Neumann digital microphones

o.k. so the boys form Neumann where @ work today giving demo's of their digital line of microphones. The concept is interesting. According to the Neumann guys the signal is converted to digital right after the capsule. It goes down AES42 into the interface box which then outputs an AES/ebu digital signal. The output box allows the mic controls to interface with proprietary software. This allows for level settings, pads,roll off and even a DSP compressor/limiter. Heard the analog counterparts of the TLM 103 and KM184 and then the digital TLM1903D and KDM. It was evident that there was a difference. Not bad not bad at all, now if they could just make them more to my budget :wink:

I don't have "Digital inputs" on any of my nice mic-pre's or 1176 / Summit Limiter etc etc !!

I don't understand their thinking to be honest.

I like analog balanced signals, they are my friends

MM. :wink:

You can achieve very good dynamic range with digital microphones.

Other than that, I don't really see much point.

it seems like pure consumerization of a professional product. kinda like Dolce and Gabana t-shirts, you see them everywhere, but generally speaking those wearing them dont have anything elzse from them at home. now are those t-shirts any better quality? no. probably not even designed by Dolce or Gabana, (they would probably hate them!)I still bet they make more from that line than couture. (sorry I just saw a tshirt yesterday and had this thought)

I think the main market for these is broadcast etc. The concept being that you don't need to use analog mic pre's etc. Everything is in the Mic.

The few TV studio's I've been in have hundreds of meters of cable to a sound room. Anyone who's used an analog multichannel snake will have heard the loss of running a tiny microphone signal through so much cable.

By converting the signal to AES/EBU early on, digital mics maintain the signal a whole lot better. Multiple channels of AES/EBU can also easily be converted to mutlichannel MADI and piped directly over copper or fiber to the control room.

I'm unsure if digital mics will really take off in the recording environment, where the focus is on "flavor" (i.e. one mic pre has a different sound/flavor than the other). However, in the broadcast environment, where the focus is on maintaining clarity for as long as possible, then these mics will do very well.

I think cost reduction on this technology will serve the market quite well. But also, the interface needs to change a little. Maybe this market would be better served by a really good interface to USB. However, that itself would introduce it's own batch of problems.

An ultra-high quality stereo digital mic with a USB interface might be of interest for classical recording. - Simple setup, high quality.

Cheers

R

you could be right about the market. these arent cheap! listing in the $10k and up cuts out the banjo center market.

Lol, don't get me started on banjo center. I have a good friend of mine working there, he introduced me to their Pro Audio guy.

He had no idea about audio. What he spoke about was "I'm really in with the plug-ins". I ended up educating him why it's worth spending a little more on a decent mic pre, why good converters will benefit your recording.

Completely clueless... and then the guy tries to talk me into investing into a mastering studio that he's putting together.

What_A_CROCK_OF_SH*TE.

worst yet... the GC guys never get exposure to the good stuff, because the companies policy is to only stock the cheap stuff (below $400 or so) unless GC has a deal with the manufacturer.

How can these guys sell quality product, or even learn the difference between rubbish and diamonds if all they get their hands on is the low end junk?

ok.. calm down... rant over sorry for thread stealing.

O.k. according to the Neumann guy the street price for said mics was around 3200 dollars. Not as expensive as the big daddy solution D mic but not exactly cheap either.

It was put this way, You buy a good mic plus a mic pre and you would end up spending around the same amount.

Apart from the various valid reasons for it, maybe it's also to claim a bit of new territory that isn't yet covered by Chinese copies ? (a few weeks)

Tierney Sutton was about the first female vocalist to record with Solution D. I'll find the album that it is on.

Sounded good to my ears at least. Jurgen Wahl did a presentation at AES LA about the details of the conversion process, in which they manage to extract some pretty interesting equivalent resolution---it's not just tacking a good A/D on to an internal preamp.

There are some advantages to designing the A/D convertor to interface with the mic directly. Modern A/D convertors often run from 3.3V or maybe 5V rails. why boost a mic up the +/- 15v only to pad it back down again?

The analog audio path before the conversion can be simple and short, after it's digital the signal should be robust.

Only possible issues from a performance perspective is preamp quality and A/D conversopn quality. I trust they will execute that to a pretty high standard. The preamp can certainly be dialed in for that particular mic.

There will still be purists who insist on using their favorite preamp or A/D convertor but I see this as an inevitable evolution. Aren't there already cheap USB output mics?

From the mic manufacturer's perspective it allows them more control over the quality of their product's audio output. They probably have an opinion about what their mic should sound like. Going straight to digital removes a few opportunities to screw it up.

JR

[quote author="JohnRoberts"] Aren't there already cheap USB output mics? [/quote]

Most USB Mic's are based on 16bit converters. Limiting users to 96dB dynamic range.

There are a handful of 24bit mic's out there... but that means very little. 102dB out of a potential 144dB doesn't really take advantage very well. Good enough for guitarists though!

why boost a mic up the +/- 15v

Click to expand...

I would be suspect of the front end only having 5volts of headroom before I had the opportunity to add compression and such.

Mics like these are worth their weight in gold for classical recording, or any kind where you're hanging mics in front of an orchestra and running a couiple of hundred feet of cable, especially in an electrically noisy environment. I'd have given a couple of teeth for a pair at one gig I did, which got buggered up 2/3 of the way through when some kind of electrical buzz crept into the right channel and stayed there.

I'm told that the clarity of the digital mics is way better than their analog equivalents, presumably because the signal goes through so much less circuitry.

Peace,
Paul

The technology behind those mics is really clever. There is a two stage ADC to cover the entire dynamic range those mics can deliver. There are also some additional capabilities such as a limiter and a variable low cut (I think) build into the mic electronics. The AES-42 standard allows for remote controlling those features and pattern control etc. Most importantly thoes mics sound really good. I've yet to use one more thorougly, but I've heard a friend sing through a Solution D (the big one) and it sounded really, really good. Very smooth and clear, no digital harshness at all.

Let's face it, sooner or later digital microphones will hit the music production market as well. Neumann already offer entry level digital mic kits. There is a digital version of the TLM103 now (1500 Euro, IIRC) and digital versions of their small diaphragm line. They also offer a SPDIF converter for small studios who don't want to go AES-42, although that won't let you use the remote capabilities, of course. The way I see it, some years from now, people will use digital microphones and "flavor" to taste using software much like Guitar Rig or AmpliTube in the Guitar market.

[quote author="Rochey"]
Most USB Mic's are based on 16bit converters. Limiting users to 96dB dynamic range.
[/quote]

That said, I think I'd be happy if I achieved even potential 16-bit performance dynamic-range-wise for most sources with the usual amount of noise kicking around.

FWIW:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar07/articles/neumannk1840.htm

Suprised that gus hasn't said anything about this? I wonder what his opinions are?