Vamisound?

I'm still wet behind the ears in understanding a LOT of electrical engineering principles. It's a fun but slow process learning about EE as time / energy permits as a hobby, i.e., I have no formal training, so take all of this with a grain of salt. Definitely others here and at GroupDIY can improve upon probably anything written in this post, and I'd love to see just that as I find these two mics interesting as well!

E22S "uses a cascode discrete FET front end, combined with a custom (amorphous, 4:1) Lundahl output transformer." Capsule is thought to be the 22mm electret Primo EM21, potentially custom spec'd by Josephson. I've never held much less owned one, but my understanding is there is some attention to vibration and impact from stray drumsticks. I find everything about this mic pretty interesting, and cost-prohibitive, unfortunately. Seems like the most useful info for this mic is this thread: groupdiy.com/threads/cad-equitek-e100-capsule.77061/ - pics of the mic guts, reverse-engineered schematic, discovery of general capsule type, etc.

VM55 is a single stage FET circuit that seems more akin to a km84 in its circuitry, rather than the 2 stage FET E22. The output tx is a Moby VM14, which may/may not be same specs as the T14 used in 414 etc. On FB they state "Heart of our new microphone is famous VM14 tranformer by Moby," but there's no VM14 listed on Moby's site, so I'm not sure what they mean by this. Capsule is 21mm(?) electret transound 2555B. No idea how it handles similar impacts from drumsticks or if much thought went into the decoupling of element from body. The body sure appears to look the same, but again, I've not had them side by side but my guess is that the capsule mounting confers similar acoustical resonance results, i.e., similar head basket shapes. It's about 1/4 to 1/3 the price of the E22S. I bought some, but won't have a chance to put them to use for a long, long while. I can definitely attest the Vami guys are very friendly, helpful, and enthusiastic about sound. That's a necessary foundation in my book.

I've no idea how the above VM55 details translate to performance, be it technical specs like impedance in either extremes of frequency response, SPL and handling of transients being useful or not so useful for drums vs. say violin, mechanical isolation, resilience to impacts, the noise floor, etc. etc. Different capsules, different circuitry, and surely different transformer construction / tooling / specs that may / may not have comparable results.* Much of Josephson's mics seem to be proprietary, and reverse engineering only gets you so far. I.e., Lundahl or Primo aren't going to sell a DIYer the same parts.

*As D Josephson notes here repforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/topic,26709.msg383159.html#msg383159 "Unit-to-unit variations, shorted turns, poorly controlled core laminations, magnetized cores, etc. etc. can cause major variations and if the manufacturer isn't paying attention, can make this problem even worse." I get the impression Moby's work is more vulnerable to such items than Lundahl, given scale of each company, access to equipment to standardize processes at tight tolerances, etc. I'm out of my league here, I've never seen either operation in person, it's just assumptions related to 1 man shows vs larger company and the general capital / machining capabilities. And again, no idea how this tx impacts performance at end of the day.

I imagine/hope there will eventually be some well-done comparison videos/files. Each mic certainly have their merits. The more I look at the two mics, the more I see differences between them. Although I love the form factor for placement, it does seem to ape the E22 body's design pretty distinctly. Even there, however, it may be different materials (brass housing in E22 vs. Vami's materials I am not aware of).

In summary, just like this post, the value and usefulness of VM55 has yet to be known, but I doubt it will suck, and rather anticipate it will sound pretty damn good.

Boris, thanks for the info. I know less than nothing when it comes to electronics - I need stupid simple/specific instructions to make anything.

The form is the most interesting to me. The side address SDC is pretty clutch. I have a family of the shure beta 181s and they do the job nicely but they can’t take stick hits worth a damn. Hoping these are constructed a bit sturdier. I did borrow a pair of e22s from a friend. They are very cool sounding but I don’t think I can justify the expense after a shootout with my current options, especially when paired with a resonant head mic. But something in the ballpark for $450ish def piques my interest. I feel like somewhere it mentions it has a brass body but maybe I’m imagining/hoping?

I did write them on instagram and asked about SPL as well as dimensions. It is shorter than the e22 by the look of it but if the width is the same I think I’m in at least for one to try.

phdamage - Yeah, the form is very attractive to me as well. The capsule size (~20-25mm) also a big plus IMHO for percussive instruments, be it in an e22s, vm55, or whatever. As for SPL, some variables pre-set by Vami if using their capsule and FET, but if I understand correctly, increasing the value at C2 should pad the circuit hopefully making it tolerate high SPL is very much possible. To me, experimenting is part of the fun, but I also think anyone with decent soldering skills (not too hard to gain them, but good equipment sure helps) and attention to detail could build this mic.

Maybe akin to your beta 181s to some extent, I have a pair of ATM 450s I’ve previously used for toms. I got them when they first came out and are still great bang for buck, but I’ve wanted something higher-end in side-addressed medium diaphragm capsule for some time. I’d love to hear a VM55, Beta 181, AT 450, and E22 in a shootout. The 181s aren’t cheap, so maybe selling them (and some plasma) you could swing the E22, or a few VM55s? Again, so few units are in the wild since release, and no sound samples much less comparisons I’m aware of. Hopefully at some point…


ericn - wow! i know as a self-described “gear pimp," nuanced answers to client inquiries don't close the deal as quickly as short and simple answers like yours, but I also don't think they do much to help advance understanding on a topic (that is your goal here, right?) Dismissing all the other elements as having a negligible contributory role to an undefined endpoint ("what the e22 is") is simply unfounded - you haven't done the research or cited any credible sources for such bold claims about each mic. if you're aware of the research from credible sources, why not share it with the class?

If you clicked on the links provided in the earlier post, you'd read Josephson himself disagreeing with you.