I’m also very interested in a review from someone that has used this mic.

At AES last month, there were a number of interesting presentations about ambisonic microphones. One of the most interesting to me was from Univ of Rochester where I had the opportunity to ask how the recordings from the ambisonic mics compared with the ones they were making simultaneously with a Neumann binaural head. The professor responded that the ambisonic microphone did not have good frequency response in the low end when compared to the binaural. Upon further questioning, he couldn’t determine whether this was an issue with the capsules, the processing, or what. They were using the Eigenmike in this comparison.

This really surprised me because the whole idea that they were presenting was an effort to make accurate archival recordings and provide good audio for live-streams of classical concerts at Eastman. Inferior frequency response is a huge negative in this situation and something that I had not heard about previously.

Does anyone else with experience using ambisonic microphones have frequency response-related feedback that you can share about these mics? I’m immediately turned off by this poor frequency response and am hoping that I simply misunderstood the professor.

I have the Rode mic and I will shortly have Zylia pro as well. I will do a Comparison. For nów I like Rode but I do get the need for Higher order mic, hence the Zylia.

Any news about the comparison - and your general experience with the Røde Soundfield?

::
Mads

https://www.minidsp.com/products/aco...ment/ambimik-1

Here is a recently available Soundfield microphone for $349. Cheapest I'm aware of. Haven't used them, but wonder if they weren't good enough for someone wishing to try out this type microphone before spending the big bucks. USB as well so all you need is this and a laptop.

imo the schoeps double m/s array outperforms any typical 4-capsule, first order ambisonic mic array.

This is very interesting. Do you have any short clips of recordings you've done with the double M/S?

I've been meaning to use my Lewitt LCT640TS for some double MS recordings. It lets you choose the pattern after the fact. So I could actually be using the same microphone for the front and rear cardioid. And then use a figure 8 side to side achieving double MS with only 2 microphones. This way there is no positional difference in the front and rear channels.

Or, use one MKH30 and one MKH800 Twin to roll your own double MS.

To my ears, none of ready made ambisonic microphone sounds any good. The inherit sonic quality of the capsules used in those ambisonic microphones are simply not good enough. I am happy to stand correct on this statement but until that day comes ambisonic is nothing but gimmick.

So yes, I could use the $1300 and $4300 pair of microphones in place of my pair of $900 microphones. I even assume it would sound better (though both mics you list are noisier).

I don't play in that elevated class of microphones unfortunately. $5600 vs $1800 isn't quite apples to oranges.

The LCT640TS btw functions exactly as the MKH800 twin does. Back to back capsules that can be used individually for remote or after the fact control of patterns. The Senns are .5 inch vs 1 inch and I expect much better off axis response from them versus the Lewitts.

Your reply does clarify your meaning. Not so much double MS is inherently better, but that soundfield mics have poor capsules in them. I've never used any myself and plenty of others have said the same thing.

Fine, use a decent figure 8 plus two cardioids placed back to back of your less expensive choice. Frankly, anything is better than ready made ambisonic crap. I heard most of them, they all sound horrible.

personally, i prefer sdc's for mains and specifically mics with mostly linear frequency response, hence i prefer mics from schoeps over ldc's from akg, neumann, austrian audio and lewitt but also the mkh twin mics. another advantage of double m/s using but three capsules is preamp/channel/track count, yet another is size/weight, especially with the new cmc1L (which i haven't bought yet though)

i do not post clips as i do not own the rights of any music i'm recording/mixing/mastering.

___


i do not agree that other ambisonic mics sound 'horrible'; i like the relatively affordable sps-200 quite a bit; i wish i had the digital soundfield mic or that neumann would have come up with an ambisonic mic using the capsule from the d-01...

I previously owned a Soundfield MKV and it sounded very good but not quite as good as separate high quality mics eg mKH8040 XY 90. However, I now have a Soundfield DSF-1 (has an improved preamp/processor with digital design by “The” Dave Hill).
To my ear, it sounds equal in quality to my Sennheiser MKH8040/8050/30 mics and I routinely use it for my “Main pair” with a small amount of Josephson C617 omni’s 2ft spaced.

It’s a shame that Sennheiser didn’t make a “Soundfield” type mic using MKH capsules instead of the Ambeo mic.

Glad to hear the positive movement. Could you share some recording samples?

It all boils down the the price I guess. If Sennheiser had used 4 MKH type capsules, the mic would have costed $5000.00+the decoding box. $7K, perhaps?

That makes MKH30/MKH800Twin double MS setup a bargain.

Agree. An MKH type arrangement with Sennheiser's RF tech could be a marked improvement. One wonders if Rode will see an opportunity to do that instead?

I got off the ambisonic train a couple of years ago. The future seems to be in higher order arrays. Although a spaced omni or near coincident setup delivers better, or at least more pleasing spatial reproduction to my ears (on headphones). None of these mics can reproduce time of arrival differences.

With that said, wasn't it Priory Records who famously did their organ recordings with a Soundfield? Also there's the Nimbus-Halliday/Native B-format setup used on their releases.

Yes, Dseeto I will post some samples of the the DSF-1.Give me a few days, as I am busy with rehearsals for a livestream.

Looking forward to it.

I've been alternating dual MS and native horizontal array with MKH mics, either (2) MKH30 and an MKH20 or MKH800 Twin and an MKH30. Both very good, no definite preference yet, and I like to have AB omni outriggers along with as much as possible. My use tends to be amplified music in theaters and clubs with sound reinforcement, many times blending with multitrack stage feeds. Sometimes shotguns are useful too.

My Josephson c700s sounds pretty damn good as an ambisonic mic, albeit horizontal only! But yeah, most of them aren't very good. And as far as being a gimmick, for people working in 360 video like myself, ambisonic mics are by far the best solution right now for acquiring quality spatial audio during a 360 shoot.

Different horses for different courses, I guess.

Someone posted some 360 degree video of an orchestra performing on the stage. The sound sort of tracks the viewing angle of your own choosing.(Interactive) The concept is intriguing but the audio quality was god awful. It made me wanted to puke. Gimmicky was the only word I could use to describe the experience. Zero redeeming quality as far as I am concerned when it comes to music enjoinment.

Ha, yeah, I know the video you are referring to, and the sound quality truly is terrible - just because you can do something doesn't mean you should!

But have you ever watched a higher quality piece in a VR headset? Head-tracking in a headset makes a tremendous difference in the quality of your overall experience, and spatial audio is a must for some of the projects I've worked on. We attach ambisonic microphones to 360 camera rigs, some even mounted on gimbals in extreme environments that most people would never experience. Even a lesser ambisonic mic is much better than camera audio or a stereo pair in these situations.

All that being said, I had a fantastic job for 3 years producing audio and video for Virtual Reality, and a large reason I got the job was that I was doing this kind of work with a c700s while other people were using terrible mics, so mine stood out well above the rest. The c700s is a brilliant mic no matter how you use it, and it sounds very good even in ambisonics.

C 700S is not an Ambisonic microphone. It only does horizontal plane, as far as I can tell.

It sounds good because it uses Pro grade capsules. And it isn't cheap. The list price is about the same as two MKH800Twins. With two Twins, you can do both horizontal as well as vertical, to form a real Ambisonic toy.

While the c700s wasn't designed or sold as an ambisonic mic per se, and is horizontal only (as I said before), it is still a native B-format, ambisonic microphone that can be used directly with any number of b-format ambisonic encoders. You don't need any special converters or tools because it is indeed a b-format ambisonic microphone. I've owned one for 5 years and have used it on hundreds of ambisonic recordings around the world and delivered dozens of pieces in 1st to 7th order ambisonics for Virtual Reality headsets and domes. It can easily be upsampled to 3rd or 7th order using Blue Ripple Sound's Harpex Upsampler or the more recent AALTO / SPARTA compass upmixer. Considering that the vast majority of people cannot discern height information in binaural decodings from ambisonics without a custom HRTF, and none of the consumer headsets support those, the fact that the c700s doesn't record height information is not that important when it comes to delivering spatial audio experiences for actual consumers. The biggest downside to the c700s in the field is the form factor, which is difficult to use alongside many 360 cameras - double MKH800 Twins would be even harder to work with, but for controlled shoots in a studio or concert hall, I'm sure it would sound fantastic. The c700s isn't cheap, but for me it's been an invaluable tool that literally changed my professional career, and hence my life. For the price I paid, I could have purchased a Soundfield, but chose the c700s instead for reasons you would probably appreciate - the superior sound quality of the capsules.

Actually, a friend of mine just posted about a recording he did using the Sennheiser "AmbeoCube" - using MKH800 Twins:

https://www.schallgeber.com/symphony...PFLRavgWnc6es8

https://en-us.sennheiser.com/ambeo-b...s-loudspeakers

I am not auguring the validity of the C700S. On the contrary, I am glad it is working out so well for you and your work. I heard the samples of recorded sound from C700S and it does sound very good. First class.


However, I was pointing out the fact that on its own, it would be hard to give the listener a true sense of VR experience if the presentation would to provide the listener with the ability to move his head up and down and have the sound to track the movement. For that, you do need a true Ambisonic system, at least in theory.

I'm failing to see how it's possible. Please describe. I'm not seeing a way to get WXY and Z out of two.

I find the Josephson C700S an exceptionally beautiful microphone. You don't have the Z plane (to record the ceiling and the floor), but apart from that, you can use it for Ambisonics. I like its sound better than that of my Sounfield MkV.

Sorry dseeto for the delay, but here’s an example of the Soundfield DSF-1 decoded to Blumlein vs 3’ spaced pair of Josephson C617’s. I will try to find more examples for you.

Another Goldberg Variation

It is a damn pity that Rode never partnered with either Zoom or Sound Devices (or any other field recorder company) to get their B Format decoding for the NT-SF1 built in.

Thank you for the link.

I ma sorry, but there is no directional microphone can compete with the sound of omni C617. I don't understand why one would even bother to get involved with a microphone that sounds like that of DSF-1.



Da-Hong