|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 20, 2016 23:08:46 GMT -6
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Oct 20, 2016 23:09:40 GMT -6
I listened in the studio.
Good video , and good discussion at the end.
At its price point, I think its a bit of a winner... for a preamp and mic.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2016 1:56:06 GMT -6
Thought the 47 sounded pretty close here, although in another shoot out Slate was nowhere near other copies. Baffling that the SOS guys could easily pickup differences with sibilance etc., yet the Slate designers either haven't, or aren't able to deal with it, could that be the Slate capsule? It's almost as if they got 80% there and thought it good enough. Maybe they're leaving a bit of wriggle room for VMS 2  Like you say, for the money, pretty good (as long as the drivers are updated as fast as OS these days, otherwise may be a relatively short shelf life) |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 21, 2016 8:50:54 GMT -6
Good post Wiz, thanks. This was a beautifully done video, much cleaner than my home brewed posts on youtube. They confirmed my suspicions about the Slate system. In previous videos I've thought the Slate was a little flatter, more 2D than 3D. Here, they mentioned the ambient sound being lacking, and I agree. I've always thought that the Slate mic would likely have a Chinese capsule. That doesn't mean it can't be good, but most every Chinese made capsule I've heard has that slightly pinched sound where the sibilance is.
That's the very thing I spent extra money on to get rid of when I switched to the Thiersch M7 capsule in my Blackspade mic. I've sold that now, so in a way, if the Slate didn't have that same issue, I might have gone for it. I do think there's a place for it though. Small studio engineers and producers who need a variety of choices for customers would cover a lot of bases. Many modern productions are quite noisy, lots of effects and heavy bottom, so the subtleties you might find missing if you were doing a singer/songwriter style thing would probably not matter as much.
Once again, I liked the U67. That's frustrating.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Oct 21, 2016 9:13:58 GMT -6
Haven't listened yet...but I wonder if t will get to the point that it's accepted as much as something like the Kemper. I would venture to say the Kemper gets the sound - the snapshot of that chain - 100% right. The biggest difference is in the feel and amp-in-the-room thump in the chest.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 21, 2016 9:31:18 GMT -6
Haven't listened yet...but I wonder if t will get to the point that it's accepted as much as something like the Kemper. I would venture to say the Kemper gets the sound - the snapshot of that chain - 100% right. The biggest difference is in the feel and amp-in-the-room thump in the chest. Speaking of the Kemper, I mixed one live for the first time the other night. It was the powered version through a Marshall 4x12 and sounded boss. Really impressed... http://instagram.com/p/BLoEmRKgcYg |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Oct 21, 2016 12:57:09 GMT -6
Finally a non-Slate shootout.
It's an admirable try and a no doubt useful product for a lot of people in a lot of situations but I'm not the least bit interested in it. It sounds like a plugin compared to a piece of hardware (to me). About what I expected.
Again though, no doubt it's just the ticket for some situations and budgets. I'd just be very reticent to have the initial building blocks of all my sounds be those plugin emulations. Losing that 3D, weighted realness right from the start isn't something I'd be keen to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Oct 21, 2016 14:25:05 GMT -6
Produce Like A Pro did a comparison between his VMS and his U47. They aren't very close at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Oct 21, 2016 16:23:27 GMT -6
Finally a non-Slate shootout. It's an admirable try and a no doubt useful product for a lot of people in a lot of situations but I'm not the least bit interested in it. It sounds like a plugin compared to a piece of hardware (to me). About what I expected. Again though, no doubt it's just the ticket for some situations and budgets. I'd just be very reticent to have the initial building blocks of all my sounds be those plugin emulations. Losing that 3D, weighted realness right from the start isn't something I'd be keen to do. Yep, as far as I'm concerned it's a total fail as a serious studio tool. The top end is just no good, would drive me crazy. Very foreground 2d compared with the U47 and 67. If they had used a better capsule as the foundation, and made the mic 1500 or so... Rather spend the money on an MT71S, which is a pretty smooth sounding mic and has more depth. |
|
|
|
Post by donr on Oct 21, 2016 21:59:03 GMT -6
Is there an aftermarket for 'tuning' the Slate VMS mic? Seems like there would be.
|
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Oct 21, 2016 22:17:12 GMT -6
Of course no two vintage mics are the same for starters. Secondly as plugin emulations seem to be moving back up the line towards the source ie. tape simulator > compressors > EQ's > micpreamp emulations > microphone emulation > ... singer plugin?
|
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 22, 2016 1:20:39 GMT -6
Not to rag on the shootout but what the F***. You have a butchered c12 with nylon capsule ( fail ) and a fixed cardioid u47 with glitter..How do you own a c12 and cheap out on the capsule replacement? .. Ok now I can focus on the audio part of the video Why do I have a feeling Slate will say it the plugin or something wasn't setup correctly. The last comparison on GS he had like 10 posts in the thread trying to correct the person and say they did their takes wrong. This thread is missing a little marketing... From the VMS manual Intro: The Slate VMS microphone employs an edge terminated capsule "It fully recreates every authentic drop of vintage non linearity right before your ears. "Pay no mind to the capsule" "Why" you ask..." We have fully reproduced an edge terminated capsule that operates and produces exacting center terminated capsule characteristics, on and off axis response, including all the nonlinearities and distortion we all love from these capsules.... " That guy Slate must do pro audio magic to have an edge terminated capsule and plug in emulate a center terminated capsule much less multiple microphones with said capsules....  I mean my sm58 has been sounding like a u47 for years thanks to my $19 Antares mic modeler, I don't know how I would get the quality takes I do now without it. Then when I'm done virtual mixing my record I can send it off to a virtual mastering engineer algorithm, I mean robot,, No I mean it's a Grammy winning mastering house... Sony c800g is amazing to me Slate VMS failed bad on the sibilance... c12 airy and balanced at the same time, again the slate is hashy brightness.... the u67 is great here |
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Oct 22, 2016 3:51:42 GMT -6
Not to rag on the shootout but what the F***. You have a butchered c12 with nylon capsule ( fail ) and a fixed cardioid u47 with glitter..How do you own a c12 and cheap out on the capsule replacement? .. Ok now I can focus on the audio part of the video Why do I have a feeling Slate will say it the plugin or something wasn't setup correctly. The last comparison on GS he had like 10 posts in the thread trying to correct the person and say they did their takes wrong. This thread is missing a little marketing... From the VMS manual Intro: The Slate VMS microphone employs an edge terminated capsule "It fully recreates every authentic drop of vintage non linearity right before your ears. "Pay no mind to the capsule" "Why" you ask..." We have fully reproduced an edge terminated capsule that operates and produces exacting center terminated capsule characteristics, on and off axis response, including all the nonlinearities and distortion we all love from these capsules.... " That guy Slate must do pro audio magic to have an edge terminated capsule and plug in emulate a center terminated capsule much less multiple microphones with said capsules.... I mean my sm58 has been sounding like a u47 for years thanks to my $19 Antares mic modeler, I don't know how I would get the quality takes I do now without it. Then when I'm done virtual mixing my record I can send it off to a virtual mastering engineer algorithm, I mean robot,, No I mean it's a Grammy winning mastering house... Sony c800g is amazing to me Slate VMS failed bad on the sibilance... c12 airy and balanced at the same time, again the slate is hashy brightness.... the u67 is great here So was the C12 capsule the same capsule as fitted to the later VR re-issue? I don't get that if it was. Pretty much screws the C12 comparison. Sounds like the mic rental company needs to find itself some better vintage mic examples? |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 22, 2016 6:35:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 22, 2016 7:29:14 GMT -6
Don't know about the t-racks, but just for kicks, I bought the $24 Guage-usa Mic Clone, when I was offered a $5 discount. I can't say I'd "re-mic" a track done with a high end mic, but I tried it using a $600 Avantone C95, and it really worked on the U67 setting. So, for people who have low cost or mid-priced Chinese capsule mics, this one little plug can help it sound much better. If only one of the mics modeled works well on one track, it's well worth the money. www.finalmix.biz/Final_Mix_Software/Mic_Clone.htmlAttachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by donr on Oct 22, 2016 9:58:35 GMT -6
Those McClone demo's sound better recorded to me than most of these various youtube 'shootouts.' The 'before,' clean but sterile, the 'after,' rich and creamy and sounding great.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 22, 2016 10:28:22 GMT -6
That's why I had to poke a little fun at the shoot out and th slate marketing... I don't see how an edge terminated capsule can ever reproduce a center terminated capsule response, my feeble mind can't grasp that rowmat they put a nylon c414 / c12VR capsule in the c12... Yes a damn shame and not even a valid comparison, however it still crushed the Slate emulation. Also with the u47 being fixed cardioid something had to have happen for that choice to be made, I really don't think that's something you do just for shits n giggles.... ( permanently making u47 cardioid ) |
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Oct 22, 2016 10:53:35 GMT -6
This whole idea seems flawed to me. Why try and emulate a vintage mic with a cheap mic. Why not just try and use your cheaper mic in the best way possible for the track. Just compress and eq on your own and make it sound great. Don't try and make it something it is not, and never will be with emulation processing to be back at the same spot of needing to compress and eq that sound to fit the track. Keep it simple and use what you have. This is to gimmicky for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 22, 2016 11:03:49 GMT -6
Did y'all hear the hashy brittle nastiness on the c800g and c12 emulations.... the c800g emulation should not even be named that at all.... How is Slate using the mic names without paying licensing? All of Slate's products use names like fg73 to skirt around that usually.... Where is Slate to come in and tell us the video dept guy uploaded the wrong files? Or to come say how shocking it is that people are mistaking the SW for HW when 80% of the people picked out the distressor files as distressor files Im sure his team has "sent a nice email" to Sound on Sound telling them how they used the VMS wrong and that it's not a fair representation of his VMS lol haha Maybe it's me but this type of stuff makes me feel like all Slate stuff is a gimmick... how does every paid slate marketing vid say the VMS is best thing since sliced bread, and the comparisons files "so close" but every independent review shows the VMS in its true light.... And this was against butchered rental vintage mics....and none were even close to emulating even the family of sound... I really wanted to believe in this product but nope another gimmick fueled by the Slate marketing team and his cronies/ fans/ SD users... |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Oct 22, 2016 11:42:36 GMT -6
This whole idea seems flawed to me. Why try and emulate a vintage mic with a cheap mic. Why not just try and use your cheaper mic in the best way possible for the track. Just compress and eq on your own and make it sound great. Don't try and make it something it is not, and never will be with emulation processing to be back at the same spot of needing to compress and eq that sound to fit the track. Keep it simple and use what you have. This is to gimmicky for me. That's how I feel about a lot of the clones out there. Do my clone X sound just like the vintage counterpart? Who cares. Does it provide something sonically pleasing? Yep. That's all that matters to me. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Oct 22, 2016 11:59:54 GMT -6
Did y'all hear the hashy brittle nastiness on the c800g and c12 emulations.... the c800g emulation should not even be named that at all.... How is Slate using the mic names without paying licensing? All of Slate's products use names like fg73 to skirt around that usually.... Where is Slate to come in and tell us the video dept guy uploaded the wrong files? Or to come say how shocking it is that people are mistaking the SW for HW when 80% of the people picked out the distressor files as distressor files Im sure his team has "sent a nice email" to Sound on Sound telling them how they used the VMS wrong and that it's not a fair representation of his VMS lol haha Maybe it's me but this type of stuff makes me feel like all Slate stuff is a gimmick... how does every paid slate marketing vid say the VMS is best thing since sliced bread, and the comparisons files "so close" but every independent review shows the VMS in its true light.... And this was against butchered rental vintage mics....and none were even close to emulating even the family of sound... I really wanted to believe in this product but nope another gimmick fueled by the Slate marketing team and his cronies/ fans/ SD users... Not going to bat for Slate, and as I said, I'm not impressed with the comparisons in that clip, but SOS didn't do that C-800 comparison right. They used a vintage actual mic but compared it to the modern VMS emulation even though VMS also has a vintage C-800 emulation that's mellower. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Oct 22, 2016 13:15:14 GMT -6
Those McClone demo's sound better recorded to me than most of these various youtube 'shootouts.' The 'before,' clean but sterile, the 'after,' rich and creamy and sounding great. It does! That's why I tipped of the cats here, for $24, it's a usable plugin. And usable means a lot. I have at least 100 plugs I don't use. Even if it works every once in a while, I think it's well worth it. You can scroll through the different emulations, and it might help a vocal stand out without any EQ boosting or cutting. |
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on Oct 22, 2016 13:36:23 GMT -6
My concern would be the quality of the VMS capsule/mic.
The big thing I noticed when I bought my Wunder CM7 was, taking aside any tube saturation and transformer warmth, was just how incredibly
faithful the captured image was to the original source compared to my other cheaper mics.
Even though the CM7 has that mid forward U47 footprint it still renders an image of my voice as though I'm stood right their in front of you.
It is incredibly detailed and true to the source.
I see saturation and transformer warmth as secondary to this fundamental function of a great capsule/mic.
I just wonder if the basic sound of the VMS mic/capsule can render a true to life image as highly detailed as say my CM7 can? It's a big ask of any mic and for me the gold standard of a great mic.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 22, 2016 16:20:09 GMT -6
 Screenshot from Slate Digital website Quoting Ragan: [/quote] Not going to bat for Slate, and as I said, I'm not impressed with the comparisons in that clip, but SOS didn't do that C-800 comparison right. They used a vintage actual mic but compared it to the modern VMS emulation even though VMS also has a vintage C-800 emulation that's mellower. [/quote] My response : Well ragan the c800 was based off c37a, the c800 being a modern recreation and that's is not what the VMS is comparing or emulating as a vocal mix because the c800 was an instrument mic that could handle 154 db SPL. The frequency responses are way different the c800 doing 20-22khz and the c800g doing 20-18khz...Other than being made by Sony they don't share much in common beside name and look, two completely different mics. The Sony c800g that's in the vid is the correct mic they are comparing...as far as I know there was 2 mics made in 1992 and even Sony didn't really market the two mics correct. Both use 6au6 tubes 1 in mic, 2 in power supply, the capsules are different c800g a k67 style capsule, as well as a large transformer, and a peltier style cooling system to protect capsule / mix from excess heat whereas the c800 does not... SOS was shooting out the correct emulation If you don't take my word there are a few threads I will link for you ... have a great day repforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,2035.msg11199/topicseen.html#msg11199 repforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,22407.msg307175/topicseen.html#msg307175 I'm glad I don't pay this dude for mixes or masters. The falsetto on the c800g is pure magic. The singer eating the mics during the verses and the c800g stayed more balanced to me but a little sibilant and the Slate was all sibilance and bright hash again...I also think this is not as good of quality comparison as the SOS vid. The voiceover reveals a lot about the Slate sibilance where as the c800g had even more sibilant words in its phrase and was still a lot smoother and my harsh... |
|
|
|
Post by ChaseUTB on Oct 22, 2016 16:38:42 GMT -6
|
|
