Slate Digital Launches The VIRTUAL MICROPHONE SYSTEM
by Steven Slate   30th October 2015

Some people had beef with the original FG-800 emulation being too sibilant. How long did it take for Slate Digital to create one modelled off of an older C800G? Probably not that long. They've already developed the tools and method they're using to approach their modelling process. So, why couldn't the same be done with the 47 emulation? Using the particular U47 that I mentioned, as long as the owner was up for it. As an avid Slate customer, I'm use to waiting a long time for them to release the things they say they're going to release anyway. Steven is a perfectionist who takes the quality of the stuff his company puts out seriously, and I appreciate that about Slate Digital, which is why I spend money with them.

There is no definitive "one size fits all" sample of each classic mic that will float everybody's boat, so why not offer more than 1 modelled emulation for each type of mic being emulated?

It would seem that I'm not the only one with interest in seeing this. We all know what we want, so it's important to voice our opinions so the type of **** that we want will hopefully get considered and hopefully get done.

I did a load of extra listening last night to my previous expensive tracking chain vs VMS - I feel very confident that over time when the more darker sounding emulations of mics are out, some RCA ribbons and the older RCA/Langevin/610 style vintage tube preamps are emulated (plus ML2 microphone) then I can't imagine needing other mics or preamps. Even if they didn't bring out new mic emulations I could prob match my previous chain 95% with VMS plus some EQ.

Which is great because I can sell some mics and preamps - get a 2nd VMS, and a beautiful hardware vari-mu compressor, or a stunning EQ etc etc.

I'm totally persuaded that VMS could be a great tool. I'd be interested in it if it didn't use VMS, which I really detest, but that's not the point. The idea of getting different colors from a single mic is a good one.

The interesting thing is that comment in this thread has now shifted to which U47 sounds a like the a U47, when the founding assumption going in was that the U47 had a characteristic sound that everybody covets.



"you're using a bad U47! Yes it's totally a real U47 but it doesn't sound like a U47!"

"but is IS a U47"

"Yeah but it's not the right U47"

So I guess I should assume that if I rent a U47 it won't actually have the sound of a U47?

This is either a rabbit hole of imaginary authenticity or a head scratcher. The vintage fidelity thing is just a hot mess

Correct me if I'm wrong, but all microphones differ because of EQ correct? I mean, a super expensive U47 captures the same amount of data as a consumer microphone (They all list 20 to 20), but because of inferior electronics or whatever they simply have different EQ responses.

So why can't someone re-create those EQ curves with a computer? Seems plausible to me and in a mix, completely undetectable. I cant tell you how many posts I have read where someone used a cheap SM7, or Beta 58 in the studio and everyone falls all over how great it sounds. With everything being so subjective in this industry, even down to the music Genre, I can't believe this is even an issue.

Seems to me Kemper is having great success with modeling amps and again, in a mix nobody could tell you if it was a real amp or a simulated amp.

For the record I bought the VMS, I am pretty excited to try it out and I'm sure it will give me a lot more flexibility over owning a single $10,000 mic / pre that may not work with my voice.

Hello Steven,

Please allow me to respond to your complaints on behalf of Sound On Sound magazine.

We did precisely what anyone with an interest in the VMS system would do: we went to a reputable hire company and hired four vintage mics to compare with the VMS system. Our stated aim and intention was not to see whether the VMS system modelled perfect examples of beautifully restored vintage mics, but to see how it compared to a bunch of real, hired in vintage mics – which is the real-world option open to our readers.

We wanted to answer the question, ‘What would sound best and be most practical: hiring some expensive vintage mics, or buying the System?’ I think we explored that question very well, and the answer was that the Slate VMS “…gets you frighteningly close, and … you’d be hard pushed to tell the difference.”

Was that conclusion really flawed and misleading?

Of course our hired-in mics weren’t the specific mics you based your models on; and, in reality, those specific models aren’t available for hire to most other people either! Moreover, the very nature of vintage mics is that they do all inherently sound slightly different because of component and capsule ageing and maintenance through years of use – a point we also made clearly in both the article and video.

It seems to me that if our simple test can be described as ‘flawed or misleading’ then so too, surely, can your marketing claims for the VMS system! Does the system model the general character of typical real-world U47s, C12s, etc, or just the very specific pristine examples you have on your desk?

We stand by our published findings that the VMS produced results that were extremely close to the various models we compared across the board – something which we all agreed to be a fine achievement. Yes, of course there were some tonal variations – and inevitable personal preferences – but as Neil Rogers wrote in the article conclusion: “The fact that six engineers sat debating some of the nuances of the various models after the session was a testament to just how close these comparisons became!”

It is true that the hired had suffered a hard life, and the had a replacement capsule – and we spotted and pointed both of these facts out in the article and video. But again, anyone who hires, or even buys, a vintage mic is likely to face similar situations and this was – intentionally – a ‘real-world’ test.

As for the choice of C800 model, I concede that you may have a point there: in retrospect our comparison comments do lean towards a mismatch between the selected VMS model and the physical example we had in the studio. We’re currently involved in a magazine production week, but once the decks are clear again I’ll ask the team to recreate the audition files with the alternative (and apparently) darker-sounding 800M model, and update the material on our website accordingly.

In our defence, though, as I understand it the 800M model is in the expansion pack, not the basic default set which is what we had loaded when we ran that C800G comparison, and none of us were aware at the time of an alternative VMS model in the expansion pack and so didn’t go looking for one – which I accept was an error on our part. I don’t believe any of us were aware that the C800’s sound character has changed radically over its production life as you suggest, either, but it’s always good to learn something new.

Steven, we’ve met in person several times and I know very well how passionate you are about your products – it’s something I completely respect and applaud. I’m sure you are equally aware of how passionate the whole SOS team is about what we do, too. In this case, I fear you are perhaps so close to your product that you are struggling to ‘see the wood for the trees’. Our review is overwhelmingly positive, and it comments constructively throughout on how closely matched the models and physical vintage mics were. The tonal differences we described were generally subtle nuances – exactly as we hoped and expected.

I won’t trawl the whole article for instances but, as a representative example, we said when comparing the real U47 and its VMS model: “…It was quite obvious even at this early stage that there wasn’t a huge amount of difference between them, and that the VMS deserved to be taken seriously”, and “…we were impressed with just how close it was coming to sounding like our particular vintage model”.

Where there were more noticeable differences, such as in the C12 comparison, we explained why we thought those differences existed (in this case because of a capsule replacement) and – importantly – what we thought of the usability of the VMS model regardless of the comparison. Again, in this case Neil stated, “…I would quite happily have used either.”

As I mentioned earlier, the article conclusion states: “…the all-important modelling software really is quite good. It’s not always indistinguishable from the real thing, but at times it gets you frighteningly close, and in the context of a mix, or on less than stellar monitoring, you’d be hard pushed to tell the difference.”. Now, perhaps there’s some or our stereotypical British understatement in there, but it reads as overwhelmingly positive to me, and I feel we are undeserving of your strong criticism in this popular public forum!

It WAS the real thing: we hired real vintage mics.

It wasn’t misleading, either: we were extremely careful to describe the tests, the quality of the vintage mics, and to explain the relevance of any differences we heard.

And it didn’t set you up for failure at all: the VMS System came out of the comparisons extremely well, and we were all left very impressed by it – as we stated clearly in both the video and article.

I’m rather surprised you can’t see why we were interested in this aspect; I don’t consider the off-axis test ‘ridiculous’ at all. The sound obtained by a microphone is the sum of all sounds arriving at it, both on- and off-axis, and in many applications the quality of any off-axis spill from other musicians or instruments is almost as important as the wanted on-axis sound. However, as the character of the off-axis sound is determined by the physical characteristics of the capsule and microphone housing, these things can’t be modelled in the same way that the on-axis character can.

So, although we knew the off-axis sound character would inherently be different between the VMS and the various vintage mics, we wanted to check whether it would be problematic in the context of a mix: specifically, would the modelling of on-axis sound character compromise or colour the off-axis spill in such a way as to make mixing difficult, for example? We were reassured to find that, while there were clear differences between the VMS and vintage mics in this respect, the off-axis sound was never a problem – which is another testament to the quality of the VMS microphone itself.

So, not a stock like the one we hired then then? Strange that there’s no mention of this modification on the website. Who’s misleading who here?

No! We didn’t say it was “not correct”, we said we heard subtle differences… which we all did. We put those differences down to normal ageing variances, but it now seems they may have also been because you modelled a non-standard and modified mic! We’ll add a reference to that fact in the in-line article as soon as possible.

I must admit I had some reservations when I first opened the flight-case and took that U47 out because, as we pointed out in the article and video, it had clearly had a very hard life. It had been modified (the pattern switch had been removed) and repaired after an obvious dropping accident at some point. However, while it may not have represented a U47 in the prime of health, it is a U47 that anyone might hire for a session in their own studio – I’m quite sure that not all U47s in rental stocks around the world are as pristine as the one you selected to model.

Anyway, despite it not being a pristine example of the U47, we still all recognised its innate character, and we were impressed with how well the VMS model delivered the same features. We also commented on how we were able to fine tune the modelled sound to match our specific, tired and battered old example even more closely by adjusting the intensity control. Impressive indeed!

I do understand your upset regarding the C800 comparison, and I take that one on the chin – we got that wrong and I apologise on behalf of SOS. I’ve already explained how that came about and what we plan to do to remedy it, but I want to take this opportunity to address the point about consulting you in advance.

One of the reasons that Sound On Sound has maintained its immensely strong reputation for fair, unbiased, and reliable reviews over more than 30 years is that our reviews are entirely OUR reviews. They are written by experienced engineers and producers who relate their own personal experiences, opinions, and balanced judgements of the review products. Unlike virtually all of our competitors, we do not – as a matter of strict policy – invite manufacturers to preview our reviews or impose editorial changes before publication. This policy lies at the heart of our enviable independence and it’s not something I would ever offer an apology for!

There is also the practical side of conducting a review like this to consider. Had we approached you before setting up this VMS comparison, it seems likely from your comments here that you might have insisted we use your own specific pristine mics for the comparisons. How would that relate to the real-world experience of our readers faced with the decision of hiring vintage mics locally or investing in the VMS system? What about the practicalities of getting £30k+ of reference vintage mics in and out of the country from America, intact and in a timely fashion to meet our relentless and immovable production deadlines? Ultimately, it just wouldn't have been practical and the scope of the review would have suffered considerably as a result...

On balance, I remain content and confident that our 100% totally independent comparison tests were technically valid and genuinely helpful to our readers. I also believe the VMS system came out of it very positively, that we recognised it represents a genuine step forward in the technology, and that it represents a very practical and cost-effective option for anyone looking to be able to employ the character of a variety of vintage microphones in their productions. I would hope that if you read it all again, with a slightly more distant and relaxed perspective, you will come to the same viewpoint.

I completely understand your need to leap to the defence of your products in the face of perceived slights, and I’d expect nothing less, but in this case I feel you may have over-reacted somewhat, as well as misinterpreting our findings and conclusions. As a direct result I feel it is disappointing that you chose to lambaste our review in public here before giving us the opportunity to explain our position in private. I know that you sent two e-mails to the SOS team over the weekend… but it was the weekend – we only found them when we arrived for work this morning!

People tend to read what they want to read, and interpret the real words in a way that suits their own mindset. There’s nothing we can do about that – but, as I’ve highlighted in this reply, we were all left genuinely impressed with the VMS system after our session with it, and would all be quite happy to use it in appropriate applications. The review and video say precisely that, and I don’t think we can be any fairer.

Hugh
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Er... no. A U47 FET doesn't plug into a vintage valve PSU and the hired model definitely did! FX rental supplied us with a U47 which had clearly suffered a hard life, and the grille assembly had been replaced at some point with one which appears to have come from a 47FET. The pattern selection switch had also been removed, as you can see in the video.

H

Steven has exactly the right approach by choosing collectors mics, which are basically in original shape and sound accordingly to the designers intention. Guys like Bruce Swedien did not spent fortunes on a brandnew U 47 back in the 50s because they sounded muffled and dull ( like many in bad shape do now...).
They bought it since it was the most tranparent mic of the time - often replacing RCA ribbon mics, which were the standard.

I don't need a dull U 47.
If I want it warmer I can follow it with VTM or a softube pultec - chaka bumm - engineers can do these things ; )

What I learned over the years about vintage gear and its owners is - their unit usually is the best one out there. How boring.

I'm perfectly happy with the current available models and will do much beatiful work with them in the coming years.

Absolutely -- I totally agree.

However, we wanted to answer the question, ‘What would sound best and be most practical: hiring some expensive vintage mics, or buying the Slate VMS System?’

We weren't particularly interested in whether or not Steven had managed to accurately mimic the sound of some rare pristine original and/or restored models, but rather whether the VMS system would match and better the only practical alternative open to most home studio jockeys, which is to go to their local rental house and hire some originals (and with no control of the condition they turn up in!).

Bottom line... it does!

H

I would always hope for the best.

I admire your courage coming into the Team Slate Cheerleaders' Clubhouse. Brace yourself for pom poms to the head, no matter how reasonable your points are.

Unlike the 3U mic threads??

Not many people have survived calling them 'cheap Chinese mics' etc - quite rightly so... Some of the best value mics out there.

I personally like mics from a ton of people - and I feel there has been some proper nay saying on this thread, big time.

Huge - I´m not really arguing with you.
Having done several dozens of mic comparisons at my studio I know that it´s a huge can of worms.
Your test is interesting - however it creates the impression that slate vms somehow is not "there" - which is clearly not true.

I think one thing we all learn from this discussion is how hugely different
the same microphone can sound after 10,20, 30 years.
I was not aware of this by myself.
My initial test at my studio with a ca. 20 years old Sony 800 led to similar results
like yours - however when Steven came up with the FG-800 M the difference has gone (well allmost...).

BTW which preamp did you use for the vintage mikes....?

I had an Andreas Grosser 47, which is one of the most detailed recreations of an original U47 there is and - after having compared against Steven´s model - I sold it. The particular FG-47 model is such a beautiful balance between warm and detailed that the sale was an absolut no brainer...

I think it is inevitable when comparing two similar mic sounds to end up apparently favouring one while dismissing the other has not being 'quite there' -- but we really were talking about quite subtle nuances most of the time and I think its fair to say we were genuinely all quite impressed with how well the Slate VMS did in delivering the fundamental characters of each of these radically different vintage mics -- despite their various states of repair!

Yes... I understand where you're coming from here. It was commented upon briefly in our discussions too as it did seem to be a common trait of the processing. Having said that, yet again we are talking about a very subtle artefact and I don't think it's something that will bother most users at all -- and especially not given the practicality, price and convenience of the VMS system compared to the alternative of tens of thousands of pounds of vintage mics in the locker!

The real hardware vintage mics all went through Neve's 500-series version of the 1073 -- the 1073LB -- and we set the VMS system up with the modelled 1073 with similar gain settings.

Absolutely -- but generally the fundamental character of the specific mic persists, despite ageing variances in brightness or noise floor, etc...

Yep. Hands up to that one -- we just weren't aware that he had created a second version of the C800G model and hidden it in the expansion pack! It's not as if the original FG-800 model says, 'use the alternate 800M model if you're looking to replicate an older C800G!

The SOS guys will create new samples using that 800M model as soon as they can.

In a similar vein, it's not immediately obvious that the U67 model is of a hot-rodded version of the mic rather than a stock example, either.

Nevertheless, it's very encouraging to know that if you take these obscure variances between the supplied models and the hardware review mics we compared them with into account, the results we observed all make perfect sense, and further indicate what a good job the VMS system actually does.

H

I take your point, and it's fair. People get nuts when they decide they're on a "team". They'll do or say anything to defend the Team because they've made it part of their identity. Just look at our election....

To be fair though, people trolling the 3U thread with "Oh great, another Chinese OEM knockoff" just, factually, don't know what the hell they're talking about (and don't care to of course, they're just bored, petulant people, I guess the kiddies call 'em "trolls"

There's some of that here of course too. Anyone with as much notoriety as Steven surely attracts his own trolls.

But the Rah Rah My Team thing extends way beyond trolling. Even measured, reasoned posts that don't fully bite on the Slate thing get the Cheerleaders' Panties in a Bunch and the nonsense comes out. It's just part of the deal in a Slate thread. Everyone knows it, some can hack it, some can't. The way it goes in the murky world of online discussion/sales/marketing.

All valued points - I personally find the mentioned posts from both threads equally annoying.

Surely you don't need reminding that people posted on that thread calling fan boy at people too, even claiming KV was taking a cut of sales (idiots).

there is the added 'digital' dimension to this thread that on a slutty forum like this gets people's backs up. Maybe if I had dropped 7k on a classic already, or didn't have 1k for VMS I might feel the same. Or maybe the work flow isn't right for some.

I personally wasn't confident in VMS until I heard a few of the better demos, and did a shootout in own studio. I now like it a lot (am sure you've noticed). to my ears some of the emulations don't suit my voice like my GZ and VT1 combo - but at least half of them do, and it's early days in terms of future emulations. One decent gritty vintage preamp emulation and I'm there.

I think when the next mic pack drops, people will understand what the current emulations are for in relation to the darker sounding ones to come. Then more people will be drinking the Kool Aid.

On another note I can't even count the times I mentioned 3u mics (or other brands like iSK) outside of its official thread to the sound of nothing but tumble weeds - people just want to hear Neumann, AKG, Sony in the High End forums, and nothing but Rode CAD etc in the Low end forum. Hopefully over time that will change.

Heheh. Yeah, or hell, I don't care if those folks catch on to the ridiculous amount of mic you can get for small coin with 3U. Maybe it'll keep the prices down at their (ridiculously low) current state and I'll keep buying em up. I sold off all my higher end mics and now have a mic locker full of big, smooth, transformer-coupled, classic voiced mics and lots of other gear I bought with the windfall profit.

As for VMS, I've no doubt it's very good. People get hung up because Slate always has to say "EXACT" instead of "REALLY CLOSE AND AMAZING VALUE".

I'd still consider picking up a VMS or two to play with, haven't written it off yet. I just can't do the inherent latency of software monitoring (I know, I know...some people aren't bothered by it, which is great) and I'm not sold on the emulations. YET.

I'm still listening to every comparison I can, especially comparisons made by third parties. If it gets past my ears, I'll try it out.

Kudos to SOS for the detailed and measured response! I'm a big fan of Steve, and I understand he defended VMS like a proud father should. I'm also a big fan of SOS, and glad to see them fearlessly stepping into the ring!

Hugh, thanks very much for chiming in! As I said, I have no hard feelings towards you or anyone at SOS, but I felt it necessary to stand behind our product when we felt it was being misrepresented, and I'd hope you would do the same if you were in my shoes.


While I can see that was the intention, the presentation implies otherwise. For instance, the cover text alone sets an interesting stage:



Before you even have to open the issue, you've established that in terms of vintage mics, there is a "REAL THING". Already, this is misleading because as you are well aware, there is no universal 'real thing' when it comes to vintage mics due to how much they will vary.

So this sets up the question "Do the Slate mic models sound LIKE the 'real thing'?". And of course, your real thing is not OUR real thing since we are referencing different mics, and that is what is not clear to many people who read your article and saw your video. And therefore, the premise has already set us up for failure.

Many uninformed readers, some who have posted here after watching your video, did not understand that there is no such thing as a universal REAL THING when it comes to old mics.. So the result is that we have many users with the impression that since our modeled mics didn't match your rentals exactly, then the question on your cover is answered. And NO, they do not measure up. And that's the problem.

Unfortunately, based on how the video especially was conducted, yes it was extremely misleading in my opinion.

The point of VMS is not to get just any old vintage 47 or C12, it's to know that you have models of only the BEST, most PRISTINE, most well preserved renditions of these classic microphones.

So comparing them to models that I've found to be quite faulty or don't have the original capsule, and then acting as if this is a valid test, even going so far to include an off axis test which made no sense to me... what is this trying to achieve? How does this allow the user to know if the VMS accurately models the mics that we've modeled? All it tells them, and especially those who are uninformed, is that our VMS models don't sound like the rented mics that you have deemed the "REAL THING". That is the very definition of misleading.

Then the chat at the end of the video becomes very unfair, as the engineers are discussing LABELED files (confirmation bias) and then discussing how our VMS doesn't quite sound like the rented mics.

A lot of the talk was how our mics were brighter, which is to be expected when you have rented mics that are not in pristine condition and have issues with top end response, and in the case of the 47, apparently severe top end issues.

We've always stated even in the initial video, that we found the most pristine and well preserved mics we could find, and that is what we've modeled. When others have compared them to mics that are also in pristine condition, they have actually matched very well, especially when taking the effort to use the VMS functions like the intensity knob. When we did a mic comparison at NRG Studios, I first had listened to and compared some of their several U47's to our VMS 47 to find which one matched the best. And one of them was in prime condition, and this one did match our model very well. We used this one in our test and the difference were hardly audible. Not coincidentally, this was the same mic Ross Hogarth tested against the VMS 47 at NRG during his Future Villains sessions which led him to become a believer.

So what I can't figure out is that if you were to go through all the trouble of doing this shootout, whey not contact me and ask me if you can do the shootout with the ACTUAL MICS? The answer would have been a big YES. And I would have suggested you do the test results chat using blind files, and then we would not be in this situation.

I do appreciate the fine things you said about VMS. But what I don't appreciate is how the premise is still a big setup for "you missed the mark". And as you can see from the reaction to the video in the comments section, this was how several uninformed people saw it, and then we have a situation that affects our business. We even had one user write several pages pack on this very forum (unless he edited or erased it).. "Well just saw the video and now I'm not going to get VMS".. So again, I have to take this seriously. SOS must understand the impact of what they say and do in these reviews and how it can affect the developers of the reviewed products.


Yes, that's fine if you got some rented mics that were not in good condition. That's fine if other people got some rented mics that may not be good condition. It's fine that the 47 capsule is clearly at its end of life. It's fine that the C12 didn't have a CK12 capsule like our model did. Nothing wrong with that Hugh.

But when you present it as "These are the real mics, does VMS sound like it".. you have to see why this is not the right way to do it. Again, there is no way for us to come out winning in the eye of the user.

Thanks Hugh. Just so you know, the FG-12 and FG-67 you used in the review are from the same update pack as the 800M. All five of those mics are featured in our Classic Tubes 2 launch video. We did clearly explain that we found differences in a brand new out of box 800G and an older 800G, and that the 800M would be more fitting if comparing to older 800Gs. I cannot explain why there is a difference, but we do have some users with real newer 800Gs who claim their mic sounds closer to our original "brighter" version.

But it was a bit troubling to read in the review how the 800 "especially missed the mark" when I knew you were not using the correct model as we intended. Therefore I appreciate the kind gesture to update the audio files since the proper 800M seems to match your files almost indistinguishably with the given intensity setting.



Right there, is a perfect example of how this could be considered misleading. "It's not always indistinguishable from the real thing"... Well now how can you say that when the "real thing" in the case of the VMS are mics that were not involved in the shootout? Once again, this statements suggests there is singular universal "real thing" when it comes to vintage mics, and this is misleading.

Because when we've posted blind audio test files comparing VMS models to the ACTUAL 'real thing' aka the mics we actually used for modeling, they did seem to be indistinguishable to many people!

And when I did take the time to do basic models on the mics you rented, I think in some cases, the results truly are indistinguishable.

So again, perhaps if we spoke more about this cover story review and were consulted, and we were told it was going to be conducted as a true comparison shootout, I would have told you to send me a certain amount of files recorded with one of the vintage mics, I could have modeled that mic FOR the review, and then that would have been something extremely exciting, relevant, and would have demonstrated the true authenticity of our technology.




According to a lot of the commentary on the video, this is not the case. Uninformed folks who don't understand the nuances of vintage microphones were led to believe that since the VMS didn't sound like your rented mics, then it was not doing what it claimed. The comments are still there. And again, there are two users who even said it here. And as I wrote to you privately, one user was so confused as to why our mics didn't sound like yours that he questioned whether he should cancel his order. So again... I have to take this seriously.

And if I haven't yet said it already, a much more fair thing to do would have been to first post a blind shootout since we both know that you could have posted dog excrement and labeled it "U47" and there are people who would have said it sounded divine compared to VMS.



So right here you just admit you wanted to hear the off axis characteristics in a mix to see if the modeling was problematic in a mix.. this could have been done JUST by testing the VMS. But again, the way it was presented was "does the off axis sound the same as the off axis of the rented vintage mics?". That is clearly how it's portrayed, and in the video end chat the off axis response is discussed in the way of comparison to the vintage mics, not by its own merit as you suggest.



I'll take it! While I have stated quite a lot in this forum that the 67 has the filter mods, it is indeed NOT in the official documentation. However, given the efforts going into this cover story, a simple fact check (which we did not receive) would have not only handled the 67 issue, but also the 800 issue as well.



Well, you mentioned that the VMS version had more top. In fact, it was stated in a not so courteous way. And that's exactly the intention of the filter mod.. it takes the normally dark 67 and opens it up. I appreciate the addition to the article.


I'd say that is the case and we agree. Many 47's probably aren't in as pristine condition as the one we chose. And therefore, given the fact that we agree on that statement, it's probably not a good idea to position this hard-life rented 47 as your reference point of "the real thing" in which VMS must match in order to be validated! Haha, do you see my point here?


This question speaks volumes to me honestly, because I think that you may be reviewing a product in which, because you did not speak enough with the manufacturer.. you've missed much of the point and mission of the product.

The VMS is not intended to be a replacement for going out and renting random vintage mics. It is a product that when you buy it, you have the CONFIDENCE that you have models of the most well preserved and pristine mics in the business. And you have a lot of them, and they are all beautifully unique, and you can choose the proper microphone for your source.

So the real review that you missed is the obvious one.. Do the VMS models sound like the pristine vintage mics that we claim? When you use the VMS, are you getting the tone of classic mics that sound the way they did in their PRIME?


You could have flown in for AES, we could have conducted the tests in one day, an you could have featured it in your December issue.


I think the review was fairly complimentary for the most part, but it tried too hard to set a premise that seems to have confused a lot of readers/watchers, and therefore has led to some unjustified feedback in some cases.

Ultimately, I hope that the fact that we were able to get so close to the rental mic tones with our modeling software can actually indicate just how advanced our tools and technology are to many people, so I hope you'll post all of our files to demonstrate this.. to me it's an equally crucial part of the story and I'd hope you would agree.



Unfortunately we live in the internet age where 'waiting' is not always a possibility. We received a lot of reactions based on your video especially, and we didn't have the luxury of letting it go.. instead we had to jump on top of it, and I think it was the right decision to make.

If someone wrote on a Friday that SOS was publishing alien propaganda messages, I'm sure you would want to send out a denial quite promptly rather than letting it brew for an entire weekend.

Hugh, let it be known I have an honest respect for all the hard work that you folks at SOS do, and I remain till this day a big supporter and fan.

We have disagreements with how this review was conducted, and that's ok. What I hope people see from the discussion that Hugh and I are having is that it is indeed possible to disagree while remaining professional and respectufl. I think we've had a valuable debate on this topic that has ultimately lead to a better understanding of each other's side, and it is my desire to move on in a positive light. Much love.

Cheers,
Steven

People got hung up on the 3u mk1 not sounding like a real u87, even when noone claimed it did, so it's a bit of a damned if you do damned if you don't thing.

I think you'd totally love VMS - maybe when the really coloured emulation come out people might go bonkers over them.

Steven mentioned this:
So maybe this is another reason the 'cleaner' more pristine examples are there currently, as a contrast other packs coming out

SOS first let me say that I'm a fan of your publication, I've been a subscriber for many years.

From everything I've read in the exchange between you and Stephen, SOS is deeply flawed in their thinking. The first question I have to ask SOS, what are the odds that the average person purchasing the VMS microphone, even has the ability to go rent any of the microphones were talking about here?

Are you suggesting to me that someone in Tulsa Oklahoma, Asheville North Carolina, Haines city Florida, Akron Ohio, are there are any locations where they could go rent one of these real Mic's?

As you know already, the answer is no. Outside of LA, Nashville, New York, maybe Miami, you're not gonna find any place to rent these kind of microphones out to the general public. There is simply not enough demand. Maybe in rainy England they are on every curb.

Then you've got to look at the average demographic of who would be purchasing the VMS microphone. Overwhelmingly it's going to be project studio owners. Guys who are just sitting in the bedroom trying to make the best music they can on a very limited budget. Does anyone honestly think the full fledge recording studio is going to go out and sell all of their high-quality microphones and replace them with the VMS? Of course not, even if 100 out of 100 studio engineers would attest that it's as good as the original. The general public doesn't understand these things, they still want to be impressed by the name. I'm not suggesting that studio folks are not potential cuatomers, but my prediction is the home guys will make up the majority of sales.


As far as Mic comparison , You were in no way comparing apples to apples, not even comparing apples to oranges, it was more like you're comparing apples to Lettuce! The only thing that matters to potential buyers, is how well do they stack up against the most pristine and well-maintained versions. It's certainly the only thing I would consider a compelling factor.

Every single point that you made trying to justify that your perspective was on, could not be further off! You're simply out of touch with the demographic of the majority of folks who would be interested, and likely to purchase this microphone.

Bottom line, you owe an apology not only Steven, but all your readers as well.

Oh good lord. Pom Poms a flailing.

I can rent any of those mics (and have) here in Seattle. Large studios have been hit hard by the music industry tanking and everyone producing from their bedrooms. Gear rental is a way to keep some income coming in in slow times. Very common.

It must be a tight line to walk, presenting critical reviews in the magazine business.

One the one hand, you have your subscribers that expect a transparent review; and on the other, you are receiving ad revenue from the companies whose products you are either reviewing, or those of their competitors. If you praise too highly the one, do you risk losing the ad revenue of the other?

Hi Ragan, be aware that many could consider you the constant anti pom pom. You're extremely vocal in all Slate threads, and while you've always been for the most part respectful, your dialogue has consistently been the opposing view. And what's odd to me is, that you don't actually appear to own any Slate products, nor do you seem to want to own my products based on your comments. So before insulting people who happen to agree with some of my opinions by calling them "pom poms", perhaps you should reflect on how your own comments could be portrayed.

BTW, when SOS released their video, your comments were an example of my exact points of concern. Because the VMS didn't match their rented mics, you immediately criticized the modeling. Then when I posted files matching their mic sounds using our VMS modeling, you went silent.

So again, it is very possible to disagree and yet still be respectful.

Cheers,
Steven

I wanted to take us back to brighter days...

Here again is a new video upload of Natalie Major singing her original song HUMAN with the VMS 251 and FG-73 models. We display the preset she used in the video now.

At the end of the day, creating a piece of art like this is all that matters, and we shouldn't forget it!


Cheers,
Steven

As a novice producer looking to buy my first microphone of higher quality, I actually think this whole ordeal regarding the SOS clip and the following discussion and audio clips, have shed a lot of new light into the VMS and to its benefit. Hearing your argument as well as listening to your recently added clips (that I hope SOS will feature on their website) I feel more confidence in buying your product than I did a week ago. Keep up the amazing work and keep the passion for your products, that you clearly have, burning!

Stopped reading SOS a long time ago, I am subscribed to their youtube channel though, saw the video and thought yeah this should be great. It wasn't! Not because of their verdict, I own VMS and love it, it works for what I need and thats all that really matters, but the video from SOS, why bother reviewing something if you aren't going to even use it/demonstrate it the right way? Everyone who's done some research knows about the intensity slider, the emulation differences etc. It was the same as Warren Huarts video, why not set the mics up side by side and record the same take (at least SOS did that) not to mention the fact Warren has the pre before the mic in the rack (I know there are no rules, but thats not necessarily the way Slate designed it!). You guys are pros in the industry why not take time to do products justice for the ones who aren't!! It was nice to watch an SOS video without a universal audio ad at the start though...

Heheh. Well that's a little disappointing, Steven.

You're a bright guy and I don't consider you to be disingenuous. Or rather, from your online persona, you haven't given me a solid reason to think you're disingenuous.

But I seriously doubt you actually have reading cognition issues so I'm running out of other options. Maybe you're just so busy you only skim these posts? But that doesn't really work because you're on here constantly, and when your product isn't raved about, you post lengthy, in depth responses. Disengenuous it is, I guess?

I've pointed out dozens of times that I bought every Slate product from the beta version of VCC up to the original VMR release. So VCC, FG-X, VTM, VBC, Trigger (with a few expansion packs) and VMR. I don't know what that adds up to but I've forked over a chunk of change. And was glad to do it.

Also, you're ignoring (I guess I have to think intentionally at this point) my main point on the SOS video. The VMS mics, to my ear, as well as to many posters on other, less infomercial-y threads/forums, don't have quite the life and depth of the actual mics. It's not about this or that one having more top end or more bite in the mids. It's about a consistent, little lacking thing (subtle, yes, but important to me) in the models. It's not different than comparing plugin emulations to other hardware. (Another topic with wildly disparate opinions, which is of course fine).

Now, you can validly say "well me and my supporters disagree, there's nothing lacking". Fine and fair. And you may be right and I may be wrong. All fine and dandy. What you can't say, validly, is that I'm somehow taking cheap shots at your products, because I'm not.

I've also said over and over that I'd love to believe in this type of modeling, and that while I don't hear it being there personally yet, I see no intrinsic reason it won't be there eventually. I've also said I'd be glad to be wrong and that I would never pass final judgment on something until I used it myself, extensively.

Hell, a post or so ago I was talking about buying a pair of VMS to give them a proper trial.

But it would seem that since I don't hang on every word of your ad copy and repeat it ad nauseaum here (a practice which is fast becoming the only accepted one in these threads) I've become a nuisance you feel you need to discredit.

Or something. I'm no trained psychologist.

Whatever the reality of why you've chosen to skip the parts of my posts that don't fit with your narrative of me as some sort of cheapshot/agitator and emphasize the parts that do, I think it's an unattractive way to promote your products.

Ether way, no thanks. I won't intrude on the party any more because, frankly, it's not rigorous, interesting discussion, it's just cheerleading (sorry, that's the most accurate analogy I've got at the moment).

And that, to me is boring, childish and irrelevant.

Oh and by the way, I'm terribly sorry for "going silent" there. I know how much you love your "difference hearers always disappear when audio is posted" narrative (and who doesn't love a good hero narrative about themself? I'm no exception) but for various reasons I'm not going to go into here, I haven't been down to the studio in days. I've never been remotely afraid to take blind tests. When I pass them (like I did with your Distressor files) I don't consider that the end of the story and when I fail them (like I have many others) same deal.

I don't care to bolster or knock down your narrative but I was/am interested in the clips and I will listen to them at my leisure. But I'm not going to post any more here. Too exhausting and there are other places where real dialogue can still happen and that is actually valuable and interesting.

Fair enough, I certainly take back what I said about you not owning the products.

Well I'd hope that your tune would change if you were actually able to USE the product!

I'm happy that a lot of people in this thread, some who have made platinum records and have years of experience and even owned the vintage mics in question.. and some who are using the mic on grammy winning singers... have disagreed with your statements. Having said that, audio is subjective and if you hear something, there's nothing I can do about it!

But it would be more interesting if you had the actual product in hand before calling my life's work "lacking". Were you able to download the hi res files from the NRG comparison? Here they are:
http://download.slatedigital.com/vmr...udio_Files.zip



And yet, you have passed judgement quite a bit, but that's ok! You have that right. And you've also passed judgement on others who support the product and have called them cheerleaders. Not really digging that to be honest.

I don't feel the need to discredit you my friend. But I also don't think you should consider people who disagree with you to be carrying pom poms, just as I don't consider everyone who disagrees with me to be wrong.


You were very quick to praise the sound of the SOS rented mics when you heard the video (despite the fact that my opinion is that some of these mics are poor representations of the classics), and you were equally as quick to criticize our tech. So I would honestly hope that you would do me the favor of taking a listen to the files where I matched those mics..the mics that you yourself praised.. and then tell me if it changes your thoughts. I hope it does.

Here they are again if anyone wants to hear them:


www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace67_96khz.wav

www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace67B_96khz.wav


www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace47_96khz.wav

www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace47B_96khz.wav


www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace12_96khz.wav

www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace12B_96khz.wav


www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace800_96khz.wav

www.slatedigital.com/vmsdemo/Grace800B_96khz.wav


Cheers,
Steven

Thank you for taking the time to respond at length here on Gearslutz. I appreciate that you guys are an independent company and that can sometimes lead to product misunderstandings. Your insights should lead to a better product for everyone in the end.

That being said, you should have never done the C12 shoot out. It certainly was NOT the real thing by any stretch. Thank you for redoing the Sony C800 model with the correct emulation and amending your digital article.

Slate Digital should have been more thorough about which mics they modeled, particularly the U67. So, agreed there and the confusion was on SD's part not your own.

I'm really looking forward to seeing a VMS Rental House Collection of sorts!

@ Steven Slate Has the Quick Start guide or manual been updated with the new microphone models?

That poster was me and indeed I was/am uninformed about all of the nuances about vintage microphones. But VMS is now back onto my To Buy List.

That says it all right there. And indeed, the magazine COVER headline is very misleading based on that.



The only fair comparison would be to use the exact same microphones that were modeled with the exact same preamps that were modeled.

@ Steven Slate

On my phone so I can't do the big multi-quote thing easily.

1) I don't call your life's work "lacking". Give me a break. People are crazy about VMS. Even if I'm right and it's not 100% there sonically (widely disagreed about and I could be wrong, yes, obviously) it's still a remarkable product and I've praised you on this site for developing it.

2) I've never attacked anyone for simply disagreeing with me. Not once. I love a good valid point. Even if it proves me wrong. In fact, especially when it proves me wrong. Then I can learn something from it.
But there are loads of people on here (a few in particular) who go after anyone who doesn't dig the VMS. And they go after them with nothing but little nips and jabs. No counter point whatsoever. It is excruciatingly clear that they just don't like someone who they interpret to be on The Other Team. This, is cheerleading. It is dumb and it is worth taking the piss out of, whatever "side" it's coming from.