R/E/P > Klaus Heyne's Mic Lab

Pop Filters: Which Work? Which Suck? The Lowdown

<< < (9/10) > >>


--- Quote from: klaus on July 01, 2020, 03:35:15 PM ---Make sure the metal does not resonate when pinged.

--- End quote ---
It doesn't, the acrylic paint seems to damp enough, and I clamped a little rubber piece inbetween the two sheets.

The double metal sheet filter isn't totally neutral.
There is a little coloration in the treble, but no comb filtering.
I only use it for long speech recordings (hi gain) when there is no time to remove all pops that made their way through.

Removing some singular pops in song productions isn't complicated with my soft (Magix Sequoia), the object-based processing makes high-passing little cuts very easy.
Therefore I use the nylon for those.

I had a Stedman for a while. Metal perforated with angled holes to divert the blast. Not bad but it did ring until I added a rubber damping hoop.
I am pretty sure there is nothing as good as the Rycote.


--- Quote ---I am pretty sure there is nothing as good as the Rycote.
--- End quote ---
As you personally used the Rycote (the only scenario that would justify posting about it here), can you tell us what you like?

The 'scenario' is that I have lived with many many different types of screens over the years. If there were one aspect to my work which sticks out it would be Vocals.
To the extent of being widely used as Reference. Generally I was always disappointed when pops appeared. I like to be free to add LF. But susceptibility to pops is typically accompanied by disturbance from fricatives and dentals also. I made many, including a 4 layer of popsocks on embroidery hoops. etc. etc.
My preference ended up being the Neumann Foam plus a Ticket PopperStopper, small hoop/mesh thing, surround not perforated.  All individual types I tried performed poorly enough that I have always had to use two, sometimes three.
To now:- Since I started the Rycote I cannot remember any Pop.
It is super convenient in use. It attaches to their shock mount, which itself works well and is gentle on the mics. No stand, no gooseneck, nothing blocking view of the lyrics.
I am not sure if Foam would describe the actual screen, more of a tortuous plastic mesh IMO.
It presents a rounded surface to the wavefront, perhaps like the bulbous bow of a tanker. I reckon much better than a flat in any case.
This and the  surround prevent it from bending with the blast. Flat meshes visibly move and pass the Pop onward.
Also, they are washable.

BUT....  I just ran a quick few tests and the HF disturbance from all the  different designs which I still have is a tad disturbing.
(Back to the standby that seems to still work best...KH): The least disturbing is a large diameter wooden hoop with two layers of mesh, by Neumann.
I will try some Popping later.

I use small foam screens on SDC to stop the earthquake when an acoustic instrument player breathes into one.  Also in live work in case someone blows into them to check if they are working!  I use Canford UK ones.  This thread reminded me to check them all for ageing.
Yes, with some rubbing, small amounts of dust appeared on a paper sheet, so all gone.
I intend buying some B&K foams to replace them.

Those damn fricatives and dentals!


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version