MOTUnation.com

Don't think anyone expects this to be interesting to someone with a deep mic locker, a classic desk and two vintage outboard pres. Me on the other hand, I don't have a bunch of classic mics and pres around. Just like I don't have any desks or tape machines around. So I couldn't tell you how "close" the Neve model or the 456 model on the VCC and VTM is to the real thing. What I can tell you is that using VCC and VTM sounds far far better than not using it. And $2k for a clean mic pre, two clean mics, and good emulation software is a steal. (Kinda curious to hear what the hardware sounds like by itself...)

So if VMS gives me a better vocal chain or guitar chain than what I have, one that is in the ball park of the emulated gear, I'll be all over it. All of you who have tons of classic Neumanns and Telefunkens and Neve pres and whatnot, you can keep on using the real gear, and I'll be the first to assume it'll still be superior to any emulation.

That's right, I'm talking to the whole lot of you, conceding your dozens of mics and pres from the 60s and 70s are better... uh, hello?

Hello? Anyone here?

Anyone?



Yeah thought so - there's MAYBE a small handful of people here on MOTUnation who own substantially more than a couple of classic mics and pres at best. For the rest of us, who f**ing cares if its off-axis response is not properly modeled?!? I usually use my mics head-on anyway...

EMRR wrote:Just noticed this comment elsewhere, from a guy who spoke directly with Slate about it at NAMM. This person is a working engineer in LA, and a strong skeptic. I'm a strong skeptic, especially at that sort of price.

http://groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=549 ... #msg702353

Talked to the slate guys about the virtual mic. First time I went by their a/b mic, a u-87 wasn't working. Then today they had a real u-47. Asked about the mic modeling process and how they went about modeling each mic for on axis and off axis responses. To which the look of confusion on their faces was priceless. Best was when they told me they modeled frequency response and distortion. But no mention of relation to polar pattern or any other characteristics of any microphone.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. We never even had a U87 at the booth, and the U47 we had worked great and provided us with over two dozen live A/B demos.

I had ten people working at the booth. Two of them were engineers. So that leaves a very large chance that if you asked a random booth member about off axis response, they'd probably have no idea, nor could they wax poetic on how closely our cardioid capsule in the ML-1 replicates the off axis response of the classic M7 and CK12, and how we only model other large cardioid mics with the ML-1.

I'd be glad to answer any questions on the VMS.

Cheers,
Steven

Before Antares had a plugin, they had a box, the MM1. You dialed up the input mic on one side; the one you were trying to emulate on the other. The price was $1,499 IIRC. It worked but it was never the real deal and Antares discontinued it in favor of the plugin. I bought mine when Guitar Center blew out the remaining units super cheap ($149? $99? I don't remember) and sold it a couple of years later for $300 on eBay. One of its big drawbacks was that it did not have a mic pre as part of the unit.

Interestingly, it's baaaaack with a street of $249.99 (B&H) to $399.99 depending where you buy it. This version from TASCAM now has a built in mic pre. Otherwise, it's pretty much the MM1.
http://tascam.com/product/ta-1vp/


I really like the Slate version. The idea of using a neutral mic as the start point makes much more sense than the Antares approach. That there are two channels means that you could use this for true stereo recording if you had two mics that were the same. That will cost more than the initial $2K hit but I could see some studios asking for it right away, especially for use on piano where playing with the mic model might make an instrument sit in the mix in a way that 31 band EQ can't.

I'm of the opinion that emulation cannot equal the real deal ever but, if well done, no reason that you can't get very, very (very) close. This will not put the boutique builders out of business any more than the countless U47 copies have made engineers not want a real one.

OK, I wish that the mics had variable patterns (Omni/Cardioid/Figure 8 on the large; cardioid/omni on the small). OTOH, the large and small cardioids will be the most useful to the vast majority of potential users - if I were rolling out a new product, this would be the logical first choice. Perhaps multi-pattern mics as a future add on.

So if VMS gives me a better vocal chain or guitar chain than what I have, one that is in the ball park of the emulated gear, I'll be all over it.

I'm with you.

If this becomes as successful as I think it could be, perhaps a chassis/module version capable of more than 2 channels in a rack space would be a logical step down the road. Yea? Yea?

Thanks for chiming in Steven!

I guess I'm just a heretic. In the old days, manufacturers were always trying to make their products better. Tape recorder makers were always pushing for lower distortion, higher bandwidth, less wow and flutter. Preamp makers were trying to make the holy grail of pres, the "wire with gain." Microphone makers were looking for "what you hear is what you get." Audiophiles bragged about how realistic their systems sounded. Yada, yada, and so on.

Now that we have the technology to move forward, everyone is obsessed with emulating vintage gear. I just don't get it. I think I'm going to change my screen name to something more appropriate. Suggestions welcomed.

Phil O wrote:I think I'm going to change my screen name to something more appropriate. Suggestions welcomed.

Phildelity?

Or 'Hi-Phil'?

Phil-O-sophy.

Tritonemusic wrote:Phil-O-sophy.

wwwWinning!

Steven, Any ideas on DP support for raven?

There's one thing that Steven's new microphone system can't provide you. You know that little diamond shaped badge that says "Neumann" on it? Without that, how are your clients going to know that what they are hearing is the best?



Well, it turns out that you can buy those little badges on eBay, so it's no problem. Just stick 'em on the microphones that come with Slate's new system, and you're good to go. No more confusion for the client, and no need to explain the complicated system that's reducing the length of your equipment list and bragging rights.



Shoosh

Phil O wrote:I guess I'm just a heretic.

I'm with you Phil. Having tools that help achieve a particular sound is fine, but I don't understand the "vintage" obsession. I understand where it starts, but not why so many people seem to buy into it.

IMHO, the BEST way to choose gear (and mixes, and etc etc) is by a BLIND test. I have every belief in my bones that psychologically we are prone to choose stuff based on our biases and brand names.

How many times have we had clients in and they ask for something changed, it doesn't get changed immediately and they say they like it? Or we hear or read someone say how good a piece of gear is and we automatically go in with a pre-conceived notion of said piece of gear?

I'd like to hear more than just the U47 emulation in the Slate Mic Locker. But I'd like to hear them blindly. If it sounds good, there's no amount of nerdy talk that can justify buying a 10k mic vs the 2k system from Slate.

bayswater wrote:

Phil O wrote:I guess I'm just a heretic.

I'm with you Phil. Having tools that help achieve a particular sound is fine, but I don't understand the "vintage" obsession. I understand where it starts, but not why so many people seem to buy into it.

Some people like an enormous amount of field testing, perhaps?

wonder wrote:IMHO, the BEST way to choose gear (and mixes, and etc etc) is by a BLIND test. I have every belief in my bones that psychologically we are prone to choose stuff based on our biases and brand names.

How many times have we had clients in and they ask for something changed, it doesn't get changed immediately and they say they like it? Or we hear or read someone say how good a piece of gear is and we automatically go in with a pre-conceived notion of said piece of gear?

I'd like to hear more than just the U47 emulation in the Slate Mic Locker. But I'd like to hear them blindly. If it sounds good, there's no amount of nerdy talk that can justify buying a 10k mic vs the 2k system from Slate.

I like duration testing. If it works great for a long period of time, and I love the sound of it and want to use it over and over and over again, on good days and bad... ah, then it's golden and receives my stamp of approval (which is worth one Blue Chip stamp).

Slate VCC, VTM, and FG-X have all passed the test.

Steven Slate made more in depth posts in the thread I originally linked. Some good info.