Topic: most likely a silly question...

[Jimna]

can someone explain the difference between caps with a sub card pattern vs. a wide card?

thanks in advance
jim

[bhtoque]

can someone explain the difference between caps with a sub card pattern vs. a wide card?

thanks in advance
jim

I've always understood it to mean the same thing. Two ways to name a pattern more directional than an omni, but not as directional as a standard cardiod pattern.

JAson

[Jimna]

really?  someone in the busman thread tried to say there was a difference but then didnt elaborate.

[KLowe]

really?  someone in the busman thread tried to say there was a difference but then didnt elaborate.

Paging DSATZ.................

[Jimna]

thanks KLowe, your avatar just reminded me i need duct tape before i leave town.

+t

[blindman]

A subcardioid-capsule has a wide-cardioid pattern

I have never seen published information that says there is a difference. I always understood the terms to be synonymous.

[Jimna]

me either, so i asked here to be sure.

[T.J.]

is it sort of like hyper card and super card being synonymous? i'm pretty sure they are...

[Brian Skalinder]

is it sort of like hyper card and super card being synonymous? i'm pretty sure they are...

Hyper- and super-cardioid are distinctly different, though the terms are often used loosely and interchangeably.  DSatz had a good post about it at some point (no surprise there), and as with most of his posts, I sponged it up as best I could.  I'll see if I can find it.

Not the one(s) I was thinking of, but...FWIW:

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,88264.msg1173079.html#msg1173079
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,69574.msg1045512.html#msg1045512

Basically, it seems most mics labelled "supercardioid" or "hypercardioid" are somewhere in between.  As I understand it, theoretically and generally speaking, supercardioid looks more like #6 on the image below, while hypercardioid looks more like #7.

[T.J.]

thanks brian. damn, i never noticed their was a major difference but judging by the difference b/w 6 and 7, it looks like hyper cardiod mics REALLY pick up a large portion from that rear 'lobe' (don't know if i'm using the right terminology there)

[Brian Skalinder]

thanks brian. damn, i never noticed their was a major difference but judging by the difference b/w 6 and 7, it looks like hyper cardiod mics REALLY pick up a large portion from that rear 'lobe' (don't know if i'm using the right terminology there)

Well, that's the theoretical difference:  hyper has a narrower front lobe with a larger rear lobe.  But remember that's just theory - as DSatz explained in the posts to which I linked, most mics labeled super- or hypercardioid are somewhere in between.  Where, exactly...depends on the mic  I'll keep digging to see if I can find the post I was thinking of.

[T.J.]

gotcha

+T

[dean]

Checking in to lurk...

[DSatz]

umm ... uhhh ... actually, all the replies in this thread are spot on. Simple answer is that the two terms mean the same thing. But meanwhile, there's no one agreed-upon definition of what that "same thing" is. Any microphone manufacturer is free to design a "wide cardioid" according to their own idea of what that pattern ought to be, as long as it's somewhere in the expanse of turf between omni and cardioid. If "Puce Microphones" decides to introduce a "wide cardioid" that's only a tiny bit broader in pattern than a standard cardioid, nothing is written in stone that the rest of us could point to and say, "Nuh-uh!".

See, the thing is, the directional patterns that can be obtained from a single transducer form a continuous spectrum from omni through cardioid to figure-8. It's an analog situation--you can plant your flag anywhere you like. Cardioid is smack in the middle, for example (causing some people's eyes to light up as they think "Platonic ideal!" while a few cranks and grumblers say, "Fehh--neither fish nor fowl!"). But if you observe the actual microphones that are called "cardioid" you'll see a range of behaviors. The cardioid pattern has a precise trigonometric definition but any specific implementation will be ... what will be.

And that's even before we consider the question of "what is the directional pattern at different frequencies?"--since the uniformity or non-uniformity of the pattern at different frequencies is very different among different microphone designs, and that makes a HUGE difference to the way they pick up sound, particularly for live indoor recording (as opposed to close-miking in an acoustically dead studio, where most of the sound that matters arrives on axis, or most outdoor recording). No, we're NOT talking about that, even though it's maybe half of what really matters. No! (Trying ever so hard not to go there ...)(though I want to)(pant, pant)

Anyway, following that epic struggle, attached is a graphical sketch that I once proposed for a certain manufacturer's general catalog. It was intended to show where one of their capsules sits on the above-mentioned spectrum. Any microphone can be anywhere on this spectrum at any frequency in the audio range. But only a few places along the spectrum have definite names attached to them.

In the case of "wide cardioid" there's an embarrassment of riches: two competing names, both of which have major defects as items of terminology go. But "subcardioid" wins the prize for being truly obscure--most writers avoid it unless they hope to earn snob points simply by being in the minority.

Some microphones have even been designed to be continuously adjustable across the spectrum (including one vintage classic, the Neumann M 49), and about ten years ago one idealistic manufacturer introduced a system that let the user remotely set a pair of microphones to have different patterns in different frequency ranges. They could be (for example) wide cardioids at low frequencies, supercardioids in the midrange and figure eights up top if you wanted--and you could choose the boundaries of those frequency ranges. In terms of flexibility it was kind of a SoundField microphone on ster[e]oids, with only two channels of output but better-sounding capsules. You could even do the M/S-like trick of recording the signals "raw" and then making your choices later on in playback, in the comfort and privacy of your own home, bomb shelter or cardboard box. Unfortunately it also cost as much as a small herd of llamas, and not many systems were ever sold.

--best regards

[dean]

No, we're NOT talking about that, even though it's maybe half of what really matters. No! (Trying ever so hard not to go there ...)(Oh I so want to go there, but NOT NOW.)(pant, pant)

LMAO!!!   

As always, thanks for you insight, Mr. Satz!

[rowjimmy]

As always, thanks for you insight, Mr. Satz!

QFT
Reading your posts is like going to class except
a: I stay awake
and
b: I want to learn the material... and do!

Thanks.

[Belexes]

I have learned so much from DSatz from this forum, I need to know where to write my tuition check.

[John Willett]

can someone explain the difference between caps with a sub card pattern vs. a wide card?

They are the same thing - also sometimes called hypo-cardioid.

[John Willett]

Hyper- and super-cardioid are distinctly different, though the terms are often used loosely and interchangeably. 

People often discuss the difference between super-cardioid and hyper-cardioid microphones, as many people seem to use the two terms as the same thing.

There are, however, important differences between the different types of cottage-loaf microphone patterns, which is why Sennheiser make super-cardioid microphones and not hyper-cardioid.

The pressure-gradient microphone with the best directivity of 4 is dubbed the hyper-cardioid.  Its disadvantage, however, is the lack of rejection for sound coming directly from the rear (180º). The rejection here is only 6dB. Trying to optimise the directional characteristics, Sennheiser created a super-cardioid microphone with equal rejection at 90º and 180º. This improves the rear rejection figure without sacrificing the side rejection figure too much, and still retains a high directional coefficient of 3.86.

The theoretical figures for the various cottage-loaf microphones are:-

Hyper-Cardioid
The hyper-cardioid microphone has it’s angle of maximum rejection at 109.5º.
It is optimised for the maximum directivity coefficient of 4.0.
Rejection at 90º is -12dB
Rejection at 180º is -6dB

Super-Cardioid
The super-cardioid microphone has it’s angle of maximum rejection at 125.3º.
It is optimised for the maximum front to rear index and has a directivity coefficient of 3.73.
Rejection at 90º is -8.7dB
Rejection at 180º is -11.6dB

Sennheiser Super-Cardioid
The Sennheiser super-cardioid microphone has it’s angle of maximum rejection at 120º.
It is optimised for equal attenuation at 90º and 180º, it has a directivity coefficient of 3.86.
Rejection at 90º is -9.5dB
Rejection at 180º is also -9.5dB

The attenuation at 90º is equal to the attenuation at 180º (the 180º signal being out-of-phase of course), this means that the attention is concentrated on the sound coming to the front of the microphone. The disadvantage of the hyper-cardioid is that sounds from the rear can be too high due to the lack of rear attenuation, and the disadvantage of the standard super-cardioid is that its side rejection is not enough.

Please note that these are the theoretical figures which may differ slightly in practice.

(adapted from a Sennheiser info. sheet)

[Gutbucket]

The theoretical figures for the various cottage-loaf microphones are:-

Mmmmmm, microphones and jam. 
Warning: The fruit cake variety is known for limited rear rejection if consumed in large quantities.

What's a cottage loaf? A crusty muffin top bread?

[DSatz]

> also sometimes called hypo-cardioid.

Ooh, yes--it's short, of course, for "hypodermic cardioid" because of the way it gets under your skin. Michael Williams uses that term, which has the advantage of debasing only one dead language at a time. (Subcardioid is an unholy mixture of Latin and Greek, like tonsillectomy, sociopath or Pentium.)

Such is life that people compete for these obscure bragging rights. Feel that tug on your sleeve at the local AES meeting? And the quavering voice that says, "Remember me, sonny? In the winter of ought-three I invented the name 'pulminoid' for a microphone pattern. Yeah, that was me! Believe it! But I never got rich like you'd expect. I offered the rights to Neumann, but they acted as if they couldn't see the use of a lung-shaped microphone pattern. No one understands a genius. Ah, well, we old pioneers don't get any respect anyways--why, I remember the glory days of classic 16-bit PCM, just the way Sony intended digital audio to be; you'll never convince me that this newfangled 24-bit stuff will ever sound as good as that. This music these kids listen to nowadays, it ain't nothing but noise." And so on.

It's sad, I tell you.

--best regards

[sygdwm]

mr satz,

just so i an sleep tonite and justify owning part of (3) 24 bit recorders, tell me there still a benefit for recording at higher bit depth if you want to edit the filesets before dithering to 16 bit?

[John Willett]

What's a cottage loaf?

It's an old English loaf (bread) which is basically one lump on top of another. 

[dean]

What's a cottage loaf?

It's an old English loaf (bread) which is basically one lump on top of another. 

With a distinct Hypercardiod pattern shape to the dual loaf, too!!

[Gutbucket]

Someone should bake-up all the 1st order polar patterns.

Or, just imagine a whole display case full of high order ambisonic bakery treats.

[DSatz]

John W., many thanks for that picture of a cottage loaf. I'd seen the term in Angus MacKenzie's microphone reviews in "Studio Sound" back in the 1970s, and wondered what it was. You've solved a mystery that's been knocking about in my head all these years.

Gutbucket, the problem with baking up anything on the figure-8 side of cardioid is that the rear lobe would have to be made of antimatter since it has inverse polarity. Any of the Star Trek fans on this board can tell you why that canna be allowed near the "positive matter" side of the pattern.

--best regards

[rowjimmy]

Don't worry about the anti-matter containment. Scotty's having a look at it.

[Gutbucket]

You think the metaphor can be stretched far enough with just pumpernickle vs refined white flour? Now that IS most likely a silly question.

..off to lunch on some Blumlein cheese bread-

[dean]

^ ROTFLMAO!!!   

[Jimna]

ok!  both informative and humerus.  +T for the great explanation.