I have questions about mics that claim to model others without explaining much of the technical aspects. Are the voltages per capsule changed to affect the lobes of sensitivity? How does modelling recreate the transient response of different mics or the circuitry? Is it all just EQ profiles or is there more processing happening with 'mic selection' acting like shortcuts to apply different processing to a signal? How do these mics work differently to the OC818? Hope I'm not being too nerdy but these kind of purchases really matter for independent musicians!
As far as I can understand it's a stereo large diaphragm condenser with software that adds an impulse response (or other) type modelling of one or two other mics. I don't think anything analogue is happening when you change emulation.
Its a dual capsule mic with various software eq profiles. All dual capsule mics can be used to create various effects such as figure of 8, cartiode, super cartiode and omni. They appear to have wired up the 2 capsules as separate signals to allow more sophisticated processing. I didn't understand what extra the front end pre amps do, but i think all processing is in the box.
Ya basically it is .. take a kemper guitar modeller. They feed a signal thru a certain amp, and effect pedals and save each as an impulse file. of cause it's a bit more complex if you have to model each settings on eg a guitar stomp box. The microphone is fairly easy to record a sweep of how it's frequency responce is in a 360 degree angle
Fully agree, and there is so many options in this that you waste hours after hours trying to find the sound you want, when you could just set a standard mike up and start recording and then learn how to get the best out of what you have.
Even listening to the comparisons of the 2 mikes with and without the software / Filter on a good pair of headphones there is absolutely minimal sound difference on youtube compressed sound, Really hope there is more difference when you monitor it directly on the interface, or this is a waste of money that can purchase you 2 good microphones without being bound to a UAD interface to be effective. I see no point in this if you arent already invested in the UAD eco system of dsp interfaces and plugins.
@@mrdali67 To be honest the studios with 20 plus mics only ever really use at maximum 4 or 5, and usually only 1 or 2 for a vocaling and it will be a mic the producer knows how to use and adapt the sound. Honest truth is I could actually make a good enough recording off of a pair of earbuds with the built in mic. I have seen it done and so long as the audio isn't clipping or gain to low then it will be usable, bit of reverb goes a long way.
@@HOLLASOUNDS Exactly, and yes of cause there is a differece between a 5k microphone and eg a Roede NT-1a, but if you have a decent room to record in and know how to treat that microphone I really doubt any “normal” listeners would notice the diff. On a typical media and consumer speaker/headphones. Even on a good HiFi system you need to have good ear to even hear the diff between a lossy mp3 and a lossless codec. So its already exagerated.
@@mrdali67 I have heard a top quality song being made out of a guy singing into his phone in his car homeless, so there is no actual boundary level to mic recording so long as its above an average level mobile phone. I had a cheap smart phone with stereo mics, and was excellent for capturing stereo sounds and the quality sounded great, but I dropped it and broke the screan, and now it hardly works.
It'a a very interesting aproach, especially if the mice's affordable for homestudio usage, but if you talk to pro producers they are gonna wrinkle their nose and other body parts 😅 What happens in some years when either UAD stops supporting it, or you move to another platform where the software isn't supported then you a have a mic you can only use as paper weight or door stopper. I would personly go with some of the trusted allround budget microphones. Most of them do a really nice job and you will learn how to use them efficiently over time. I think It's the same as going out to buy a keyboard that have tons of effects and different engines for every kind of sounds, and all you really need is a good keybed and some good basic sounds and if you need more you can always add some software synths along the way if your recording. Think many beginners should really just get one or two decent microphones and learn how to use them instead of wasting the time choosing between 38 different models of modelled mices. And just like all the fancy techs you can get today, if you have a favorite mic, guitar sound or Hammond organ all the smart modelled kemper amps, clonewheels, software synths etc. isn't gonna make a true afficionado chose it over the real deal if they have access to it or the wallet to buy it. I remember having the discussion with our guitarist after watching a band where the guitarist had a rack with a Kemper and couple other effects, and yes its darn smart when your a tech freak to have tons of sound posibilities in one small box and you can just send a di signal to the foh, but most people won't even touch it especially if they are just a bit "analog minded" they will rather drag along 2 or 3 amps, 4 guitars and a buttload of old school stomp boxes and deal with humm, noise and feedback issues from miked up amps.🤨 I admit it is a whole lot easier to just bring a 14kg single manual clonewheel that just sends out a line signal to the foh than dozering about with a 200kg B3 and am 80kg Leslie and dealing with miking it proper up.
Ive learned these lessons through the years. Software based anything can be great but its almost always better to just buy the real things (mics, hardware etc) in 20 years it will still be relevant to your workflow.
Well, the mic will still work and sound fine without the software. You will just lose the modelling and polar design capabilities. It's a good mic without it. But it's a valid point for sure. I would personally prefer if the modelling was built into the mic for that reason. But I guess most people will want the ability to change it after recording. An alternative could be to get a mic that has different characters built in, like many of the Lauten Audio mics. I don't get why guitarist are still using amps for gigs. I've been playing without an amp for 25 years, wouldn't dream of dragging one around. But it's been getting increasingly more common for people to use modellers live in the past 10 year.
@@henrikpetersson3463 It's the question if you want the easy solution or the "real thing". I play with a Drummer in our band that uses Roland V-Drums, and Its always nice to see the big smile on the sound engineer's face when they don't have to mike the drums up, and they can get a di signal from the guitars and the keyboards it's the exact same thing about a clonewheel and a kemper modelling amp. It's just so easy when you have your sounds made ready at a touch of a button, no feedback problems with mikes and the sound guy can concentrate completey on the volumes
Hello, I bought a new uad sphere dlx, but do I have to record my vocals in stereo? Will I experience any losses if I switch it to mono later? I know it's always better to record in mono and mic collection doesn't allow that :(
Awesome video, thanks! Two questions, if i have an external mono preamp can i connect the front Mic cable to the external preamp and the rear one to the sound card or do I have to have an external 2 channel preamp and connect both cables there? I saw that dlx also has the mic shield simulation(es. Aston halo), is it also present in the lx? Thanks!
@@christianthompson1473 it can be done. In fact, it was pretty standard in the 50s and 60s to utilise one mic for drums. I agree though to capture variables in dynamics you will need a number of mics.
@@patrickanthony3572 sure in the early days they would record the whole band with 1 mic by placing instruments at different distances from the central mic. Not ideal though 😶
For $300-$400 this would be great for home studios but at these price points I’d go with a 57 and a couple of mid-range condenser mics like a at4040 and a c214 instead
Sounds like a bit of the old confirmation bias there, no? Better mic is better and all that. Modelling aside, if the people involved are happy then arguably it has 'matched' the higher spec mic. That’s all it needs to do - please the users. And really, anyone’s claims that they can discern any kind of difference are besides the point.
$299 is a better price point for modeled microphones, they are too much like snake oil by now. It does not sound anything like the actual real microphones because the circuitry and material and power are not the same you can copy character and tone and eq profiles all you want its just not gonna sound anything like the real thing... ever.
This is complete spam no studio recording engineer would use or buy this. i am a fan of UA but this is eq or impulse responce modeling. learn how to use a U87 SM57/8 etc. come on UA who are you trying to pull the wool over our eyes?
This mic is pristine
Got two of the originals and ready for that expanded isosphere and more free mics!
I have questions about mics that claim to model others without explaining much of the technical aspects. Are the voltages per capsule changed to affect the lobes of sensitivity? How does modelling recreate the transient response of different mics or the circuitry? Is it all just EQ profiles or is there more processing happening with 'mic selection' acting like shortcuts to apply different processing to a signal? How do these mics work differently to the OC818?
Hope I'm not being too nerdy but these kind of purchases really matter for independent musicians!
As far as I can understand it's a stereo large diaphragm condenser with software that adds an impulse response (or other) type modelling of one or two other mics. I don't think anything analogue is happening when you change emulation.
Its a dual capsule mic with various software eq profiles.
All dual capsule mics can be used to create various effects such as figure of 8, cartiode, super cartiode and omni. They appear to have wired up the 2 capsules as separate signals to allow more sophisticated processing.
I didn't understand what extra the front end pre amps do, but i think all processing is in the box.
Ya basically it is .. take a kemper guitar modeller. They feed a signal thru a certain amp, and effect pedals and save each as an impulse file. of cause it's a bit more complex if you have to model each settings on eg a guitar stomp box. The microphone is fairly easy to record a sweep of how it's frequency responce is in a 360 degree angle
Thanks for the demo, I have Rode NT1 and Audio Technica 4040, they kinda got what I need.
Fully agree, and there is so many options in this that you waste hours after hours trying to find the sound you want, when you could just set a standard mike up and start recording and then learn how to get the best out of what you have.
Even listening to the comparisons of the 2 mikes with and without the software / Filter on a good pair of headphones there is absolutely minimal sound difference on youtube compressed sound, Really hope there is more difference when you monitor it directly on the interface, or this is a waste of money that can purchase you 2 good microphones without being bound to a UAD interface to be effective. I see no point in this if you arent already invested in the UAD eco system of dsp interfaces and plugins.
@@mrdali67 To be honest the studios with 20 plus mics only ever really use at maximum 4 or 5, and usually only 1 or 2 for a vocaling and it will be a mic the producer knows how to use and adapt the sound. Honest truth is I could actually make a good enough recording off of a pair of earbuds with the built in mic. I have seen it done and so long as the audio isn't clipping or gain to low then it will be usable, bit of reverb goes a long way.
@@HOLLASOUNDS Exactly, and yes of cause there is a differece between a 5k microphone and eg a Roede NT-1a, but if you have a decent room to record in and know how to treat that microphone I really doubt any “normal” listeners would notice the diff. On a typical media and consumer speaker/headphones. Even on a good HiFi system you need to have good ear to even hear the diff between a lossy mp3 and a lossless codec. So its already exagerated.
@@mrdali67 I have heard a top quality song being made out of a guy singing into his phone in his car homeless, so there is no actual boundary level to mic recording so long as its above an average level mobile phone. I had a cheap smart phone with stereo mics, and was excellent for capturing stereo sounds and the quality sounded great, but I dropped it and broke the screan, and now it hardly works.
TOOOOOOOM!!!!
Having had a Townsend L22 before, the LX sounds better to me
It'a a very interesting aproach, especially if the mice's affordable for homestudio usage, but if you talk to pro producers they are gonna wrinkle their nose and other body parts 😅
What happens in some years when either UAD stops supporting it, or you move to another platform where the software isn't supported then you a have a mic you can only use as paper weight or door stopper. I would personly go with some of the trusted allround budget microphones. Most of them do a really nice job and you will learn how to use them efficiently over time. I think It's the same as going out to buy a keyboard that have tons of effects and different engines for every kind of sounds, and all you really need is a good keybed and some good basic sounds and if you need more you can always add some software synths along the way if your recording. Think many beginners should really just get one or two decent microphones and learn how to use them instead of wasting the time choosing between 38 different models of modelled mices. And just like all the fancy techs you can get today, if you have a favorite mic, guitar sound or Hammond organ all the smart modelled kemper amps, clonewheels, software synths etc. isn't gonna make a true afficionado chose it over the real deal if they have access to it or the wallet to buy it.
I remember having the discussion with our guitarist after watching a band where the guitarist had a rack with a Kemper and couple other effects, and yes its darn smart when your a tech freak to have tons of sound posibilities in one small box and you can just send a di signal to the foh, but most people won't even touch it especially if they are just a bit "analog minded" they will rather drag along 2 or 3 amps, 4 guitars and a buttload of old school stomp boxes and deal with humm, noise and feedback issues from miked up amps.🤨
I admit it is a whole lot easier to just bring a 14kg single manual clonewheel that just sends out a line signal to the foh than dozering about with a 200kg B3 and am 80kg Leslie and dealing with miking it proper up.
Ive learned these lessons through the years. Software based anything can be great but its almost always better to just buy the real things (mics, hardware etc) in 20 years it will still be relevant to your workflow.
Well, the mic will still work and sound fine without the software. You will just lose the modelling and polar design capabilities. It's a good mic without it. But it's a valid point for sure.
I would personally prefer if the modelling was built into the mic for that reason. But I guess most people will want the ability to change it after recording.
An alternative could be to get a mic that has different characters built in, like many of the Lauten Audio mics.
I don't get why guitarist are still using amps for gigs. I've been playing without an amp for 25 years, wouldn't dream of dragging one around. But it's been getting increasingly more common for people to use modellers live in the past 10 year.
@@henrikpetersson3463 It's the question if you want the easy solution or the "real thing". I play with a Drummer in our band that uses Roland V-Drums, and Its always nice to see the big smile on the sound engineer's face when they don't have to mike the drums up, and they can get a di signal from the guitars and the keyboards it's the exact same thing about a clonewheel and a kemper modelling amp. It's just so easy when you have your sounds made ready at a touch of a button, no feedback problems with mikes and the sound guy can concentrate completey on the volumes
Hello, I bought a new uad sphere dlx, but do I have to record my vocals in stereo? Will I experience any losses if I switch it to mono later? I know it's always better to record in mono and mic collection doesn't allow that :(
I have a presonous audio box 96, can the lx work together with its 20 emulations?
eva listens gustavo cerati for sure
Awesome video, thanks! Two questions, if i have an external mono preamp can i connect the front Mic cable to the external preamp and the rear one to the sound card or do I have to have an external 2 channel preamp and connect both cables there? I saw that dlx also has the mic shield simulation(es. Aston halo), is it also present in the lx? Thanks!
Are you stuck with a subscription like the Slate ML-1 for the models now that UA owns it? Like you must have SPARK?
No, the core DSP and native plugin remain free. The Ocean Way Mics and Putnam Collection are paid DSP only options.
🤤 wow
"the only mic you'll ever need" LMFAO.
Why?
@@HOLLASOUNDS try micing up a drum kit with a single overhead. Possible but no flexibility
@@christianthompson1473 True, yes I see what you mean.
@@christianthompson1473 it can be done. In fact, it was pretty standard in the 50s and 60s to utilise one mic for drums.
I agree though to capture variables in dynamics you will need a number of mics.
@@patrickanthony3572 sure in the early days they would record the whole band with 1 mic by placing instruments at different distances from the central mic. Not ideal though 😶
For $300-$400 this would be great for home studios but at these price points I’d go with a 57 and a couple of mid-range condenser mics like a at4040 and a c214 instead
lol....
Damn! Looking at the preview I wondered what's George Lucas doin' there? 😆
It aint the gear anymore
I don’t see how a lesser mic with whatever software is going to match the higher spec mic it’s modelling.
Sounds like a bit of the old confirmation bias there, no? Better mic is better and all that.
Modelling aside, if the people involved are happy then arguably it has 'matched' the higher spec mic. That’s all it needs to do - please the users. And really, anyone’s claims that they can discern any kind of difference are besides the point.
I strongly dislike Anderton's daft airhead bro vibe. It always feels like they underestimate the intelligence and age of their viewers.
$299 is a better price point for modeled microphones, they are too much like snake oil by now. It does not sound anything like the actual real microphones because the circuitry and material and power are not the same you can copy character and tone and eq profiles all you want its just not gonna sound anything like the real thing... ever.
Fair amount of snake oil in this comment…
This is complete spam no studio recording engineer would use or buy this. i am a fan of UA but this is eq or impulse responce modeling. learn how to use a U87 SM57/8 etc. come on UA who are you trying to pull the wool over our eyes?
I'm not a studio engineer, I record stuff in my bedroom and to me this is genius, it would allow me to have one mic for everything.
Let me help the girl. Don’t quit your day job. Save you from living a life of being a poor person.