Shure Nexadyne Super cardioid

[mspin]

I recently purchased a new microphone. I’m a guitarist/Vocalist. I have been previously using the beta 58 and a times the beta 57 for vocals live. They have been exemplary pieces of equipment and are in no way in need of replacing. But Being a musician GAS Is a way of life. For those of you that understand that you will understand why I purchased a new microphone. I was intrigued by the literature as well as the reviews I saw online, but as many of you know it’s not until you actually have the new product in your hands and you try it you understand whether or not it is something that will benefit you.

Let’s start with the unboxing. The microphone at $299 came with a very nondescript brown cardboard box. Within the box came the microphone, a very nice carrying case and a microphone clip. I passed Shure microphone purchases Particularly the SM 58 beta and the SM 57 beta came with a very nice box and a very colorful cardboard sleeve with the same microphone microphone clip, and in those cases a soft bag. So much for the aesthetics.

Upon opening, I noticed the microphone was very, very sleek and very comfortable as far as wait and the mesh grill was very superior and looked really cool. How is it gonna sound? I started out by comparing it to the beta 57 microphone that I’ve been using for vocals. I took each microphone and I sang through it and then I unplugged it and put the other microphone on and sang through it. The first thing I noticed was, I was getting a lot of feedback. I looked at my monitor and noticed that the volume setting or level was set at about 2 o’clock. The beta 57 did not squeal but the Nexadyne Was having a problem problem. I initially thought what a waste of money because essentially it was twice the price of the beta 57 and beta 58.

I quickly figured out that the output of this microphone was much more substantial than the beta 57. I rolled back the volume on the monitor and all of a sudden the microphone performed as I hoped it would.

The immediate difference was there was a higher output and also it felt like somebody took a cover off of the other microphone and the clarity was amazing. I was looking for every reason to return this to Sweetwater music. Because I thought there’s no way it could be as superior as the marketing suggested. I recorded a sample on my iPhone of a new song. I’m working on and sure enough there was a major audible difference. It seems as if the new microphone is much better EQ’d From the get-go. I have since been using it extensively and listening intently. I am looking forward to the next band rehearsal to see how it cuts through the mix. I have a feeling it’s going to be stellar. I hear my voice, much more efficiently through this microphone as opposed to the beta 57. I am in no way disparaging the beta 57 is an excellent microphone and has served me well over the years has the beta 58. The Nexadyne is a completely different platform.

My initial interpretation has been very positive and believe me I was looking to not be happy because I thought it’s twice as much money as a microphone that I’ve been happy with but the technology is new and I’m not an expert on it. I can tell you there’s a noticeable sound difference when I perform with it, I wanted to share this as this is my first post and I’m very excited about this microphone . I will add another post once I have had a chance to use it in a full band situation, which I have no doubt will be an improvement over what I had and considering the quality of the microphones I have used this dynamic microphone is a step up and I encourage anybody to try it.

[alexis]

Thanks for this excellent review, spin!

I read the review on this month's SOS, was licking my lips, then asking comes yours ... I think I'm destined to grab one!

One of the things in the write up was a bit about its having pretty good off- axis response, good for keyboardists, etc.

Did you notice anything about that?

Thanks!

[Tim Gillett]

Goodness, a blast from the past. AKG made dual capsule mics maybe 50 or more years ago. D200? D202? I remember using them in my teens. British parliament used them for many years for parliamentary speakers. Dont know if they still do. These mics had excellent on and off off axis response, flatter response than comparable dynamic single capsule mics, and I think had reduced proximity effect. They were well regarded.

I think the only downsides were the treble capsule tended to fail and they were fairly heavy to handhold. They were more complex to manufacture so I guess the price was higher than a comparable single capsule dynamic.

Interesting that Shure has for the first time AFAIK put out such a mic. Maybe an AKG patent has expired?

https://martinmitchellsmicrophones.word ... -edit0.jpg

[Drew Stephenson]

Interesting that Shure has for the first time AFAIK put out such a mic. Maybe an AKG patent has expired?

KSM-8 came out a few years ago, that's a dual-diaphragm dynamic.

[Forum Admin]

For info, the SOS Review of the Nexadyne is located here: https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/shure-nexadyne

[Kwackman]

Goodness, a blast from the past. AKG made dual capsule mics maybe 50 or more years ago. D200? D202?

There was a smaller version, D222 too.
"D222 too" - fun to say that out loud..

[Tim Gillett]

Interesting that Shure has for the first time AFAIK put out such a mic. Maybe an AKG patent has expired?

KSM-8 came out a few years ago, that's a dual-diaphragm dynamic.

Yes dual diaphragm but only one is an electrical transducer capsule. The new mic has two full transducer capsules which is the same setup as the old AKG types. My understanding anyway.

[Drew Stephenson]

Yes dual diaphragm but only one is an electrical transducer capsule. The new mic has two full transducer capsules which is the same setup as the old AKG types. My understanding anyway.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Goodness, a blast from the past. AKG made dual capsule mics maybe 50 or more years ago. D200? D202? I remember using them in my teens. British parliament used them for many years for parliamentary speakers.

There were four related models, the D200, intended for instrumental recording; the D224E — a conventional looking pencil mic; the D202 with that very distinctive conical sintered windshield; and the very similar-looking but smaller D222 — this being the one that is used on the PM and LotO lecterns in Parliament.

D202s were used as DJ mics in BBC Radio 2 (and elsewhere) when I joined the Beeb in the early 1980s.

The two capsules used in each of these mics were specifically engineered for high (front capsule) and low (rear capsule) frequency ranges, and combined through a passive crossover circuit.

The primary aim was preventing proximity effect... but the technology did also bring significant benefits in the overall frequency response linearity and off-axis accuracy (especially for the time).

I have a pair of D224Es here and they really are incredible mics (and surprisingly heavy!).

At the time, they delivered capacitor mic quality at a lower price... but that advantage didn't last long and good capacitor mics soon undercut the complex engineering of the D2xx series mics.

I've not looked into it, but I assume the technology was patented as I'm unaware of anyone else using the same idea until now — although it seems Shure's take is slightly different anyway.

[Drew Stephenson]

Patents only last 20 years (unless there are shenanigans) so the idea is long out of protection.

[Kwackman]

There were four related models, the D224E ...

I never knew that the D224 was part of that family. Another lesson learnt! Thanks

[Hugh Robjohns]

D224 Pdf brochure:
https://www.akg.com/on/demandware.stati ... s/D224.pdf

[Kwackman]

Thanks Hugh.

[mspin]

Thanks for this excellent review, spin!

I read the review on this month's SOS, was licking my lips, then asking comes yours ... I think I'm destined to grab one!

One of the things in the write up was a bit about its having pretty good off- axis response, good for keyboardists, etc.

Did you notice anything about that?

Yes, because I sing and play guitar sometimes I need to look at the guitar fret board and I move Off axis And this Mike with the super cardio pattern really helps and that’s exactly why I got this one

Thanks!

[alexis]

Thanks for this excellent review, spin!

I read the review on this month's SOS, was licking my lips, then asking comes yours ... I think I'm destined to grab one!

One of the things in the write up was a bit about its having pretty good off- axis response, good for keyboardists, etc.

Did you notice anything about that?

Yes, because I sing and play guitar sometimes I need to look at the guitar fret board and I move Off axis And this Mike with the super cardio pattern really helps and that’s exactly why I got this one

Thanks!

Thanks for that info, mspin!

[Sam Inglis]

Goodness, a blast from the past. AKG made dual capsule mics maybe 50 or more years ago.

...
Interesting that Shure has for the first time AFAIK put out such a mic. Maybe an AKG patent has expired?

There have been quite a few designs over the years that have used dual capsules, for various different reasons. Before Ben Bauer invented the unidirectional dynamic capsule, one way to get a (sort of) cardioid response was to combine an omni dynamic capsule and a figure-8 ribbon element, like in the old STC 4033 and Western Electric 'birdcage' mics.

The AKG system is meant to work like a two-way loudspeaker in reverse, with separate capsules for the high and low frequencies (although Stewart at Xaudia tells me he has doubts about whether all the models in the range actually have two capsules). Sanken used something similar in a couple of their capacitor mics, I think more in order to improve off-axis response than to minimise proximity effect. The Sony C100 also has two capsules, but the crossover is at 25kHz and the second capsule is for capturing ultrasonic frequencies.

Shure's system is significantly different and even if AKG still held active patents around theirs, I'm sure it wouldn't infringe them. The idea of the Shure system is that the two capsules are part of a complex structure that should be considered as a single transducing element with its own polar pattern and other properties. AFAIK they are both full range capsules and there is no crossover.

[Tim Gillett]

Goodness, a blast from the past. AKG made dual capsule mics maybe 50 or more years ago.

...
Interesting that Shure has for the first time AFAIK put out such a mic. Maybe an AKG patent has expired?

There have been quite a few designs over the years that have used dual capsules, for various different reasons. Before Ben Bauer invented the unidirectional dynamic capsule, one way to get a (sort of) cardioid response was to combine an omni dynamic capsule and a figure-8 ribbon element, like in the old STC 4033 and Western Electric 'birdcage' mics.

The AKG system is meant to work like a two-way loudspeaker in reverse, with separate capsules for the high and low frequencies (although Stewart at Xaudia tells me he has doubts about whether all the models in the range actually have two capsules). Sanken used something similar in a couple of their capacitor mics, I think more in order to improve off-axis response than to minimise proximity effect. The Sony C100 also has two capsules, but the crossover is at 25kHz and the second capsule is for capturing ultrasonic frequencies.

Shure's system is significantly different and even if AKG still held active patents around theirs, I'm sure it wouldn't infringe them. The idea of the Shure system is that the two capsules are part of a complex structure that should be considered as a single transducing element with its own polar pattern and other properties. AFAIK they are both full range capsules and there is no crossover.

Attached is a link to an original AKG D222EB mic document complete with Architects' and Engineers Specifications, frequency response and polar axis plots etc. My search engine for the same data for the new Nexadyne produced various links but I saw no specific match for "architects specifications". It would be good to know more about the new Shure mics at a similar level of technical detail as was offered to the public some years ago by companies including AKG and Shure.

https://www.akg.com/on/demandware.stati ... s/D222.pdf

[Mike Stranks]

If anyone's interested, there's a couple of D200s on eBay at present... £190 a pop...

When I started in hospital Radio in 1975 one of our studios had them as a presenter mic - other studios had Sennheiser 421s. I always preferred my 'sound' on the D200, but that may be because the acoustics could have been different and I didn't self-op in that studio so wasn't right on top of the mic... proximity effect et al...

[Sam Inglis]

@Tim Gillett, there is a Shure 'tech portal' on their website where you can access detailed technical info about their products. I think you need to create an account in order to do so, though.

[Tim Gillett]

@Tim Gillett, there is a Shure 'tech portal' on their website where you can access detailed technical info about their products. I think you need to create an account in order to do so, though.

Thanks Sam. I wonder if after having accessed the technical information - that they used to just provide without such limitations - we are permitted to link to it and discuss it on internet forums like this. Hopefully.

[Hugh Robjohns]

I've not yet found any technical white papers on their Revonic /Nexadyne technology.

But I did find this YouTube video that casts some light on what they're doing.

https://youtu.be/GE8NZSZIoa0

In essence, its two capsules mounted together and wired in opposite polarities, one receiving direct on-axis sound and one not.

In that way, handling noise and hum are strongly cancelled, but so too is a lot of off axis sound, giving a tighter polar pattern.

As always, though, the devil is in the detail and this system only works if the two capsules are very closely matched — which means very tight tolerance manufacturing and engineering.

In particular, the acoustic delay material (referred to as 'resistance' in the video) which controls sound reaching the rear of the diaphragm to give the cardioid/supercardioid response, has to be very closely matched — something which is very difficult using traditional materials technology.

So it looks like they have engineered a way of tuning that element during production.

Besides the claimed performance and technical benefits, I suspect this new technology is actually a way of out-engineering the Chinese copy-cat machine. It appears to be built entirely in the US and I doubt they'll be anything meaty by way of technical detail published.

[Tim Gillett]

Thanks for the video link and the comments.