|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 24, 2024 7:45:27 GMT -6
Soyuz finally released their Ambisonic mic today, and I've been impatiently waiting to share it with everyone! I've had it here for a bit and made an over hour long video that I'll post below. If you've never really worked in Ambisonics and don't know a lot about it, this video will provide you with a bit of a crash course so you can walk away from it and feel confident getting into that world and dealing with the files and workflow correctly. I've also recorded a whole song with the 013A on every source and have provided full ambisonic session files so you can really dive in and experience how cool the technology is and all the ways you can manipulate it in post.
In a word, I would have to say that Ambisonics sounds really different than plain old stereo and is a hell of a lot more flexible. You can't really make a normal stereo mic sound like and image things like an Ambisonic mic, but you can take the Ambisonic signal and mess with it to make it sound like what you're used to hearing with a stereo mic. This isn't just an esoteric 1970's technology that you can only use for things outside of music production. It was completely ahead of it's time in a lot of ways and now that we have modern computer processing and plugins, the sky really is the limit on what you can do with one of these mics. Ambisonics is also somewhat "format agnostic", so it's very simple and straight forward to convert this into stereo or any other surround sound/atmos format you can think of. This is more or less just really complicated math.
This has been a whole new world to me over the last few months learning about all of this and discovering all the cool potential possibilities. There's no going back at this point, I've gotten sucked into the Ambisonic world and can't believe it's taken me this long to try it...
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Jun 24, 2024 9:57:25 GMT -6
Looking forward to digging into this, thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 10:29:28 GMT -6
$2800. Medium price range in a market with only high and low, mostly. Better sound than a Soundfield, or as solid a set of processing options? Surely better than the Rode, Sennheiser, and Core Sound TetraMic on the low end.
I've done a lot with horizontal only arrays using individual Sennheiser MKH mics, and the sound is great.
I have the relatively cheap Rode Ambisonic, but I honestly can't say if I think it sounds good or not since it only gets used for ambience in live settings...but definitely not as good as the Sennheiser MKH array. I'm putting up the MKH for anything close and critical in sound.
Localization is a little fuzzy by nature, it generates coincident patterns from "almost" coincident capsules, supposedly gets much better with 2nd order 8 capsule ambisonic mics (Core Sound OctaMic - $2000)...but...8 tracks of capture!
Those wanting the sound of spaced mics won't get it from this, but you can do creative things blending spaced pairs with ambisonic virtual pairs, or surround derivations.
People were sad when the Sennheiser ambisonic came out and was aimed at the low end rather than being an MKH capsule type, but as they said, it'd be a $10K mic with MKH capsules. It'd probably be the best of the 4 capsule types though.
For the haters, this is 3D M/S. hahahaha!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 24, 2024 14:12:49 GMT -6
For the haters, this is 3D M/S. hahahaha!!! This was also a bit of a surprising take away for me after using it for a bit. I figured out that once the transcoder send the signal to Ambix, channel 1 was basically the "Mid" signal and 2-4 were the "Sides/Height" information more or less. I found a great company called Red Rock Sound (https://redrocksound.pro/en/) that makes a bunch of analog inspired plugins (Neve, Pultec...) and all of them are Ambisonic compatible. The coolest part of their plugin layout is the way you can process all the different channel separately. On the Pultec style EQ I could tell it to take just the first channel (mids) and boost the low end, then take channels 2-4 (Sides) and cut a little low end. I tried the same thing compression wise, really interesting results compared to trying to same thing in normal M/S after the decoder had taken the signal down to stereo. Theres a TON of flexibility when you can do some of your processing to the signal as a full ambisonic thing, and other things at the end as purely stereo processing. You do kind of destroy the "accuracy" or the stereo field when you start doing weird things like that, but so far I've just rolled with it if it sounds cool! |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 14:24:56 GMT -6
I sampled some bits of the video, nice work, and sounds good!
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 15:07:46 GMT -6
There's hardly any market for it, but what I find missing is hardware that can deliver a stereo output in real time like the Soundfield products can. Most of the time I'd use my Rode, I can't because there's no post, it's a live mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 24, 2024 16:08:27 GMT -6
There's hardly any market for it, but what I find missing is hardware that can deliver a stereo output in real time like the Soundfield products can. Most of the time I'd use my Rode, I can't because there's no post, it's a live mix. I agree, it would be really cool to have a hardware option that would put it down to two channels. Even an analog ambisonic channel strip with 4 inputs that are all linked to a single gain knob, a basic EQ and Compressor on there that do the same thing to every channel and spits it out to stereo. You're right, not really a market (and part of the fun is the endless manipulation in post), but it would still be awesome to see someone do it... I guess Soyuz could make one for their specific microphone, as it would have to be tailored to a specific mic if you have to do the transcoding via hardware (I'm assuming/guessing on that though). If you really wanted to do it right, someone could figure out how to do the decoding via a super low latency digital part of the circuit where you could input presets for different mics or something? |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 16:25:41 GMT -6
I just dug around and found the original Calrec Soundfield encoder circuit diagrams....I see why there's no product options! But it could be done easily in digital in a hardware box.
|
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 24, 2024 17:11:04 GMT -6
I just dug around and found the original Calrec Soundfield encoder circuit diagrams....I see why there's no product options! But it could be done easily in digital in a hardware box. I'm just wondering if it's possible to do it with no latency in the analog world using a digital decoding system through SHARC chips or something (similar to UAD). The plugin transcoder that Audio Brewers did for Soyuz has a low latency "Monitor" option so you can send a low latency signal to artist headphones to monitor the Ambisonic signal down to stereo in real time. The quality isn't as good as the "Quality" option, lots of latency involved with the better quality mode... |
|
|
|
Post by russellcreekps on Jun 24, 2024 18:16:22 GMT -6
Great vid as always and very informative! I love the way it sounds on the acoustic in Atmos…not sure how well that would work in a full mix, but damn it sounds so real to life on its own, great or a simple acoustic/vocal track. Would have liked the bluegrass band to have the vocal more upfront which is probably impossible due to this scenario…regardless, truly impressive. And your tune, recording and mix, really amazing…loving it all but especially the drums/cymbals overall…well done! Another one that’s looking pretty cool but isn’t quite the same tech is the Nordic Audio Labs NU-880K (sold as a ‘surround’ mic). Two figure of eight patterns and one omni (3 total). It also has the capability to move stereo placement in post with plugins. Really interested in buying one of these types of mics specifically for acoustic. I think the 13A just moved to the top of the shortlist. A lot of things on that list though…not sure I’ll ever get there!  |
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Jun 24, 2024 18:27:24 GMT -6
There's hardly any market for it, but what I find missing is hardware that can deliver a stereo output in real time like the Soundfield products can. Most of the time I'd use my Rode, I can't because there's no post, it's a live mix. My Sound Devices MixPre 6 has an Ambisonic mode. I’ve never been able to try it, bc I don’t have an Ambisonic mic, but I assume it’s doing something to mix down to stereo on-the-fly while recording the 4 discrete signals for later post processing. Always been super curious about this, but an Ambisonic mic keeps getting bumped down the purchase list… |
|
|
|
Post by nobtwiddler on Jun 24, 2024 18:38:46 GMT -6
I watched the entire vid, listened, and I have to say, although the clips sounded good, I don't think it was anything that special? (spatial) Haha
(I do agree the lead vocalic the Bluegrass clip was TOO low in the mix!)
Especially if you are just going to do stereo stuff, then I feel this is a total waste of time, as is any of these mics.
I could create a deep & wide stereo field from stuff I already own.
I really wanted to like this, as I'm a freak for stereo (+) mics.
But I didn't get the feeling from the video, that it warrants a purchase.
SO be it.
|
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 24, 2024 19:03:28 GMT -6
There's hardly any market for it, but what I find missing is hardware that can deliver a stereo output in real time like the Soundfield products can. Most of the time I'd use my Rode, I can't because there's no post, it's a live mix. My Sound Devices MixPre 6 has an Ambisonic mode. I’ve never been able to try it, bc I don’t have an Ambisonic mic, but I assume it’s doing something to mix down to stereo on-the-fly while recording the 4 discrete signals for later post processing. Always been super curious about this, but an Ambisonic mic keeps getting bumped down the purchase list… If you're super curious, I can send you a few "raw" ambisonic files that you could run out of your DAW and a SUPER low level and into your Sound Devices MixPre just to experiment and see what it does. I would say download the session files from my video, but I had to burn in the ambix transcoder for all of those files because there was no way for people to demo the Soyuz transcoder plugin (each license is tied to the microphone serial number when you buy the mic). Let me know and I can send you something (drums would probably be the most interesting thing). |
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 24, 2024 19:06:02 GMT -6
I watched the entire vid, listened, and I have to say, although the clips sounded good, I don't think it was anything that special? (spatial) Haha (I do agree the lead vocalic the Bluegrass clip was TOO low in the mix!) Especially if you are just going to do stereo stuff, then I feel this is a total waste of time, as is any of these mics. I could create a deep & wide stereo field from stuff I already own. I really wanted to like this, as I'm a freak for stereo (+) mics. But I didn't get the feeling from the video, that it warrants a purchase. SO be it. Ya, I needed her to sing just a "little" louder in a few spots to be ideal. That's just the nature of doing that stuff, and there's a lot going on in a song with a lot of instrumentation going on and a quieter vocal in parts. Anyway, it sounds like I saved you some money at the very least  . |
|
|
|
Post by stevenlmorgan on Jun 24, 2024 19:37:00 GMT -6
There shouldn’t be too much to calculate for conversion to stereo as aren’t there are only 2 potential metrics per capsule within a stereo field? Pan and Level?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Jun 24, 2024 19:40:56 GMT -6
There shouldn’t be too much to calculate for conversion to stereo as aren’t there are only 2 potential metrics per capsule within a stereo field? Pan and Level? Yeah but ambisonic is basically multiple M/S matrixes made by combining the different capsules, and before you do that I believe there is an offset that adjusts for the difference in distance between the capsules, so it gets rather complicated. At least that’s my understanding, I’ve just barely been dipping my toes in this world. |
|
|
|
Post by stevenlmorgan on Jun 24, 2024 19:43:40 GMT -6
There shouldn’t be too much to calculate for conversion to stereo as aren’t there are only 2 potential metrics per capsule within a stereo field? Pan and Level? My room is fully treated; measures perfectly and I do hear things that I don’t believe would be as accurate with stereo micing. I hear an extra dimensionality in the recording. I have patiently been in the market for a stereo mic, the high end options are primarily 2 great mics vs one and I do enjoy Soyuz, own a black 017 FET. |
|
|
|
Post by stevenlmorgan on Jun 24, 2024 19:46:54 GMT -6
Yes, but, conversion to stereo has to reduce the matrixes to pan and level. It would be great to know the formulas per capsule. There shouldn’t be too much to calculate for conversion to stereo as aren’t there are only 2 potential metrics per capsule within a stereo field? Pan and Level? Yeah but ambisonic is basically multiple M/S matrixes made by combining the different capsules, and before you do that I believe there is an offset that adjusts for the difference in distance between the capsules, so it gets rather complicated. At least that’s my understanding, I’ve just barely been dipping my toes in this world. |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 19:59:44 GMT -6
There shouldn’t be too much to calculate for conversion to stereo as aren’t there are only 2 potential metrics per capsule within a stereo field? Pan and Level? Yeah but ambisonic is basically multiple M/S matrixes made by combining the different capsules, and before you do that I believe there is an offset that adjusts for the difference in distance between the capsules, so it gets rather complicated. At least that’s my understanding, I’ve just barely been dipping my toes in this world. There’s an EQ component too |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 20:00:44 GMT -6
Yes, but, conversion to stereo has to reduce the matrixes to pan and level. It would be great to know the formulas per capsule. Yeah but ambisonic is basically multiple M/S matrixes made by combining the different capsules, and before you do that I believe there is an offset that adjusts for the difference in distance between the capsules, so it gets rather complicated. At least that’s my understanding, I’ve just barely been dipping my toes in this world. All the original papers about the Soundfield spell it out. There are copious AES papers. |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 20:01:59 GMT -6
Great vid as always and very informative! I love the way it sounds on the acoustic in Atmos…not sure how well that would work in a full mix, but damn it sounds so real to life on its own, great or a simple acoustic/vocal track. Would have liked the bluegrass band to have the vocal more upfront which is probably impossible due to this scenario…regardless, truly impressive. And your tune, recording and mix, really amazing…loving it all but especially the drums/cymbals overall…well done! Another one that’s looking pretty cool but isn’t quite the same tech is the Nordic Audio Labs NU-880K (sold as a ‘surround’ mic). Two figure of eight patterns and one omni (3 total). It also has the capability to move stereo placement in post with plugins. Really interested in buying one of these types of mics specifically for acoustic. I think the 13A just moved to the top of the shortlist. A lot of things on that list though…not sure I’ll ever get there! That’s a horizontal only B format array, like the Josephson and the thing I do with 3 MKH mics. |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 24, 2024 20:03:12 GMT -6
There's hardly any market for it, but what I find missing is hardware that can deliver a stereo output in real time like the Soundfield products can. Most of the time I'd use my Rode, I can't because there's no post, it's a live mix. My Sound Devices MixPre 6 has an Ambisonic mode. I’ve never been able to try it, bc I don’t have an Ambisonic mic, but I assume it’s doing something to mix down to stereo on-the-fly while recording the 4 discrete signals for later post processing. Always been super curious about this, but an Ambisonic mic keeps getting bumped down the purchase list… I think my Zoom F8n does too, but it’s a single fixed pattern with no control |
|
parasitk
Full Member
Posts: 37
Member is Online
|
Post by parasitk on Jun 25, 2024 10:24:32 GMT -6
Very interesting video, thank you!
|
|
|
|
Post by stevenlmorgan on Jun 25, 2024 11:15:57 GMT -6
What signal did you send to the group for monitoring? quote author=" andersmv" source="/post/370092/thread" timestamp="1719266907"][[/quote]I agree, it would be really cool to have a hardware option that would put it down to two channels. Even an analog ambisonic channel strip with 4 inputs that are all linked to a single gain knob, a basic EQ and Compressor on there that do the same thing to every channel and spits it out to stereo. You're right, not really a market (and part of the fun is the endless manipulation in post), but it would still be awesome to see someone do it... I guess Soyuz could make one for their specific microphone, as it would have to be tailored to a specific mic if you have to do the transcoding via hardware (I'm assuming/guessing on that though). If you really wanted to do it right, someone could figure out how to do the decoding via a super low latency digital part of the circuit where you could input presets for different mics or something?[/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by andersmv on Jun 25, 2024 11:44:01 GMT -6
(Are you talking about the live recording of the Bluegrass group? They didn’t have any headphones or anything) If you’re recording an artist or group and want to send them a headphone feed of the ambisonic mic, the Soyuz transcoder has a “monitor” option that dumbs down the quality of the transcoding a little bit so you can have a low latency option to monitor the plug-in. I put the Audio Brewers decoder on after that and just send the ProTools track to the headphones.
It was a little more complicated for me when I was tracking my song. I’m on a UA Apollo, so I’m normally monitoring out of the Apollo Console App before it hits my DAW. I have to rack my sample rate up to at least 96k with a 64 sample buffer to be able to monitor right out of ProTools for the decoded ambisonic signal. I’m not picky, so I just sent myself one of the ambisonic mic channels so I could monitor (the first input is usually somewhat on axis and sounds fine). I doubt any of my artist are going to care that much about the ambisonic aspect and “need” a decoded ambisonic signal in their headphones, so that’s how I’ll handle the Apollo workaround for the time being.
|
|
.
