Townsend Sphere

I have. The reason I haven't talked about it is I haven't used it enough, and know enough about it or any of my mics for that matter, to speak definitively about it in a forum like this. 

I like it. I use it with a silver Apollo Twin, although you can use other mic pre's. The mic itself is good enough to make a release quality recording with. I've only used it so far in its main intended purpose, to record a 360º raw sound field for the Sphere modeling software. I haven't used it as a point source stereo mic, which you can also do.

The mic itself sounds good, but clicking through the modeled mics post recording lets you quickly find one that flatters your source and gets you into the ballpark of how it will sound in the mix. I don't have enough experience with the mics that are modeled to tell how close the Sphere gets to them, but none sound bad. So far on my voice, I tend to like the vintage 87 and one of the three flavors of AKG 414 on my voice the best, before any EQ added. Townsend just added a bunch of new mics to the software, including some Soyuz mics. Haven't tried 'em yet, but I could go back and try them on vocals I've already recorded. You probably wouldn't use the Sphere to model a mic you already own, but if you don't own one, you can get the flavor of it with the Sphere. Using it might give you some insight into which mics work well in a particular situation.

It's really cool to be able to change the pickup pattern of any mic after the fact, since all the data has been recorded and preserved by the Sphere mic on two tracks, although the processed track is essentially a mono track. I think this could be really useful in an ensemble recording situation. I record by myself just about all the time at home, but you can control how much room you want and also the proximity effect as well at any point in time.

It's a unique and useful tool. I think some people are using them daily, and it might be the thing for a small home studio situation to cover a lot of bases. I can't compare it to the Slate mic, never seen or used it. But the front/back recording of the Sphere makes it unique in the modeling arena. I don't know what's out there to demo or listen to it, but the tech is impressive. 

I have one, but similarly to donr, I haven’t used it enough to form a strong opinion. When I first got it, I spent a few days shooting it out with a few mid-priced ($500-1500) mics, and the clean recordings before any modeling or processing fared favorably - clean, articulate, no Chinese-capsule high end issues - I wouldn’t hesitate using it as a main mic in a production.

The modeling software is way useful and makes the mic endlessly versatile. I hadn’t used any of the vintage mics they modeled so I can’t compare how well it nails the tone, but the models sounds great and different from one another. The post-recording variable pickup pattern selector is awesome and helpful during mix time.

I’d say it’s a solid contender for mics in the $1000+ range, and the versatility is something special (you can use it as a stereo mic). For someone who likes having options or only has a few mics, you can’t go wrong.

That being said, I quickly learned that having all those options slowed my creative process down, and I prefer simplicity. After I got my REDD and a couple old UM70s, the Sphere hasn’t left its case.

I’d say that depends on if you’re someone who likes having flexibility post-recording. The beauty of the modeling software is you can get creative and transform the base recording during mix time without touching an EQ. Too much proximity effect? Change the polar pattern. Too much/not enough room? Change the polar pattern. Not happy with the overall tonal footprint? Too much highend? Wrong kind of midrange character? Change the mic models. The kind of changes you can make go beyond frequency balance, you can really alter the character of the recording. It’s a great tool if you like keeping your options open come mix time.