Some mighty strong opinions here. I'll reserve mine till it finishes downloading & I can install it.

Its been up'd over on the Z.

 

I didn't or was trying to make a confession? lol!
Nah, my point is, I bring out a track fully recorded with a band. Both recorded with a Rode NT2000 ($600) emulated/mix accurately, and that Neumann U87 ($3199); From the top of the head, it is gonna be hard for most to know which mic the vocals are coming from.
That "harshness" you are talking about is treatable in current mixing world; A little more time and dedication but it is treatable. I mean, of course, taking both mics and sing on them acapella style without any processing on empty would make the Neumann a clear winner by a long shot. And I know for sure even in a full track, the Neumann is still a winner. However, it is not that the $600 Rode is sooooo awful that there's no technical mixing method to treat its results and upgraded to come close to the U87.

I have no idea so far which mic was used for Adele's "Hello" (or the trillion songs I've listened to over the years) and that goes for every other engineer out there, period! It just sound great. But until somebody pull the recording session and see the name of the mic or was there physically then it is hard to tell; We can all assume and guess base on certain nuance coming out. It could have been a sub $2000 mics for all we know (although, I'm pretty sure it wasn't) but we wouldn't know just by listening to it.

"Some may even choose not to demo the software with fear that it does actually work and crush their false assumption"
I was being sarcastic with that. However, the sad part is, these folks exist . But that's a whole different story on its own.

Anyway my 2025 Tax bet still stands if I ever get to get it

HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO YOU AND THE REST OF THE AUDIOSEX FAM!

 

Last edited: Nov 26, 2015

You can't boost what isn't there, that's kinda the whole point. With eq curves and impulse respones you do not go from one mic to another. There can be a big dynamic response.. and a mic which has a very strong high-end-roll-off (like old Ribbon's for instance) are simply _missing_ that high end.. how do you know what 'should' be there if you recorded it with a condenser.

I _believe_ in having an (almost) flat response mic that captures pretty much anything, and that you can shape that into what you want. I have no problem believing in 'a special' mic modeled to be whatever, or a reference mic (tc30?) modeled to be whatever, or even a good condenser to be modeled into whatever.

But a recording done with a R121 and make that have the high-end of a U87 or something, I don't think so.

Let's be very clear here: I'm talking about _a hard time believing it_. I love to be proven wrong :P, but that is what demo's and reviews are for.

 

Happy thanksgiving to you too!

Well, back on our own subject, believe me, AFTER PROCESSING, both mics will have a different level of smoothness and a certain vocal will just sound best if tracked through that high-end microphone. Adele's Hello was recorded through high-end gear, the comparission between Rode NT2000 and U87 it's not relevant in her scenario, because her team will always ensure the highest standards.
I'm not trying to get douchy or something, but try it for yourself. Take a great vocal, make a song with it and ask her/him to record twice so you can shootout the U87 and NT2000/NT2A. Then mix the vocal as you would regulary do so you make sure both are processed to the "record standard" point and see which one sounds better and less fatiguing in the mix. I assure you that once you finish the song, in the mix you'll hear U87 more natural and silky-er. I've already got through that experience countless times. Yes you can tame harshness, but you just can't fix the fake top-end of a cheaper solution. The harshness will always be there, maybe in a less obvious way after the processing, but still obvious enough. That type of fake high-frequencies sounds so unnatural and fatiguing, which also makes the vocal thinner too. You can EQ it as much as you want, but you won't achieve the smoothness level of a high-end mic because the native harshness of the cheaper solution it's embeded in the microphone's character.

 

Seems OK on my SM58 for grabbing quick vocal ideas. Didn't try it on my condenser mic though.

 

Does your condenser is supported in their source list? Because i see they don't support a lot of condensers, like Sm7b, TLM103, ksm44, not even Rode NT2a/1a, NTK, LOL!!
Condenser-wise they sourced only high-end microphones. Now that means it's not a "home-user-aimed" product anymore.
Let's see how the "testers" gonna roll with it now.

 

I guess the "home-user-aimed" was a reference to their own custom mic which should be somewhat cheaper compared to a U87 but allows you to emulate one. I think it is just an interesting experiment software wise and probably one thing to consider is the fact that this Mic Room is mainly geared towards vocals which are probably a less complicated "instrument" to record and study compared to something else so it should be possible to emulate the same vocal on different mics in a more accurate way than let's say an acoustic instrument.

 

hahah "pro studios". just listen to top40 music on the radio. its totally possible to do that quality in the bedroom nowadays.

i'm testin this plugin, yeah it transforms an cheap sm58 with a weak bass-response into something magical with great bass response. top notch stuff

 

Don't be ignorant , the only thing that happens in the bedroom when it comes about Top40 hits is just the production if that's the case. Yeah, you can get that done in the bedroom, but then the vocals are recorded in a real pro recording studio, then the mix and mastering are handled by pros as well. You won't see hits on the radio unchecked by pros. Even the radio guys can tell if there's something wrong with a particular song, i have a friend from Portugal, producer as well, who was asked by the radio dudes to fix a problem (he scooped too many lowmids) before they could release it publicly, so his song would match the other songs.

 

I partially agree with most of you. You can't clone a good mic from another one. The dynamics, frequencies, etc... once they're gone they are gone.

On the other hand, if the source mic is a good one I think it's possible to imitate another, not even close to perfection, but with good results. I don't know much about mics, but it makes sense to me.

 

I tried this out with a Behringer B-1 on vocals with various settings and didn't really notice a lot of difference on overall sound.