The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tags: ,

Early Music Chamber concert recording report w/ clips Condenser Microphones
Old 4th September 2008
  #31
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghellquist View Post
Oops.

Andy, I believe this can turn nasty for all the wrong reasons.

I understand that you really believe in your microphones. The rest of us has never used them. And we all tend to take marketing with quite a bit of salt, and, well, you do the selling so how can we tell really.

There is in my mind actually a real risk that what you write will turn potential customers away. Just think a second, assuming that your microphones will only make recordings that sound good on very good speakers. But the rest of the world uses headphones (as witnessed by one of the reviewers) so clearly these microphones are totally worthless except for a very small group of people. Let us not end up there.

Please go on and convince us with fantastic recordings, but accept that not everyone will love them. This goes for any product, after all this is gearslutz and for every product one person loves over everything there is at least ten persons hating it.

Gunnar
Gunnar, I not only accept that not everybody will love the recordings - I am saying that it is not possible for everybody to love them and I am interested in the reasons why.

Andy
Old 4th September 2008
  #32
Lives for gear
 
d_fu's Avatar
 

I don't think there is any need for anything turning "nasty"... As far as I'm concerned, whatever I say, comment on, or even criticize is never intended to be personal. I have great respect for Andy's work in principle - designing his own microphones and even developing new technologies. I also don't really object to the way he is presenting them here. I think he considers this forum a testing ground rather than a marketplace in which to tout his products (I could never afford them anyhow, BTW)... What I'd like to see is a bit more of technical background, beyond the rather scarce information concerning "acoustic impedance" on the website. Why and how do these funny-looking things achieve what they claim to do? What does a horn in front of the diaphragm do? Are there any conventional graphs for frequency response and polar patterns?

All I can say that I'm not very enthusiastic about the samples I've heard (some of those I've commented on earlier have been removed, I don't know whether this has to do with what I said). Both with headphones and speakers I sometimes have the impression of a "wall of sound" in quite a different sense - a rather "flat" sound with little depth of field, quite contrary to the claims made (e.g. with the Gregorian chant samples).

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_simpson View Post
Gunnar, I not only accept that not everybody will love the recordings - I am saying that it is not possible for everybody to love them and I am interested in the reasons why.
IMHO trying to find the reason in people's playback systems and playback SPL will not lead to any revelation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_simpson View Post
The easiest method is to arrange a pair of speakers either side of the source, calibrate recording/playback equipment for closest resemblence, make a number of brief recordings, bring in the subjects, arrange for a randomly selected 'play list' and alternate between reproduction & real performance according to the list, asking the blindfolded listener(s) to judge each brief performance as real/false.
I don't believe this can possibly succeed, at least not in a room/hall with any kind of natural ambience... Unless you move the mics up really close, your mics will capture this ambience/reverb, and speaker playback in the same acoustics will add more ambience and make reproduction easily discernible from the original. And if you move the mics right up, you won't likely get the "natural" sound you're after.

Daniel
Old 4th September 2008
  #33
Lives for gear
 
sonare's Avatar
Perhaps these are the most amazing microphones on the planet (or ANY planet), but I run a business. Your mics are $32,000 a pair.

It really doesn't matter that much what I think, because my competitors will also look to their bottom line. So far my customers are not unhappy with the sound I furnish, so apart from the ever-present personal quest for audio perfection I cannot responsibly embark on such a capitol investment unless it brings more clients and allows me to increase fees because they all clamor for it.

Perhaps the Sony/Sonoma marketing model might bear study.

Rich
Old 4th September 2008
  #34
Lives for gear
 
Corran's Avatar
 

Andy, if you were to guess, what kind of frequency response do you think your mics would have? Also, I believe you mentioned that they had something close to a cardioid pickup pattern, right? If not, what do you think the polar pattern would be?

It intrigues me, because to me the "perfect microphone" would be one in which the frequency response is flat as possible at all distances and angles and picked up sound generally like your ears (so, maybe two mics in A-B with a Jecklin disc, though I don't have a J-disc so I usually get by with an ORTF pair and an A-B pair mixed to get that balance between instruments and room). This is my "reasoning" for using Earthworks mics (self-noise be damned, I can fix that in the computer).

Also, is it only because you have a horn stuck on the end of the mic that you really suggest having a horn-driven speaker play back the recording? I could understand that, but then, I would wonder what your mics would sound like sans-horn.
Old 5th September 2008
  #35
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonare View Post
Perhaps these are the most amazing microphones on the planet (or ANY planet), but I run a business. Your mics are $32,000 a pair.

It really doesn't matter that much what I think, because my competitors will also look to their bottom line. So far my customers are not unhappy with the sound I furnish, so apart from the ever-present personal quest for audio perfection I cannot responsibly embark on such a capitol investment unless it brings more clients and allows me to increase fees because they all clamor for it.

Perhaps the Sony/Sonoma marketing model might bear study.

Rich

Is this for real?

I thought that they were around the £600-£1,000 each mark. For me they don't blow away the microphones I'm used to recording with on a daily basis (in my honest opinion most of the samples I have heard, are not really satisfactory), the mounting of them is impractical for the work I do.

I'm not convinced about the impedance matching idea, in fact I would have thought that this would lead to much higher SPL's on the diaphragm causing them to reach distortion levels earlier

Has anyone bought any, ever?


Regards


Roland
Old 5th September 2008
  #36
Lives for gear
 
sonare's Avatar
Unless I have misunderstood his website or my currency calculator has had a stroke, that's the price.

Rich
Old 5th September 2008
  #37
Lives for gear
 
Larry Elliott's Avatar
Rich

I do think your currency converter has haemorrhaged!

Larry
Old 5th September 2008
  #38
Lives for gear
 
Larry Elliott's Avatar
OOPPPS - Just re-read the prices on the web site - these are 10x what I was advised about a year back.
Old 5th September 2008
  #39
Lives for gear
 
sonare's Avatar
This from the Simpson website:

Model A (Single), Boxed - 9,995-00 GBP

Model A (Matched pair), Boxed - 17,995-00 GBP

Model A (5-piece Matched Surround Set), Boxed - 42,995-00 GBP

Rich
Old 5th September 2008
  #40
Lives for gear
 
mljung's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonare View Post
This from the Simpson website:

Model A (Single), Boxed - 9,995-00 GBP

Model A (Matched pair), Boxed - 17,995-00 GBP

Model A (5-piece Matched Surround Set), Boxed - 42,995-00 GBP

Rich
Think about all those wonderful microphones out there you could buy for this amount of money. Given the audio-samples we have heard this far I can't see why one should bother one second about model A. I have to admit that I'm shocked.

One could get a full surround set of Schoeps for the price of one Model A.
stikestike

This must be an error in the price list, don't you think?
Old 5th September 2008
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Elliott View Post
OOPPPS - Just re-read the prices on the web site - these are 10x what I was advised about a year back.
I'm not sure that he has sold any, but I am convinced that he won't sell any at that money, the samples posted at the begining of this thread slound "live" but that in my opinion is down to the midrange colouration I heard, probably a function of the horn, someone, on a previous thread, mentioned that they needed an correction curve applied to the raw signal to make them usable, however, typical of this kind of product there are a lot of claims and no technical data and measurements to back them up. As I mentioned earlier in the thread despite Andy's claims about preserving depth perspective this particular recording seems to have no perspective and the claims about using a pair of Mackie SR450's for reproduction IMHO can't be taken seriously.

Regards



Roland
Old 5th September 2008
  #42
Lives for gear
 
d_fu's Avatar
 

Andy

Could you tell me the name of that piece with the singers? Sounds familiar somehow.

My Beyer DT880 Pro is back, and the two clips sound nicer on these - especially after swapping channels, which significantly improves the sound quality...
Makes it sound a lot more realistic, in fact. heh

Still no strong feeling of depth, but an overall pleasant sound, due to no small extent to the lovely performance... I don't think you mentioned how the mics were spaced and angled, are they parallel. Considering the distance from the ensemble, the sound is indeed quite present.
On headphones, I find the stereo base a but too wide maybe. There's a slight hint of a hole in the middle.
And there still is a certain mid-range overpresence.

I wasn't going to do this, but on these phones, taking out a fairly broad range centering around 800k (down about 3 to 4 dB) certainly helps to make the sound a bit less muddled, esp. in the more complex passages. But I don' want to go very far into this excercise...

If I had the money for a pair of your mics and was allowed to spend it on mics only, I'd still buy a few TLM 150s or so...

D.
Old 6th September 2008
  #43
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by d_fu View Post
I don't think there is any need for anything turning "nasty"... As far as I'm concerned, whatever I say, comment on, or even criticize is never intended to be personal. I have great respect for Andy's work in principle - designing his own microphones and even developing new technologies. I also don't really object to the way he is presenting them here. I think he considers this forum a testing ground rather than a marketplace in which to tout his products (I could never afford them anyhow, BTW)...
Indeed, I don't find Daniel or anybody else to be in any way nasty - at least not any more so that I am!

Passion, enthusiasm, scepticism, challenge, argument and so on are all a healthy part of progress.

Quote:
What I'd like to see is a bit more of technical background, beyond the rather scarce information concerning "acoustic impedance" on the website. Why and how do these funny-looking things achieve what they claim to do? What does a horn in front of the diaphragm do?
When we consider the microphone as a mechanical system we can make better sense of the application of the acoustic loading 'horn'.

In physical terms, all mechanical error is subject to the acoustic impedance at which the microphone operates. It is not necessary to complicate the question with the exact nature of the mechanical error in order to understand the concept.

For example, a microphone diaphragm operating within solid steel, at the very very high acoustic impedance of steel, would be almost incapable of error.

On the other hand, a microphone operating in a vacuum would be capable only of error.

In this way, with raised acoustic impedance, the Model A achieves significantly reduced mechanical error, relative to conventional direct-radiator microphones.

Quote:
Are there any conventional graphs for frequency response and polar patterns?
Given the way in which frequency response graphs are 'massaged', averaged, smoothed and then rendered at very low visual resolution, and given the further fact that the Model A is designed to be calibrated, there is little point presenting a frequency response graph. This would be an almost worthless graph, as I'm sure anybody would be quick to point out.

Polar plots would be more useful perhaps to illustrate the rather unusual polar response where pickup is essentially flat 'on-pattern' and 'not at all' 'off-pattern' and also the transition to omni below the acoustically active range, but at this time I choose not to publish them for several proprietary-design reasons and don't feel that the end-user is at any great disadvantage in the absence.

Quote:
IMHO trying to find the reason in people's playback systems and playback SPL will not lead to any revelation.
Given the general lack of awareness of equal loudness in the industry, I don't agree with this.

Regarding playback systems in general, the state of the mastering industry alone is evidence enough of the complete defecit of common understanding of mechanical/acoustic factors.

For example, where we see a speaker which is over-damped between 4k-5k, and an under-damped (resonant) microphone in the same area, the overall impression is likely to be of 'compensation' in spectral terms.

In this case the resulting sound quality will be significantly unnatural from both the microphone resonance and the limited dynamics of the speaker, despite the apparently ideal frequency response of the system as a whole.

Quote:
I don't believe this can possibly succeed, at least not in a room/hall with any kind of natural ambience... Unless you move the mics up really close, your mics will capture this ambience/reverb, and speaker playback in the same acoustics will add more ambience and make reproduction easily discernible from the original. And if you move the mics right up, you won't likely get the "natural" sound you're after.
In my experience, the most critical factor in this test is simply the mechanical error performance of the microphone & speaker (which is dictated by acoustic impedance).

In other words, if we can present a reproduction with a low enough mechanical error, minor spectral differences will be perceived as nothing more than real sources with different spectral qualities.

On the other hand, if we present a reproduction with perfectly matched frequency response but with greater mechanical error the end result is that the source does not sound real, regardless of the ideal frequency domain.

In the same way, minor differences in reverb content are of little issue, as long as the essential mechanical performance is convincing.

To illustrate this idea, let's consider the case of reproduction of a single violin, in a space similar to that of my chamber recording.

In this case, on comparison between the source and the reproduction, if both sources are perceived as 'real' due to the lack of significant mechanical error, then without intimate knowledge of the violin itself, we cannot know which is real and which is not.

If there are differences in the amount of reverb, we will most likely perceive them, but not necessarily will we perceive this as a sign of an un-real source as much as simply a 'difference'.

In this case we can describe the differences, but we will likely perceive them as two different violins.

Andy
Old 6th September 2008
  #44
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corran View Post
Andy, if you were to guess, what kind of frequency response do you think your mics would have? Also, I believe you mentioned that they had something close to a cardioid pickup pattern, right? If not, what do you think the polar pattern would be?

It intrigues me, because to me the "perfect microphone" would be one in which the frequency response is flat as possible at all distances and angles and picked up sound generally like your ears (so, maybe two mics in A-B with a Jecklin disc, though I don't have a J-disc so I usually get by with an ORTF pair and an A-B pair mixed to get that balance between instruments and room). This is my "reasoning" for using Earthworks mics (self-noise be damned, I can fix that in the computer).

Also, is it only because you have a horn stuck on the end of the mic that you really suggest having a horn-driven speaker play back the recording? I could understand that, but then, I would wonder what your mics would sound like sans-horn.
I think probably these points are answered in my previous reply to Daniel.

With regards to the 'perfect' microphone - as mentioned above, I consider mechanical performance to be of primary significance.

I don't suggest playback with horn-loaded speakers for anything other than ideal/maximum performance.

Reproduction on direct-radiators will not suffer any more than with conventional microphones.

To listen to the microphone with the acoustic loading (horn) removed is to drive a turbo-charged car with the turbo disconnected.

Andy
Old 6th September 2008
  #45
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
I'm not sure that he has sold any, but I am convinced that he won't sell any at that money, the samples posted at the begining of this thread slound "live" but that in my opinion is down to the midrange colouration I heard, probably a function of the horn, someone, on a previous thread, mentioned that they needed an correction curve applied to the raw signal to make them....
If you make even a cursory study of the design you will understand how there can be no colouration as a result of the 'horn' (not least in consideration of the planar propagation in question).

Regarding the calibration post-equalisation, you will need to recognise the difference between the time-domain & frequency domain in order to understand this.

Quote:
usable, however, typical of this kind of product there are a lot of claims and no technical data and measurements to back them up. As I mentioned earlier in the thread despite Andy's claims about preserving depth perspective this particular recording seems to have no perspective and the claims about using a pair of Mackie SR450's for reproduction IMHO can't be taken seriously.
As I have described above, I use the Mackie SRM450 for its mechanical performance, which is close enough to ideal.

While they have minor issues (noise-floor for example), they are high-output, portable, clean and robust.

As I have said before, these speakers have gone through various revisions and the earlist (RCA driver) version is the only suitable version. I have no idea which version you have heard.

Regardless, these speakers are deceptively well designed and will drastically outperform ANY direct-radiators, especially with Model A recordings.

Andy
Old 6th September 2008
  #46
0VU
Gear Addict
 

um.......incredible

Or incredulous

Or both.
Old 6th September 2008
  #47
Lives for gear
 

+1

Quote:
Originally Posted by 0VU View Post
um.......incredible

Or incredulous

Or both.
Andy, I think at some point you'll have to realize that people are different one from another, and all from you.

I think you're a bit stuck on the "one best way," and that is fine, but realize it will be the "one best way, or approach, or microphone, or playback system" for YOU.

If you are waiting for the world to say that your way and your gear are the best, I'm afraid you'll be waiting for a very long time.

If there was a "best," there might not be any room in the world for you and/or your gear.

So I think it best if you allow room for others and their gear.
Old 6th September 2008
  #48
Gear Maniac
 
RichS's Avatar
 

I'm waiting for the Model B, hopefully without the "midrange colouration" problem.
Old 7th September 2008
  #49
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichS View Post
I'm waiting for the Model B, hopefully without the "midrange colouration" problem.
What I have been trying to say is that if you don't like the calibration applied in my sample recordings you can simply calibrate the Model A to your taste/monitors - that is the freedom of improved mechanical performance.

My samples are calibrated to best match in direct comparison, using high-powered horn-speakers. This calibration may or may not suit your application/monitors/taste.

In fact, the Model A is now sold with personal delivery/training & on-site calibration (which is part of the high cost shown in the revised pricing) and can be calibrated/voiced to any specification and for any specific application.

When I deliver mics to a client, if I don't manage to calibrate the mics to the total satisfaction of the client I will waive the cost entirely and leave the mics free of charge.

Andy
Old 7th September 2008
  #50
Gear Maniac
 
Chris Wilson's Avatar
Before this thread, I was unaware that a market for a product/service like this could exist.

The couple people I know who record movie scores (orchestras and BIG budgets) who get to work in familiar and very good sounding locations might be the target clientele for mics like these.

I on the other hand, drag my stuff all over the city, and usually work in less than perfect rooms. Even if I had a $32,000 pair of mics, I personally wouldn't take them to a job that is paying at most $300.

Perhaps these mics are the hottest thing since the Brazilian wax, and perhaps someday we'll all have cathedrals to calibrate our equipment to, but for now, most of us are not Mr. Simpson's target clientele.

I'll probably never even see a pair of these in real life, but anyone who can pull this off certainly has my respect.

Congratulations Andy
Old 7th September 2008
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Corran's Avatar
 

I must say that, while I generally like the recordings that Andy puts up, even if these were the end-all-be-all of microphones I'd still never pay that much, personally.
Old 7th September 2008
  #52
Gear Maniac
 
RichS's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichS View Post
I'm waiting for the Model B, hopefully without the "midrange colouration" problem.
Andy,
Sorry... next time I'll be sure use one of these "" so you can tell I was just leaving a "smart-ass" comment and not necessarily a criticism of your mic's.

Your samples were interesting in that they sound more like what I experience as an early music vocal soloist standing in the midst of an instrument ensemble as opposed to listening from the audience position. It's something I noticed almost immediately, but wouldn't necessarily want in my recordings.

The one thing in your reply that caught my attention was that "the Model A...can be calibrated/voiced to any specification and for any specific application."

Are you saying there's a mechanical or electronic adjustment performed on the mic's at delivery? Can this adjustment drift over time or because of physical wear? What happens when I use different audio chains for mixing and mastering. Given the very nature of location recording, how can you possibly calibrate for an optimum acoustic response or application?

Not to be a "smart-ass" again, but I can buy 8 or 9 assorted matched pairs of Schoeps and a damn fine mastering EQ for the cost of one of your pairs.

Hmmm... I guess I just don't get it.

RichS
Old 8th September 2008
  #53
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Wilson View Post
Before this thread, I was unaware that a market for a product/service like this could exist.

The couple people I know who record movie scores (orchestras and BIG budgets) who get to work in familiar and very good sounding locations might be the target clientele for mics like these.
Actually, for simply mechanical reasons this is the ideal application because of the type of speakers found in the cinema theatre.

For example, if you visit the THX website you can find a list of certified theatre speakers, where without exception you will find horn-loaded (high-output) speakers.

As you will find if you take any of my sample recordings to a theatre, these speakers offer the ideal mechanical-acoustic performance and stand to benefit the most from the technology.

In this application there are other benefits aside from a general improvement in sound-quality, such as greatly reduced ear fatigue - which any dubbing/scoring stage engineer can tell you is a problem when using conventional microphones with these speakers.

Actually, with my microphones, this type of speaker will result in less fatiguing presentation compared with matched (RMS) SPL using direct-radiator speakers & microphones - which can make life easier for the lengthy projects that are common in this industry.

Andy
Old 8th September 2008
  #54
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichS View Post
Your samples were interesting in that they sound more like what I experience as an early music vocal soloist standing in the midst of an instrument ensemble as opposed to listening from the audience position. It's something I noticed almost immediately, but wouldn't necessarily want in my recordings.
This is the product of the mechanical advantage I mentioned previously.

With regards to the perspective of the recording - well, this is of course a question of taste. Had there been no audience at the recording I would possibly have taken a more distant 'audience' perspective.

Quote:
The one thing in your reply that caught my attention was that "the Model A...can be calibrated/voiced to any specification and for any specific application."

Are you saying there's a mechanical or electronic adjustment performed on the mic's at delivery? Can this adjustment drift over time or because of physical wear? What happens when I use different audio chains for mixing and mastering. Given the very nature of location recording, how can you possibly calibrate for an optimum acoustic response or application?
The calibration I mentioned involves mastering quality linear-phase software and depends on several factors including electrical: mic-amp/cable length/etc, acoustic: environmental factors/placement height/width/etc and subjective: equal loudness/personal taste/blind-test, etc.

For example, a client may on one hand wish to use the mics with a v76 for close-mic vocals with a spectral response close to a u47 or 251 and on the other hand he may want 'blind-test quality' recording of classical music.

In this case, the two different applications would require different calibration for optimal results.

For a further example, the client may have specific requirements with regards to equal loudness (playback SPL) - such as equal loudness related calibration for high-SPL cinema or low SPL consumer use.

Specifically, the mics are calibrated to sound 'ideal' to the client for each application, via whichever monitors he choses to use as reference.

Quote:
Not to be a "smart-ass" again, but I can buy 8 or 9 assorted matched pairs of Schoeps and a damn fine mastering EQ for the cost of one of your pairs.
Sure and where economy is the key factor this would be a sensible option.

However, if performance is the most important factor, no amount of conventional direct-radiator mics with any amount of EQ will be able to compete.

Andy
Old 8th September 2008
  #55
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_simpson View Post
Actually, for simply mechanical reasons this is the ideal application because of the type of speakers found in the cinema theatre.

For example, if you visit the THX website you can find a list of certified theatre speakers, where without exception you will find horn-loaded (high-output) speakers.

As you will find if you take any of my sample recordings to a theatre, these speakers offer the ideal mechanical-acoustic performance and stand to benefit the most from the technology.

In this application there are other benefits aside from a general improvement in sound-quality, such as greatly reduced ear fatigue - which any dubbing/scoring stage engineer can tell you is a problem when using conventional microphones with these speakers.

Actually, with my microphones, this type of speaker will result in less fatiguing presentation compared with matched (RMS) SPL using direct-radiator speakers & microphones - which can make life easier for the lengthy projects that are common in this industry.

Andy
Sorry Andy, but this is complete BS!

Horn loaded speakers are used in Movie theatres for purely practical reasons. Effectively it's a PA system and horns provide more efficiency in a situation where higher SPL's are required in larger rooms, of course they are also more efficient budget wise too (a major consideration for any movie theatre). Sound quality in many theatres is good to fair, IMHO THX certification is more a marketing tool than any real standard, point is that you can buy THX certified home equipment for a few hundred dollars, this stuff is hardly state of the art.

Orchestral recordings for films often have slightly different requirements than standard recordings for CD, not least is the dynamic range is deliberately manipulated for the requirements of the action rather than to reproduce the "full" dynamic range of the players.

If the point you made about recording with horn loaded microphones really represented what they required they would have beaten a path to your door to at least trial your mic's if not purchase them. When I see films at the cinema I don't hear the so called problems you say exist, to be frank, orchestra's for film scoring sessions are usually quite heavily miked to offer more textural options at the mixing stage to re-enforce the dramatic effect they require.

I again dispute your claim that horns are uncoloured, if they weren't you wouldn't need a corrective curve in order to get the sound. PZM's are worked on a pressure gradieted system, however they haven't come close to knocking out everything that went before them.

I've listened carefully to your clips, and whilst some of the recordings have some merit, I don't find that they are without issue, in terms of sonics, balance and perspective, certainly to my ears, they don't produce standards above what I am used to using pretty proprietary microphones (DPA, Schoeps, Neumann, Sennheiser etc) that I am used too. Your description of their mounting and usage would make them difficult to integrate into a normal session. Now factor in your price structure, it's a no brainer. You seem to have generally side stepped the issue, but tell me, how many have you actually sold? Who (that I would reasonably respect) has bought them and what commercial projects are they actually been used for?

As interesting as I have found your concept, I have seen these kind of products before in this industry and unfortunately almost to a fault they fail to generate sustainable sales. If you are really interested in horns, I would suggest there was far more market in the speaker end for audiophiles, perhaps you should start your own esoteric recording label, based on your techniques?


Regards



Roland
Old 8th September 2008
  #56
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
Sorry Andy, but this is complete BS!
Roland - sometimes I'm not sure if I am Batman and you are the Joker or if it's the other way around.... :-)

Quote:
Horn loaded speakers are used in Movie theatres for purely practical reasons. Effectively it's a PA system and horns provide more efficiency in a situation where higher SPL's are required in larger rooms, of course they are also more efficient budget wise too (a major consideration for any movie theatre).
I never said that horn-loaded speakers are used in cinema theatres BECAUSE OF the mechanical performance - only that they ARE USED (for reasons you have stated) and therefore represent the ideal playback performance.

Quote:
I again dispute your claim that horns are uncoloured, if they weren't you wouldn't need a corrective curve in order to get the sound. PZM's are worked on a pressure gradieted system, however they haven't come close to knocking out everything that went before them.
Clearly, you still don't understand the concept - if you are really interested, please study wave propagation in the context of the horn, from both planar (incoming - microphone) & spherical (outgoing - speaker) perspective. There is significant difference here that is critical.

Also, let us be clear about what we call 'colouration' - this is a vague term at best.

If, by colouration, we are talking about time-domain distortion (eg. resonance) - this cannot be corrected with equalisation.

An example of this would be diaphragm resonance or even reverb.

Or, if we are talking about frequency domain performance which is unrelated to time-domain distortion - this is the category into which falls the Model A - then this is entirely correctable with EQ, and in the case of linear-phase EQ it is corrected without penalty.

Andy
Old 8th September 2008
  #57
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
I never said that horn-loaded speakers are used in cinema theatres BECAUSE OF the mechanical performance - only that they ARE USED (for reasons you have stated) and therefore represent the ideal playback performance.
I would argue that for these reason's they don't represent the ideal, just what is practical to achieve given a reasonable budget, this is a slightly different take on it.



Quote:
Clearly, you still don't understand the concept - if you are really interested, please study wave propagation in the context of the horn, from both planar (incoming - microphone) & spherical (outgoing - speaker) perspective. There is significant difference here that is critical.

Also, let us be clear about what we call 'colouration' - this is a vague term at best.

If, by colouration, we are talking about time-domain distortion (eg. resonance) - this cannot be corrected with equalisation.

An example of this would be diaphragm resonance or even reverb.

Or, if we are talking about frequency domain performance which is unrelated to time-domain distortion - this is the category into which falls the Model A - then this is entirely correctable with EQ, and in the case of linear-phase EQ it is corrected without penalty.
Many horns today (and I'm talking about from a speaker perspective) have wave guides (phase plugs, whatever you like to call them) to minimize the distortion caused by the reflections in the horn flare, indeed I notice from the pictures on your website, a similar device on the model A. My contention is that these minimize the issues, but do not completely resolve them. The fact is that I don't think that the samples of the model A you have posted sound without colouration, for example the strings on the orchestral examples have a slightly "odd" quality. Playing these back on a high powered PA system is not going to negate that.

I'm still interested to hear who is using your mic's and what commercial projects have they been used for.

Regards


Roland
Old 9th September 2008
  #58
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
I would argue that for these reason's they don't represent the ideal, just what is practical to achieve given a reasonable budget, this is a slightly different take on it.
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear - I meant 'ideal mechanical performance', which is not related to anything other than acoustic loading.

We can consider that the theatre speakers are mechanically ideal purely by chance or fate, it makes no difference.

Quote:
Many horns today (and I'm talking about from a speaker perspective) have wave guides (phase plugs, whatever you like to call them) to minimize the distortion caused by the reflections in the horn flare, indeed I notice from the pictures on your website, a similar device on the model A. My contention is that these minimize the issues, but do not completely resolve them. The fact is that I don't think that the samples of the model A you have posted sound without colouration, for example the strings on the orchestral examples have a slightly "odd" quality. Playing these back on a high powered PA system is not going to negate that.
As I mentioned previously, the propagation issues of the loudspeaker stem from the fact that it deals with outgoing spherical propagation.

This is fundamentally different to the microphone, which to all intents & purposes deals only with incoming planar propagating sound.

In other words, it is not possible to have reflection issues in the microphone because of the nature of the incoming sound waves - which can only be planar (the previously mentioned cursory study of the design will illustrate this).

With regards to 'phase-plugs' - this term does not apply whatsoever to microphones.

The 'central spur' of the Model A is there for purely acoustic impedance geometry reasons, which are proprietary, not to 'correct reflection issues' which cannot occur.

Andy
Old 12th September 2008
  #59
Lives for gear
 

I just added a couple of further samples from the concert to my server:

Ensemble clip C
Ensemble clip D

I think somebody asked who the composers were: - Arcangelo Corelli & Antonio Caldara.

Andy
Old 12th September 2008
  #60
Gear Guru
 
Ethan Winer's Avatar
 

Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_simpson View Post
Last week I was recording an Early Music chamber concert as part of my field testing program in a gothic church in Eastern Poland. On arrival at the venue it was immediately apparent that the acoustic was almost ideal in terms of spectral balance/decay.
I just spotted this thread and thought I'd comment briefly on these samples. On my JBL 4430s these recordings sound amazingly realistic, like you're right there. These speakers are the large "old-style" JBLs, bi-amped, with a 15 inch woofer and bi-radial horn. I haven't listened on the near-fields in my living room system yet, but on my big JBL speakers this is one of the most "convincing" recordings I've ever heard.

--Ethan
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
0VU / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
18
Manozi / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
30
bove / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
9
mikehc / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
8
hannaent / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
5

Forum Jump
Forum Jump