That’s something I noticed a while ago: all podcasters have those huge microphones in front of them - sometimes with a gigantic boom - that wouldn’t look out of place on 1950s TV. But unlike in the 1950s, they’re not trying to hide them, no no: the more visible, the bigger, the better.
I can’t figure out the point of that prop. If I did a podcast, I’d try to unclutter the shot myself.
it’s pretty difficult to capture human voices accurately while rejecting ambient noise, and a larger diaphragm and its supporting components need larger housing than a mic that isn’t as particular.
techzone audio makes their mics by hand and has good informational videos showing the internal components; you can see there’s not a ton of empty space inside their mics, and the diameter itself is determined by the internal housing and necessary components.
That used to be true with the tecnological limitations of analogue and early digital systems. Now these functions are processed digitally. You can get excellent microphones that do not need to appear on camera at all.
It’s mostly for show and the popularity of the medium has built a market who want to look the part of serious people and wanting to evoke the image of the trusted old timers on the news, for one example, is part of the image.
Hard disagree. There’s a reason pro equipment still exists. Digital noise suppression is still noticeable in comparison to analog. It’s always better to start with a higher quality analog source and do the least amount of digital processing after.
Now, this is with the caveat that someone in an already isolated room with good acoustics can get away with a much cheaper microphone sounding comparable, but give some reflective surfaces in a room and make it non-symmetrical and now the advantage starts to amplify for good source audio.
Source: I’ve done audio production for a few stage plays and produced an album.
Got a degree in audio engineering. Otacon239 knows what they’re talking about.
audio is usually processed digitally; these XLR mics all filter their input through a preamp, but a digital process won’t directly capture audio the same way a physical diaphragm in an XLR mic will, which is what the podcast microphones OP is asking about use.
companies can produce smaller microphones and a lot of people use smaller microphones that capture and process audio differently then XLR mics, but if you’re curious about why podcast microphones specifically are physically larger than other mics, it comes down to the function of a microphone diaphragm designed for the human vocal range and its supporting components shown in the video linked above.