Paul Mac reviews the USM for Audio Media

The Rycote USM is the latest microphone suspension system in the company’s InVision product line, based around the innovative ‘lyre’ suspension component made from the Hytrel composite material. This new offering is the first to address the larger microphone market – anything with a body diameter between 18mm and 55mm – and claims to offer up to a 12dB reduction instand-borne noise compared to traditional suspensions.

The product currently comes in two versions, differentiated by the lyre colour. Red is for any mic that is less than 350g, and black is for the heavy briogade. However, if you are going to tilt the microphone from the vertical (upside down or not), there is a weight band in the middle where Rycote recommends you opt for the heavy duty option.

The suspension unit itself is fairly standard in overall design – a short stand thread coupled by a hinged joint with threaded tightening knob, then two concentric plastic rings – the centre ring suspensded and thus de-coupled from the outer ring. Instead of the usual elastic arrangement though, there are four lyre suspensions. A thread adaptor is included in the box, and as a welcome detail there’s a stand-tyor cable retainer around the short threaded upsright. There are never enough of those left on any stand.

The whole thing feels extremely well-made, and certainly nowhere near as brittle as a couple of my suspensions have proved to be in the past (grrr). I’ve previously tested the ‘virtually unbreakable’ claim on the smaller INV series, and it would appear to hold just as true with the USM.

To actually hold the microphone in place, there are four threaded rods terminated in small discs, which are in turn buffered by ‘grippy, spongy pads’ (my technical term). The idea is that you screw in these rods until the microphone body is firmly gripped – and then you’re ready to go. Yes, this arrangement takes a little more effort than putting a mic in a manufacturer’s bespoke suspension, simply because it’s a ‘universal’ solution – and most of the short amount of extra time is taken keeping the pads equidiatnt. All the mics I tried were held absolutely firmly in place, so I didn’t even bother with a pillow at the base of the stand.

In Use

My prime guinea pigs for this review were two C414s. These mics have flat sides and it took a moment to get the pads screwed into place and to get the microphones into the centre of the inner ring. These mics weigh about 300g, and tipping the suspension produced an insignificant sag, with no effect on the isolation.

That isolation, which according to Rycote can be up to 12dB more than elastic suspensions, was the main revelation here. U admit I was skeptical, having not really questioned traditional suspension at all, especially in a market as mature and developed as the large-diaphragm microphone. The best test here is the simplest – just tap the stand. By comparing the sound you get through the mic to the natural, airborne sound of a tapped stand, it’s easy to hear the difference. With the USM, air and signal both sound the same. With the normal suspension, you can hear distinct overtones and ringing. These probably get perceptually emphasized because of the direct comparison, but they are all the same.

To check there’s no downside to this performance, I checked a number of sources, and stereo arrangements. It;’s hard to emphasise just how important the concept of a spring is in transducers – whether they are speakers or microhpnes. You can potentially lose so much to a mount, a stand, or even the floor if you’re not careful. The bottom line is that pretty much everything is a spring – ot’s the characteristiscs of that spring that count. With the USM inc ahrge, there is no apparent downside, and it stands to reason that without energy being channeled into unwanted resonances, there should be an upside. My tests certainly confirmed that the mics maintained clarity and openness, and there was no apparent strangeness when a pair were employed. Om blalance I would say there were improvements in response and tonality – but the biggest gain was in my own confidence in the setup, which probably counts for a lot when you then start listening.

Compared to pretty much any manufacturer mount these suspensions are incredibly good value for money, and their effectiveness is easily proved. If there were any reasons to pause it could be the slightly fiddly nature of the threaded rods – the 414 suspension, and most others, have a threaded base ring that is narrower than the mic body so mics can’t fall through. However, I would say you’re more than likely to have an accident on the way to the mic stand, which is definitely nothing to do with the USM.

Conclusion

For me there is no decision to be made. The benefits of the USM easily outstrip any slightly paranoid ‘what if’ concernsm Your microphone’s [erformance, and your confidence in your microphone, can be lifted way beyond the cost of the mount itself. As an aside, I think that large diaphragm microphone manufacturers should be beating a path to the Rycote licensing department – if there is such a thing. Imagine the non-universal potential of this mechanical marvel.

Buy several – and some for your frinds as well.

To read the full article, please visit http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/newbay/audiomedia_201003/#/22