New SP mics

[kid klash]

Hopefully, they come with the "Dorsey Mod" off the shelf.

Did I guess right Alan?
.

What is the "Dorsey mod", and what mic(s) does it apply to? I like my original B1's and B3 just the way I received them.

 

[PhilGood]

New and old, for those who don't like to click links.

 

[alanhyatt]

Wow, lots of questions, and I am happy to answer them. First of all, let me list what the changes are;

1. Higher Polarity Voltage to the capsule: Lowers noise floor by 10dB
2. New frequency tension on capsule: Smoother response in the low end
3. Updates to components using higher quality polystyrene components
4. Lower resonance body: Less artifacts from reflections
5. New Head grill design: More air over capsule for better sound
6. Stronger reinforced mesh over capsule: Prevents damage from accidents
7. New SP Halo Shockmount: A better, more flexible shockmount system that allows multiple mics to be mounted from a single source point
8. Higher output: More gain to the mic amp.

Now, to us, this has been a good amount of upgrades, but it is still in the budget range of dollars, so we are not making general comparisons to anything. We just like the new sound and performance better.

The new Halo Shock mount system will be available for other microphone brands that use a threaded mount. This new shockmount designed by us is not cheap at $189.99, but is included in the C1, C3, and T3. So yes, we have raised the price, but you get much more, and all models are RoHS and WEEE compliant.

Not looking to start a fight here, but Chessrock mentioned the Scott Dorsey mod. No, we do not use his mod because his mod is not very good and flawed. There is no adjustment for the bias to the voltage for the rails on his mod, specifically his old mod that was going around these boards. We do not put much into that mod, but others seem to pass it around. Scott is not a mic designer and should know this mod has issues. I hope this does not start a rampage, but it had to be said and it is "our or my opinion".

What we are excited about will be the new C4's and the new CS1 and CS5 that will ship in January. We have done all the budget mics we can do, and now we move up market with the mics.

VTB-2 - Sometimes you have to put things aside because better things are happening. Nothing I can discuss now, but the VTB-2 has been shelved for now.

New photos are on the site, so some of you may have to refresh your browser if cookies were set to see the new pics.

Thanks for allowing me the time to post and reply...

 

[billisa]

What we are excited about will be the new C4's and the new CS1 and CS5 that will ship in January.

Hi Alan,

What would the specs be for the CS1, esp. self-noise? What is it particularly designed for?

Thanks

 

[Marik]

Not looking to start a fight here, but Chessrock mentioned the Scott Dorsey mod. No, we do not use his mod because his mod is not very good and flawed. There is no adjustment for the bias to the voltage for the rails on his mod, specifically his old mod that was going around these boards. We do not put much into that mod, but others seem to pass it around. Scott is not a mic designer and should know this mod has issues. I hope this does not start a rampage, but it had to be said and it is "our or my opinion".

I don't think it is something to start a fight, as what you say is true (at least IMO).

Although "Scott Dorsey's mod" might be an improvement over some mics, generally speaking, it is not a very good design. Based on a famous Schoeps circuit, his design is much simplified and in that appearance was used in many Chinese mics, with slight modifications. In fact, I don't see a good reason of building it, as you could as well to buy a mic with the circuit already incorporated.

What you get with this very simple circuit is restricted bass response, dry and lifeless 2D sound, and limited SPL handling.

Best, M

 

[Harvey Gerst]

And before people start jumping Alan's ass, he's right about the "Scott Dorsey mod" - it does have some problems. The original Schoeps circuit is a good design, but I don't think pulling the transformer out of a mic is always the best solution. It makes the mic sound "different", not necessarily "better".

Changing out cheap caps and FETs for better components is usually a good idea (which is what Scott also recommends), but please note that as Flatpicker points out, "This circuit doesn't work well on mics using capsules from 797 (Studio Projects, Behringer, and some MXLs to name a few). These capsules need a voltage multiplier to generate a higher bias voltage, so you're better off just up-grading the capacitors on the original circuit board."

Alan and Brent have made some significant improvements to the new SP mics. Don't trivialize it by suggesting the "Scott Dorsey mod" is automatically a vast improvement to any mic.

I love Scott Dorsey and he's a good friend, but we argue, and sometimes disagree, on what's "good". His Schoeps circuit "mod" can improve many mics - but not all of them.

 

[kid klash]

I don't think it is something to start a fight, as what you say is true (at least IMO).

Although "Scott Dorsey's mod" might be an improvement over some mics, generally speaking, it is not a very good design. Based on a famous Schoeps circuit, his design is much simplified and in that appearance was used in many Chinese mics, with slight modifications. In fact, I don't see a good reason of building it, as you could as well to buy a mic with the circuit already incorporated.

What you get with this very simple circuit is restricted bass response, dry and lifeless 2D sound, and limited SPL handling.

Best, M

Thanks for the answer Alan and Marik. Sounds like something I'm not interested in doing.

 

[Marik]

Flatpicker points out, "This circuit doesn't work well on mics using capsules from 797 (Studio Projects, Behringer, and some MXLs to name a few). These capsules need a voltage multiplier to generate a higher bias voltage, so you're better off just up-grading the capacitors on the original circuit board."

To add to this point, the original Schoeps circuit was developed for SD, lower output capsules. The use of the circuit with LDs (esp. with a voltage multiplier) will greatly reduce the circuit overload capability (which BTW, is not that great to start with).

Best, M

 

[tone_aot]

I'm gonna be kinda mad if the new C1 sounds better than the old one. Then i'll want another mic. I'm interested in hearing what it sounds like compared to the old ones.

 

[notbradsohner]

Thanks for the good info. I appreciate the to-the-point response without any "fluff."

 

[cannabis]

thanks to alan, harvey and marik

for your usual knowledgeable

and helpful info - much appreciated

Hopefully, they come with the "Dorsey Mod" off the shelf.

Did I guess right Alan?
.

a new pretty sticker and a higher price for SP, nice

and chesspro chimes in

with his usual passive-aggressive

uninformed comments




























oops,

did i say that out loud?

 

[chessrock]

If anyone else besides me had asked about the Dorsey mod thing ... it would have been viewed as a legitimate question, and answered as such.

Easy guys.

 

[tubedude]

What the general charachter of the mic. Still pushing towards that "Neumann" mic that the original C1 was going for?
I'll bite and be the first to try a new C1 on 3 different vocalists here in 2 weeks. Are they available yet? If not, Alan, get one to me, just tell me how. paul at demokingproductions dot com

If I can get one, vocal samples will follow shortly. Stay tuned.

 

[tubedude]

Will Full Compass have them yet?

Also, tell me more about the new C4's and thier projected release.

 

[Brent Casey]

And before people start jumping Alan's ass, he's right about the "Scott Dorsey mod" - it does have some problems. The original Schoeps circuit is a good design, but I don't think pulling the transformer out of a mic is always the best solution. It makes the mic sound "different", not necessarily "better".

Changing out cheap caps and FETs for better components is usually a good idea (which is what Scott also recommends), but please note that as Flatpicker points out, "This circuit doesn't work well on mics using capsules from 797 (Studio Projects, Behringer, and some MXLs to name a few). These capsules need a voltage multiplier to generate a higher bias voltage, so you're better off just up-grading the capacitors on the original circuit board."

Alan and Brent have made some significant improvements to the new SP mics. Don't trivialize it by suggesting the "Scott Dorsey mod" is automatically a vast improvement to any mic.

I love Scott Dorsey and he's a good friend, but we argue, and sometimes disagree, on what's "good". His Schoeps circuit "mod" can improve many mics - but not all of them.

<POOF!>

Goodness gracious. Haven't been here in a while.
Now, if I understand what you or Flatpicker is saying here, Harvey - it's that the 797 capsules require a some sort of multiplier/charge pump circuit in order to function. This actually is not the case. They will function just fine without this circuitry as any capsule of similar design will.
As for Scott Dorsey's circuit, from looking at the schematic that was published in Recording Magazine, it is clear that there is no way to set up the operating point of the FET configured as impedance converter/phase splitter in order to ensure that the signal voltage can swing to its maximum potential without clipping on the high or low excursions.
In an active balanced topology such as the "Schoeps Circuit", this is a crucial detail.
I think you are a good friend to Scott Dorsey, but I would not go so far as to say that the Dorsey Mod will "improve many mics". It will not improve any mics.
And to Marik: The Schoeps topology may have been originally intended for SD capsules, meaning that a bigger capsule with higher signal voltage will overload the circuit earlier - but you must also consider the improved in-out ratio, S/N and the fact that there is still a very good headroom spec. with a large capsule.

Brent Casey
PMI Audio Group
877-563-6335

 

[Harvey Gerst]

It was Flatpicker's statement about the voltage multiplier that I quoted. I was just pointing out that the "Dorsey Mod" consists of throwing out a microphone's existing circuitry and substituting the Schoeps circuit instead.

That does not make sense to me on many levels. It was perhaps generous of me to say it will improve "many" mics; let's leave it at "some" mics.

We are not in disagreement, Brent*. I think you missed this line in my original post:

"Alan and Brent have made some significant improvements to the new SP mics. Don't trivialize it by suggesting the "Scott Dorsey mod" is automatically a vast improvement to any mic."



*Unless you're really trying to deliberately piss me off, in which case, I will ask Alan to beat the crap out of you.

 

[tubedude]

Harvey do you have a new C1 yet?
I just sold a Soundeluxe U195 because it wasnt quite doing it for me and was a bit too sibilant sometimes. I need a replacement. Soon.

 

[notCardio]

PMI representatives

Just curious. When you have 2 mic brands, how do you decide what improvements go into which line? How does that work?

 

[notCardio]

I thought siblance

was supposed to be one of the major drawbacks of the old C1?

 

[Harvey Gerst]

Harvey do you have a new C1 yet?

I only own one SP mic - a T3, which I dearly love. I do plan on buying a JM47 from PMI.

Alan also sent me a JM OneQ to try, and we're definitely buying that as well.