There's no mention of any capsule element substitution with this mic, like CM3/CM4...here he simply says " -New name, same product (OM becomes Omni1)"

However...he has also gone to the trouble of silk-screening the new name on the side of the mic body, and presumably on the storage box labelling too (?), so there is some 'differentiation' going on...

It seems to be exactly the same here:
https://www.nohypeaudio.com/lineaudioproducts.htm

Yes I see that....and it also solves the mystery....the NoHype page adds this :

"Line Audio Omni1:
Small size Omnidirectional condenser microphone. Replaces the well known previous incarnation, absolutely identical technically, but renamed for legal reasons"

I would have thought a 'name clash' with a microphone would be the most likely reason....although this (following) product has been around much longer than the Line Audio mic !

https://www.olympus-global.com/techn...hnology_museum

Much less likely would be confusion with this mic (although it was originally issued as the OM-1, apparently....):

http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Audix/OM11

"The Audix OM11 is a reissue of the OM1, originally in production in 1985. The mic is a handheld dynamic, with a hypercardioid polar pattern"

Maybe Roger (the manufacturer), or JP Gerard from No Hype will chime in here and solve the mystery for us ?

Hey guys.will my Motu m2 be enough for om-1? I've heard great records in this thread just with some portable recorders + om-1 which I suppose are not better than audio interface aren't it?

I don't own OM-1s (Omni1) but I do have CM3s and I also have the MOTU M2. I don't ever use the combination for location recording, but I do use it often for solo vocal and instrumental tracks recorded at home. I don't know what you are are recording, but I can say that the M2 preamps are good enough quality that I do not run into any noise issues with my CM3s even when the input gain is near max.

Thanks! Hope it will works fine with om-1 as well.

So I finally got my pair of om-1 directly from Roger. At first Roger is very nice and responsible person!

Can't say something interesting about microphones yet because I've tested it briefly one by one. But first impression is they sound noisy with my Motu m2 in home room. I've recorded few passages on classical guitar and haven't gotten satisfactory result. I'm newbie in recording so I hope I just do something wrong.

If you have closed-back headphones, wear them while you are recording your guitar and playing (are you recording your own playing ?)

Move around the microphone (or have a friend move the mic around) and listen for tonal and ambience changes as you get closer and further away, point the mic at the body, then soundhole, then neck/body joint, then bridge. You should find a combination of distance and guitar-body location that is pleasing with a little of this experimentation.

Are you meaning you hear room noise or hiss from mic’s self noise?

Yep, I have headphones and I've tried to find place.

I guess it's mic's or preamp noise but I'm not sure. My room was silent.

May I ask you what the distance from the source was? Do you have a short sound sample to share?

It was about 1,5m from guitar to mic. I'll provide more samples due to week or two. I've saved only one short sample of my primitive etude on my phone. On this specific sample room wasn't completely quiet. But I definitely hear permanent noise which I believe is not from my room. You can also noticed that gain is a little insufficient. If I've increased it would be even noisier.

Unfortunately microphones are far from me so I can't retry now.

Don't get me wrong. I don't wanna say mics aren't good. I just say my results wasn't good and I want to figure out.

Recording from 1,5 mt you probably added like 40 db of gain, given OM-1 sensitivity. I like the sound.
I wouldn't say the result is THAT noisy, anyway a background hiss is hearable...getting closer ( i.e. 1 mt), if you still like the sound, could probably lower the noise that you hear by like 3 db, which should be fine.

To be honest I don't like closer recording of classical guitar. In my opinion guitar starts singing from 1.5m +. Recording should take some air. Just my taste.
In fact it's single mic on that sample. Pair will be better anyway. But this little noise is slightly annoying

In April. Potential legal battle was avoided. Details not important... moving on.

Just wanted to be sure the name change wasn't hiding a capsule change, like CM3/CM4...

Same exact mic, no worries!

Hi everyone, I hope this is the right place to post this. First of all thank you all so much for this thread and its CM3/4 counterpart, not only was it extra useful to be able to read firsthand reviews of these tiny mics but the quality of music and recording on display here is amazing.

Let's get to the point : In about a week I'll have to record a baroque quartet in an as-of-yet-undefined space. Two violins, viola da gamba, harpsichord. I have access to 4 OM1s that a friend lent me and - don't laugh please - two extremely cheap but surprisingly effective t-bone LDCs that I've been using for about 10 years and know inside and out.

Off the top of my head I'd go for a spaced pair of OM1s as mains, maybe throw in the two LDCs in Blumlein or M/S to have some choice when mixing, and the two remaining OM1s would be spots, one for both violins and the other for harpsichord/gamba. Might be nice but i fear the harpsichord will overpower the gamba. I could also scrap the Blumlein/MS and use the LDCs as spots for gamba/harpsichord...

I guess my question is : How would you go about mic'ing this particular setup ? I'm perfectly ok going by ear/feel as I've always done but some outside input is always welcome.

If this really isn't the place to post this I'll delete my post, no worries!

Cheers

Tom.

Read the recently published Decca Recording methods book, to which a thread is devoted here in the Remote forum. Consider using both Om-1 pairs as mains, one pair close, one distant. Tbone mics as spots. Or single pair of OM-1 as main and mix the second pair of OM-1’s and tbones as spots. A spot each on gamba and hpschd recommended

Don’t use spot mics too close….Decca book chapters on chamber music is your friend here….get it as an ebook if you can’t afford the paper version

I agree with studer58.
All depends of the acoustic naturally.
For the example, this was recorded only with a pair of OM1. Spots would have been great.

Thank you both so much, I'll try that and will definitely have a look at the Decca recording book. I agree with you studer58, gamba and harpsichord really need their own spots, especially since I know both violinists play on exceptional instruments and can be quite loud. Good news is that we're recording in a really nice church near Paris so I'll be able to take advantage of the acoustics! Thanks again

When you read the Decca book you'll notice that considerable attention is given to the individual radiation/propagation patterns and design/construction intricacies of instruments.

A lot of it seems counter-intuitive and not predictable from an instrument's size or shape. For example, in an orchestral or even quartet context, some of the largest instruments (eg double bass, cello) are those that need the most help from spot miking. This tendency is heightened with baroque instruments, gut strings etc as they tend to have less projection than the modern equivalents.

While not being either a preview or excerpt from that book, here are some thoughts (along similar lines) from a veteran Decca recording engineer: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/DeccaTr...Tryggvason.pdf. Might be of some help or at least interest ?

In terms of recording session pragmatics, whether players are standing or seated makes a big difference, how they are arrayed and which direction the players and their instruments are facing also determine miking decisions and placements...so many factors you haven't even considered, your head will spin, the book reveals a wealth of detail on these matters and many more.

Just out of curiosity, is that buzz in the left channel (or at least, predominantly in L chan.) something you have encountered before with the Line Audio mics?

It's not on other recordings with the same mics.
Probably some lights buzz.

Thank you

This was a great read, thank you. I'm planning on getting a hard copy of the Decca book after this session as my budget will allow this (and I love being able to annotate physical books).

I have found the Line Audio mics to be more sensitive to EMI (not RFI, just AC line harmonics) than other small-diaphragm mics in my collection. It's only noticeable in proximity to strong magnetic fields, so it won't be a problem everywhere. But, take care not to position the mics near HVAC equipment, dimmer circuits, power distribution, or AC power cords with high-current loads on them. The problem is also much more noticeable in older buildings with poor electrical wiring (usually open grounds).

The attached image is a level-matched comparison of the SE8 Omni and the OM1 both inside a large foam block, inside an iso cabinet, recording just the 'silence'. Each was run with the same type/length of Mogami 2534 cable into adjacent channels of a Sytek MPX-4Aii. Both pick up the room's HVAC rumble very accurately, but it's also easy to see the EMI harmonics picked up by the OM1 (this is NOT acoustic noise, this is electrical interference) that are not present in the SE8 omni (and it's easy to hear them, too, listening to the files). This particular room is in a pretty bad EMI environment, in a building next to a commuter rail line that uses 700VAC power and regenerative braking systems.

First recording with OM1
Piano and violin duo, OM1 pair between violin and piano (grand, half stick), more toward violin, heighth 2,5m (8')
Recorded during a rehearsal, so it's not the final version ;-)

Good start with the OM1 : very natural sound.
Some instruments balance to refine and a bigger room to have a more pleasant acoustic ?