|
Post by Quint on Aug 20, 2019 18:12:49 GMT -6
Pearlman mics are also great if your not sure if you want a U47 or U67. Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any.
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Aug 20, 2019 18:17:01 GMT -6
Pearlman mics are also great if your not sure if you want a U47 or U67. Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any. Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him.
|
|
|
Post by notneeson on Aug 20, 2019 19:12:27 GMT -6
Pearlman mics are also great if your not sure if you want a U47 or U67. Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any. I have some time on the Pearlman Church mic, nice option for male vox in particular.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Aug 20, 2019 20:47:29 GMT -6
Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any. Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him. How does the TM-1 compare to the circuit in the 67? Any negative feedback in the TM-1 circuit like there is in the 67?
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 21, 2019 13:34:48 GMT -6
Ugh...I get your sentiment and can kind of buy into it, but your choice of mic would be one of the last I'd ever reach for...... God damn me too...let us go bond somewhere with our mutual distaste of such an overrated ear scraping microphone... sorry, carry on everyone. You can't just say "a 414" - there are more than half a dozen different versions. The earliest 414s and 414 EBs had the "magical" C12 brass cap and were great. The later 414EBs and 414EB p48 had the first iteration of the nylon cap and still sounded really damn good. All those had the really simple amplifier circuit and the OT. After that AKG started screwing with the design big time - I've lost track of all the designations (you can look them up if you want), but all of them, with or without transformer, had various versions of "updated" (and more complex) electronics and, as a general rule of thumb, usually the more you complicate a mic's electronics the "less good" the sound gets. Also, AKG kept on "improving" the cap, which (by reading between the lines) I interpret as "improving" the design for less expensive, more automated production and less actual hand assembly and adjustment - which might have been OK if they'd dropped the price accordingly but, of course, they didn't. At this point I would buy a used new one, but only if I could get it for about the cost of an SM58 and I'd have it in the GS classifieds the next day.
I'm quite fond of my pair of EB p48s - they're not as good as their granddaddy, my C12A (brass), but they're real mics, not overpriced toys. They sound real nice on acoustic guitar.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 21, 2019 13:35:26 GMT -6
No "like"-let alone "love", for the B-ULS? Tough crowd... Chris No.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Aug 21, 2019 13:45:01 GMT -6
God damn me too...let us go bond somewhere with our mutual distaste of such an overrated ear scraping microphone... sorry, carry on everyone. You can't just say "a 414" - there are more than half a dozen different versions. The earliest 414s and 414 EBs had the "magical" C12 brass cap and were great. The later 414EBs and 414EB p48 had the first iteration of the nylon cap and still sounded really damn good. All those had the really simple amplifier circuit and the OT. After that AKG started screwing with the design big time - I've lost track of all the designations (you can look them up if you want), but all of them, with or without transformer, had various versions of "updated" (and more complex) electronics and, as a general rule of thumb, usually the more you complicate a mic's electronics the "less good" the sound gets. Also, AKG kept on "improving" the cap, which (by reading between the lines) I interpret as "improving" the design for less expensive, more automated production and less actual hand assembly and adjustment - which might have been OK if they'd dropped the price accordingly but, of course, they didn't. At this point I would buy a used new one, but only if I could get it for about the cost of an SM58 and I'd have it in the GS classifieds the next day.
I'm quite fond of my pair of EB p48s - they're not as good as their granddaddy, my C12A (brass), but they're real mics, not overpriced toys. They sound real nice on acoustic guitar.
I think its well known the the originals are awesome. But nothing you by since like 85 or something thats a 414 is good.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 21, 2019 13:45:18 GMT -6
An original U47 with V14 is going for what - $15k from a reputable dealer? It in no way, shape or form sounds 5 times better than the Heiserman I just bought...I have been searching for mics that I put up and they just work. No weird pinching or resonances. The H47 does that. For a fifth of the price. Yeah, for other than a collector, it's just not worth the going price IMO. There are great alternatives, and the differences are minimal. Evenmoreso with the current "state-of-the-art" laptop speakers. :lol: I don't mix for "laptop speakers" or f-ing earbuds. If people want to use those it's their own damn fault (or they're just trying to drown out the even worse noise from the bar's jukebox, which I am guilty of). I mix for people who have decent stereos, or at least listen in cars with stereos as good as the ones in my (former) 2016 Prius or my new RAV4 (which doesn't have a damn CD player. Hope the one I ordered from Amazon works in the car....)
I do not understand why any engineer would deliberately mix for degraded quality equipment. If your mix is good it will sound good anywhere - if it's mixed for a degraded system it will sound good nowhere, just different versions of "bad" depending on the playback.
/diversion
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 21, 2019 13:48:55 GMT -6
I hear you. But it’s not a multiplication equation. It doesn’t make sense to say it sounds 150 times better than a 58 either. It just sounds like it sounds, and it costs what it costs. Just like any mic. So we decide if we want one or not! If you can justify the expense, more power to you. I could see maybe buying a 67 when the ship comes in, but unless I was wealthy and used it as investments, I just can’t see putting over $15k in one item. Original U47s (or 67s) are not going to get any cheaper. Quite the contrary. So it's going to be a decent investment even if you don't look at it that way. A MUCH better investment than dumping the same amount on a new computer/PT rig.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Aug 21, 2019 13:52:09 GMT -6
If you can justify the expense, more power to you. I could see maybe buying a 67 when the ship comes in, but unless I was wealthy and used it as investments, I just can’t see putting over $15k in one item. Original U47s are not going to get any cheaper. Quiote the contyrary. So it's goping to be a decent inmvestment even if you don't look at it that way. A MUCH better investment than dumping the same amount on a new computer/PT rig. Kind of disagree. A U47 is only going to gain in value over time. A Computer is going to loose value as will any other interface. Why it sucks to have to buy a new computer ever 5-10 years and converters.. U47 is still a U47 in 15 years. And probably worth more than you bought it.
|
|
|
Post by jamiesego on Aug 21, 2019 14:01:43 GMT -6
Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any. Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him. Man, sentences like this are dangerous to my bank account.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 21, 2019 14:07:44 GMT -6
Or that U48, signed by John & Paul, that's been up at ebay... Chris
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 21, 2019 14:10:52 GMT -6
I've tried the new 414 XLS and thought it sounded "good" on me. But nothing like the original brass 414 I tried, at the Heiserman NAMM Booth. Or the Heiserman C12 capsule-in a vintage 414-sitting right next to it. Both of those were terrific! Chris
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 21, 2019 14:13:29 GMT -6
Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any. Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him. I liked my first TM-1 so much that I got a second one. The only bad thing I have to say about the TM-1s is that the shock mount swivel isn't very robust, but that's easily solved. Mine are both the original black ones.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 21, 2019 14:18:42 GMT -6
Or that U48, signed by John & Paul, that's been up at ebay... Chris Thought is was signed by two of the engineers - Emerick and somebody else?
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 21, 2019 15:54:03 GMT -6
You're probably right. I'll have to recheck. I wonder whatever happened to John's infamous "cracked" 57? Chris
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Aug 21, 2019 23:22:53 GMT -6
Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him. I liked my first TM-1 so much that I got a second one. The only bad thing I have to say about the TM-1s is that the shock mount swivel isn't very robust, but that's easily solved. Mine are both the original black ones. Yeh you need to be careful when referring to the TM-1....I think he went through many versions. I heard the originals had something pretty special, especially in terms of tube options, but his latest ones ain’t too shabby either. Getting back to this thread...the TM-47 is supposed to be a little closer to the 47. Has a little more mid range bite. Haven’t actually heard it in person my self...but that’s coming from Dave. Vintage King did a pretty good U47 shootout you should check out.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Aug 22, 2019 3:00:24 GMT -6
I liked my first TM-1 so much that I got a second one. The only bad thing I have to say about the TM-1s is that the shock mount swivel isn't very robust, but that's easily solved. Mine are both the original black ones. Yeh you need to be careful when referring to the TM-1....I think he went through many versions. I heard the originals had something pretty special, especially in terms of tube options, but his latest ones ain’t too shabby either. Getting back to this thread...the TM-47 is supposed to be a little closer to the 47. Has a little more mid range bite. Haven’t actually heard it in person my self...but that’s coming from Dave. Vintage King did a pretty good U47 shootout you should check out. Shootout?
Nah.
Shootouts don't tell you much of anything, except sometimes what the dealer making the video wants you to buy. At best they're sometimes entertaining. At worst they can be really misleading.
Perhaps you've missed my comments about shootouts, mic shootouts in particular?
Without going into it too much, if a shootout attempts to present the mics "equally" then probably no mic is being demoed to its optimum performance as no two mics have the same optimum setup. At worst the shootout might be set up optimized for one particular mic to the detriment of the others.
Also you never know for sure what might have been done in post production. Even if you really know and trust the person doing the shootout, they never have all the mics individually set up for optimum performance because "it wouldn't be fair".
That's why, unless I already know the mic, I generally insist on being able to demo it at my studio for at least a couple of weeks before I buy.
Dave Pearlman is a really good guy (who makes/sells crappy shock mounts) He's a good friend of the guy who sold me my first TM-1. I tend to mostly trust what he says, but I still need an audition.
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Aug 22, 2019 8:50:57 GMT -6
I actually totally agree with you on the whole shootout ‘youtube’ thing.
It really doesn’t mean squat until you get it into the studio and try it out for yourself. But maybe they at least helpful to inform on some very basic things and features/etc.
Good example my buddy trying to convince me his Roland digital Jupiter 8 emulator sounds EXACTLY the same as my real Jupiter 8. “I saw it on YouTube A/B so it must be true”...ha not really.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Aug 22, 2019 10:33:44 GMT -6
While I don't necessarily disagree with John's critiques of shootout techniques, I've been helped many times by mic shootouts. I've found I often get a very good general idea of what a mic sounds like, and it helps me focus on mics I might be interested in and not bother with some I disliked.
One example, I bought a Blackspade UM-17, and it sounded exactly like the demo when I got it. I would never have found out about the Blackspade or chosen it otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by oliviadolphinjohn on Aug 22, 2019 13:19:46 GMT -6
Had and sold a tm47. To be fair I'm not sure how much Dave means these to be a 47 emulation, they seem to be more like a TM-1 with some vintage components in a 47 looking body.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Aug 22, 2019 15:39:50 GMT -6
How did you like it? Thanks, Chris
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 23, 2019 5:59:13 GMT -6
Meaning that you feel that they reside somewhere in between the 47 and 67? Which model(s)? I've been interested in Pearlman mics for a while, but have never had the chance to try any. Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him. there are a few guys here chiming in on this . . . so, please allow me to offer some advice. What comes between 47 and 67? The 57 . Specifically, the Neumann UM57 (Made in Gefell, but still Neumann officially) A REALLY good UM57 sounds like it's smack in the middle of an M7 U47 and a U67. Shannon gave mine a little love and told me it was one of the finest he had ever heard. And there are plenty more good ones out there Get one and send it to Dave Wheeler wave and he'll work his magic on it. Ask Heiserman tskguy and mdmitch2 for further references. of course, if you really want a 'New of the assemblyline' U47, there's only one choice: The forthcoming Heiserman 47 Tube.
|
|
|
Post by stam on Aug 23, 2019 6:29:05 GMT -6
I would have to second Signal Arts. Chad is a very knowledgeable guy and extremely passionate about his work, detail focused and designed the WA47 which I believe to be a great microphone for it's price and I normally don't praise competition unless they really deserve it. Other people have come out with more expensive U47 clones recently but if you look at the components that pass audio it is almost exactly the same, the sound you will get from paying 1.200 USD or 3.000 will be essentially the same, and maybe not even that. The major upgrade here is of course the aesthetics, body material, connectors, power supply chassis etc.. I myself explored this route to make a 3k microphone but in the end it sounded the same and I rather be able to reach more people. They look really beautiful though, I must say. With regards to my SA47, here is a video comparison. Credit goes to Dany though, he made the circuit, capsule, etc.., I only found suitable tubes and transformers, AMI for me is the clear winner of anything that is out there and the EF800 tube is only 10 bucks, used by much more expensive offerings. It really does sound close to a U47. Eddie Here is what this find gentleman had to say about it "We have tried out the mic on several vocal sessions and it really does have a very good resemblance to the original" Here is a video comparison as well for those who have not seen it:
|
|
|
Post by soundintheround on Aug 23, 2019 17:23:02 GMT -6
Yes, I think it’s smack in the middle. Smoothness of a u67 but bigness of U47. I am referring to the TM1. Talk about cool guy too. He sent me a selection of tubes to try out and get different tones when I purchased one from him. there are a few guys here chiming in on this . . . so, please allow me to offer some advice. What comes between 47 and 67? The 57 . Specifically, the Neumann UM57 (Made in Gefell, but still Neumann officially) A REALLY good UM57 sounds like it's smack in the middle of an M7 U47 and a U67. Shannon gave mine a little love and told me it was one of the finest he had ever heard. And there are plenty more good ones out there Get one and send it to Dave Wheeler wave and he'll work his magic on it. Ask Heiserman tskguy and mdmitch2 for further references. of course, if you really want a 'New of the assemblyline' U47, there's only one choice: The forthcoming Heiserman 47 Tube. Wow didn’t even know about those. Yes I would say take my whole ‘it’s smack in between 47 / 67 comment with a grain of salt’. Listen to ward here. I was just trying to give some reference point. I eventually sold my TM-1, id rather have both a 67 and 47 for options and authenticity of that sound.
|
|