Posted by Richard Crowley on 04/22/07 20:48

"Smarty" wrote ...
> "Richard Crowley" wrote ...
>> "Smarty" wrote ...
>>> The laws of physics don't really need to be violated so much as
>>> cleverly exploited. There actually is a method to cancel mechanical
>>> sounds at a fixed location removed from the source of the noise, and
>>> this method, "active noise cancellation" is particularly suited for
>>> this problem,
>>
>> Which would be an excelent argument if a mic jack weren't
>> an infitessimal fraction of the cost of active noise cancelling
>> circuitry/etc. If you were responsible for the design of a
>> camcorder targeted to be sold for $350, take a wild guess
>> what the management would say about such a feature.

>I am making no argument whatsoever to offer this as a practical
>solution to an external mic jack. I merely was pointing out that
>physics was ***NOT*** the issue.

You're right. It is an economic issue, not a technical one.

[Back to original message]