What is the symbol for a mic?
in [Basics]
|
Prev: Need heater strip circuit
Next: ua741
From: ehsjr on 16 Oct 2009 14:15 Michael Black wrote: > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, ehsjr wrote: > >> Michael Black wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, John Fields wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:53:01 -0400, Michael Black <et472(a)ncf.ca> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Eddie wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I want to write (by hand) if some voice recordings of mine are in >>>>>> mono or stereo. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there some standard symbols used for a mono mic and a stereo >>>>>> mic? >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there mono/stereo mic symbols used in schematic circuit diagrams >>>>>> which could be used? >>>>>> >>>>> There are rarely stereo microphones. Usually just two >>>>> microphones. Even >>>>> when something has two microphone elements in close proximity, on a >>>>> schematic they would appear as two microphones, since there would be >>>>> two elements hooked up to separate circuitry. >>>>> >>>>> Why not "M" for mono, "S" for stereo? >>>>> >>>>> That's so much simpler than drawing a symbol, even if you had >>>>> something >>>>> that was standard. >>>>> >>>>> Michael >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> http://library.thinkquest.org/10784/circuit_symbols.html >>>> >>> But he wants something to indicate mono or stereo. I agree, that's a >>> fairly standard symbol for a microphone, but he wants something to >>> indicate stereo. And I would argue that an "M" is still simpler than >>> drawing the mic symbol. >>> >>> Michael >>> >> >> Simpler is irrelevant. It's all about clear communication, not >> about whether a symbol is easier or harder to draw. >> > Reread his post. I was answering what you were talking about, which seemed to be schematics: "There are rarely stereo microphones. Usually just two microphones. Even when something has two microphone elements in close proximity, on a schematic they would appear as two microphones, since there would be two elements hooked up to separate circuitry." > He's talking about labelling recorded material, not > drawing a schematic. What's relevant for a schematic is not relevant in > this case. > Right. If it's just about labelling the recordings, then Mono or Stereo works well, and better than making up a symbol. Ed > Using letters or full words, "Mono" and "Stereo" fits the scenario far > better than trying to find some imaginary schematic symbol for a "stereo > microphone" which will take a lot more effort to draw for his purposes. > > Michael > > >> If it is not a standard symbol, then the person looking at the >> schematic may not understand what the symbol is supposed to >> mean. D= is a mic symbol (when properly drawn) - there is no need >> to identify it as mono with an M, it already is mono. If you >> replace the symbol with an M, you still need to show the two >> legs. And someone could still mistake it - for example, maybe the >> "M" means meter. If you want to show a mic as stereo, then you >> have to show where the other two legs connect, so merely adding >> an S is not enough. And if you show it as just an S, someone might >> think it represents a sine wave. >> >> Ed >>
From: Rich Grise on 16 Oct 2009 16:48 On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 21:15:56 -0400, Michael Black wrote: > On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, John Fields wrote: >> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:53:01 -0400, Michael Black <et472(a)ncf.ca> wrote: >>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2009, Eddie wrote: >>> >>>> I want to write (by hand) if some voice recordings of mine are in mono >>>> or stereo. >>>> >>>> Are there some standard symbols used for a mono mic and a stereo mic? >>>> >>>> Are there mono/stereo mic symbols used in schematic circuit diagrams >>>> which could be used? >>>> >>> There are rarely stereo microphones. Usually just two microphones. >>> Even when something has two microphone elements in close proximity, on >>> a schematic they would appear as two microphones, since there would be >>> two elements hooked up to separate circuitry. >>> >>> Why not "M" for mono, "S" for stereo? >>> >>> That's so much simpler than drawing a symbol, even if you had something >>> that was standard. >> >> http://library.thinkquest.org/10784/circuit_symbols.html >> > But he wants something to indicate mono or stereo. I agree, that's a > fairly standard symbol for a microphone, but he wants something to > indicate stereo. And I would argue that an "M" is still simpler than > drawing the mic symbol. > Just use two mics, one labeled "Right" and the other labeled "Left." Sure, there are "stereo mics", but they're really just two mics in the same package. Cheers! Rich
From: Lostgallifreyan on 16 Oct 2009 23:44 ehsjr <ehsjr(a)nospamverizon.net> wrote in news:hbad7t$17e$1(a)news.eternal- september.org: > Right. If it's just about labelling the recordings, then Mono or > Stereo works well, and better than making up a symbol. > Some people use labelling machines with basic graphic capability, or they print them from a computer onto a sheet of little paper labels. So if you only design it once you might as well do something that looks nice. I like my idea of combining the two overlapping cirles and the standard circle/bar symbol, as it's a simple design and seems to fit well with what the OP had in mind, AND is unambiguous enough for schematics and block diagrams too.
From: Lostgallifreyan on 16 Oct 2009 23:47 Rich Grise <richgrise(a)example.net> wrote in news:pan.2009.10.16.20.48.02.498947(a)example.net: > Just use two mics, one labeled "Right" and the other labeled "Left." > > Sure, there are "stereo mics", but they're really just two mics in the > same package. > This is true, but when the point is to think in terms of a pairing as default state that would be like having to always explicitly specify multiples of the scissor, or the trouser.
From: Lostgallifreyan on 16 Oct 2009 23:53
Lostgallifreyan <no-one(a)nowhere.net> wrote in news:Xns9CA73030F5F62zoodlewurdle(a)216.196.109.145: > ehsjr <ehsjr(a)nospamverizon.net> wrote in news:hbad7t$17e$1(a)news.eternal- > september.org: > >> Right. If it's just about labelling the recordings, then Mono or >> Stereo works well, and better than making up a symbol. >> > > Some people use labelling machines with basic graphic capability, or > they print them from a computer onto a sheet of little paper labels. So > if you only design it once you might as well do something that looks > nice. I like my idea of combining the two overlapping cirles and the > standard circle/bar symbol, as it's a simple design and seems to fit > well with what the OP had in mind, AND is unambiguous enough for > schematics and block diagrams too. And for the proverbial shits and giggles, consider a real stereo mic, a mid/side type built in a single capsule, where you might symbolise it with two adjacent touching circles with a bar tangential to both. (Bar for directional mid, circles-as-figure-8 for bidirectional side) Though I think that might be more ambiguous, I think I've seen that kind of shape meaning something else, somewhere.. |