It's official - look at Philip Bloom's April Fools Page: http://philipbloom.net/2013/04/01/canonraw

Interesting, though, he does mention that some day this might be true! After all, the Canon Raw thing is already sort of true (BMC) and it's actually cheaper than the Canon was.

@MirrorMan

So - all that means is that it can record for a full five minutes with a fully charged battery. Easy to get around - just buy 20 iTouch devices and rotate them to achieve a reasonable day's shooting;)

Or, wire four car batteries in series for power. You could use them as weights for your tripod - very stable! And you will only have to recharge once every few months (mostly because of self-discharging) even with full days of shooting...

How can it not be an april fools joke? The capsules look to be the same as the NT4 and the NT5 which would mean needing phantom power and I doubt the iPhone is capable of providing that. Its also not on listed in their product line anywhere on the website.

Ahaa, but there is the iXY which looks quite handy. Anyone tried this? http://www.rodemic.com/mics/ixy

@tetakpatak

I see other advantages to array microphones, aside from normal recording considerations:

Noise suppression - achieved by differentiating out sound data from other directions.

Narrow pickup pattern from normal capsules - achieved by processing proximate capsules. In fact, you could tune the patterns to a certain extent.

Surround - obviously.

Virtual capabilities in post - you could create virtual channels from the array such as narrow pattern channels in various directions with noise suppression for dialog and surround ambient channels, then mix them as if they had been captured with separate devices. MS configurations, etc... You could pretty much pick what you want in post.

Teleconferencing companies have array systems that make relatively distant sources sound like they are close up - could be some interesting possibilities there.

Capsules and reasonably high quality opamps and AD converters are so cheap these days that their cost is insignificant compared to the case you put them in. Why not consider designs with lots of capsules?

A true array would respond to changes in environment, or consist of an extremely large number of small microphones that have network profiles. Otherwise there is no reason to have an array, since it is easy using MADI to hook up a few dozen mics to one cable and create the virtual array in post. Another intriguing way to use arrays is use certain mics for certain frequencies, in the way that a speaker uses different drivers with a crossover.

Here's a simple array anyone can try (with cheaper alternatives): a Schoeps MK2H or DPA measurement mic (Oktava omni) for the bass, Sennheiser MKH 40 for the mids (Oktava cardioid) and an Earthworks QT 30 or 40 for the treble (RODE small diaphragm omni). You have to create EQ curves to smoothly handle the crossovers. Tie the three together with rubber bands (or silicon O rigns) to retain phase and isolate against noise.

If you like ribbon mics, but are disappointed in the top end and bass extension (they don't have either) you can create a gorgeous sound by using such an array with a ribbon mic--or coincident pair of ribbon mics--in the middle of this array, and then blend the treble and bass in to extend the range from 20 Hz to 24 kHz.

I made a mistake. I just noticed: "Combining the Mid-Side and X/Y mics together allows full 360-degree surround sound recordings in either 2-channel or 4-channels. In 2-channel mode the sound is recorded to a single stereo file, while in 4-channel mode two separate stereo files are recorded to provide more options when it comes to post-production"

http://www.gizmag.com/zoom-h2n-handy-recorder/19204/

I didn't see that in Zoom's VST module . Will have to look more closely. Maybe I can do even better with this $125 gadget...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/72598773@N00/sets/72157628073874259/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/72598773@N00/6373426165/in/set-72157628073874259

Something like eight microphones around with four each up and down.

@cbrandin When I read this, my first idea was what @trevmar already wrote, to use two H2n's if you like this idea in general.

And although we're probably April Fools this time, it was also my point what @DrDave described better: the problem of such a device is the fact, that one would must position all sound sources around it. Separately positioned mics will always sound better.

April Fools - but - I purchased a Zoom H2N at $125 a month or so ago. It records MS, and they give you a VST plugin which is rather nice in post. Especially when the mic is very close to the sound source and the image needs to be trimmed down in width a little.

ps: it records in XY front, XY rear (4 channel) or MS, and I have been using it mainly in MS...

Boy, if this is an April 1st joke it will inspire me to design something like it - but in a more spherical array. Something like eight microphones around with four each up and down. Their choice to use a two dimensional array is somewhat confusing.

Some commercial offerings similar in idea: http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_2008-Q1_mics-whiston.pdf

Just in case you want to learn about microphone array processing (and you're somewhat of a masochist): http://www.idiap.ch/~mccowan/arrays/arrays/tutorial.html

Ha, ha, I find it very funny if it is really 1st April joke :-)