|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 20, 2016 20:56:06 GMT -6
Haven't listened yet, but here you go.
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Aug 22, 2016 14:44:20 GMT -6
it sounds good. Can't hear a difference on drums or guitar. On the voice, you can hear a difference, but it's real subtle. Here's hoping we see a Slate v. Townsend shootout after the Townsend mic is released.
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Aug 22, 2016 15:37:41 GMT -6
Slate should send me a pair to make a whole record with. Actually--maybe THAT answers my question--see, I've been looking for some way to make a "completely digital" type production....ie, everything in headphones....everything software--amp models, bass DI, piano/key samples/VIs, fake drums obviously....mixed all inside software with no hybrid anything....but, I was sort of stuck on what do do on the front end for the vocals/acoustic guitar....do I do them both with the Sm7 some inexpensive used channel? New channel? Not an interface preamp--I'm not trying to make it sounds BAD.....quite the opposite....
Maybe this would make the perfect companion for that project. I DID see they made an M269 model.....no? Bring it on!
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Aug 22, 2016 21:10:04 GMT -6
lol if he sends you a pair, he should send all of us a pair!
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 22, 2016 22:18:40 GMT -6
I can hear the difference in most clips on my laptop. As chuck mentioned, it's subtle, but it's there. That's not too encouraging. The virtual mic is "in the zone" - kinda, but in the zone is not going to make me go out and buy one....
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 22, 2016 23:35:26 GMT -6
I can hear the difference in most clips on my laptop. As chuck mentioned, it's subtle, but it's there. That's not too encouraging. The virtual mic is "in the zone" - kinda, but in the zone is not going to make me go out and buy one.... I haven't listened to the clips yet but VMS is going to need to be in a different league than the other Slate software models (which is to say software modeling in general because I think Slate does it as good as anyone) for me to bite.
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Aug 23, 2016 0:30:46 GMT -6
I can hear the difference in most clips on my laptop. As chuck mentioned, it's subtle, but it's there. That's not too encouraging. The virtual mic is "in the zone" - kinda, but in the zone is not going to make me go out and buy one.... It'll make those thousands of bedroom producers buy one tho, because they can't afford the real thing or even a clone made by Shannon or another mic builder tho. Steven has a hit on his hands in that regard. His target demographic is not guys like you, drbill
|
|
|
Post by donr on Aug 23, 2016 7:14:48 GMT -6
Would two 47's and two 1073 pres sound identical? Are the mic's and pre compared the very ones used to model the VMS?
The natural suspicion is there's something of a Hollywood backlot quality to the virtual version. You're being asked to buy a shape shifter. It doesn't seem to be a bad value. I crowd-funded the Townsend 3D mic because that tech seems truly revolutionary and it was designed to work with hardware I already have. I'm a sucker for innovative products. I still have Tom Scholz rack stuff from the '80's. The 'Clean2' sound is unique.
|
|
|
Post by kilroyrock on Aug 23, 2016 7:21:29 GMT -6
My neighbor sweats the slate. He really really really wants a Tube mic but refuses to buy anything that would be less than 7k, so he never gets one. He is gassing hard for the slate mic system. I just don't like buying into software that you can't resell later. It's my gripe with plugins too.
|
|
|
Post by 79sg on Aug 23, 2016 7:39:30 GMT -6
The problem is when you don't buy the real thing you will always remain wanting for it. This leads to nothing more than wasted time and money. Save some money, buy the right tool the first time and move on. I understand not everyone will be able to do this, so why not just rent the gear when you need it and not wonder if "it's close enough"? Only listened on my laptop so far but to my sophomoric ears the models sound thinner than the originals.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 23, 2016 10:17:51 GMT -6
These are close enough that I bet I'd fail a blind ABX. But I don't trust it any further than I can throw it. I don't really think Slate's a crook or there's funny business going on, but when users post their own comparisons with the VMS, it's never this close. Usually, one sounds like a mic and one sounds like a plugin. Who knows though. Maybe it's the user demos that are the misleading ones and Slate's is a truer comparison.
I'd love to be wrong, it would be amazing if VMS (or something like it) really delivered. I've just compared too many software emulations to their hardware counterparts to be a real believer at this point.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 23, 2016 10:19:37 GMT -6
Would two 47's and two 1073 pres sound identical? Probably not. But you would hope they both sound great. I can't put my finger on it, but the digitals sounded....well, kinda digital. They have that "thing" that separates reality from forgery. Often it's difficult to discern it in a short clip - and those were SHORT, but after using it for awhile it leaves you cold. I can almost guarantee I'd be left cold using this VMS thing and virtual pre's. I can hear it. It's in the air that surrounds the real thing vs the emulation. Hard to explain, but that's the best way I can describe it. One thing that I think would have helped make this a better test would have been to use a REAL 1073 instead of his emulation. That might have brought things closer and - for me - would have been a better test, but I understand why they did it the way they did. Gotta brace up that branding and product line..... Anyway, I'm sure many people will put this to good use. But it's not going to kill large mic lockers or the vintage mic mania....
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 23, 2016 10:26:08 GMT -6
These are close enough that I bet I'd fail a blind ABX. Perhaps. But blind ABX tests are not what runs a session. If I put a singer up in front of a beautifully restored 67 / 47 / c12 I get a different respect and performance from them as compared to what I get from them with a chinese mic, clone or emulation software. Same thing with a vintage Rhodes, or a classic Martin guitar. We are human beings, not robots. We respond positively to tools that inspire us.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 23, 2016 10:28:53 GMT -6
These are close enough that I bet I'd fail a blind ABX. Perhaps. But blind ABX tests are not what runs a session. If I put a singer up in front of a beautifully restored 67 / 47 / c12 I get a different respect and performance from them as compared to what I get from them with a chinese mic, clone or emulation software. Same thing with a vintage Rhodes, or a classic Martin guitar. We are human beings, not robots. We respond positively to tools that inspire us. Absolutely. And if you've got clients to impress/coax-good-tracks-out-of, that's a reasonable consideration. If you just want the sonics, it's another ballgame. But again, I'm not a believer (in the sonics) at this point.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Aug 23, 2016 10:30:30 GMT -6
Would two 47's and two 1073 pres sound identical? Probably not. But you would hope they both sound great. I can't put my finger on it, but the digitals sounded....well, kinda digital. They have that "thing" that separates reality from forgery. Often it's difficult to discern it in a short clip - and those were SHORT, but after using it for awhile it leaves you cold. I can almost guarantee I'd be left cold using this VMS thing and virtual pre's. I can hear it. It's in the air that surrounds the real thing vs the emulation. Hard to explain, but that's the best way I can describe it. One thing that I think would have helped make this a better test would have been to use a REAL 1073 instead of his emulation. That might have brought things closer and - for me - would have been a better test, but I understand why they did it the way they did. Gotta brace up that branding and product line..... Anyway, I'm sure many people will put this to good use. But it's not going to kill large mic lockers or the vintage mic mania.... Well, also the preamp emulations are part of the product you're buying with VMS. If I was thinking of purchasing the VMS and they just showed me how half the product stood up and left the other half out, I'd be shaking my head.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 23, 2016 10:57:58 GMT -6
Probably not. But you would hope they both sound great. I can't put my finger on it, but the digitals sounded....well, kinda digital. They have that "thing" that separates reality from forgery. Often it's difficult to discern it in a short clip - and those were SHORT, but after using it for awhile it leaves you cold. I can almost guarantee I'd be left cold using this VMS thing and virtual pre's. I can hear it. It's in the air that surrounds the real thing vs the emulation. Hard to explain, but that's the best way I can describe it. One thing that I think would have helped make this a better test would have been to use a REAL 1073 instead of his emulation. That might have brought things closer and - for me - would have been a better test, but I understand why they did it the way they did. Gotta brace up that branding and product line..... Anyway, I'm sure many people will put this to good use. But it's not going to kill large mic lockers or the vintage mic mania.... Well, also the preamp emulations are part of the product you're buying with VMS. If I was thinking of purchasing the VMS and they just showed me how half the product stood up and left the other half out, I'd be shaking my head. Understood, but it puts another layer of emulation into the picture, potentially clouding the viability of the mic itself - IMO.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 23, 2016 10:59:27 GMT -6
Perhaps. But blind ABX tests are not what runs a session. If I put a singer up in front of a beautifully restored 67 / 47 / c12 I get a different respect and performance from them as compared to what I get from them with a chinese mic, clone or emulation software. Same thing with a vintage Rhodes, or a classic Martin guitar. We are human beings, not robots. We respond positively to tools that inspire us. Absolutely. And if you've got clients to impress/coax-good-tracks-out-of, that's a reasonable consideration. If you just want the sonics, it's another ballgame. But again, I'm not a believer (in the sonics) at this point. it's a consideration for me as well. I love playing with old classics. I don't get the same feel from new cheap imitations. But again, that's maybe just me.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Aug 23, 2016 11:36:58 GMT -6
I listened on my monitors. The Slate was a little duller every time. It's a good sound though, much better than most $200-$600 Chinese mics. I'd still want the air I hear missing though.
|
|
|
Post by NoFilterChuck on Aug 23, 2016 11:48:39 GMT -6
Well, also the preamp emulations are part of the product you're buying with VMS. If I was thinking of purchasing the VMS and they just showed me how half the product stood up and left the other half out, I'd be shaking my head. Understood, but it puts another layer of emulation into the picture, potentially clouding the viability of the mic itself - IMO. The emulation is a huge part of the system. You're asking to compare transmissions between the Honda Accord and Toyota Carolla, as opposed to comparing the entire car. The VMSystem is the Clean Mic + Clean Pre + Emu software. If you're listening to only the mic, you're not comparing the VMSystem to another signal chain.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 23, 2016 14:02:36 GMT -6
I listened. I really don't trust video shootouts most of the time, but I did hear clear differences on the vocals, the drums, and the DI'ed bass guitar. In all cases the emulations sounded more "two dimensional" and perhaps just a tiny, wee tad duller. Close, but no cigar.
In addition, I don't know what he was using for his narration mic, but it sounded sibilant as hell, espercially toward the end of the vid.
Of course his target market probably won't be able to hear or notice the difference, but to me the differences are some of the things I pay attention to when evaluating microphones.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 23, 2016 19:01:06 GMT -6
The thing I notice that's different in the mic pre emus on the Apollo is the "body"...just a thickness that doesn't seem to be there with the emus
|
|
|
Post by mrholmes on Aug 23, 2016 19:46:50 GMT -6
The true story is told when you have to mix the fake mic pre stuff.
One thing I love about my real 1073 is that the singal sit great in the mix. Using EQ is diffrent too - on the tracks which have seen the 1073.
If all sims would make me happy. I would have sold a lot of gear a long time ago.
I love it, special for guitars and some vocal work.
Overall I use two mic pres. One super clean by RME and the 1073. I also used to own an SPL Channel-One-Tube-Mic pre which I sold (worng decission) it was killer on bases.
For the mic part I am happy with a few dynamics Beyer, No Names, Shures. KM 184s, and one UMT70 with the M7 capsule.
I think I dont need anything else in homegrown recording. A minmalistic approach.
BTW...since the SLATE VCC demoinstration on GS I dont give a lot about self marketing. There is belivable selfmarketing like Pensados Place, they dont overdrive it too 11.
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Aug 24, 2016 20:35:56 GMT -6
Slate vids are always so sibilant. Also it almost sounded like the vox takes were compressed/ or maybe there is just a lot of natural room sound in the vox takes b/c it almost sounded like reverb added to slate takes. The vms is sibilant, and those vox takes seemed like a pretty high gain level as well. I am not sold, and by far would invest a little more to have 2 miktek c7, or 1 cv4, 414, etc
Also, I don't believe a Chinese capsule can have the capsule characteristics/ sound properties/ overall performance of Akg c12/ kk47/ m7, and I feel that is where the Townsend mic will suffer as well. Putting that much stock in a Chinese mass produce capsule to replicate Akg c12, kk47/67/87/870/ m7, c800 capsule is a lot to ask for, when all of these capsules respond differently to the source, as well as gain, mic position, polar pattern, And the room. If the capsule is center terminated, I don't see how it will replicate/ reproduce the c12 capsule's sound/ effect on sound,
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Nov 2, 2016 10:01:41 GMT -6
I should have VMS here in a couple days.
I'm skeptical but curious enough that I need to try it out for myself.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Nov 2, 2016 14:21:29 GMT -6
I've only listened on computer game speakers, but the VMS always seems to be brighter and less girthy in the low end than the vintage mics. I used the Sound On Sound files haven't watched the video.
Sounded usable in most cases. The romance is certainly not there, but in a way this is cutting edge technology and that does give a mystique about it.
Some internet reviewer said he liked the VMS U47 way more than his Peluso 2247 SE. I would love to try that shootout in my own room, since I know that mic pretty well, and it was basically the same cost.
Slate gear for the most part has left me pretty flat, so I have some doubts if it would work for me, who knows. If Softube was behind a product like this, I would freak out immediately.
|
|