Hi all,
I am still in Germany (as Barry mentioned) recovering from the show with a brief stop in an internet cafe.
As seems to have been observed, there are pictures on the site & some description of the concepts.
I'll write a very quick overview here now and cover the thing in detail when I get to the UK in a few days.
Acoustic Impedance Matching.
By better matching acoustic impedance between the diaphragm and the air, the first thing we get is acoustic gain - between the band at which the 'horn' is efficient.
This gain is critical but not in and of itself (we can get plenty of gain electronically).
However, diaphragm resonance is also at this impedance, so relative to the gain of a 'direct loaded' (normal) microphone, the resonance is reduced by the same factor as the gain.
Increased damping WITHOUT increased impediment of freedom of movement of diaphragm.
To achieve the same amount of damping with usual friction methods would also impede the free movement of the diaphragm by the same amount and would negate the effect.
By increasing the damping without compromising freedom of movement we get a basic time-domain improvement (within the critical band). This means dynamics, resolution, timbre.....all facets of time-domain.
As Oliver has mentioned, the idea of using a horn for recording is not new IN ITSELF.
However, in those days the acoustic horn was used FOR GAIN and as soon as gain could be achieved any other way, the horn was dropped in favour of electronic gain.
The idea of using the horn FOR DIAPHRAGM DAMPING is NEW.
Regarding my samples, these are very basic 'worst case' recordings, made with entry level gear.
Best regards from K