A few questions about AES 42 MODE 1 and MODE 2:

I do understand that my assumptions may be wrong, so please correct me if I'm wrong. Thank you.

MODE 1:

Is this assumption correct? The most important disadvantage of MODE 1 is that you can't sync two mics and therefore stereo recording in MODE 1 is not ideal? Is this correct?

MODE 2:

In MODE 2, the mics will be clocked externally using a master device like RME DMC-842. Does that mean that in MODE 2, the same digital mic can sound differently based on the clock quality of the device feeding it the clock? In other words, in MODE 2, ultimately the quality of the mic's AD conversion is entirely determined by the quality of the clock it's receiving. Is this assumption true?

If my assumption/question about MODE 2 is correct, is the following assumption then also true?

If you're doing mono work, it's always better to use MODE 1 for the highest quality conversion, because in MODE 1, you'll ALWAYS experience the mic's own internal AD conversion quality. But in MODE 2, you'll always be limited by the external clock quality the mic is receiving.

Thank you.

do your homework and rtfm! there's a ton of literature on the topic... - here's a more recent link which doesn't go into details but adresses some intrinsic benefits of digital mics:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pbrn7mMQ2BE

Schoeps is releasing the CMD 42 digital mic amp. Discussion here:
https://taperssection.com/index.php?...873#msg2410873

Also here.
SCHOEPS CMD 42 Beta - The New Digital Colette Amplifier

Capsule Memory to be added at a later date by Schoeps.

New product release includes the basic features only.

Thanks; I had not seen that thread.

What I'm asking is: in MODE 2, does the quality of AD conversion happening in the microphone depend on the clock quality being fed to the microphone by the AES 42 device?

In other words, in MODE 2, does the digital microphone's AD conversion quality always stay the same regardless of what AES 42 device one uses as long as said device is capable of MODE 2? Or does the device providing the clock directly impact the final AD conversion quality that happens in the digital microphone?

I do understand that at the moment there's only one device capable of MODE 2 and therefore this question may not even matter. But I'd still like to know the technical answer regardless of the current situation. Thank you John.

The quality is mainly down to ADC in the microphone unless you have an 'iffy' clock. The clock should not really affect the sound unless it's a crap one that won't lock properly.

But you can always name the first microphone as the master if you want to be sure.

There were two mode-2 microphones on the market: the Neumann KM-D series and the Sennheiser MZD 8000, the latter being capable of stereo with the ability to attach two MKH 8000 series microphone heads.

Mode1 microphones have to go through a DAC and ADC to clock them

Unfortunately Neumann have discontinued the KM-D (the KM-A is still current and replaces the KM 100 series) and Sennheiser have also discontinued the MZD 8000 - Sennheiser have, unfortunately also discontinued the MKH 20, MKH 40, etc., though the MKH 30 stays.

Personally I think that digital microphones were too early and discontinued too early - I have a friend who uses the KM-D series in a broadcast t
situation and can run 200 mrters plus of cable and the microphone sounding as if it's inches away from the mixer, without any of the problems that normally happen with long cable runs.

Thank you for the answer John, I appreciate it immensely.

yep.

watch out: the maximum cable length is limited by the sampling rate...

...but if this is handled reasonably, it is indeed a pleasure to realize that the cable no longer takes its toll/degrades the sound: the next step up after remotely controlled preamps!

i just bought two more dmi-2's from a german retailer who informed me that he currently still has ca. eight devices on stock (and a shop on ebay) - pm me if you want his address...

I wish Neumann revived their digital microphone interfaces. They seem like the perfect interface for digital microphones, especially the two-channel one.

Microphones cost to much to update when converter tech and standards update. Will be a while till the audio formats level out vs CPU speeds.

oh well... - did you ever use a digital mic at all? did you compare it to its analog equivalent? if so, what are your conclusions? and how do they align with neumann's, sennheiser's and schoeps' research?

regarding converters: development has largely stalled ca. 20 years ago, before digital mics became a thing, meaning the converters built into digital mics are fully capable of converting every detail the capsule picks up and they will continue to do so for another two decades:
no need to wait 'until the tech is there', profit from the intrinsic advantages of digital mics now!

Microtech Gefell MV 240 USB Microphone