Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Before I answer some of the points raised....

I have recently updated my website with details of the microphone - pictures will tell much of the story.

This will answer some questions and raise some more.

The short version of the concept is this: by acoustic impedance matching a greater level of damping is achieved without impeding freedom of movement.

Or it can be viewed as a greater level of freedom of movement without reduction of damping (among other perspectives).

Quite clearly this concept applies to the horn-loading of speakers but in this case the motivation is simple 'damping', within the frequency band of greatest human hearing acuity.

However, the issue of 'damping' is not simply a question of resonance control but rather of basic time-domain (impulse response) - so dynamics, resolution, etc AND resonance are all positively affected.

Regarding the specific implementation in my microphone, this is slightly more complicated as a 'full range' horn would be impossible for many reasons.
So, the microphone is designed to be effective within the previously mentioned critical band of human hearing and, owing to the basic acoustical properties of the design, the microphone is designed to be post-equalised, hence some issues with incorrect post-eq callibration.

In (simplified) theoretical terms, the less time-domain distortion present, the more transparent post-equalisation should be. My clips illustrate this quite well, I think.

Best regards,

Andy

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site