And the Blue Yeti Pro isn't. But it seems to sound the same.
The Yetis are now the official mics for the two shows.
At first blush, that seems peculiar, doesn't it - and that one would be inclined to think that it would be the other way 'round? Actually, the only "good" reason for it (in my personal opinion) is that the manufacturer (in this case
Blue Microphones http://www.thx.com/test-bench-blog/on-the-record-with-blue-microphones/) simply did not submit their professional version (the only
real difference between the two models seems to be that the
pro version sports an professional
XLR connector for use in an
pro recording environment, in addition to it's
USB connector) of what, I'd wager, are exactly the same "
guts" in both mics (which would explain your observation of no noticeable deviation in tonal quality between them) for
THX testing and certification. That little
THX emblem comes at a premium but, in most cases, for a very good reason. This choice saves
Blue Microphones money, and those savings often "
trickle down" to the consumer at the checkout.
I own several (and have owned several other) pieces of
THX Certified consumer electronics and loudspeakers down through the years - always the ones where the
THX certification matters most and derives the most "bang for the buck" over competing non-certified consumer brands. For instance: some ten years ago, I purchased a
Rotel RSP-985 Surround Sound Processor http://www.rotel.com/NA/Products/ProductDetails.htm?Id=194&Tab=2&Pic=1 (or "
controller," in
THX parlance) firstly, because it is a
THX Ultra certified
Preamplifier/
Processor (or,
Pre/
Pro) thereby offering a performance advantage over comparable machines that did not provide the patented
THX "
post-processing" (which is the only accurate way to translate film sound tracks originally mixed for proper playback in large cinemas, to the much smaller environment of a typical domestic space) provided in the
Rotel Pre/
Pro. Secondly, it was the least expensive
Pre/
Pro on the market at the time which (for me and
my money) made it the obvious choice.
Another piece I own is a
THX Certified 5.1-channel, analog (so-called "
constant-Q") graphic equalizer (or
EQ) the "
The Bijou"
Theater Series Home Theater Equalizer by
AudioControl http://www.audiocontrol.com/19888/products/THX-Equalizer----The-Bijou.html Though slightly "
dated" yet serviceable, still in production and selling, it offers precise (by comparison to non-
constant-Q EQ topologies) +/- 6
decibel's (or
dB's) of cut/boost frequency control from
80Hz to
800Hz in 1/3 octave-spaced bands (over
eleven, uniformly spaced, frequency points) for the front three channels -
Left,
Center,
Right (or
LCR) - 1 octave-spaced bands (over
eight, uniformly spaced, frequency points) from 100Hz to 6,300Hz for the stereo
surround channels -
Right Surround and
Left Surround (or
RS and
LS) and very narrow (for an analog graphic
EQ) 1/6 Octave-spaced bands (over
twelve, equally spaced, frequency points) from
22.4Hz to
80Hz for the subwoofer/
Low Frequency Effects (or
LFE - the
.1 in
5.1) channel where the majority of the most troublesome room resonances occur (nostalgically speaking,
er, typing - at the time of it's initial release, the
The Bijou was the
only consumer
EQ available with these narrowly spaced 1/6 octave adjustment controls for the subwoofer/
LFE channel). At the time of purchase (about twelve years ago) I was obliged to also acquire a professional
AudioControl Industrial SA-3051 http://www.audiocontrol.com/t37/60172/19939/Stand-Alone/Real-Time-Spectrum-Analyzer-SA--3051.html 1/3 octave,
Real Time Analyzer (or
RTA) in order to correctly fine-tune the equalizer because, without it, the
EQ would have been, for all practical intents and purposes, otherwise valueless. These turned out to be the single best purchases I've ever made for the improvement of my listening/viewing room's acoustics, following acoustic wall treatment and careful placement of the loudspeakers and furniture, that is.
Nowadays, most of the newest
Audio/
Video Receivers (or
AVR's) and
Pre/
Pro's offer some form of digital
Automatic Room Correction (or
ARC) solutions by several competing companies such as
Audyssey MultEQ - in it's five various flavors
http://www.audyssey.com/audio-technology/multeq,
Trinnov Audio Optimizer http://www.trinnov.com/en/optimization/more-info/how-it-works/acoustic-correction and
Anthem Sonic Frontiers International Anthem Room Correction http://www.anthemav.com/download/an...d2v-technical-briefs-arc-1-data-sheet/details (to name only three of the many that are available) all of which employ sophisticated, proprietary algorithmic
DSP with slightly dissimilar implementation methodology (no surprise there) between competitors, each inherently designed to "
ideally" achieve the same, or similar, results - for the most part. These systems are capable of performing correction in the "
time-domain," as well as the "
frequency-domain," and at much higher resolution, meaning
many more, extremely narrow, individually adjustable frequency points per audio channel than any analog
EQ. That is to say, (in terms of, say,
Audyssey MultEQ XT32) an analog
EQ with anything less than, like, a thousand frequency band controls per channel (which would be highly impractical) could ever hope to approach, and still would do nothing in the realm of early reflection
time domain correction.
The down-side of this seeming technological improvement (
not that I'm putting it down, because this is truly useful, highly sophisticated, and extremely powerful
DSP) is that the arbitrary
room correction (and this is what any and
all audio frequency equalizers correct for -
room - not
system - frequency aberrations, regardless of design philosophies) calculations they arrive at (even though those calculations are derived from in-room calibrated microphone measurements taken using a method called s
pacial and
temporal averaging in conjunction with test tones played back over the loudspeaker system)
are automatically derived, and therefore, in the absence of an high-resolution
RTA on hand such as
True Audio's
TrueRTA http://www.trueaudio.com/rta_abt1.htm to
verify the validity and accuracy of the changes imposed by the algorithmic parameters of
ARC, one can never be completely certain
or trusting that the algorithm has performed the corrections accurately and to best effect. At any rate, when the results of these systems
have been analyzed,
most of them (though not all, or consistently from manufacturer to manufacturer) have shown to be reasonably accurate.
I'm such a "
gear-head" though that, if I didn't own equipment to perform an manual analysis after one of these
Automatic Room Correction sessions, I literally would not be able to sleep nights for not "
knowing." No joking - I've lived it. . . Alright, so I suffer from
OCD. . .
I'm okay with it.
At last, this brings me to the subject I've been striving for from the start. . .
THX Ultra certified loudspeakers. The inclusion of the word "
Ultra" indicates that
THX Certified loudspeakers sporting this "post-designation" are suitable for use in rooms of up to and including 3,000 cubic feet in volume, which corresponds to a fairly good sized domestic space, and are
identical to the original Home THX Sound System specifications. In the wake of the original specifications, other certification specs were created - for instance
THX Select identifying those loudspeakers suitable for use in smaller rooms (such as "efficiency"-style apartment living rooms, bedrooms, dorm rooms, etc.) of up to and including 2,000 cubic feet in volume.
THX I/S Plus (
I/S standing for "
Integrated System") is intended to sell as a "
turn-key" system solution, and is
performance categorized under the
THX Select room volume specifications of up to 2,000 cubic feet. There exists new certification specs called
THX Select2 Plus and
THX ULTRA2 Plus that include some extra, and useful,
DSP functionality, loudspeaker and specification modifications beyond the original incarnation. All of the currently available
THX Certification Performance Categories for Home Theater can be found here:
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-en...ter/thx-certification-performance-categories/
I purchased
my dream-system loudspeaker package, the
S-5000THX http://web.archive.org/web/20041022014314/http://www.mksound.com/s5000.htm (these were the very same model loudspeaker chosen by
Dolby Laboratories for their research and development of the "lossy"
AC-3 Perceptual Audio Coding scheme now commonly known and referred to world-wide as
Dolby Digital http://www.dolby.com/consumer/understand/playback/dolby-digital.html#) manufactured by a now defunct
pro-sound company called
M&K Sound Corporation. These
consumer loudspeakers are firmly rooted in
professional audio, as they are highly sought after by both sound professionals and audiophiles alike.
M&K Sound was supplying practically all of the major Hollywood Film Studios the world over with their professional work station and dubbing stage monitoring systems when I made my purchase some eight years ago, now. They were the first officially licensed
Lucasfilm Home THX Sound System certified loudspeakers available to the public. In fact, many of the movies and television shows you've seen over the last fifteen-or-so years were likely mixed and mastered using professional
M&K Sound monitors and powered subwoofers, and several of these film soundtracks were Academy Award winners for best sound - including films like
James Cameron's TITANIC and
Peter Jackson's
KING KONG.
Suffice to say that I'd coveted these loudspeakers for ten years (lust is a
powerful, pitiless emotion, isn't it? ) Well, as fate would have it,
my S-5000's were among the very last batch made by
M&K Sound before the company was forced to file for chapter eleven protection, and close their doors for good. This was (sadly) precipitated by a sudden surge of cheap, inferior Chinese knock-off imitations flooding the market (I have this on good authority directly from
Mr. Kreisel personally, by the way) an increasingly all-too-common scenario perpetrated against American manufacturers across the board these days in an attempt to
force them to either move their manufacturing operations over seas in order to remain competitive, or suffer the consequences of choosing to keep American jobs
here in
America, where they belong.
The demand for
M&K loudspeakers had always been high, due in part to the fact that they were hand-made-to-order, and that each and every driver
and fully assembled loudspeaker were
thoroughly tested before they were allowed to leave the
M&K factory in Chatsworth, California -
http://web.archive.org/web/20050207133126/http://www.mksound.com/kenmessage3.htm a necessary business model for a (realistically speaking)
small manufacturer (and by "
small" I mean by comparison to their competitors' virtually unlimited capitol resources and fully stocked warehouses) by master craftsmen, technicians and veteran loudspeaker designer
Ken Kreisel - the
"K" in
M&K (the "
M" in
M&K was
D. Jonas Miller - now deceased - making the full,
official company name
Miller & Kreisel Sound Corporation, not that any of this matters at all any more.
My
M&K surround loudspeakers are of a
THX endorsed "
Tripole" design. A design proprietary to
M&K Sound (this post is already too long for me to dive into a lengthy, technical explanation as to exactly what comprises this loudspeaker design and the psycho-acoustic theory upon which it is based, and I'm not sure that anyone would care to read it if I did) though they are
not THX Certified loudspeakers - but, I knew that going in.
M&K did make a
THX Certified Tripole - the
SS-150THX -
http://web.archive.org/web/20051114.../spec_mains/MK_SS150thx_speaker_specsheet.pdf) with a total of four drivers mounted in a rigidly-constructed trapezoidal-shaped (form dictated by function) cabinet. The Non-
THX Certified model that I purchased (the
M&K Surround-200 Mk II Tripole http://web.archive.org/web/20051102...ec_mains/MK_Surround200_speaker_specsheet.pdf) is essentially the same design - only on steroids. It uses the exact same midrange/tweeter-combo drivers and separate dome tweeter as the certified version mounted in a similarly shaped, slightly larger, more robustly constructed cabinet to accommodate a larger bass driver (a 6.5" woofer opposed to the 5.25" woofer used in the certified model) which extends the loudspeaker's low frequency reproduction to below what
THX certification requires for surround loudspeakers, thereby "besting" the
THX Certified design by, essentially, providing more of a good thing.
M&K refers to this loudspeaker as the "
step-up model" from their
SS-150THX, and it includes an equivalently high quality, more advanced, internal frequency crossover network and a total driver count increase to
six versus only
four in the certified model which, when combined, increases power handling capacity due to a greater over-all efficiency, expands the loudspeaker's usable frequency and dynamic ranges, while simultaneously improving it's maximum attainable output
Sound Pressure Level (or
SPL). From an engineering viewpoint, all desirable, achievable and, ultimately, attained qualities.
So
finally, after all this, my remaining, long-lingering question is: Could these loudspeakers (just as I suspect of Gene's
Blue Microphones Yeti http://www.bluemic.com/yeti/manual.pdf and
Yeti Pro http://www.bluemic.com/yetipro/manuals/YetiPro_manual_English.pdf have passed spec-testing by
THX Ultra certification standards? As over-built as they are I have no doubt that they could have, but
M&K made the decision to
not pay the extra cost involved in the certification process for this particular loudspeaker model (which, I am told, is
not inconsiderable) and it is my
personal belief and opinion that it is for the reasons I sited at the very beginning of this post when I set out to type what turned into this overly-lengthy reply so very,
very long ago.
P.S. If you stuck with me for the duration, you have my thanks (and sympathies) for reading. If not, well. . . then you'll never know that I said "thanks all the same."
Northern NY State. . ?