In terms of SPL and the mic.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

Okay, now everything has a resonant frequency. At this point, the most energy will be on the object correct? If this is the case, wouldn't it be wise to find the resonant freqency of a particular meter in your intended application and mounting location, measure it, and then design for your peak to be at that point? Wouldn't that produce the highest reading? I'm sure this has been thought of, but I'd like some input. Sean, Neil. . .

[DevilDriver 28]

Okay, now everything has a resonant frequency. At this point, the most energy will be on the object correct? If this is the case, wouldn't it be wise to find the resonant freqency of a particular meter in your intended application and mounting location, measure it, and then design for your peak to be at that point? Wouldn't that produce the highest reading? I'm sure this has been thought of, but I'd like some input. Sean, Neil. . .

Inuitively, it's a very clever idea.

The first thing of note is that a microphone, in particular it's diaphragm, has a resonant frequency well above the range of frequencies allowed in SPL competitions. In general, smaller items have higher resonant frequencies. For microphones designed for measurement over a wide frequency range, they typically use multiple diaphragms with various filters to keep frequency response as neutral as possible. If this were not the case, we would still have to make it pass impedance correction circuitry.

I'm not totally sure if those used in SPL competition are piezoelectric, dynamic, or condenser microphones (which would describe the exact specifics in which they work) but the above roughly summarizes why I *think* it wouldn't work.