Antelope Audio - Townsend Labs Sphere - Mic modelling

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

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

bosski

Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2023
Messages
10
Location
United Kingdom
Hello everyone!

This is my first post, and I'm thrilled to finally join this community of microphone enthusiasts and legends. I've been silently absorbing a wealth of knowledge from discussions over the past few months, and I'd love to share my thoughts and ideas with you all.

I work with vocals a lot, particularly in processing. But most of all, I'm a student in all I can possibly learn in this life both from my uni peers and legends like all of you. The wealth of knowledge and expertise in this community is truly inspiring, and I'm eager to contribute my perspective, ideas and learn even more from your experiences.

Now, let's dive into my exciting topic… mic modelling.. 😅

My story began with a profound interest in capsules, their history, and the intricate details that make each one unique. I was captivated by the Townsend Labs Sphere mic modelling system, and I vividly remember the days when I yearned to own it but couldn't quite afford it at the time (I even downloaded the software at that time, not realizing it required a dual-output dual capsule mic!). Regardless, I shoved my SE Electronics X1S mic into it with horrible results. However, this fascination drove me to explore every aspect of the L22, capsules, and the technology with my limited knowledge.

As time went by, Townsend Labs L22 evolved into the Universal Audio Sphere DLX, but my pursuit of mic modelling technology persisted. The concept of having a mic cabinet in my studio, with the ability to select alternatives and post-process variables such as polar patterns, fascinated me. This somehow led me to the group DIY community, and I fell down the rabbit hole of wisdom and legends.

I learned a great deal, particularly in discussions related to DIY dual-output microphones, notably @kingkorg @mihi_fuchs @Wordsushi @Tim Campbell . Inspired by their insights and the wealth of knowledge shared here, I was on the verge of building my first DIY microphone – a dual-output mic with the Alice OPA dual board and a 797 CY002 capsule. However, my plans took an interesting turn (thank god) when I discovered the Antelope Edge Duo microphone and the impressive 18 emulations it offered.

It got me thinking that with King Korg's EQ curve, maybe I could even explore the Townsend Labs models and could potentially save the hassle and cost of building a dual-output microphone from scratch (which most likely would end up a Frankenstein being my first build). 🤖

So now, I've owned the Edge Duo mic for 4 months and been really impressed by its use. I have had some situations where an artist recorded his vocals on an RE-20 and C414 at a different studio, and using the Edge Duo emulations, it was hardly noticeable in the mix or in the vocal composition stage. The chopped takes blended in with no noticeable difference (in the mix).

My question is, how well would the Townsend software work with the Edge Duo microphone considering the different capsule and I'm assuming circuitry from my limited knowledge? I looked at available data on the Edge Duo on Audio Test Kitchen, and from seeing the frequency responses on some models Townsend shares, there were quite some differences where Antelope was very close to the modelled mics such as the U47 FET, while Townsend looked better such as the Sony C800 emulation.
 

Attachments

  • edge duo capsule side.jpg
    edge duo capsule side.jpg
    1.3 MB
  • edge duo close up capsule.jpg
    edge duo close up capsule.jpg
    1.6 MB
  • edge duo.jpg
    edge duo.jpg
    1.3 MB
  • audiokitchen duo vs sphere.png
    audiokitchen duo vs sphere.png
    139 KB
  • SONYEDGESPHERE.png
    SONYEDGESPHERE.png
    143.3 KB
  • U47FET.png
    U47FET.png
    110.5 KB
  • U67.png
    U67.png
    179.9 KB
im still in pursuit of building a dual output mic as it is a must!!! but im in the process of learning to walk before running by doing smaller projects as advised.
 
If you made an eq correction so that you match Edge's response to L22's i don't see a reason for Edge not to perform exactly as L22. Maybe use existing audio files on atk and matching EQ like Fab Filter or CurveEQ to get approximate EQ curve. You could also go by the graph on ATK and see if the resulted correction curve makes sense. Btw, Sphere c800 emulation is spot on, as can be heard from ATK examples.
 
Hello everyone!

This is my first post, and I'm thrilled to finally join this community of microphone enthusiasts and legends. I've been silently absorbing a wealth of knowledge from discussions over the past few months, and I'd love to share my thoughts and ideas with you all.

I work with vocals a lot, particularly in processing. But most of all, I'm a student in all I can possibly learn in this life both from my uni peers and legends like all of you. The wealth of knowledge and expertise in this community is truly inspiring, and I'm eager to contribute my perspective, ideas and learn even more from your experiences.

Now, let's dive into my exciting topic… mic modelling.. 😅

My story began with a profound interest in capsules, their history, and the intricate details that make each one unique. I was captivated by the Townsend Labs Sphere mic modelling system, and I vividly remember the days when I yearned to own it but couldn't quite afford it at the time (I even downloaded the software at that time, not realizing it required a dual-output dual capsule mic!). Regardless, I shoved my SE Electronics X1S mic into it with horrible results. However, this fascination drove me to explore every aspect of the L22, capsules, and the technology with my limited knowledge.

As time went by, Townsend Labs L22 evolved into the Universal Audio Sphere DLX, but my pursuit of mic modelling technology persisted. The concept of having a mic cabinet in my studio, with the ability to select alternatives and post-process variables such as polar patterns, fascinated me. This somehow led me to the group DIY community, and I fell down the rabbit hole of wisdom and legends.

I learned a great deal, particularly in discussions related to DIY dual-output microphones, notably @kingkorg @mihi_fuchs @Wordsushi @Tim Campbell . Inspired by their insights and the wealth of knowledge shared here, I was on the verge of building my first DIY microphone – a dual-output mic with the Alice OPA dual board and a 797 CY002 capsule. However, my plans took an interesting turn (thank god) when I discovered the Antelope Edge Duo microphone and the impressive 18 emulations it offered.

It got me thinking that with King Korg's EQ curve, maybe I could even explore the Townsend Labs models and could potentially save the hassle and cost of building a dual-output microphone from scratch (which most likely would end up a Frankenstein being my first build). 🤖

So now, I've owned the Edge Duo mic for 4 months and been really impressed by its use. I have had some situations where an artist recorded his vocals on an RE-20 and C414 at a different studio, and using the Edge Duo emulations, it was hardly noticeable in the mix or in the vocal composition stage. The chopped takes blended in with no noticeable difference (in the mix).

My question is, how well would the Townsend software work with the Edge Duo microphone considering the different capsule and I'm assuming circuitry from my limited knowledge? I looked at available data on the Edge Duo on Audio Test Kitchen, and from seeing the frequency responses on some models Townsend shares, there were quite some differences where Antelope was very close to the modelled mics such as the U47 FET, while Townsend looked better such as the Sony C800 emulation.
Cant go into details how i did this, but if ATK data is correct this should be the exact correction curve Edge to L22. Load csv file in Voxengo CurveEQ before the plugin, and test Edge with Sphere vst ;)

 
If you made an eq correction so that you match Edge's response to L22's i don't see a reason for Edge not to perform exactly as L22. Maybe use existing audio files on atk and matching EQ like Fab Filter or CurveEQ to get approximate EQ curve. You could also go by the graph on ATK and see if the resulted correction curve makes sense. Btw, Sphere c800 emulation is spot on, as can be heard from ATK examples.
HOLYYY!!.... this why im afraid to post on here.... you guys if i may say are God level to a peasant like me. I was just about to post that I'm going to try the fabfilter approach as I'm slightly familiar with eq matching but never knew how to create a corrective eq curve until reading your previous posts regarding impulse responses (as i love reverb and field recording).. the other question is do you think the edge duo would have a corrective eq in the software as you mentioned in your previous findings with L22 and regarding the sphere DLX being corrected in the circuit..? Many thanks again for the quick response and for this gem!!. P.s i just had a good A/B listen to the sphere c800 model in ATK and daamn theyre great!! antelope sounded great in the mix but i can hear the difference when soloing vocals. im hoping to do some tests and promise to share results as my university has a good selection of mics to play with.
 
HOLYYY!!.... this why im afraid to post on here.... you guys if i may say are God level to a peasant like me. I was just about to post that I'm going to try the fabfilter approach as I'm slightly familiar with eq matching but never knew how to create a corrective eq curve until reading your previous posts regarding impulse responses (as i love reverb and field recording).. the other question is do you think the edge duo would have a corrective eq in the software as you mentioned in your previous findings with L22 and regarding the sphere DLX being corrected in the circuit..? Many thanks again for the quick response and for this gem!!. P.s i just had a good A/B listen to the sphere c800 model in ATK and daamn theyre great!! antelope sounded great in the mix but i can hear the difference when soloing vocals. im hoping to do some tests and promise to share results as my university has a good selection of mics to play with.
Judging by the graph on ATK i'd say all the correction happens in software. Let us know how it works out :D
 
Judging by the graph on ATK i'd say all the correction happens in software. Let us know how it works out :D
Yessirr i will do 100 percent!! i intend to bug my tutors at my university to dust out all those mics in the locker and put them to use!.. they have several mics both software's emulate and I'm very curious in finding out how would they perform side to side with the real thing. i just need to think of a way to make this a fair test and what would be a good approach. :unsure:
 

Attachments

  • 3.png
    3.png
    7.2 MB
  • 4.png
    4.png
    4.3 MB
  • 5.png
    5.png
    6.2 MB
  • imw mic list.png
    imw mic list.png
    682.2 KB
Well, I'm a believer. Not even so much in modeling (though it's awesome) but in the dual output design with ability to change polar pattern in post.

Picked up a "maybe works" Edge Duo for cheap. Definitely didn't work, capsule was freely bouncing around the headbasket when I got it. I was able to get the stock capsule working but one side was damaged and gives the occasional "wooshing" sound, so I replaced it with a JLI-86U capsule. The capsules definitely have different responses, with the original having a high end that straddled the line between detailed and hyped, which the new one mellows.

But using it makes me appreciate the world of difference polar response makes in capture / reproduction of a performance. While I have a couple mics with variable polar patterns, and many with multiple patterns, I rarely move out of whatever pattern I already have in my head for a given mic / source combo.

I did not expect to like this mic enough to keep it, let alone actually use it ;). I will be doing both I think. It is cumbersome, requires two channels, and a stupid ilok dongle (man I hate dongles), but the flexibility it provides to reshape the sound after capture is remarkable for me. I believe it will make me a better recordist by helping me appreciate the nuances of pickup patterns and make better decisions about how to mic things.

I've seen on various threads about other topics folks touching on dual output mics. I am, as the youths say, here for it. Give me more dual out diy content!
 
Well, I'm a believer. Not even so much in modeling (though it's awesome) but in the dual output design with ability to change polar pattern in post.

Picked up a "maybe works" Edge Duo for cheap. Definitely didn't work, capsule was freely bouncing around the headbasket when I got it. I was able to get the stock capsule working but one side was damaged and gives the occasional "wooshing" sound, so I replaced it with a JLI-86U capsule. The capsules definitely have different responses, with the original having a high end that straddled the line between detailed and hyped, which the new one mellows.

But using it makes me appreciate the world of difference polar response makes in capture / reproduction of a performance. While I have a couple mics with variable polar patterns, and many with multiple patterns, I rarely move out of whatever pattern I already have in my head for a given mic / source combo.

I did not expect to like this mic enough to keep it, let alone actually use it ;). I will be doing both I think. It is cumbersome, requires two channels, and a stupid ilok dongle (man I hate dongles), but the flexibility it provides to reshape the sound after capture is remarkable for me. I believe it will make me a better recordist by helping me appreciate the nuances of pickup patterns and make better decisions about how to mic things.

I've seen on various threads about other topics folks touching on dual output mics. I am, as the youths say, here for it. Give me more dual out diy content!
You might be interested in this thread about doing the same thing, but in a way more like the Josephson C700A (two seperate capsules, rather than one dual-diaphragm one):
https://groupdiy.com/threads/making-a-figure-8-with-an-omni-and-a-cardioid-capsule.87941/

And this one (dual-diaphragm capsule):
https://groupdiy.com/threads/quick-diy-dual-output-ldc.69193/

And,
https://groupdiy.com/threads/dual-o...-circuit-k87-capsule-bm-800-donor-body.78430/

https://groupdiy.com/threads/tlm67-modification-to-dual-output.68096/
 
Last edited:
Hello everyone!

This is my first post, and I'm thrilled to finally join this community of microphone enthusiasts and legends. I've been silently absorbing a wealth of knowledge from discussions over the past few months, and I'd love to share my thoughts and ideas with you all.

I work with vocals a lot, particularly in processing. But most of all, I'm a student in all I can possibly learn in this life both from my uni peers and legends like all of you. The wealth of knowledge and expertise in this community is truly inspiring, and I'm eager to contribute my perspective, ideas and learn even more from your experiences.

Now, let's dive into my exciting topic… mic modelling.. 😅

My story began with a profound interest in capsules, their history, and the intricate details that make each one unique. I was captivated by the Townsend Labs Sphere mic modelling system, and I vividly remember the days when I yearned to own it but couldn't quite afford it at the time (I even downloaded the software at that time, not realizing it required a dual-output dual capsule mic!). Regardless, I shoved my SE Electronics X1S mic into it with horrible results. However, this fascination drove me to explore every aspect of the L22, capsules, and the technology with my limited knowledge.

As time went by, Townsend Labs L22 evolved into the Universal Audio Sphere DLX, but my pursuit of mic modelling technology persisted. The concept of having a mic cabinet in my studio, with the ability to select alternatives and post-process variables such as polar patterns, fascinated me. This somehow led me to the group DIY community, and I fell down the rabbit hole of wisdom and legends.

I learned a great deal, particularly in discussions related to DIY dual-output microphones, notably @kingkorg @mihi_fuchs @Wordsushi @Tim Campbell . Inspired by their insights and the wealth of knowledge shared here, I was on the verge of building my first DIY microphone – a dual-output mic with the Alice OPA dual board and a 797 CY002 capsule. However, my plans took an interesting turn (thank god) when I discovered the Antelope Edge Duo microphone and the impressive 18 emulations it offered.

It got me thinking that with King Korg's EQ curve, maybe I could even explore the Townsend Labs models and could potentially save the hassle and cost of building a dual-output microphone from scratch (which most likely would end up a Frankenstein being my first build). 🤖

So now, I've owned the Edge Duo mic for 4 months and been really impressed by its use. I have had some situations where an artist recorded his vocals on an RE-20 and C414 at a different studio, and using the Edge Duo emulations, it was hardly noticeable in the mix or in the vocal composition stage. The chopped takes blended in with no noticeable difference (in the mix).

My question is, how well would the Townsend software work with the Edge Duo microphone considering the different capsule and I'm assuming circuitry from my limited knowledge? I looked at available data on the Edge Duo on Audio Test Kitchen, and from seeing the frequency responses on some models Townsend shares, there were quite some differences where Antelope was very close to the modelled mics such as the U47 FET, while Townsend looked better such as the Sony C800 emulation.
Hello teacher, what is this software for viewing frequency response curves
 
Very curious to get more opinions on Antelope overall versus Sphere overall. And, in particular, how the Edge Go compares against the Sphere LX.

I know that most folks have their existing XLR interfaces of choice, but I do personally find the integrated USB-C interface of the Edge Go to be attractive, so long as it works well.
 
I like Antelope products in general, but I am very much in the minority on that. My personal experience with the Edge Duo is that it is an excellent microphone on it's own but the modeling software produces less convincing results than Sphere.

My experience until recently was limited to the VST. I've now got the Antelope Zen Quadro and have been using the integrated modeling and the results are wildly different than the plugin. Using the plugin the modeling was pretty subtle and nuanced model-to-model, but the "Synergy" version is anything but subtle. Some of the models in the Synergy version give me great results while others are totally unusable with obvious phase issues and or out of left field frequency responses.

That is undoubtedly in part because I replaced that capsule of the Duo, so my results are not necessarily representative. That said, the plugin version had very subtle difference before and after the swap and in general the most notable difference was less high-end hype after the swap. There are no models in the plugin version that are unusable for me and most do lean towards the sound you would expect.

Sphere on the other hand I hear nothing but positives about and it's software produces better results with the Edge Duo than the Antelope software.

So, while I don't own a Sphere if I were buying either new I would opt for the Sphere.
 
I have been very happy with performance of Antelope’s equipment, however, they offer only a very short time for support. This is painful when it comes to software-based products, since computers are always being updated to more advanced OS that may not support older app (obviously I’m mainly a Mac user).

As an example, I have an Antelope Eclipse Monitor Controller/Audio Interface that was extremely well-regarded (and about $6k) in 2013 or 2014. This is a sophisticated interface and mastering console-in-a-box that requires an app to control it. Antelope never once updated the app, so the last Mac OS that runs the app is Sierra or High Sierra. That software was severely outdated by 2015. First world problem, I know but it sucks to have to run an old laptop in the studio just to make use of an expensive piece of gear. Antelope makes no apologies.

I would hope the apps or plugins that support a modeling mic would remain current for at least several years, even as operating systems and DAWs move forward, but who knows!

I get that things move forward, but a $2k or more hardware investment should last at least a decade or more in a studio setting….
 
Thanks for the feedback, sounds like UA is where its at for consistent quality and reliability. For simplicity and portability currently trying Behringer B-1 into Shure MVX2U. Maybe at some point I'll upgrade to Sphere LX into a dual-channel interface (possibly, but not likely, Apollo Solo).
 

Latest posts

Back
Top