15:21
Dynamic mics don’t reject noise better than condensers! And yet they do?
Julian Krause
Overview
This video debunks the common myth that dynamic microphones inherently reject more background noise than condenser microphones. It explains that physically, both microphone types operate on similar principles of sound waves vibrating a diaphragm to create an electrical signal. The perceived difference in noise rejection often stems from factors like frequency response and microphone placement, rather than the microphone's core technology. By matching frequency responses and considering typical usage scenarios, the video demonstrates that the distinction in noise handling is less about mic type and more about these other variables.
How was this?
Save this permanently with flashcards, quizzes, and AI chat
Chapters
- The common advice to use dynamic mics in noisy or untreated rooms for better noise rejection is a myth.
- Sound waves do not 'know' or 'care' what type of microphone they are hitting; they are simply pressure variations.
- Physically, dynamic and condenser microphones cannot have inherent differences in noise rejection based solely on their type.
- The idea that dynamic mics have a faster sound fall-off with distance is also physically impossible and a misunderstanding.
Understanding this myth is crucial for making informed microphone choices, preventing unnecessary reliance on one mic type over another based on false premises.
The speaker uses an analogy of sound waves not changing their behavior when hitting a dynamic versus a condenser mic, highlighting that the physics of sound doesn't differentiate between microphone types.
- Both dynamic and condenser mics work by converting sound waves into electrical signals via a vibrating diaphragm.
- The fundamental principle of sound pressure causing diaphragm movement is the same for both types.
- Differences exist, but they don't fundamentally alter how sound pressure is converted into an electrical signal.
- Sound pressure is sound pressure, regardless of the microphone technology it interacts with.
Recognizing the shared physical principles helps demystify microphone technology and focus on the actual factors influencing performance.
The speaker explains that in both mic types, sound wiggles a membrane, which then generates an electrical signal, emphasizing the core similarity in their operation.
- When the frequency responses of a dynamic and a condenser mic are EQ'd to match, their noise rejection capabilities become virtually identical.
- A test was conducted where a condenser mic was processed with EQ to sound like a dynamic mic.
- In this matched scenario, there was no significant difference in how much room reverb or ambient noise was picked up.
- This demonstrates that frequency response, not mic type, is the primary driver of perceived noise handling when other factors are equal.
This controlled experiment provides strong evidence that when technical characteristics are aligned, the perceived difference in noise rejection between mic types disappears.
The speaker EQ'd a condenser mic to perfectly match the frequency response of a dynamic mic, then played both back, showing minimal difference in capturing room reflections.
- In raw, un-EQ'd comparisons, differences in noise rejection often emerge due to inherent frequency response variations.
- Dynamic mics often have a natural high-frequency roll-off, which captures less room reverb.
- Condenser mics typically have more treble extension, making them sound more 'open' but also capturing more ambient room sound.
- Microphone placement (proximity effect) significantly impacts the direct-to-reverberant sound ratio, with closer placement reducing perceived room noise.
These real-world factors explain why dynamic mics *often* perform better in noisy environments, not because of their technology, but due to their typical sound characteristics and usage.
The speaker plays audio examples where a dynamic mic (with a natural high-frequency roll-off) captures less room reverb than a condenser mic in a typical recording setup.
- Dynamic mics generally have lower output levels, often requiring more preamp gain.
- To compensate for lower output and proximity effect, dynamic mics are frequently placed closer to the sound source.
- Condenser mics, with higher output and sensitivity, can often be placed further away.
- Built-in pop filters on many dynamic mics allow for closer vocal placement without plosives, further encouraging proximity.
Understanding typical usage patterns clarifies why dynamic mics are *perceived* to be better in noisy spaces, as they are often used in ways that naturally minimize room noise.
The speaker notes that dynamic mics are often used closer to the mouth, partly due to built-in pop filters, which inherently reduces the capture of room reflections compared to a condenser mic placed further away.
- Technically, dynamic mics do not possess superior inherent noise rejection capabilities compared to condensers.
- The perceived difference is largely due to typical frequency responses and common microphone placement strategies.
- Frequency response shape and proximity to the sound source are more significant factors than the microphone's fundamental technology.
- While dynamic mics aren't magically better, their common characteristics can lead to audible benefits in suppressing room reverb and ambient noise in practical scenarios.
This synthesis helps learners make practical decisions by focusing on the controllable variables (EQ, placement) and understanding the nuanced reasons behind common microphone recommendations.
The speaker concludes that while physics doesn't favor dynamic mics for noise rejection, their typical frequency roll-off and closer usage patterns often result in a practical advantage for recording in less-than-ideal spaces.
Key takeaways
- The idea that dynamic microphones inherently reject more background noise than condenser microphones is a common misconception.
- Both dynamic and condenser microphones convert sound to electrical signals through diaphragm vibration, operating on similar physical principles.
- When frequency responses are matched, dynamic and condenser microphones exhibit comparable noise rejection capabilities.
- The perceived difference in noise handling is primarily influenced by a microphone's specific frequency response and its distance from the sound source.
- Dynamic microphones often have a natural high-frequency roll-off, which helps reduce the capture of room reverb.
- Dynamic microphones are frequently used closer to the sound source due to factors like lower output and built-in pop filters, which naturally minimizes ambient noise capture.
- Ultimately, microphone placement and frequency response characteristics are more critical for managing ambient noise than the microphone's type (dynamic vs. condenser).
Key terms
Dynamic microphoneCondenser microphoneNoise rejectionBackground noiseAmbient noiseFrequency responseRoom reverbSound wavesDiaphragmEQ (Equalization)Proximity effectPop filter
Test your understanding
- Why is the common advice that dynamic mics reject more noise than condenser mics considered a myth?
- How does matching the frequency response between a dynamic and a condenser microphone affect their noise rejection capabilities?
- What are the two primary factors, besides microphone type, that significantly influence how much ambient noise or room reverb is captured?
- Explain how the typical usage patterns of dynamic microphones contribute to their perceived advantage in noisy recording environments.
- What physical principle underlies the operation of both dynamic and condenser microphones, and why does this similarity challenge the idea of inherent noise rejection differences?