Posted by Jacques E. Bouchard on 12/03/07 05:41

"nappy" <n@n.n> wrote in
news:weG4j.79023$Um6.16229@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net:

> "Jacques E. Bouchard" <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:Xns99FA8190D16E8jebouchard451yahooca@204.153.245.131...
>
>> I'm sorry, maybe there was something about my post that wasn't
>> perfectly clear. Here it is again. I typed more slowly this time to
>> let you catch up:
>
> nice. You may not know this but typing slowly doesn't really have any
> effect on the speed at which the words show up in a post.

I think you must be putting me on. Yes, surely that's it.

>> The mic doesn't pick up any of the room's echo that a camera-mounted
>> mic would (regardless of quality).
>
> Probably because it rolls off at 1000Hz?

No, because it's not mounted ten feet away from the subject. I'm not the
first one to mention distance in this thread. You know that perfectly
well (or maybe not - I'm only *presuming* you're a competent
professional), but you couldn't pass up the opportunity to sneer.

> Hollywood will be so happy to hear about your discovery!

"Hollywood"? I specifically said "interviews". Maybe I wasn't typing
slowly enough after all...

>> but as I said I recommend
>> it for anyone who wants to know whether a wireless lav mic is
>> adequate for their needs, before committing several hundred dollars
>> to a quality mic.
>
> If you want crap. Pay for crap. You'll get crap. It will always be
> crap.

And if it turns out that lava mics aren't suited for your needs, you've
only blown $10 - not $1,000.

Again, I don't see what wasn't perfectly clear about my post. Maybe you
just need to put away the smugness before you put your eye out.


jaybee

[Back to original message]