|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 14, 2016 15:31:13 GMT -6
jakeharris, nice chart, thanks. I believe I've seen that before, and as I thought, the 87 is by far the most common. Part of the reason for that is cost though. If you could choose between a vintage 87, 67, 47, C-12, ELA M 51, and the price was the same, that poll would be different. I still think the 87 would be in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd place though.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Apr 14, 2016 15:41:52 GMT -6
I dunno, I agree on individual basis, but not general application.
But so many 67s had been abused, needed service, or were modified, and C12 sounds wrong on a lot of singers.
As compared with fresh early 80s 87i. If you want something predictable without having to set up a bunch of mikes, that's it.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 14, 2016 16:35:16 GMT -6
Don't disagree. I had a U-87 I bought new in 1980, and it fit everything so well, I never gave the microphone a second thought, just turned on the juice and got to work. I wish I still had it.
I did use an incredible vintage C-12 once for a live recording in a studio and never sounded better. I wish I owned that one too !
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 14, 2016 16:54:47 GMT -6
I have NOTHING good to say about modified Neumanns.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 14, 2016 17:03:45 GMT -6
This thread is making me want a U87
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Apr 14, 2016 17:21:37 GMT -6
He didn't. Myself and a few others kept bugging Max about doing it. He did, but it didn't meet his sonic expectations, so he decided not to offer it. Simple really. Not really, from first page on GS "I'll also have a special version for vintage U87(i) mics." That's called advertising. I totally understand why he decided not to offer it, that's why I said I wish the conversion could be revisited. Btw, if he hadn't jumped the gun with that statement, I would have gotten a TLM at the time instead of another purchase and gotten the mod. But thinking I already had a U87i for the mod, and having no idea whether the TLM67 gets lower rated capsules from Neumann than the U87ai, I got something else. Maybe I'm not the only one. Not that it matters in the scheme of things, but that's the business consequence. Anyway, would be interesting to see Klaus do a tear down analysis of the innards (e.g. tube and transformer) with reference to Neumann's proprietary techniques and component selection process, like he did with the official U47 FET reissue. Have you heard a modded TLM67? That statement was added AFTER the initial announcement. i.e.: he edited that in later. The initial release was for the AI and TLM67 only. If you read thru the thread you'll see that. His stab at doing a vintage 87 was brought on by people asking for it in the ongoing thread.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Apr 14, 2016 17:24:02 GMT -6
This thread is making me want a U87 Hahaha!!! Get one John!
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 14, 2016 17:40:33 GMT -6
Can I borrow three grand?
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Apr 14, 2016 18:19:30 GMT -6
Not really, from first page on GS "I'll also have a special version for vintage U87(i) mics." That's called advertising. I totally understand why he decided not to offer it, that's why I said I wish the conversion could be revisited. Btw, if he hadn't jumped the gun with that statement, I would have gotten a TLM at the time instead of another purchase and gotten the mod. But thinking I already had a U87i for the mod, and having no idea whether the TLM67 gets lower rated capsules from Neumann than the U87ai, I got something else. Maybe I'm not the only one. Not that it matters in the scheme of things, but that's the business consequence. Anyway, would be interesting to see Klaus do a tear down analysis of the innards (e.g. tube and transformer) with reference to Neumann's proprietary techniques and component selection process, like he did with the official U47 FET reissue. Have you heard a modded TLM67? That statement was added AFTER the initial announcement. i.e.: he edited that in later. The initial release was for the AI and TLM67 only. If you read thru the thread you'll see that. His stab at doing a vintage 87 was brought on by people asking for it in the ongoing thread. Um, no not exactly what happened. I just read through the thread again. He added the vintage u87 part a day later, and repeatedly said he was working on the conversion and it should be available soon and then "Soooo - the vintage U87(non-AI) to U67 Module is now tested and completed! To replicate the behaviour of the U67 in the best way, the backplates of the capsule are electrically connected and the Pattern is switched via PSU knob similar to the M269 microphone." You also chimed in along the way with enthusiasm, and then silence. And as you said, no explanation from him just that he was not offering it, no technical explanation either, just an explanation from you that he didn't like the sonic results. Then a few people with vintage 87s being like darn, oh well, including yourself. Maybe he felt it would be too much a pain in the ass to troubleshoot, or that backplate capsule connection could never be equalled in terms of performance, or too time intensive to adjust. Who knows. You certainly don't. So all I'm wondering is if this technical problem is surmountable or not, and if it can be revisited. He did say the capsule "sound-performance" is identical. That's all. Pretty simple. So you can stop punching me in the dick, thanks.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Apr 14, 2016 18:43:04 GMT -6
I have NOTHING good to say about modified Neumanns. Yeah me neither really. I think the modified market of thinning diaphragms, removing circuits, or more expertly adjusting feedback and tuning response is catering to specific needs and performers. You see a lot of mention of pop stars having their mics custom modified. Which is all well and good, and I don't think anyone would dispute that they can sound great for an individual singer. But these guys who modify mics don't make records. And while the modified designs can sound better in isolation, i.e. they sound more (or over) sensitive, or open, or brighter, they don't necessarily sound better across a bunch of mixes, and not for it to be worth the trouble since you also lose the predictability of the design. But if you want a predictable non-sibilant mic that sounds like the same mic from another studio, you record revolving and varied talent and instruments, and the point is to crank out music on the smaller label focused independent studio model, then you want the same old proven design.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 14, 2016 19:01:34 GMT -6
Modification just turns them into another hot or cold microphone that works on some things and fails on others.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 14, 2016 19:04:50 GMT -6
Let me add that a KM84 or 86 has the same "just set it up and hit record" quality.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Apr 14, 2016 19:31:21 GMT -6
That statement was added AFTER the initial announcement. i.e.: he edited that in later. The initial release was for the AI and TLM67 only. If you read thru the thread you'll see that. His stab at doing a vintage 87 was brought on by people asking for it in the ongoing thread. Who knows. You certainly don't. I bought one. Did you? I have traded personal correspondence with Max back and forth re his 67. He was was extremely apologetic that - after my purchase and a couple of others - the mod just did not meet his expectations to have the vintage 87 MATCH EXACTLY his take on what a 67 should sound like. He feels the AI and TLM do. I can respect that. He immediately refunded my money and handled the situation in a total pro fashion. He did mention that the mod sounded good, just not the same as the AI or TLM67 for whatever reason, and that at this point he would no longer offer mods to vintage 87's. The man is serious about his modification to turn an AI or TLM67 into a mic that matches his vintage 67s, and after owning his 47 replica, I have the utmost respect and trust in him and his mics. This is not heresy, its straight from Max's personal emails to me. Sorry if you don't like what you hear. But it's the facts. Nothing personal intended.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Apr 14, 2016 19:43:22 GMT -6
First of all you can't replicate a 47 without all original parts, but you can get a good sounding mic.
What you're saying is not from the horse's mouth so to speak, nor does it address my question as to whether this problem is technically an impasse and can be revisited, whether it is worth the trouble for him, etc. Perhaps not. Why don't you hear that?
I was already aware of everything you've said, I did read the original thread after all. Now for the second or third time. So all you've done is call attention to yourself and been a pain in the ass, rather than actually answering my question. I hope you can appreciate the difference.
Guess I'll email him, and not be a bitch about it.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,921
|
Post by ericn on Apr 15, 2016 7:14:28 GMT -6
Guys let's let it go and Mellow out! We are talking about a microphone upgrade not the Middle East! It would be a shame to see this thread locked over 2 egos getting ruffled over a Version that isn't being built! Now Keats all play nice.
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Apr 15, 2016 7:57:05 GMT -6
For what it's worth, these mics are really difficult to clone spot on, it doesn't mean u can't get a spectacular mic out of the deal, my C12 circuit clone is crazziballs badass! I've been at it for a while now, here are some things ive learned, Max's MKU47 is a better 47 than most originals, I have 3 of them, and one is getting some interesting mods by Dr Shannkenstein atm, should prove interesting? As far as the rest, the acoustics of the mic body/HEAD BASKET, play a much larger role than u may think, the trannys are a pita, the original make resistors, caps, tubes all play a significant role in the sound, and they are VERY hard to come by, I am building a pair of Elam "kid" and "Vybes" clones right now and have been hunting down as close to real deal nos parts as I can find, for the PSU as well, it's a tedious cat and mouse waiting game, I'll let u know how I make out.?.? A good U67 or U87 seems a bitch to duplicate from everything I've heard and read, I've honestly never heard a clone of either of these sound quite as good, as a good sample of an original.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 15, 2016 9:00:12 GMT -6
I miss hearing from Kidvybes.
Tony makes a good point. At B&H here in NYC, they have an isolated mic room. There are maybe.. 30 high quality mics, paired with a half dozen top notch preamps which you can choose from to audition. I've listened briefly to two Mojave mics , and then switched to the Neumann U-87. I believe the Mojave was based on the 87 design, (correct me if I'm wrong), and I know it's used a lot professionally, but the Neumann just kicked the $hit out of the Mojave.
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Apr 15, 2016 9:49:47 GMT -6
The difference is this clone uses the actual Neumann capsule, which is the most important part, and impossible to get right without proprietary techniques. So the the thing being cloned is the circuit and according to Max the hand-wound to spec (this would have to be indepdently verified by an expert) transformer, plus similar tube. Although Neumann tube selection process was to rigorous standard.
The Mojave mics use Chinese capsules, K67 knockoffs without the proper feedback network. Their latest C12 type probably also Asian capsule, certainly not a skilled Tim Campbell, Josephson, or custom MBHO CK12 attempt.
So no wonder the Neumann, a proven performer, beat up the Mojave.
Thing that's great about the 87 is that it cuts through the mix without sitting on top of it.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,921
|
Post by ericn on Apr 15, 2016 10:42:28 GMT -6
The difference is this clone uses the actual Neumann capsule, which is the most important part, and impossible to get right without proprietary techniques. So the the thing being cloned is the circuit and according to Max the hand-wound to spec (this would have to be indepdently verified by an expert) transformer, plus similar tube. Although Neumann tube selection process was to rigorous standard. The Mojave mics use Chinese capsules, K67 knockoffs without the proper feedback network. Their latest C12 type probably also Asian capsule, certainly not a skilled Tim Campbell, Josephson, or custom MBHO CK12 attempt. So no wonder the Neumann, a proven performer, beat up the Mojave. Thing that's great about the 87 is that it cuts through the mix without sitting on top of it. Yes the capsule is the heart and soul as well as the hardest part to get right. Ill be the first to admit to not being a fan of the cheap capsules from China, but have to admit they have brought us a ton of affordable mics that don't suck, most are far from great ut they don't suck. The thing is though anybody trying to nail the sound of a vintage mic is using aged example, and most are using new parts, so the question is how will these clones age? My biggest gripe with Max's kit is the but Ugly Head Badge found on the TLM67!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 15, 2016 12:21:09 GMT -6
Remember that the 67 and 87 kicked the sh!t out of everything that came later and were at least as good as what pro studios already had which almost always included U47s and M49s. It isn't like our bosses didn't always want some cheaper mikes that were every bit as good.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Apr 15, 2016 13:59:48 GMT -6
So who likes a TLM67 as-is?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,921
|
Post by ericn on Apr 15, 2016 15:38:23 GMT -6
So who likes a TLM67 as-is? There's an urban legend about a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy that isn't connected to Senn. or Banjomart who loves his!
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 16, 2016 16:16:09 GMT -6
I had one for a short time. Very flat and darkish.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 16, 2016 16:16:30 GMT -6
So, drsax - you have one of the mods? On the TLM?
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Apr 16, 2016 16:37:05 GMT -6
@johnkenn - I have this mod on a U87ai. Sounds great. I think Max pretty much nailed it. I think this sounds like a new U67 would. Vintage parts that age change the sound. That is why I think people hear this mod as darker. On a vintage 67, as I understand it - and I'm no expert... But the aged cap that controls the high frequency roll off, as it ages, the HF sound would get brighter. The biggest factor to me is the differences in tubes. I tried some different tubes and even while comparing several of the same model tubes - each was noticeably different. I tried 4 vintage telefunken EF86 tubes and the LF and HF response was quite different on each one. One of those tubes in particular sounds SO killer in this mic. Definitely sounds like a classic U67. FWIW, the stock PF86 that Max shipped with the mic sounded excellent - better than all the EF86 tubes I tried with the exception of the one magic EF86 which I left in the mic. And it was an old used ef86 from a tape machine - but it has "that sound." Neumann was picky about tube selection - and I see why, although I'm not sure that they used telefunkens in the original u67's. With the right tube, it does not sound flat and dull to my ears. Max did an amazing job on this mod.
|
|