I am happy to see someone else say something (anything, really) about the U95s. There isn't a week when I don't find some rave about the U99 or ELAM 251--both very fine mics indeed. But I've seen almost nothing (reviews or otherwise) about the 95s. I've A/B'd the U99 against the U95s, and for my voice in that room with the pres I tried, I fell for the 95s. It wasn't too tough of a choice, and I couldn't tell you why either, so don't ask. I got mine yesterday, and I'm diggin' it.

They're not large condenser mics, but I gotta plug the Royers (ribbon). They're more flexible than you'd expect.

-Dennis

Originally posted by retreading:
They're not large condenser mics, but I gotta plug the Royers (ribbon). They're more flexible than you'd expect.

Wait until you hear the new 'phantom powered' version of the R-121 [I think it's going to be called the R-121A, but don't hold me to it]. You may indeed need to bring an extra pair of pants to the session.

What would a ribbon mic be doing with phantom power, or any kind of power for that matter--unless they were putting a head amp inside...
Would they do that? Can you say, Fletcher?

-Dennis

Originally posted by Fletcher:

Wait until you hear the new 'phantom powered' version of the R-121 [I think it's going to be called the R-121A, but don't hold me to it]. You may indeed need to bring an extra pair of pants to the session.

What about the phantom power (or some side design benefit) would make the R-121A sound significantly better? :confused:

I would assume an active impedance matching amp at the ribbon could up the gain vs. noise, and up that awful super low impedance output......
It also could create frequency response correction.

Isn't this wierd, I just saw an ad for the new "Active Series" Royers this evening in the October Mix Magazine. They show active versions of the 121, SF-1, and SF-12.

David, from what I can read you hit on at least two out of your three points:

* gain
* impedance

Nothing in the ad about freq. resp. correction, but we might not learn about that until the new response charts are published.

Nothing at all about these new mics on their site yet.

-Dennis

Originally posted by David Bock:
I would assume an active impedance matching amp at the ribbon could up the gain vs. noise, and up that awful super low impedance output......
It also could create frequency response correction.

Bingo. Thank you folks, we have a winner. The top is a bit more open, the bottom a tad more focused, and it works a bit better with less than "fucking amazing" mic pre's (though "fucking amazing" mic pre's won't hurt matters at all).

Originally posted by retreading:
There isn't a week when I don't find some rave about the U99 or ELAM 251--both very fine mics indeed. But I've seen almost nothing (reviews or otherwise) about the 95s.

While we're in 'new products that are about to hit the street mode', lemme also mention that Mr. Bock and Soundelux have some pretty bitchin' tricks up their sleeve as well...though we're still "discussing" if one of the new releases should be called the "U-69" or the "i-69"...

The reason I bought the Soundeluxe U99 instead of the U95s is because I liked the U195 better than the U95s. (Did you follow that?) The U95s and U195 are similar in sound, but the U195 is more versatile in my opinion. I bought a pair of U99's because the high end is so clear and beautiful, and the U195 because it is warm and powerful. The U95s is also very expensive compared to the U195 making the U195 one of the best mic deals on the market.

Make sure you listen carefully to all of these mic's, as I did, before you form an opinion about their sound and performance. I am sure that many of you won't agree with my findings.