can I damage my mics at the range when firing my new .500 Smith & Wesson? at DVinfo.net

Henry Corrilan · November 26th, 2008, 12:11 AM

can I damage my mics at the range when firing my new .500 Smith & Wesson?

(either then built-in mic or the Rode mic that I added on top)

or is this a very bad idea for my mics?

Harm Millaard · November 26th, 2008, 01:04 AM

A direct hit seems inadvisable.

Allen Plowman · November 26th, 2008, 01:27 AM

1) yes, if you get a direct hit it will ruin it.
2) It will be very difficult to prevent clipping, you will need to monitor the levels.
3) at a certain sound pressure level physical damage can occur

#1 distance from the gun will not be relevant, it will still ruin it
#'s 2 & 3 will depend on the distance the microphone is from the gun.

Jim Andrada · November 26th, 2008, 02:25 AM

Maybe a tad off topic, but how do you like the S&W?

Warren Kawamoto · November 26th, 2008, 11:45 AM

Is it really possible to damage a microphone because audio is too loud? I never, ever heard of a microphone going bad because of high sound pressure levels.

Greg Bellotte · November 26th, 2008, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warren Kawamoto

Is it really possible to damage a microphone because audio is too loud? I never, ever heard of a microphone going bad because of high sound pressure levels.

Yes it is possible. I used to mix NHRA drag racing, we toasted our share of mics due to high SPLs. In the 14 years I was involved (5 for espn, the balance across other networks), we had failures of 8 Sennheiser 416 (my fav), 4 EV 635 (considered indestructible), and many other lower end mics. SPLs were in excess of 150 db when the failures occurred, and the mics were very close to the noise. Not a level many people are ever exposed to. This translates to roughly 2.1 on the richter scale BTW... :-)

I've covered many shooting events as well, but never had a mic problem with that or any other sport. If you are worried about it, stay further away from the sound sources...and DON'T forget to wear earplugs. I like to mic guns further away anyway, the closer you get the shorter the report, real close doesn't sound very natural.

Thank goodness I do golf now...

Warren Kawamoto · November 26th, 2008, 12:36 PM

Holy cow.. 150SPL??? At that level, I would think that you'd get deaf even WITH earplugs!

Allen Plowman · November 26th, 2008, 01:48 PM

I film top fuel nitro drag racing, I use an at-897, its affordable for me, and has a 129 db rating. I make sure to not stick the mic right next to the engines. I have wired up my sennheiser wireless, and put the mic on a stand about 20 foot away while I record close-up shots. (I wear earplugs and ear muffs). Noise DB levels are a funny thing, they will vary with humidity, temperature, rebound from enclosures, etc. offhand, I would think if the mic is ten feet away from the gun, you will be ok. if you want the camera right beside the gun, use a cord for the mic and locate it ten feet away. make sure to muffle the built in mic on the camera even if your not using it. a microphone can be overextended and damaged even if its turned off. do you have any clue what Db level the gun produces at 2 foot away?

Shaun Roemich · November 26th, 2008, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henry Corrilan

can I damage my mics at the range when firing my new .500 Smith & Wesson?

PERSONALLY, I think someone just wanted an excuse to tell us he got a new S&W... <laughs>

Sounds like fun!

Steve Oakley · November 26th, 2008, 05:00 PM

more interesting was that I saw some BTS doc of a nuttywood feature there they put a couple of mics down range. they had some one who was a good consistant shot sending bullets by maybe a foot away from the mics. don't know why I don't get those fun gigs :) I'd expect you might only have a potential problem being within a couple feet at best. also, handguns tend to be louder then rifles or shotguns. that said, do we get to see _video_ of your new toy on action :)

Andy Pronobis · November 26th, 2008, 09:28 PM

I would say if you're going to mic near the shooter, do it behind the muzzle plane. You'll still get the sound, but wont get the full shockwave of botht he propellant and the sonic shockwave (if indeed it's a supersonic load...at that caliber I'm guessing it is..).

True story....I was about 2 feet away from a .50 ca M2 when I was in the marines and happened to barely cross the muzzle plane while it was firing. The blood running form my ear kinda told me something was wrong.

Muzzle pressures are massive. They dissipate very quickly, relatively. but a .500 is a big round probably making a big sonic wake.

--Andy P

Grayson L. Wideman · November 29th, 2008, 08:07 PM

I can top that:
Back in the day of the Army having Nuclear Weapons, I was in an 8” howitzer battalion at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. We were firing in support of an Artillery School class when the firing point was visited by this “Bird Colonel.”

His driver had the jeep all spit-shined and the canvas drum tight. We tried to get him to loosen the canvas but he was a real jerk.

The next round went out at max charge and the shockwave split the canvas top on the jeep! And the jeep was 20’ back from the gun.

I guess a 200lb round leaving the tube at just over the speed of sound does make a little shock wave.

LOL
Grayson

Shaun Roemich · November 30th, 2008, 09:38 AM

I can't compete with the practical experience above but having recently watched an episode of Future Weapons on the M-246 machine gun firing the NATO 7.62 round, our beloved host pointed out that during the rapid fire session with the weapon, two of the soundman's mics were destroyed by SPLs.

Jim Andrada · November 30th, 2008, 01:15 PM

I worked at the Naval Weapons Lab in the early 60's and one of the groups was still doing proof tests on 16" naval rifles. IIRC 2000 pound projectile and 700 pounds of propellant. I think we could get a projectile about 30 miles down the Potomac river. Very impressive indeed. But I think the 5" and 8" rifles we were testing had a sharper muzzle "crack" and would have done more damage due to SPL. I've also noticed that a 357 magnum seems to slap your hand harder than a 44 magnum - could just be my perception but I think the burn rate of the propellant and muzzle velocity is lower in the bigger guns.

Steve House · November 30th, 2008, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Andrada

I worked at the Naval Weapons Lab in the early 60's and one of the groups was still doing proof tests on 16" naval rifles. IIRC 2000 pound projectile and 700 pounds of propellant. I think we could get a projectile about 30 miles down the Potomac river. Very impressive indeed. But I think the 5" and 8" rifles we were testing had a sharper muzzle "crack" and would have done more damage due to SPL. I've also noticed that a 357 magnum seems to slap your hand harder than a 44 magnum - could just be my perception but I think the burn rate of the propellant and muzzle velocity is lower in the bigger guns.

F=M*A, courtesy of good ol' Isaac Newton. Hotter propellant increases pressure which increases acceleration

November 26th, 2008, 01:27 AM	#3
Allen Plowman Major Player Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Paradise, california Posts: 353	1) yes, if you get a direct hit it will ruin it. 2) It will be very difficult to prevent clipping, you will need to monitor the levels. 3) at a certain sound pressure level physical damage can occur #1 distance from the gun will not be relevant, it will still ruin it #'s 2 & 3 will depend on the distance the microphone is from the gun. __________________ "What I need is an exact list of specific unknown problems we might encounter."

November 26th, 2008, 01:48 PM	#8
Allen Plowman Major Player Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Paradise, california Posts: 353	I film top fuel nitro drag racing, I use an at-897, its affordable for me, and has a 129 db rating. I make sure to not stick the mic right next to the engines. I have wired up my sennheiser wireless, and put the mic on a stand about 20 foot away while I record close-up shots. (I wear earplugs and ear muffs). Noise DB levels are a funny thing, they will vary with humidity, temperature, rebound from enclosures, etc. offhand, I would think if the mic is ten feet away from the gun, you will be ok. if you want the camera right beside the gun, use a cord for the mic and locate it ten feet away. make sure to muffle the built in mic on the camera even if your not using it. a microphone can be overextended and damaged even if its turned off. do you have any clue what Db level the gun produces at 2 foot away? __________________ "What I need is an exact list of specific unknown problems we might encounter."

November 29th, 2008, 08:07 PM	#12
Grayson L. Wideman Regular Crew Join Date: May 2004 Location: Honlululu, Hawaii Posts: 30	Shockwaves I can top that: Back in the day of the Army having Nuclear Weapons, I was in an 8” howitzer battalion at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. We were firing in support of an Artillery School class when the firing point was visited by this “Bird Colonel.” His driver had the jeep all spit-shined and the canvas drum tight. We tried to get him to loosen the canvas but he was a real jerk. The next round went out at max charge and the shockwave split the canvas top on the jeep! And the jeep was 20’ back from the gun. I guess a 200lb round leaving the tube at just over the speed of sound does make a little shock wave. LOL Grayson

November 30th, 2008, 09:38 AM	#13
Shaun Roemich Inner Circle Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia (formerly Winnipeg, Manitoba) Canada Posts: 4,088	I can't compete with the practical experience above but having recently watched an episode of Future Weapons on the M-246 machine gun firing the NATO 7.62 round, our beloved host pointed out that during the rapid fire session with the weapon, two of the soundman's mics were destroyed by SPLs. __________________ Shaun C. Roemich Road Dog Media - Vancouver, BC - Videographer - Webcaster www.roaddogmedia.ca Blog: http://roaddogmedia.wordpress.com/

November 26th, 2008, 12:11 AM	#1
Henry Corrilan New Boot Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 8	can I damage my mics at the range when firing my new .500 Smith & Wesson? can I damage my mics at the range when firing my new .500 Smith & Wesson? (either then built-in mic or the Rode mic that I added on top) or is this a very bad idea for my mics?

November 26th, 2008, 01:04 AM	#2
Harm Millaard Trustee Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands Posts: 1,832	A direct hit seems inadvisable.

November 26th, 2008, 02:25 AM	#4
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	Maybe a tad off topic, but how do you like the S&W?

November 26th, 2008, 11:45 AM	#5
Warren Kawamoto Trustee Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 1,435	Is it really possible to damage a microphone because audio is too loud? I never, ever heard of a microphone going bad because of high sound pressure levels.

November 26th, 2008, 12:36 PM	#7
Warren Kawamoto Trustee Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Honolulu, HI Posts: 1,435	Holy cow.. 150SPL??? At that level, I would think that you'd get deaf even WITH earplugs!

November 26th, 2008, 05:00 PM	#10
Steve Oakley Trustee Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 1,158	more interesting was that I saw some BTS doc of a nuttywood feature there they put a couple of mics down range. they had some one who was a good consistant shot sending bullets by maybe a foot away from the mics. don't know why I don't get those fun gigs :) I'd expect you might only have a potential problem being within a couple feet at best. also, handguns tend to be louder then rifles or shotguns. that said, do we get to see _video_ of your new toy on action :)

November 26th, 2008, 09:28 PM	#11
Andy Pronobis Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Buffalo NY Posts: 28	I would say if you're going to mic near the shooter, do it behind the muzzle plane. You'll still get the sound, but wont get the full shockwave of botht he propellant and the sonic shockwave (if indeed it's a supersonic load...at that caliber I'm guessing it is..). True story....I was about 2 feet away from a .50 ca M2 when I was in the marines and happened to barely cross the muzzle plane while it was firing. The blood running form my ear kinda told me something was wrong. Muzzle pressures are massive. They dissipate very quickly, relatively. but a .500 is a big round probably making a big sonic wake. --Andy P

November 30th, 2008, 01:15 PM	#14
Jim Andrada Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Tucson AZ Posts: 2,211	I worked at the Naval Weapons Lab in the early 60's and one of the groups was still doing proof tests on 16" naval rifles. IIRC 2000 pound projectile and 700 pounds of propellant. I think we could get a projectile about 30 miles down the Potomac river. Very impressive indeed. But I think the 5" and 8" rifles we were testing had a sharper muzzle "crack" and would have done more damage due to SPL. I've also noticed that a 357 magnum seems to slap your hand harder than a 44 magnum - could just be my perception but I think the burn rate of the propellant and muzzle velocity is lower in the bigger guns.