Dissecting the Delphos

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Wordsushi

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Messages
435
Location
Los Angeles, CA
That Roswell Delphos certainly looks sexy with its killer paint job and it seems to be getting some very positive reviews online, including that one from Greg Wells. But my question is, how different could the Delphos actually be from any DIY combination of Mic Parts MP-57 Schoeps revision and their RK-87?

I found this photo of the Delphos PCB online and it appears to me to be pretty much exactly like the MP-57, just all laid out on one board, and with the addition of larger, better quality 1uf caps at C3, C4 ? Has anyone here heard of any other specific circuit mods or component changes?



 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-05-18 at 9.00.58 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2018-05-18 at 9.00.58 AM.png
    871.7 KB · Views: 77
Looks like a typical Schoeps circuit.
I can't find T3 and the inductors for the DC/DC converter, but the fact that the trimpot is marked '60' (V?) makes me think that a DC converter must be present.

I found a picture taken from a different angle.

Looking closer, it seems that T4 is the oscillator for the DC converter, it seems the FET is on the back of the PCB.
There are markings 'S' and 'D'  next to C6.
It looks that the inductors (68 and 180 uH) are not mutually coupled.
 

Attachments

  • Delphos.JPG
    Delphos.JPG
    107.8 KB · Views: 50
The FET is on the small PCB below the capsule and connected to the main PCB with white/blue wires.
There is also a capacitor on the back of the PCB.
 

Attachments

  • Delphos-Back.JPG
    Delphos-Back.JPG
    30.4 KB · Views: 24
Isn't Roswell supposed to be some superior synthetic membrane in the capsule?

I seem to remember Shure bought the original Roswellite company (Crowley and Tripp) and eventually used the technology in the Shure KSM353 and KSM313. Or are they just using the name?
 
cyrano said:
Isn't Roswell supposed to be some superior synthetic membrane in the capsule?

I seem to remember Shure bought the original Roswellite company (Crowley and Tripp) and eventually used the technology in the Shure KSM353 and KSM313. Or are they just using the name?

I believe they are two separate business entities. The Delphos is made by Roswell Pro Audio.  A quick search of the California LLC database shows RPA was registered as a corporation in April of 2015.
 
RuudNL said:
Looks like a typical Schoeps circuit.
I can't find T3 and the inductors for the DC/DC converter, but the fact that the trimpot is marked '60' (V?) makes me think that a DC converter must be present.

I found a picture taken from a different angle.

Looking closer, it seems that T4 is the oscillator for the DC converter, it seems the FET is on the back of the PCB.
There are markings 'S' and 'D'  next to C6.
It looks that the inductors (68 and 180 uH) are not mutually coupled.

Yeah, they aren't mutually coupled on the MP-57 either. Looks like the HF EQ contour caps on the MP-57 are placed on that switch PCB on the Delphos. The MP-57 also has the gate connected directly to the pattern switch.
 
wlinart said:
Wasn't roswell from the same owner as mic-parts?
If so, the similarities are bo surprise.

Yup. That's why I was wondering if there was any difference aside from changing C3/C4 to 1uf, and of course, a different layout. I'm also wondering if there are slightly different caps used to contour the HF on the Delphos for a smoother top end.
 
RuudNL said:
As far as I can see, the capacitors are .1 uF (=0.1 uF or 100 nF)

Holy crap, I believe you are correct, sir. I think I conflated the Delphos review quote about an extended bottom end with the idea of it having the component change from the MP-57 and my mind saw 1uf.
 
I respect Matt (MP/Roswell) for many reasons, for Recording Hacks the most.

However, how did he came up with  900$ price for this mic?!
 
I'm gonna guess, something along the lines of, "because we can" ;D

And/or i guess you could argue it's to appeal (more) to the more "average" buyer, who is (sadly) still under the impression that price is a direct reflection of quality (whatever that means)...

You know, if it's ("too") cheap, it can't possibly be any good, can it? :p
 

Latest posts

Back
Top