given setup.
Edit: that is too say I was not talking about the sensitivity measurement on the box either.