Are Neumann Solution-D series microphones a Good Concept?

[Tim Sprout]

The August 2006 Issue of Recording Magazine has a blurb about
Neumann digital microphones. More info on the Solution-D Series of
mics can be found at www.neumann.com

Described features:

-A/D conversion takes place before level matching

-preamps and A/D converters are no longer required

-mixing console functions such as mute, phase reverse, and transient
limiter are integrated into the microphone.

-polar pattern, pre-attenuation, and low-cut filter can be set digitally and
controlled remotely with software.

Are these mics the wave of the future?

Historically, it seems "all in one" solutions are never as good as
solutions using good quality individual parts. But is Neumann on to
something here? Do other microphone manufacturers make digital
mics?

A quick search with Froogle lists these mics at $9000-$14000.


-Tim Sprout

[Mike Rivers]

Tim Sprout wrote:

> Historically, it seems "all in one" solutions are never as good as
> solutions using good quality individual parts. But is Neumann on to
> something here? Do other microphone manufacturers make digital
> mics?

Beyer made one for a short time, but it fizzled. Neumann has this one
pretty well thought out and it's possible to integrate it into a system
(word clock in and out means that you can use more than just one or one
pair) and it has a lot of controls available when you connect a
computer. They have an interesting two-stage A/D converter that gives
them full coverage of the mic's dynamic range, and the concept of a
preamp goes away. For ten grand or so, this isn't junk with a Neumann
mic hooked to the front end. But I don't think that price will come
down real quickly, so I don't expect to see a few of these in the mic
closet of every studio for a while yet.

Other "digital mics" today are ones like the BLUE and Samson with USB
output, designed to connect directly to a computer rather than through
a digital mixer or other interface. At $100 or less, don't expect them
to be comparable to the Neumann Solution D.

[David Satz]

Mike Rivers wrote:

> Other "digital mics" today are [ ... ]

Schoeps also has a digital body (the "CMD 2U") which can be used with
any of their Colette-series capsules. It also contains an A/D converter
and would be used in a manner similar to the Neumann.

Incidentally, Neumann recently introduced a "KM 180 D" series of
digital microphones based on their small-diaphragm KM 180 series.

A standard exists for this type of connection--"AES 42" is the term I
keep seeing, but I haven't looked it up yet.

--best regards

[gunnar]

> Are these mics the wave of the future?

Probably. But when the future will happen depends on the implementation
and the application. In some specialized applications it might spread
very fast due to the advantages at that specific usage. Today there are
a few very expensive implementations so it sure has to be specialized
usage.

Right now you will not find any of these in the typical bedroom studio,
way over their budget. But that might change when Behringer or Samson
or whatever brings out a low-priced mic with this digital interconnect
(they are dabbling in USB mics right now).

And in many applications digital mics will not happen for a long time,
if nothing else there are a lot of really good mics and preamps out
there already that will work for many years to come.

Personally, what I really would like to have is top-quality digital
wireless mics.

You never really know about technical stuff when (or if) it does come
through on a large scale.

Gunnar

[Eric Toline]

Re: Are Neumann Solution-D series microphones a Good Concept?

Group: rec.audio.pro Date: Sun, Aug 20, 2006, 10:53pm (EDT-3) From:
(gunnar)

Personally, what I really would like to have is top-quality digital
wireless mics.<<<<<<<<<<

If you mean digital wireless systems then:
www.zaxcom.com

Eric

[Ty Ford]

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:40:54 -0400, Tim Sprout wrote
(in article >):

> The August 2006 Issue of Recording Magazine has a blurb about
> Neumann digital microphones. More info on the Solution-D Series of
> mics can be found at www.neumann.com
>
> Described features:
>
> -A/D conversion takes place before level matching
>
> -preamps and A/D converters are no longer required
>
> -mixing console functions such as mute, phase reverse, and transient
> limiter are integrated into the microphone.
>
> -polar pattern, pre-attenuation, and low-cut filter can be set digitally and
> controlled remotely with software.
>
> Are these mics the wave of the future?
>
> Historically, it seems "all in one" solutions are never as good as
> solutions using good quality individual parts. But is Neumann on to
> something here? Do other microphone manufacturers make digital
> mics?
>
> A quick search with Froogle lists these mics at $9000-$14000.
>
>
> -Tim Sprout

Yes beyer preceded them by about five years. Not as feature laden as the
Neumann, but a good effort. I reviewed the beyer mic when it came out. I
think the review is still in my archive.

Regards,

Ty Ford





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

[Mike Rivers]

Ty Ford wrote:

> Yes beyer preceded them by about five years. Not as feature laden as the
> Neumann, but a good effort. I reviewed the beyer mic when it came out. I
> think the review is still in my archive.

The thing with the Beyer was that there was no word clock sync
facility. You could connect its output to an AES/EBU input and the
input device could synchronize data with what's coming out of the mic.
But then what do you do with a second mic? Also, since AES/EBU is
defined for a two -channel data stream, what does one mic look like?
Does it give you two identical audio streams? Or do you select one
channel or the other and the unselected one is silent?

My memory is foggy about this, but it's possible that there was a
digital input on the mic's termination box so that you could connect
another mic and the output would look like stereo with one mic on one
channel and the other mic on the other channel, but that was the end of
the line.

And then there was the issue of powering them. There was an AES
standard in development for "digital phantom power" but I'm not sure
where that is or if anyone ever actually implemented it. I think the
Beyer digital mic might have (for powering options) but with no
matching inputs, it didn't do much good. I believe that the Neumann
Solution D must be used with its external box, but it can be used
without an attached computer once things are set up.

An idea before its time, for sure, but the time is getting closer.

[Scott Dorsey]

Mike Rivers > wrote:
>Ty Ford wrote:
>
>> Yes beyer preceded them by about five years. Not as feature laden as the
>> Neumann, but a good effort. I reviewed the beyer mic when it came out. I
>> think the review is still in my archive.
>
>The thing with the Beyer was that there was no word clock sync
>facility. You could connect its output to an AES/EBU input and the
>input device could synchronize data with what's coming out of the mic.
>But then what do you do with a second mic? Also, since AES/EBU is
>defined for a two -channel data stream, what does one mic look like?
>Does it give you two identical audio streams? Or do you select one
>channel or the other and the unselected one is silent?

The attitude at the time was you just reclocked everything. However, it
has since turned out to be a bad thing to do; sample rate converters have
some serious problems with closely-spaced clocks. I don't think this
behaviour was well-known at the time Beyer came out with their mike.

>And then there was the issue of powering them. There was an AES
>standard in development for "digital phantom power" but I'm not sure
>where that is or if anyone ever actually implemented it. I think the
>Beyer digital mic might have (for powering options) but with no
>matching inputs, it didn't do much good. I believe that the Neumann
>Solution D must be used with its external box, but it can be used
>without an attached computer once things are set up.

The AES standard did pass the microphone standards committee and is an active
and valid standard. However, nobody but Neumann has used it.

>An idea before its time, for sure, but the time is getting closer.

If I were doing it, I'd have a ring buss of cat-5 cable. You put mikes
on it, and set their address from 0 to 7 with a dip switch. The power
supply sends clock out on one pair, and an address pulse, and when the
address indicates the time period is correct for the mike, the mike sends
a sample. You'd have to allow some slop for changes in cable length, but
it would be like a higher speed IEEE-488 thing.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> If I were doing it, I'd have a ring buss of cat-5 cable. You put mikes
> on it, and set their address from 0 to 7 with a dip switch. The power
> supply sends clock out on one pair, and an address pulse, and when the
> address indicates the time period is correct for the mike, the mike sends
> a sample. You'd have to allow some slop for changes in cable length, but
> it would be like a higher speed IEEE-488 thing.

I wonder if some of the "audio over Ethernet" technology that's
becoming popular in installed sound systems like CobraNet would apply.
They claim "very low latency" (doesn't everybody?) but when dealing for
multiple mics, if latency isn't well controlled, stable, and
controllable (and best, automatically compensated) it's going to be a
big pain to use in practice.

[gunnar]

Eric Toline wrote:

> Personally, what I really would like to have is top-quality digital
> wireless mics.<<<<<<<<<<
>
> If you mean digital wireless systems then:
> www.zaxcom.com

Getting close. Now all I need is to win on the Lotto.

Gunnar