Too early

Regarding the practical use, I think this is redundant invention. I wonder what Rode company expects here, who should be target consumer group?

Fools like you :-)

I think it's a very interesting idea from a technical standpoint even though it looks strange. Microphone elements are fairly cheap - so why not use a bunch of them?

The logical extension of this design would be to have a baseball sized microphone with large and small electret elements arranged in a spherical configuration. With suitable signal processing you could have a noise cancelling microphone capable of any number of patterns as well as ambient surround capabilities - all virtual and even simultaneously available - you would never have to "point" the microphone, just configure it! You could even do it in post - and that's a very interesting possibility.

I'm not sure I get the iPhone part, though - and the separate capsules seems clumsy.

When it's loud around, normally the mics must be positioned very close to each of the sound sources (objects of the recording). When it's silent and gain must be high, it gets difficult to avoid secondary noises (cloth etc)- so the positioning it's also difficult. If it is outside, one will need here 32 wind noise protectors.

Speaking from the practical side, I really fail to see the point for inventioning this device.

I get the issue about cloth noise, etc... that's why I suggested a spherical arrangement. In such an arrangement you could mitigate many of those types of issues with signal processing. As for the noise protectors - one big dead cat would do the job.

The advantage I see to this kind of thing (or, maybe later models) is that you could put the microphone on a pole, just above the frame, and be able to not worry about where you point it too much. Plus, you could get ambient sound and noise cancelling - all in one device. Also, you could decide directional characteristics in post.

Admittedly, I have no idea whether they support any such features or not. Nevertheless - I see the value in embarking on such designs - as bizarre as they might look.

"what I was hearing was better than what my ears could hear"!!!

mr Bloom and the Rode marketing department have done themselves proud.

even if you had 16 mics with very narrow pickup patterns played back across 16 similarly places speakers the phasing problems could/would be horrendous.

a Decca Tree, a double MS setup or a single Soundfield mic do it far more elegantly.

funny though!

@Siddho You are making some very naive assumptions about how surround sound and signal processing work. Even with simple systems currently in use there is not a 1:1 mapping between microphones and speakers. Instead sound is mapped into a virtual soundfield according to microphone configuration, and then it is remapped into a soundfield according to speaker placement. Also, the microphones don't need to be particularly narrow field - signal processing can be used to calculate a narrow field response area from multiple not-so-narrow field microphones. Granted, it might take some time to work out all the signal processing as approaching sound capture this way is relatively new - but rest assured, it will come.

Geez, for a bunch of guys into the latest and greatest visual technology, there are some real Luddites here when it comes to new ideas for sound capture;)

This idea is not really new, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundfield_microphone

If there was anyone left who was in any doubt that Bloom's opinion can be bought, that video says it all. This thing is a total gimmick. "Better than what my actual ears could hear"... makes me cringe.

Gee - now you guys are down to killing the messenger. A lot of snark from a bunch of people who have never seen a microphone array before trashing the guy who actually used the product. Unimpressive and irrational...

Microphone arrays have been around since 1975 (at least). They weren't popular because they were very, very expensive, and very difficult to use properly. With as cheap as electret elements are today, and as much as signal processing has advanced (in price, quality, and ease of use) it seems to me that all this is pretty viable today.

Hmmm. Suspicious timing.

Microphone arrays have been used now for about ten years. The basic fact is that ten mics that you can position will always sound better than ten mics stuck on a wheel or whatever.

BUT when you get up to a hundred minimics on say a large dish, computer controlled with a network and micro servos, then you create a different world of sound. This thing is basically a weed whacker style. Even with good mics, they should be detachable, either wirelessly or on spring cables.

Most of my audio is recorded live, from whatever mics happen to be within range, and it would be nice to be able to steer a VST null (to get rid of extraneous background sounds) or a peak (to focus on the subject). So Rode's idea is something I have considered myself. Perhaps not 16 capsules, however... The next best thing has been the MS mode of my new H2N...

I read that the figure 8 element of the H2N is actually two small cardioids back-to-back. Pity they don't record all three channels (M,S1,S2), that would lead to some excellent flexibility in post...