Premier Rock Forum

Boombats wrote:Seriously, is this a joke???

No, I don't think so.

I assume what they really wanted to say was that every instrument was recorded using the same mic. It's not a band playing live in a room. The singer's voice is doubled and he's singing harmonies. The guitars, bass, voice and the kick drum are definitely close miced.
The signals sound good though, but it's not that I haven't heard anything like that before.

he is explaining his microphones here: http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/mv/msg/19896/0/0/0/

Uncle Ovipositor wrote:It looks like someone's SM57 went to the vet.

good one

max wrote:I assume what they really wanted to say was that every instrument was recorded using the same mic. It's not a band playing live in a room. The singer's voice is doubled and he's singing harmonies. The guitars, bass, voice and the kick drum are definitely close miced.
The signals sound good though, but it's not that I haven't heard anything like that before.

Well, so I googled myself and noticed this....

Anyway, the kick drum was not close mic'd.

Actually, I had only a single mic available when that was recorded, so the whole thing went through the same mic - in overdubs, as was noticed by somebody.

The drums were no exception and were done with the same single mic - situated around drummers left elbow and behind him on the 'hat side, pointing towards snare/kick.

It was nice to have such a small tracklist for mixing....

Best regards,

Andy

www.SimpsonMicrophones.com

Considering the minimalistic approach the drums sound pretty amazing.
Good luck with your mics.

I was reminded of some mention here of the horribly slow download from my server so I thought I'd pop back and say that I just updated my sample section with some more stuff in both mp3 & wav, so downloading is not so painfully slow.
There are some raw drum overhead tracks there & some other things which quite nicely illustrate some material resonance signature differentiation aspects, aside from the dynamics/resolution.

Andy

hey these look very intriguing. but not for 4000 bucks a pair, especially considering there is no technical info on there at all.

What's the off axis response like? There isn't any basic technical info on the site such as frequency response or polar pattern. What's the output level? I didn't see a single picture of the mic on a stand... how do they mount? I also noticed that the "press quotes" don't say who is responsible for the quote.

i would almost spring for it at half the price IF there was more legitimate info and less mumbo jumbo on the site. i guess ill just have to stick to condensers, ribbons and dynamics for now. if they are the real deal, i would really be interested in trying out a pair.

Alright - I'm not going to get all gossipy here, but a I work with a man who owns a pair of these. I believe they are the first two sold in the US. Here's what I know:
The microphones look like a mid-range driver, and also sound like a mid-range driver. That is, until you apply a sort of reverse equalizer (think RIAA vinyl curve) on the back end. Then, according to the gentleman with the mics, they sound incredible.
So, compared to other mics, they require more work, but sound great.
Mr. Simpson, if you're reading, I hope you take this as a positive review. He said nothing but good things about the mics. Unfortunately - and this is my opinion - I don't think most people want an extra step between them and great sound. For example, most people didn't want to put four speakers in their house to listen to quad records. Most engineers might be put off by having to to equalize the sound from a mic every time they use it. There are plenty of fantastic mics out there, and people resist change.
Good luck with your business venture. If I ever have a lot of money, I'll check out your microphones.

What, exactly, is a "reverse equalizer"?

These do have all of the key elements of snake oil. I'm not saying they are because I have no basis for an opinion one way or another, and people who have them seem happy with them. But because there's no information about them and they're being described as a new type of microphone without any discussion of what, exactly, that means, but championing it as a breakthrough in "time domain performance" due to "acoustic impedance matching"...

Perhaps those are terms that microphone manufacturers use. I don't know - I'm not even a pro engineer, so it could well be over my head. It could be what the gang at Electrical can't talk about anything BUT time domain performance and acoustic impedance when they're shooting up by the water cooler. But to me it sounds like a mish-mash of technical-like lingo that doesn't make much sense when broken down.

Then someone else chimes in about how the key to these mics is the "reverse equalizer". By which I assume you meant the quantum metric de-equantifier.

It just comes across as fishy. Which absolutely is not meant to say that it is, in fact, fishy, just that it comes across that way.

And considering the price point, that could be a very costly pig in a poke.

I'll wait for someone to loan me theirs.