|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 1, 2015 18:20:40 GMT -6
I didn't have any idea about what I'm talking about, but I thought the micron measurement was measuring the thickness of the gold sputter on the capsule. Is that not the case?
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Dec 1, 2015 18:52:45 GMT -6
I didn't have any idea about what I'm talking about, but I thought the micron measurement was measuring the thickness of the gold sputter on the capsule. Is that not the case? ...I believe they're referring to the machining of the capsule back-plates...
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 1, 2015 20:45:14 GMT -6
Ah - so they're all consistent to their design?
|
|
|
Post by markfouxman on Dec 2, 2015 1:16:14 GMT -6
Hello Pavel, Good to see you here! Just wanted to make a few comments, if you don't mind. 5 more years were spent on research to come up with a “perfect” process of mylar gold sputtering. There are thousand ways do it based on combination of time/regime/voltage/vaccum pressure/square/density of sputtering etc. So it took us a lot of R&D work to pick the combination that will make the capsule sound like you want it to sound. I am not sure how the combination of any of those would change sound, let alone will make the capsule sound one way or another. Indeed, the weight and compliance of deposited material theoretically should affect the sound, but we are talking thicknesses of Gold in the order of Angstroms, so the weight of the diaphragm should still be dominating. Besides, Gold doesn't really 'stick' to the Mylar all that well and will easily peel off during the cleaning. That's why some manufacturers first deposit base material and only then Gold to ensure a nice and secure "adhesion". “2 microns precision” We cut our capsules with 2 microns tolerance (that means +/- 1 micron). It took us more than 2 years to pick the one soviet lathe from scientific institute that could do it consistently. I agree, maybe there are CNC lathes that can be quite accurate to reach an accurate size +/- 2 microns. But there are very few that can make a perfectly flat surface with diameter of 34mm and accuracy of +/- 1 micron across the whole surface. If you say you can do it, I think everybody will be very interested to see a video of the process and live measurement, if your CNC lathe can do it, I’ll get my hat off for you. I would not call it "2 micron tolerance" because "2 micron tolerance" exists only in a strictly temperature controlled room. That is, hold that part in your hand for a few seconds, or even breath at it and all those tolerances will start 'swimming' all over the place. Besides, re-cutting the surface after drilling (that's what you do... with house ground tools) will throw all the 'hole depth' tolerances out the window... What you are talking about is a "flatness" within +/-1 micron... not a big deal. Perhaps a problem with many of Soviet lathes, but something (if we are talking manual lathes) like Hardinge super precision chucker in a good condition (for which a spindle runout of 0.5 micron (!!!) is a norm) with good tool holders and inserts will do it with no any problem all day long. We have 3 of those in our shop (one with Omniturn CNC attachment) and for consistency and perfect repeatability still prefer our CNC Mori Seiki, which passed a thorough alignment... but there are other ways of doing it with even better precision and consistency;). What's the real PITA is drilling all those holes manually... why? ANY CNC will do it so much faster and by far more precise... and the hole depth and consistency is even more important than flatness... Best, M
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2015 1:14:42 GMT -6
Thank you, Mark. I also stumbled upon these things in the vid. The "flatness" of a micron can be achieved by common high precision lathes. When i was in a metal workshop before university, the rule of thumb was that a precision lathe was around one magnitude/i.e. decimal place(metric system) more precise than a "normal" lathe. And that, given that time and material does not matter that bad, you can achieve 1/10 of the spec'ed precision of a tool by careful usage, measuring and trial and error/QC. We are talking like 80's machines, but i doubt there has been much change with lathe precision in general. But o.k., i am from Germany and admittedly we are known to take precision in technics very serious and have no problems to get precision tools and machines obviously ... which can be a problem in other countries... If we are talking micron magnitudes in a mic, we are talking foil thickness. Forget about the micron flatness in the metal parts. Common dust in the air already can have thickness of 0.1 to 10 micron. And with wholes drilled by hand like in the video we aren't talking micron precision at all. When this came directly after the high precision lathe, i tended to facepalm. Please don't take it as an offense, drilling the wholes manually *can* be totally o.k. and achieve enough precision for this job, but a CNC machine can do the job faster and more precise and consistent, as Mark already said. It was just like a "shaking head" moment in the video to come from 1-micron high precision lathes to hand drilling on the same metal parts. May be ok from the marketing perspective to use such things for claims, but considering your customers are mostly technicians and engineers i would reconsider this part. Again - there absolutely is nothing really wrong in the way we see these capsules produced, they can be high quality anyway, it is just a constructive criticism of the marketing video logic and the avoidable manual process that could be improved. Messing with magnitudes of length measurements in advertisement is suboptimal for a technically trained circle of customers. We know that producing large diaphragm capsules needs lots of technical knowledge and understanding, but the really critical part is the foil material and thickness, the gold sputtering process and achieving long-life durability of it, and for sound especially the ratio of foil thickness and weight, capsule type and size and the right tension evenly applied to the foil in the manufacturing process, a.k.a. "tuning". This is the critical point in the LDC capsule because the vibrating diaphragm as transducer element decides about hit and miss, no matter how good the metal works of the capsule is (provided it has a certain degree of perfection). I respect everyone who dives into the production of LDC capsules (after i read Dale Ulans diary type of descriptions of setting up his production process for an M7 type of capsule on GDIY). I wish your company all the best and success and if Martin J. as a long-time experienced musician and singer says that your mics sounded really good to his ears - this is what microphones are all about in the end. So welcome to this board and thanks for taking your time discussing your products with us. We appreciate that so many manufacturers take the chance to write here. We write very openly and discussion of technical details is always welcome. So please don't take the open speech and criticisms around here as offensive, they are not meant this way and aim to be constructive....
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 3, 2015 8:02:39 GMT -6
I wonder what the clientele demographics are for $3500 mics? What percentage pro vs. consumer someone like VK sells to? I mean, you can't blame a company for marketing strategy - most marketing is a bit hyperbolic by nature. I do have to say - they've done a really good job with the appearance of the mic. It's one of the first new design aesthetics that I've really thought looked great.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 3, 2015 8:07:01 GMT -6
Btw - I appreciate the response from Pavel above. His not being afraid of constructive criticism and willingness to answer questions makes me think this is more than likely a good product.
|
|
|
Post by soyuz1 on Dec 3, 2015 8:22:22 GMT -6
Hi Guys, My name is David Brown. I'm the other half of Soyuz Microphones. Pasha and I founded the company together back in 2013. We're both very pleased to see you guys taking the time to discuss our mics. We would never claim that the methods we use in our production are "the best" way of doing things. They are simply the techniques that we've found that seem to get us the best results. Microphones are mysterious creatures. In some ways they're like violins or guitars. It's possible to build a great violin using modern, computer controlled manufacturing techniques. But most great violinists still prefer the handmade ones. Why? I have no idea. We have the machines and the highly skilled machinists who can do back plates in the "old" way so we do it. It gets us the results we're looking for. Does it mean that somebody with an amazing CNC lathe can't also get an excellent result? Of course not. At the end of the day, what matters most to us is how the mics sound. I would encourage any of you who are interested to test one. VK has them in LA and Nashville as does B&H, Dale Pro and Alto in NYC. Pasha and I are both always available to answer any questions you might have. Again, thanks for taking the time to discuss Soyuz.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 9, 2015 20:04:13 GMT -6
I might see if I can check it out here in Nashville. Thanks for dropping by, David...your post slipped right by me!
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 9, 2015 22:52:07 GMT -6
I should have the Soyuz 017 and I think a pair of 011's to try for a little while in a couple of weeks. I'll borrow my friends' KM 84's and track a little something with both. I can tell you this already, if the 011 is on the same level as the 017, ( I can think of no reason why it wouldn't be), it might just be the first new mic to really give the KM 84 a run for its money.
|
|
plush
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by plush on Dec 21, 2015 20:36:53 GMT -6
I bought a Soyuz 017 after hearing a demo. Fantastic mic with genuine very seductive tone. I am very familiar with classic tube mics and here we operate some M50's, M49's and U47's. Soyuz is, in my opinion, the equal of the classics. TONE generator.
I am bothered by people not recognizing that Russian production methods are perhaps not as technology oriented (latest CNC machines) as the west. Anyone who has visited Russia knows that.
However, just like in the olden days in Austria and Germany, hand work was how they started and how many classic mics that we all admire were made. Also bogus to dis the mic while observing certain circuitry or even complaining about a simple circuit. All without hearing the mic!
The Soyuz has some serious mic people behind it. Otherwise they could never produce the TONE generator that they have made.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 21, 2015 21:10:02 GMT -6
Glad to see you back, plush!
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,956
|
Post by ericn on Dec 21, 2015 21:32:40 GMT -6
I bought a Soyuz 017 after hearing a demo. Fantastic mic with genuine very seductive tone. I am very familiar with classic tube mics and here we operate some M50's, M49's and U47's. Soyuz is, in my opinion, the equal of the classics. TONE generator. I am bothered by people not recognizing that Russian production methods are perhaps not as technology oriented (latest CNC machines) as the west. Anyone who has visited Russia knows that. However, just like in the olden days in Austria and Germany, hand work was how they started and how many classic mics that we all admire were made. Also bogus to dis the mic while observing certain circuitry or even complaining about a simple circuit. All without hearing the mic! The Soyuz has some serious mic people behind it. Otherwise they could never produce the TONE generator that they have made. I agree , I do want to take a listen , and I have found that the modern Nevaton mics are also a pleasant surprise. A managed economy has no concept, of craftsmanship / cotta industries, but it by no way means that the talent isn't there! when China gets the concept where in for an interest ride! Happy Holidays Mr Hudson!
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Dec 21, 2015 22:15:51 GMT -6
I am bothered by people not recognizing that Russian production methods are perhaps not as technology oriented (latest CNC machines) as the west. Anyone who has visited Russia knows that. Also bogus to dis the mic while observing certain circuitry or even complaining about a simple circuit. All without hearing the mic! ...I'm all ears...so let's hear it...
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Dec 21, 2015 22:25:49 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 21, 2015 23:24:26 GMT -6
Kidvybes, did you listen to the shootout of the U67, C12 and Soyuz SU-017 at their website?
|
|
|
Post by jayson on Dec 22, 2015 6:03:59 GMT -6
Sylvia Massy is apparently a fan: this was on her Facebook feed this past weekend.
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Dec 22, 2015 11:55:31 GMT -6
Kidvybes, did you listen to the shootout of the U67, C12 and Soyuz SU-017 at their website? Yes Martin...it sounds very good (though I'd prefer to hear both male and female vocals, as well as spoken word for my reference purposes)...I'm not trying to imply that it's not a great mic...I'm sure that it is...just poking some good fun at another boutique product in a crowded field... ...frankly, after having one of my GDIY tube mics re-voiced by Shannon, if I were even contemplating spending that kind of money on another mic, I would simply consult with him before buying anything retail...I'm more than confident he could deliver whatever sonic profile I was in need of for half the cost of this mic...personally, I don't even entertain these kind of purchases anymore...
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Dec 22, 2015 12:17:40 GMT -6
To put some dimensioning in perspective, a micron is appx 0.000039". A human hair is appx 0.001" in diameter. So if you divide a human hair into 25 equal slices, you have a micron! Crazy! I recently bought a Neumann KM54 with the original nickel diaphragm. The nickel diaphragm is 0.7 microns thick. How do you manage to make nickel less than 1 micron in thickness especially back in the 1950's? There was no machinery available (even today) that could roll or press nickel into such thin sheets. So how did they do it? They took a thin sheet of copper, plated it with a 0.7 micron layer of nickel and then dissolved the copper sheet leaving behind a 0.7 micron sheet of pure nickel! If you were to stack 1428 of these nickel diaphragms one-top-of-the-other the stack would reach a height of... wait for it... just 1mm!
|
|
|
Post by formatcyes on Dec 22, 2015 14:09:43 GMT -6
I bought a Soyuz 017 after hearing a demo. Fantastic mic with genuine very seductive tone. I am very familiar with classic tube mics and here we operate some M50's, M49's and U47's. Soyuz is, in my opinion, the equal of the classics. TONE generator. I am bothered by people not recognizing that Russian production methods are perhaps not as technology oriented (latest CNC machines) as the west. Anyone who has visited Russia knows that. However, just like in the olden days in Austria and Germany, hand work was how they started and how many classic mics that we all admire were made. Also bogus to dis the mic while observing certain circuitry or even complaining about a simple circuit. All without hearing the mic! The Soyuz has some serious mic people behind it. Otherwise they could never produce the TONE generator that they have made. We where poking fun at their video which kind of deserves it. Great to hear the mic is fantastic.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 22, 2015 16:18:47 GMT -6
This is from my Facebook page:
Sylvia Massy said, "The Soyuz again has blown every other mic in this studio out of the water. I cannot go anywhere without it!!!!!!! I'm in Helsinki now, and luckily They shipped one in for me so I didn't have to carry mine over from the US"
I feel ya there kidvybes. I think where this mic fits in is for those professionals who have to have something as good as the classics, U-47, C12, Elam 251, U67, M49, etc. that doesn't cost 8-15 G's and is backed by a guarantee. I also think some people just think its better than those mics. It was the main vocal mic used for the new Coldplay record, which is impressive in the sense that they can obviously afford any mic they want, and chose the Soyuz.
The Soyuz is double my entire mic budget, but it's good to know it's there. I'll see what's up once I get it here for a few days. I just got the newly redesigned Blackspade UM-17B, so it should be cool to see how far above its class the Blackspade can punch. I'm still breaking it in, but man, it one of the most balanced mics I've ever heard. There was U67 file in another thread here that has a similar balance. This one sounds to me like 75% M49 / 25% U-47.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 22, 2015 16:38:12 GMT -6
https%3A//soundcloud.com/martin-john-butler/magnolia-iii Here's a link to a recording I did today. It's the first thing I've tracked with the new Blackspade UM-17B. I had to lay back though, it's meant as a music bed for an in house video. I had to lay back to leave room for the voice-over. It's my friend's wife's shop, Magnolia Bakery.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Dec 22, 2015 16:40:20 GMT -6
It was the main vocal mic used for the new Coldplay record, which is impressive in the sense that they can obviously afford any mic they want, and chose the Soyuz. This makes me want to stay away. Coldplay is literally the worst. Kidding about staying away, not about Coldplay though.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 22, 2015 16:44:26 GMT -6
I don't particularly care for the disco-ish vibe on the one track I heard from the new LP, but I do think Chris Martin's done some beautiful things.
|
|
|
Post by kidvybes on Dec 28, 2015 15:06:48 GMT -6
|
|