|
Post by aremos on Jan 28, 2018 20:25:45 GMT -6
I like the 170, & 89, a lot but feel The 87 has always had this "nasal" quality to It.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Jan 28, 2018 23:16:11 GMT -6
In person, I only have limited experience singing on the AI version. I was considering getting a Soundelux U195, later this year, because I really like how David Bock voiced the mid-range (compared to the 87AI) Plus it streets for around $1250, so it was more affordable/justifiable for me. As it turned out though, yesterday I won one at the Bock NAMM Booth drawing, so that was that! Chris
P.S. My understanding is that Bock's design goal, was to have the revamped U195 sound even more like a 70's U87. In any event, I already love it!
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 28, 2018 23:18:42 GMT -6
I like the 170, & 89, a lot but feel The 87 has always had this "nasal" quality to It. Interesting. I've heard times when it's magic. I guess I can see that though. Love my 170s but they can be a little too sparkly sometimes. Every mic has it's downfalls depending on whats in front of it.
|
|
|
Post by reddirt on Jan 28, 2018 23:59:00 GMT -6
It's 25 years since I've used a 170 but thought it was a very fine mic without hype by and large whereas the 87 of that time in comparison was substantially brighter and thus sibilant. The 89 was the poor cousin to my ears. Not sure if this is apocryphal but Karen Carpenter used an 87 and you'd never say no to that sound/ FWIW Cheers
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jan 29, 2018 0:02:36 GMT -6
Sang through the new U67 today at NAMM. No way of knowing what pre or monitoring it was going through. Sounded great. Nothing to criticize about the capture and presentation. Worth the money? Geez, I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by aremos on Jan 29, 2018 0:19:35 GMT -6
It's 25 years since I've used a 170 but thought it was a very fine mic without hype by and large whereas the 87 of that time in comparison was substantially brighter and thus sibilant. The 89 was the poor cousin to my ears. Not sure if this is apocryphal but Karen Carpenter used an 87 and you'd never say no to that sound/ FWIW Cheers Karen Carpenter would've sounded great on a Radio Shack mic. I guess it more pertains to my own vox & experience with it. The 89 sounds way more natural & balanced as the 170 (sharing it's capsule). BTW how's the Gefell coming along? Do you like it any better now?
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Jan 29, 2018 6:15:55 GMT -6
I like the 170, & 89, a lot but feel The 87 has always had this "nasal" quality to It. The U87 has a transparency about it with a very flattering top end. I’ve heard described as “nasal” by a number of people. In my experience the top end does something very unflattering to any voice that itself has a nasal quality to it. I had issues with a couple of people in my studio who have that very nasal “pop” sound. The U87ai seems to accentuate that quality in the worst way. Otherwise I find it works on nearly anyone. I feel it’s missing a little something on my voice, but it still works. My my wife has a Karen Carpenter like voice when she croons or sings in more of a pop style. The U87 loves that kind of warm female voice and reproduces it in a way that seems as though they are in the room next to you. I’ve had her on the BLUE Stage II with numerous caps, FleA49, MK67, numerous AA Mics; CM12, CM67, CM251, and a Korby Kat with 67M, 12, and 251 heads. I think the only one that really competed was the Korby with the 251 head. My wife has a bit of Linda Rondstadt in her voice too, so I’m looking forward to trying her on my new RMS269, as Linda Rondstadt often used an M269C.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,809
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Jan 29, 2018 8:53:00 GMT -6
I like the 170, & 89, a lot but feel The 87 has always had this "nasal" quality to It. The U87 has a transparency about it with a very flattering top end. I’ve heard described as “nasal” by a number of people. In my experience the top end does something very unflattering to any voice that itself has a nasal quality to it. I had issues with a couple of people in my studio who have that very nasal “pop” sound. The U87ai seems to accentuate that quality in the worst way. Otherwise I find it works on nearly anyone. I feel it’s missing a little something on my voice, but it still works. My my wife has a Karen Carpenter like voice when she croons or sings in more of a pop style. The U87 loves that kind of warm female voice and reproduces it in a way that seems as though they are in the room next to you. I’ve had her on the BLUE Stage II with numerous caps, FleA49, MK67, numerous AA Mics; CM12, CM67, CM251, and a Korby Kat with 67M, 12, and 251 heads. I think the only one that really competed was the Korby with the 251 head. My wife has a bit of Linda Rondstadt in her voice too, so I’m looking forward to trying her on my new RMS269, as Linda Rondstadt often used an M269C. You and your wife find yourselves in the deep expensive end of the pool because you both embrace the Opera, and more pop crooning territory. The 170, 89 are more "true picture " rather than flattering mics, Vincent you to as talented as you both are have learned a little help is nothing to turn your noses up to !
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Jan 29, 2018 11:56:45 GMT -6
Karen Carpenter sang through a U87, where the pattern switch was broken, so it was stuck in omni. Chris
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Jan 29, 2018 12:19:50 GMT -6
Karen Carpenter sang through a U87, where the pattern switch was broken, so it was stuck in omni. Chris Very cool. I did not know that.
|
|
|
Post by levon on Jan 29, 2018 13:15:28 GMT -6
Sang through the new U67 today at NAMM. No way of knowing what pre or monitoring it was going through. Sounded great. Nothing to criticize about the capture and presentation. Worth the money? Geez, I don't know. Love the picture, Don. Kid in a candy store
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2018 16:03:27 GMT -6
It's 25 years since I've used a 170 but thought it was a very fine mic without hype by and large whereas the 87 of that time in comparison was substantially brighter and thus sibilant. The 89 was the poor cousin to my ears. Not sure if this is apocryphal but Karen Carpenter used an 87 and you'd never say no to that sound/ FWIW Cheers The 17- is very un-hyped and flat. But detailed from top to bottom for sure. It's funny, most people find flat gear that reaches up into the high khz ranges to be dark because they don't hear the mid bump presence. I've heard this said about the Hardy preamps. Couldn't be further from the truth. They are just flat and un-hyped... The bump on the 87 could be heard as bright I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2018 16:06:03 GMT -6
I like the 170, & 89, a lot but feel The 87 has always had this "nasal" quality to It. The U87 has a transparency about it with a very flattering top end. I’ve heard described as “nasal” by a number of people. In my experience the top end does something very unflattering to any voice that itself has a nasal quality to it. I had issues with a couple of people in my studio who have that very nasal “pop” sound. The U87ai seems to accentuate that quality in the worst way. Otherwise I find it works on nearly anyone. I feel it’s missing a little something on my voice, but it still works. My my wife has a Karen Carpenter like voice when she croons or sings in more of a pop style. The U87 loves that kind of warm female voice and reproduces it in a way that seems as though they are in the room next to you. I’ve had her on the BLUE Stage II with numerous caps, FleA49, MK67, numerous AA Mics; CM12, CM67, CM251, and a Korby Kat with 67M, 12, and 251 heads. I think the only one that really competed was the Korby with the 251 head. My wife has a bit of Linda Rondstadt in her voice too, so I’m looking forward to trying her on my new RMS269, as Linda Rondstadt often used an M269C. Well, just how busy is your wife!? LOL Cumon I want to hear more of that 269! The ADK capsule sure is smooth, isn't it, Vincent?
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2018 16:08:03 GMT -6
The U87 has a transparency about it with a very flattering top end. I’ve heard described as “nasal” by a number of people. In my experience the top end does something very unflattering to any voice that itself has a nasal quality to it. I had issues with a couple of people in my studio who have that very nasal “pop” sound. The U87ai seems to accentuate that quality in the worst way. Otherwise I find it works on nearly anyone. I feel it’s missing a little something on my voice, but it still works. My my wife has a Karen Carpenter like voice when she croons or sings in more of a pop style. The U87 loves that kind of warm female voice and reproduces it in a way that seems as though they are in the room next to you. I’ve had her on the BLUE Stage II with numerous caps, FleA49, MK67, numerous AA Mics; CM12, CM67, CM251, and a Korby Kat with 67M, 12, and 251 heads. I think the only one that really competed was the Korby with the 251 head. My wife has a bit of Linda Rondstadt in her voice too, so I’m looking forward to trying her on my new RMS269, as Linda Rondstadt often used an M269C. You and your wife find yourselves in the deep expensive end of the pool because you both embrace the Opera, and more pop crooning territory. The 170, 89 are more "true picture " rather than flattering mics, Vincent you to as talented as you both are have learned a little help is nothing to turn your noses up to ! You know that's true. I have heard some wonderful vocals on a 170. I bet it could be very nice in some situations on you and your wife. Check this track out.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Jan 29, 2018 16:12:05 GMT -6
frontendaudio dot com
have a 15% off today, use the code SAVE15NOW and you can pre order for just under 6 Grand!!
cheers
Wiz
(no I didn't order one)
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2018 16:20:35 GMT -6
frontendaudio dot com have a 15% off today, use the code SAVE15NOW and you can pre order for just under 6 Grand!! cheers Wiz (no I didn't order one) Wow. You are right. I just added to cart and it took it down under 6 grand. That is quite a discount.
|
|
|
Post by c0rtland on Jan 29, 2018 18:40:31 GMT -6
frontendaudio dot com have a 15% off today, use the code SAVE15NOW and you can pre order for just under 6 Grand!! cheers Wiz (no I didn't order one) Thanks wiz. That pushed me over the edge. March seems like a far way off now.
|
|
|
Post by rob61 on Jan 29, 2018 19:08:01 GMT -6
frontendaudio dot com have a 15% off today, use the code SAVE15NOW and you can pre order for just under 6 Grand!! cheers Wiz (no I didn't order one) Thanks wiz. That pushed me over the edge. March seems like a far way off now. Did they charge your card the full (discounted) amount?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 29, 2018 19:24:00 GMT -6
frontendaudio dot com have a 15% off today, use the code SAVE15NOW and you can pre order for just under 6 Grand!! cheers Wiz (no I didn't order one) I saw that a couple days ago. If I'm being honest, it seriously tempted me for a minute. But then I came to my senses and realized that it's still six thousand dollars. I have no business owning a $6K mic. I'd buy the REDD way before that. Also, I have that MK67. And if the people who say the MK67 sounds just like a U67, then that makes even less sense to me. I mean, am I right? (Seriously, someone please validate my decision to not buy this mic!)
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 29, 2018 19:38:02 GMT -6
I'd buy a whole lot of other things first. Probably a pile of really nice SDC's and some RCA 44's. But that's me......remember my tale of picking a mic for a singer from the 'dream chains' thread. If you're after a mic for yourself that does your voice perfect, and you never record anyone else, that's maybe different.
|
|
|
Post by c0rtland on Jan 29, 2018 20:44:56 GMT -6
Thanks wiz. That pushed me over the edge. March seems like a far way off now. Did they charge your card the full (discounted) amount? yes
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 29, 2018 21:18:43 GMT -6
Indiehouse, to me, the MK67 sounded like a U87 on steroids, a bit smoother, and it took a hard hit a little better. It was clearly a real Neumann, not a fake or "style of" sound, but the real deal. So you're already in great shape with it. The vintage 67 is just bigger, which is even a little more flattering. The REDD is the only mic I've ever heard that sounds as big as the 67 does.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Jan 29, 2018 22:56:00 GMT -6
I owe this board a bit of an apology, regarding my "assessment" of the Neumann U67, after I sang through it. I think that was quite inconclusive, due to the less than ideal conditions/Neumann booth location at NAMM. I do, however, think it would have been a MUCH better move for Neumann to have a sound resistant vocal booth (ala Soyuz) for those folks who were considering buying one.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Jan 29, 2018 23:30:53 GMT -6
frontendaudio dot com have a 15% off today, use the code SAVE15NOW and you can pre order for just under 6 Grand!! cheers Wiz (no I didn't order one) I saw that a couple days ago. If I'm being honest, it seriously tempted me for a minute. But then I came to my senses and realized that it's still six thousand dollars. I have no business owning a $6K mic. I'd buy the REDD way before that. Also, I have that MK67. And if the people who say the MK67 sounds just like a U67, then that makes even less sense to me. I mean, am I right? (Seriously, someone please validate my decision to not buy this mic!) I can totally see that. I never considered it myself but can see how someone would. Neumann claims its not just temporary either. So it is a regular product again. So if you are dying for one the road I am sure you can get one. Spend that money on a bunch of other things. You can get a bunch of mics for that money. Some really nice ones too.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Jan 30, 2018 6:55:45 GMT -6
Indiehouse, to me, the MK67 sounded like a U87 on steroids, a bit smoother, and it took a hard hit a little better. It was clearly a real Neumann, not a fake or "style of" sound, but the real deal. So you're already in great shape with it. The vintage 67 is just bigger, which is even a little more flattering. The REDD is the only mic I've ever heard that sounds as big as the 67 does. It’s so funny how it’s the relationship between the source and the microphone that really matters. I thought the U67 was really nice on my voice, but not as “big” sounding as the M49C, which I know you felt was a little thin on your voice. Go figure.
|
|