I own an R-101. I have had the good fortune to use a lot of Royer products. My bet is it's going to be stunning. I now have four mics 'to add' to my collection when (and if) I upgrade and build out my room.

Bock iFet, 2 Royer R-10's, and probably I will try and find a good used Manley Reference C.

Right on. Everything Royer makes is excellent. What a cool looking design too. Looks like they have a new video on their transducers.

Great vid! Haven't tried royer stuff yet. Very interested in their new r-10. That fathead models were really the only 'pro' ribbons in that price range beside the beyer. I don't expect any sacrifice in quality w this, royer doesn't seem like that type of company.

Davedog ever used an AKG C-12? If you haven't, there may be another addition to your list. ;)

Not all cheap, little cousin, mics are bad mics. I found the Nuemann Tlm 102 to be a really nice mic, and I felt much more versatile than the u87ai. And much better than the 103. Which is counterintuitive since it's the cheapest in the line. I was a bit let down after hearing about the 87 sooo much, and lusting over it and its unattainable (for me) price tag. But the 102 and even AT3035, showed me that not all mics are cheap because they leave something to be desired sonically. Maybe their 'cheap' so you get a pair !?

Kyle. Yes i have used a C12. One of the guys I hire to do intense editing owns an original ELAM 251. I also own a modded ADK Area 51 TT thats been turned into an ELAM 251. The circuit is the ELAM250 circuit and the capsule in this one is the ADK Custom Shop GK-12. It's pretty close...as in close enough.......My 'other' TT was turned into a Neumann of sorts. It has the M249 cicuit and the ADK Custom Shop GK-49 capsule. Again......close enough for working musicians.

I gotta report this....The other day I heard a vocal track on an unfinished production of what you might call "Pop-Alt-Country"....The womans voice is a really great one and I know they are minutes away from hitting it dead on! My studio Guru is producing and tracking and he just bought a Bock iFET. Stunning. Even though that doesn't say it all.

I'm really interested in seeing this new Royer. If I buy two for drum overheads that would be about the same price as buying one MORE R-101 which is a fabulous mic on everything. I actually like it a bit more than the original R-121.

What's the price on the new R10? Anyone know off hand?

DonnyThompson, post: 452687, member: 46114 wrote: What's the price on the new R10? Anyone know off hand?

shockingly, for a matched of R-10's , sweetwater is at $1,048.00 https://www.sweetwa…
One must be around $600 maybe?

Found it. One is: $499.00

This could be a game changer.

Davedog, post: 452685, member: 4495 wrote: Kyle. Yes i have used a C12. One of the guys I hire to do intense editing owns an original ELAM 251. I also own a modded ADK Area 51 TT thats been turned into an ELAM 251. The circuit is the ELAM250 circuit and the capsule in this one is the ADK Custom Shop GK-12. It's pretty close...as in close enough.......My 'other' TT was turned into a Neumann of sorts. It has the M249 cicuit and the ADK Custom Shop GK-49 capsule. Again......close enough for working musicians.

I gotta report this....The other day I heard a vocal track on an unfinished production of what you might call "Pop-Alt-Country"....The womans voice is a really great one and I know they are minutes away from hitting it dead on! My studio Guru is producing and tracking and he just bought a Bock iFET. Stunning. Even though that doesn't say it all.

I'm really interested in seeing this new Royer. If I buy two for drum overheads that would be about the same price as buying one MORE R-101 which is a fabulous mic on everything. I actually like it a bit more than the original R-121.

Looks like you've got that covered man. Bock makes amazing mics by all accounts. Can't wait for try one someday.

Bock does make great mics. I have another friend who owns a Bock 251 which in some ways sounds better to me than the vintage one. I own a Soundelux/Bock U195 which Bock has reissued recently. I recommend this one for ANYONE on a budget and wants to get into the expensive sounding microphone level without having to shell out a couple grand.

Davedog, post: 452708, member: 4495 wrote: Bock does make great mics. I have another friend who owns a Bock 251 which in some ways sounds better to me than the vintage one. I own a Soundelux/Bock U195 which Bock has reissued recently. I recommend this one for ANYONE on a budget and wants to get into the expensive sounding microphone level without having to shell out a couple grand.

The 195 seems interesting. Does the fat switch only is a HPF or does it induce other circuit/sound modifications ?

pcrecord, post: 452712, member: 46460 wrote: The 195 seems interesting. Does the fat switch only is a HPF or does it induce other circuit/sound modifications ?

+1, wondering the same thing.

The fat switch kicks in a low-end boost @10 to 400hz and shelves the slight rise in the highs thats there for the normal setting. It has a 10DB pad and a rumble filter @ -10DB @20hz. And the mic sounds wide open in all settings. No pinch. I love mine. And if you believe the white paper hype the new release is even better although, to Bock's credit, he never implies that its a better mousetrap than the same mic he built for so many years as a Soundelux.

New guy here, wondering if anyone has tried the R-10. I'm considering it as a first ribbon mic for a small home studio. Any thoughts on it, particularly how it compares to other ribbons in its price category ($500 is about the most I'm willing to spend)? The other mic I'm most closely considering is the sE VR1, so any comparison with that would be great too. Thanks!

I have not had an opportunity to try out the new R10 Royer. I have used several Royer products and own an R 101 and if these are anything like what he puts into his products as far as care and quality there won't be any way to go wrong with them as a choice.

I too find it hard to believe that Royer would make anything sub par.

Thanks for the opinions. I appreciate the responses. I don't doubt that it's a fine product. Royer after all has a great reputation. I was more interested in impressions of its sound characteristics, like what it does with the top end, clarity in mids and bass, and how it compares to ribbon mics just below it's price point and to the other Royer ribbons like the 121 and 101. I'm asking because I have zero experience with ribbon mics but am intrigued and overwhelmed by everything I'm reading about them. At this point I can only buy one in this price range, so I'm trying to make an informed decision.

Thanks for the opinions. I appreciate the responses. I don't doubt that it's a fine product. Royer after all has a great reputation. I was more interested in impressions of its sound characteristics, like what it does with the top end, clarity in mids and bass, and how it compares to ribbon mics just below it's price point and to the other Royer ribbons like the 121 and 101. I'm asking because I have zero experience with ribbon mics but am intrigued and overwhelmed by everything I'm reading about them. At this point I can only buy one in this price range, so I'm trying to make an informed decision.

Getting honest reviews on a brand new product is tough. There’s not a wide spread consensus, and theirs often the case of ‘i Love mine cuz it’s new and it’s mine’.

You should probably try and find a place that has a return policy or loaner model, and try it for yourself. Music is so subjective anyway, and each setup and room really dictates the tools, there’s really no other true way.

I totally understand your looking for opinions and doing your due research, just figured I’d mention trying it out as an option.

Best of luck, please offer your thoughts on the mic if you end up going that route.

I think the lack of detailed replies is because it's still fairly new, and not many have any real time experience with it yet. We're assuming it's likely of nice quality based on our experiences with other Royer mics...if I was going to trust any review source, it would be SOS, (I don't know if they've done one yet) although I did read a review last week on it (Mix Mag?) and it was very favorable.
I think it was a really smart move for Royer to make a mic priced for those who want to get into using Ribbon mics in their recordings; they are becoming known more to home recordists who are beginning to find out what the pros have known for years, when it comes to drum room, overheads, guitar amp, horns and vocal miking, etc., that ribbons are a valuable addition to any mic locker. ;)

Addendum...
It was Mix Mag. I just checked this month's issue (October 2017), page 44.
Some excerpts:

"The R-10 offers the same ribbon transducer as the R-121, the XFO and outer appearance are different".
"The mids and top end are nearly identical to the 121, but the R-10 has a fuller low end, necessitating an HPF on occasion".
"The R-10 is an instant classic."
-Kevin Becka, Mix Magazine

FWIW
-d.

BonScott, post: 453716, member: 50892 wrote: I'm asking because I have zero experience with ribbon mics but am intrigued and overwhelmed by everything I'm reading about them.

The common thing about ribbons (except for active ones) is that the output level is lower than condenser mics.
This isn't a problem with loud sources but if you want to record acoustic guitar with them or other low level instruments, you will need a very good preamp to obtain healthy recording levels without noises.
I use one of my Focusrite ISA preamps when recording with a ribbon mic because they offer 80db of noiseless gain.

I say so because many are desapointed with their first ribbon mic only because they don't have an appropriate preamp to drive it.

DonnyThompson, post: 453720, member: 46114 wrote: Addendum...
It was Mix Mag. I just checked this month's issue (October 2017), page 44.
Some excerpts:

"The R-10 offers the same ribbon transducer as the R-121, the XFO and outer appearance are different".
"The mids and top end are nearly identical to the 121, but the R-10 has a fuller low end, necessitating an HPF on occasion".
"The R-10 is an instant classic."
-Kevin Becka, Mix Magazine

FWIW
-d.

I hadn't come across the Mix review. Thanks for pointing it out. That has just the kind of info I was looking for, although I wholly agree with your earlier comment about subjectivity. I do have a preamp with 80db of what I think is pretty noiseless gain (it's a GAP PRE-73, original model). I also found only favorable reviews from purchasers on the Sweetwater site. Guess I have some sorting out to do and would really like to see the SOS review when it comes out. So thanks for the responses. I expect we'll see more comments on this mic as more folks pick one up.

pcrecord, post: 453721, member: 46460 wrote: you will need a very good preamp to obtain healthy recording levels without noises.

Or an inline booster such as a cloudlifter or cathedral pipes Durham. These tap into the phantom power on your pre and convert it to additional available gain... as much as 20db.
FWIW. :)

I also came across this review from Vintage King, which includes an audio comparison with the 121:

https://vintageking.com/blog/2017/10/royer-r10-shootout/

Maybe this helps someone out, too?

DonnyThompson, post: 453724, member: 46114 wrote: Or an inline booster such as a cloudlifter or cathedral pipes Durham. These tap into the phantom power on your pre and convert it to additional available gain... as much as 20db.
FWIW. :)

They are very good tools.. but is anybody tested how much they are transparent ? does the quality drops ?
Other thing, if you are gonna go to the world of ribbon, the impedance of the preamp will make a lot of difference on the sound.
Having a preamp that has a selection of impedance values to offer is also something to consider ;)

pcrecord, post: 453728, member: 46460 wrote: They are very good tools.. but is anybody tested how much they are transparent ? does the quality drops ?
Other thing, if you are gonna go to the world of ribbon, the impedance of the preamp will make a lot of difference on the sound.
Having a preamp that has a selection of impedance values to offer is also something to consider ;)

Dunno about quantitative tests, Marco, but they're universally recommended...at least the cloudlifter is...

pcrecord, post: 453728, member: 46460 wrote: Other thing, if you are gonna go to the world of ribbon, the impedance of the preamp will make a lot of difference on the sound. Having a preamp that has a selection of impedance values to offer is also something to consider ;)

That was one of the reasons I built my own two-channel version a few years back. At the time, there was only one signal booster on the market (the FEThead), but now there are at least four, including the CloudLifter and the McBoost.

Both the McBoost and the Cloudlifter-Z version have &feature=youtu.be'">variable input impedance. CloudLifter also does 2 and 4-channel signal lift boxes.

Boswell, post: 453736, member: 29034 wrote: That was one of the reasons I built my own two-channel version a few years back. At the time, there was only one signal booster on the market (the FEThead), but now there are at least four, including the CloudLifter and the McBoost.

Both the McBoost and the Cloudlifter-Z version have &feature=youtu.be'">variable input impedance. CloudLifter also does 2 and 4-channel signal lift boxes.

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/McBoost is 199$
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/CLZCloud is 299$
https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ISAOne is 499$

I know which one I'd get, but that's just me ! ;)

For those who use a Cloudlifter or similar signal booster, I'm curious about the preamps you own that don't provide enough noiseless gain by themselves. Can you give some examples?

I could only wager a guess, as I have preamps with sufficient gain to run both Ribbons and low output dynamics at optimal levels ... tascam, behringer, are a few I've seen that traditionally lack gain, because they are budget models, are built with entry level cost in mind, as they're targeting the home market, where most hobbyists are using cheap condensers or dynamics that can operate at lower gain ratings, such as the 50-55db that these cheaper preamps are rated at. Ribbons, and dynamics with low outputs - like the Shure SM7 - generally like to see 65db of gain or better. Focusrite ISA, Millennia, ADK, Grace, API and others of that quality-caliber, can have gain from 65 ... some up to even 80-85db.
The trouble with maxing out cheap preamps to try and get useable gain, is that they tend to get noisy when you gain them up to their full-out setting. This is where you'll hear the quality difference...cheaper components are being used to keep the costs down for the typical home user. Preamps that have better builds are whisper silent when it comes to electronic noise, even maxed-out, because they are built better, using much higher quality electronics. Of course, you'll pay more for them. ;)
FWIW
-d.

BonScott, post: 453742, member: 50892 wrote: For those who use a Cloudlifter or similar signal booster, I'm curious about the preamps you own that don't provide enough noiseless gain by themselves. Can you give some examples?

Most budget audio interfaces preamps offer 45 to 55db of gain which is normally enough for any mics..
Where it gets tricky is that most of them will produce electronic noises when passing 75% of the gain available.
I experienced it with my old Focusrite liquid saffire 56 and my 8i8. It was even worst with my old m-audio card.
Now all this doesn't have any impact on the quality if you use ribbon mics as overheads or a cranked up guitar amp.
If you want to record someone who doesn't sing loud or an acoustic guitar played gently. Then you're in trouble.
Even some dynamic mics won't give you much gain to work with and will sound better with a cloudlifter or friends..

Thanks for those thoughts on the pres. I think I'm going to be okay with 80dB of gain on my GAP Pre-73 as it seems fairly noiseless with gain cranked. But can you also get any extra gain you might need from the interface you use to go into your DAW? I mean if you're using an external preamp and running it into the interface, can you or do you balance or gain stage between the two? Or do you really want sufficient gain already in place before the signal leaves the pre? (Maybe I'm starting to veer too much off-topic, and I'm new to using a DAW (used stand alone recorder in past recording efforts.))

The only pre I’ve ever felt was overly noisy or lacked gain was the presonus digimax 8. Beyond that it’s nevr been an isssue.

Considering digital is very forgiving as far as low signal level, gain generally isn’t an issue. Then there’s always the clean digital gain boost available in most trim pluggins. It seems possible to get the job done without an in-line booster in a pinch. If your recording electric guitar with something like the royer, is a gain booster necessary? I could see issues with it on room mics without an inline gain boost.

Im not disputing that cloudlifters are necessary or better in general for ribbons or sm7s (on some pres).

BonScott, post: 453747, member: 50892 wrote: But can you also get any extra gain you might need from the interface you use to go into your DAW? I mean if you're using an external preamp and running it into the interface, can you or do you balance or gain stage between the two?

The ideal setup is to have an interface with passthrough line inputs that will be connected to the converter directly without any circuitry that can modify the sound your external preamp can produce. The first clue that an interface has those or not is if every inputs has a gain/level potentiometer, this meens it's not direct.
If line level inputs don't have gain adjustment, then there's a good chance they go direct to the converter.

This might be trivial for some, but when I bought my first ISA preamps (ISA Two) I was impress with the sound going through my Liquid saffire but I'd still get a bit of noise and I always doubted that the sound was purely ISA or not. You see I was doing a preamp to preamp signal chain (even if the input had a switch to line level)
With the suggestions made here on RO, I now run some of my ISAs through the RME Fireface 800 and some through the UA 4-710. WOW at first try, I heard the difference.
Not only you have the quality of the converters but also how clean the electronic circuit your signal goes through to consider.

So the rule of thumb is, if you are doing a preamp to a preamp signal path; put the preamp of less quality to the minimum level as possible and crank the cleaner one.
To add to K last comment, an healthy signal level will register at an average of -18db in your DAW.
As I said earlier, I don't think ribbon level is an issue with loud sources. Altought the impedance can change the sound a lot.
I could make an impedance test with a Fathead mic I own and post samples if you guys think it's worth it...

kmetal, post: 453748, member: 37533 wrote: Considering digital is very forgiving as far as low signal level, gain generally isn’t an issue.

It's not that you can't get a signal to your DAW with a lower gain pre and a low output mic, you can... it's that using an underpowered preamp prevents you from getting the "optimal" sound of that particular mic.
As Marco mentioned, on loud sources, you might not need that increased gain, but we all know that preamps count as much in the quality of the signal chain as the mics do, or at least it's a close second place.
FWIW, The OP's GAP73 is a fine preamp, and with loads of gain. Any mic is going to sound very nice through it. I wouldn't call it "transparent", as by its very nature it's designed to be similar to the character of a Neve 73. But that aside, most certainly, it has enough gain for any mic. ;)
-d.

Thanks guys, some really great thoughts and info here. When I recently was looking for an interface, I was concerned about how my pre was going to go through it. A lot of the lower priced interfaces appear to put everything through their own preamp circuitry even though the mic/line combi inputs so common on them might suggest otherwise. I even contacted Focusrite and was told that on the 18i20 I was considering, everything goes through the internal preamps, although they claimed that the preamps were very clean. I wound up getting an RME Babyface Pro, which has two 470 kOhm inputs that go directly to the converters. Those have adjustable levels but the levels are controlled and performed digitally and limited to 9dB, according to the manual.

BonScott, post: 453760, member: 50892 wrote: I wound up getting an RME Babyface Pro, which has two 470 kOhm inputs that go directly to the converters. Those have adjustable levels but the levels are controlled and performed digitally and limited to 9dB, according to the manual.

I was astounded when RME introduced a new version of the Babyface that they called "Pro", but which had line level inputs that were not only unbalanced but had a 0dBFS level of +13dBu.

The line inputs go through an amplifier that has electronically switchable gain of 0dB or 9dB (to cater for both "pro" and domestic levels) before they arrive at the ADC. If you will be connecting the balanced outputs of another pre-amp (your GAP Pre-73?) to the line inputs of this unit, you will need to think about how you go about unbalancing the signals and limiting the output levels. If your GAP Pre-73 is a Mk iii or a modified Mk ii, taking the signal from the insert send rather than the main output may well be the better option.

I don't mean to be disparaging about your choice of audio interface - RME products are built to the highest standards, and perform similarly. I own a FireFace800 and have had nothing but good results from it. The BabyFace Pro will also give you great results as long as you think carefully about how you connect it up. Nevertheless, it's sloppy design and marketing for RME to be offering these sort of specifications and then differentiating this version of the unit from its predecessor by adding Pro to its name.

Boswell, post: 453762, member: 29034 wrote: I was astounded when RME introduced a new version of the Babyface that they called "Pro", but which had line level inputs that were not only unbalanced but had a 0dBFS level of +13dBu.

The line inputs go through an amplifier that has electronically switchable gain of 0dB or 9dB (to cater for both "pro" and domestic levels) before they arrive at the ADC. If you will be connecting the balanced outputs of another pre-amp (your GAP Pre-73?) to the line inputs of this unit, you will need to think about how you go about unbalancing the signals and limiting the output levels. If your GAP Pre-73 is a Mk iii or a modified Mk ii, taking the signal from the insert send rather than the main output may well be the better option.

I don't mean to be disparaging about your choice of audio interface - RME products are built to the highest standards, and perform similarly. I own a FireFace800 and have had nothing but good results from it. The BabyFace Pro will also give you great results as long as you think carefully about how you connect it up. Nevertheless, it's sloppy design and marketing for RME to be offering these sort of specifications and then differentiating this version of the unit from its predecessor by adding Pro to its name.

It's a valid criticism. The unbalanced inputs do seem an unfortunate choice, and I haven't yet put the BPPro through its paces, but I've run the line out of the Pre-73 (it's an original, not a MK ii or iii) into them with a TRS-TS cable and haven't noticed anything like RF interference in the couple of attempts I've made to use it. Are there some other potential problems I should be looking out for or should I be using a different cable or a different method to go from balanced to unbalanced? Or maybe I should just go into one of the balanced inputs and see if there is any sonic difference from the unit's own preamp. Last, you lost me with the 0dBFS/+13dBu stuff.

Gee, we seem a long way from the R-10 . . . .

Editing previous post: I'm actually using a TRS-TRS cable from the pre to a balanced patchbay, then a TS-TS from patchbay to the BFPro.