Just got time on a Roland VAD506 and stumbled onto something that made it feel way more “real” in in-ears: blending shell-mounted contact mics with the TD-27 module outputs. The VAD shells actually resonate a bit under the mesh heads, and capturing that tiny bit of acoustic attack/resonance and tucking it under the module tone made a huge difference in stick definition, depth, and the sense of “air” moving. Has anyone tried this kind of hybrid-without-acoustics approach?
What I did
- Stuck cheap piezo/contact mics inside the tom and kick shells (non-permanent adhesive, foam isolators), ran them into a tiny 4-ch interface.
- High-passed around 300-500 Hz on toms, 80-120 Hz on kick, added a touch of transient designer, then blended under the TD-27 mix at about -18 to -24 dB.
- Delayed the module tracks to time-align with the contact mics (more below).
- Sent the blended bus only to my IEM mix; FOH gets the clean module outs as usual.
What I heard
- Clearer stick tip definition on toms and ride, a subtle “wood” character from the shells, and better sense of dynamics on ghost notes.
- Kick felt more connected to the foot. With the contact mic feeding a throne shaker it was next-level.
Latency and alignment
- Rough measurements on my rig: TD-27 analog outs ≈2-3 ms, TD-27 USB multichannel ≈5-7 ms round-trip, extra interface for contact mics ≈2-4 ms depending on buffer.
- Easiest fix was to delay the faster path (module) to match the slower path (contact mic chain), or just nudge tracks post-recording. A sample aligner plugin worked fine live in a low-latency session.
Noise and crosstalk
- Foam-damped the piezos and mounted them away from lugs to reduce handling noise.
- Light gating/expansion cleaned up hat/ride bleed into tom mics.
- I used balanced connections/power to avoid ground loop hum; no issues so far.
Questions for folks who know the VAD506 deeply
- Best contact mic models and mounting points inside VAD shells for the cleanest “attack” without excessive buzz? Rim vs shell wall vs lug post?
- Anyone have precise, repeatable latency numbers for TD-27 analog vs USB outs at common buffer sizes? Would love reference values to streamline alignment.
- Any risk of interference with PD-140DS/CY-18DR sensors or digital cabling from running extra wires inside the shells? Didn’t notice issues, but I’m curious.
- Has anyone tried a tiny electret mic in the kick for a bit of “air woosh” and then hard high-pass/gate it to avoid low-end rumble?
- Live use: any clever routing to keep the contact-mic blend only in IEMs while feeding discrete module direct outs to FOH, without burning extra interface outputs?
- If you’ve upgraded to VH-14D or changed the digital pad lineup on a TD-27-based VAD506, did the mechanical noise profile change enough to affect this approach?
If there’s interest I can post an A/B clip of pure module vs module+contact mic blend. I’m kind of shocked how much “acoustic feel” this adds with almost no extra volume in the room. Is this a weird hack, or the missing link for making the VAD506 feel like a mic’d kit in headphones?