|
|
Post by drsax on Dec 8, 2019 20:34:15 GMT -6
Ok guys... a few of you asked... so here ya go. This may be informative for those who want to hear the REDD Mic and 67 Reissue on the exact same source at the same time - Voiceover & Tenor Sax in this case. To shake things up, I processed and level matched a second WAV file of the REDD with similar EQ settings that I often use on the REDD. Please feel free and download the files yourselves - I just ask that you don't use the sax tracks as samples, please, lol. Check them out, compare them, and feel free to see how well each mic takes EQ. Both GREAT mics, and they each offer something a bit different. I think some may be surprised how the REDD with a touch of EQ sounds next to the 67 when dealing with high frequencies and sibilance. Keep in mind that the EQ I used on the REDD was fairly subtle. It will take even more drastic settings beautifully. And of course, the U67 takes EQ very nicely as well, although I didn't do that on this test. Here's a Dropbox Link to some 24-Bit 44.1kHz WAV files: Dropbox Link to WAV Files - Sax & Voiceover - U67 Reissue & Chandler REDD Mic
I included a screenshot of the EQ settings I used on the one set of Chandler files. - Chandler REDD Mic was recorded flat through it's own internal preamp (The Drive was off) - U67 Reissue was recorded flat through the Silver Bullet (A->N) - (Both were recorded directly into a Burl B2 AD straight into Cubase) I hope this is helpful for some of you  I think these are both absolutely gorgeous tools. And although I have my personal preferences on various sources, including my sax, you can see what you think. I'll be curious to hear your opinions. P.S. These are pretty closely level matched. But keep in mind that each mic, and even the file with the EQ, changes how transients are handled, so there's really no such thing as a perfect level match. But these are darn close Oh, and on the voiceover, I purposely really overdid the sibilant consonants when I spoke... I think both mics handled it incredibly well. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Dec 8, 2019 21:27:03 GMT -6
Thanks D. I'll download these tomorrow and give a listen. Cheers for doing this!! bp
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 8, 2019 22:46:45 GMT -6
Both of those are really nice and I found my preference changed as the style of your playing changed. Gorgeous tools indeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by aremos on Dec 8, 2019 23:50:37 GMT -6
I use these 2 mics just about every day & as stated they are source dependent. But there are generalities.
The REDD sounds very different with the internal preamp @ full & @ "bypass". I happen to like it better "bypassing" (turning all the way down) the internal pre.
The REDD handles sibilance way better than the U67.
The REDD gets very close to the balanced sound of a C-800G.
The U67 is more forgiving & might just handle more sources. For rock & power it's just perfect.
Being a more "neutral" mic it's safe to put the 67 up on just about anything.
But when the source sounds great on the REDD, it just becomes beautiful.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Dec 8, 2019 23:59:13 GMT -6
I use these 2 mics just about every day & as stated they are source dependent. But there are generalities. The REDD sounds very different with the internal preamp @ full & @ "bypass". I happen to like it better "bypassing" (turning all the way down) the internal pre. The REDD handles sibilance way better than the U67. The REDD gets very close to the balanced sound of a C-800G. The U67 is more forgiving & might just handle more sources. For rock & power it's just perfect. Being a more "neutral" mic it's safe to put the 67 up on just about anything. But when the source sounds great on the REDD, it just becomes beautiful. I'm fascinated by your sibilance comment. I'm not sure I've heard any LDC handle sibilance quite as well as a U67 (though I haven't used the reissue, which by most accounts is a little brighter than an average vintage specimen) and every clip I've heard of the REDD shows it to be a very bright mic. Some REDD clips sound downright crispy (which is just what some people are after, to be fair). Your experience says you'd pick the REDD over the U67 reissue on a sibilant voice though? |
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Dec 9, 2019 0:15:36 GMT -6
I don’t wanna sway opinions either way... but I think they both handle sibilance quite well. When both EQ’ed to a similar level of brightness or darkness, I don’t find one to be significantly more sibilant than the other. They just each respond to slightly different parts of the sibilant frequencies. The comments about the REDD being sibilant are unreasonable to my ears. I think there have been a lot of bad examples recorded with the REDD where the source is the issue... not the mic. If I record with a U67 I am often adding high frequencies come mix time. If using a REDD, or any mic that has more open highs, I often will not add highs, or perhaps take some away. I do think however that the U67 and REDD handle extreme transients differently, and of course, they each have their own unique sound.
|
|
|
|
Post by aremos on Dec 9, 2019 0:21:25 GMT -6
The sibilance statement is in reference to a harsh, uncommon sibilant voice. The U67 will "take down the frequency" but will leave some harshness. The REDD will smooth it out & make it sound "more natural".
And, again, this is a GENERAL statement. 90% of what I work with is vocals. There have been times where the U67 handled the situation (of sibilance) way better than the REDD.
That's why I started the post with: " ... as stated they are source dependent".
|
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Dec 9, 2019 0:26:27 GMT -6
The sibilance statement is in reference to a harsh, uncommon sibilant voice. The U67 will "take down the frequency" but will leave some harshness. The REDD will smooth it out & make it sound "more natural". And, again, this is a GENERAL statement. 90% of what I work with is vocals. There have been times where the U67 handled the situation (of sibilance) way better than the REDD. That's why I started the post with: " ... as stated they are source dependent". I think I’d concur with this statement under most recording circumstances |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Dec 9, 2019 11:15:36 GMT -6
The sibilance statement is in reference to a harsh, uncommon sibilant voice. The U67 will "take down the frequency" but will leave some harshness. The REDD will smooth it out & make it sound "more natural". And, again, this is a GENERAL statement. 90% of what I work with is vocals. There have been times where the U67 handled the situation (of sibilance) way better than the REDD. That's why I started the post with: " ... as stated they are source dependent". I think I’d concur with this statement under most recording circumstances Ok. Got a chance to download and listen. First - great playing man. As always. I think with your playing and instrument it would be hard to make your sax sound "bad". LOL. I'm sure you could use a 57 and it would still sound stellar. But on to the mics... The REDD has an excitement to it, no doubt, and I can see why you like it. With the EQ (which was a little more serious than I expected...) it sounds the best to me - the EQ'd REDD I mean. It would work great in a pop track, and sit really well. The 67 Reissue........eh.......I love 67's, and have mentioned it before, but I actually used 15+ 67's on a recording I did at Capitol once. LOL. That was FUN!!! But this one....I dunno, seems kinda lifeless compared to the REDD. I'm speaking purely on an "emotional contact" level, not technically. Long term, the REDD without EQ would wear on me during some of your high squeezed out notes. But with EQ it's pretty good, and I'm sure I could make it work for me. I'd probably go even a bit deeper on the EQ depending on how the track sounded. If it was my money, and if I was faced with buying the REDD or the 67....and if I didn't have a pretty good mic locker already, I'd buy the REDD and take the money saved and buy an RCA77DX. That would cover everything from hard bop all the way up to modern jazz and pop. I love the RCA's on Saxes. A Coles might be a good call too, but not my first call.... All of those mics will usually need EQ-ing to make them work though, but as you have shown, that's what EQ is good for. Anyway, thanks for sharing. Great stuff and it's going to go a long way towards helping me complete and deliver my new "sax licks" sample pack for Loopmasters. . hahaaaa!! PS - can you take a low level signal out of the Chandler, or is it's pre always "in place"? Even so, I bet going into the Silver Bullet in N mode (line level if you can't bypass the REDD pre) with the REDD , driving just a touch, and shaving a bit of presence off would give you a glorious sound that might even eclipse your EQ as you did it. Worth trying.... Keep up the great playing! |
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Dec 9, 2019 11:54:06 GMT -6
I think I’d concur with this statement under most recording circumstances Ok. Got a chance to download and listen. First - great playing man. As always. I think with your playing and instrument it would be hard to make your sax sound "bad". LOL. I'm sure you could use a 57 and it would still sound stellar. But on to the mics... The REDD has an excitement to it, no doubt, and I can see why you like it. With the EQ (which was a little more serious than I expected...) it sounds the best to me - the EQ'd REDD I mean. It would work great in a pop track, and sit really well. The 67 Reissue........eh.......I love 67's, and have mentioned it before, but I actually used 15+ 67's on a recording I did at Capitol once. LOL. That was FUN!!! But this one....I dunno, seems kinda lifeless compared to the REDD. I'm speaking purely on an "emotional contact" level, not technically. Long term, the REDD without EQ would wear on me during some of your high squeezed out notes. But with EQ it's pretty good, and I'm sure I could make it work for me. I'd probably go even a bit deeper on the EQ depending on how the track sounded. If it was my money, and if I was faced with buying the REDD or the 67....and if I didn't have a pretty good mic locker already, I'd buy the REDD and take the money saved and buy an RCA77DX. That would cover everything from hard bop all the way up to modern jazz and pop. I love the RCA's on Saxes. A Coles might be a good call too, but not my first call.... All of those mics will usually need EQ-ing to make them work though, but as you have shown, that's what EQ is good for. Anyway, thanks for sharing. Great stuff and it's going to go a long way towards helping me complete and deliver my new "sax licks" sample pack for Loopmasters. . hahaaaa!! PS - can you take a low level signal out of the Chandler, or is it's pre always "in place"? Even so, I bet going into the Silver Bullet in N mode (line level if you can't bypass the REDD pre) with the REDD , driving just a touch, and shaving a bit of presence off would give you a glorious sound that might even eclipse your EQ as you did it. Worth trying.... Keep up the great playing! as always drbill thanks for the very kind words. Just make sure I get those loopmaster residual checks, lol I love ribbon mics. I have a few nice ones here including the Coles... but an RCA or AEA 44 or 77 is on my list. That and a nice 47 style mic, possibly the Heiserman. Yes, The REDD mic also sounds great through mic pres. I’ve done that before. Just put the REDD gain all the way down and run it through any variety of mic pre. I have no doubt it would sound killer through the SB!! |
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Dec 9, 2019 13:04:27 GMT -6
I really like the smoky vibe of the 67 here, *really* surprised me that I got that sensation. Made me feel good inside.
|
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Dec 9, 2019 16:34:53 GMT -6
I really like the smoky vibe of the 67 here, *really* surprised me that I got that sensation. Made me feel good inside. ”Smoky” is a great way to put it. To me I hear the 67 that way as well. It’s kind of a combination of the frequency response, the tube, the transformer sound, which kind of saturates and slightly compresses the signal. Even though it’s a fairly natural sound - the 67 definitely has that classic Neumann imprint |
|
|
|
Post by clumsycongregation on Aug 28, 2020 1:09:12 GMT -6
Thanks for Sharing! I'm a Redd owner here and I was amused to see your EQ curve because I always use a high shelf to cut from the Redd. For my tastes the signature tilts too far into the the upper frequencies. Granted, it's a classy smooth tone either way but I just think it captures a bit too much details, making it feel less immediate and guttural than I'd like. I actually prefer the 67 in these samples. For most instruments it's all about the mids. The 67 seems to highlight the mid in such a natural way. Obviously great mics, both.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 28, 2020 6:52:36 GMT -6
You, your favorite instrument and the REDD47? Magic. As BB King once said, "I've never heard it any better."
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Aug 28, 2020 22:14:35 GMT -6
I really like the smoky vibe of the 67 here, *really* surprised me that I got that sensation. Made me feel good inside. ”Smoky” is a great way to put it. To me I hear the 67 that way as well. It’s kind of a combination of the frequency response, the tube, the transformer sound, which kind of saturates and slightly compresses the signal. Even though it’s a fairly natural sound - the 67 definitely has that classic Neumann imprint Funny that’s how my wife described the U67 after singing through it for the first time...Smokey. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Aug 29, 2020 9:05:41 GMT -6
The Chandler was more transparent. Better transparency makes me sing better. The Neumann has an instantly recognizable classic sound though. Our ears have grown up on it, Beatles, Pink Floyd, etc. So I tend to like it immediately because of that feeling. In this case, I'd choose the Chandler.
I have the Stam SA67. I haven't used it much yet because of Covid, but I did a quick vocal to compare it to an old track I had with the Chandler, and it was a very close call. That in itself is good news. I need to do more work with it to make a final decision. The Chandler to me is the benchmark for any new mic.
I hate to say it, but even though what I've heard is limited, and I haven't had them both in the same room, I'm preferring the SA67 to the Neumann reissue. The nearly $5,000 difference doesn't influence my choices, but it sure doesn't hurt if you're in the market for a 67 style mic. I'd love to compare them side by side, if only I can find someone nearby with a reissue.
|
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Aug 29, 2020 14:25:52 GMT -6
It’s interesting to get everyone’s reactions. After owning the 67 alongside the Chandler REDD here for a while, regardless of how I feel about the solo’ed sound through both mics, the REDD gets picked 8 out of 10 times hearing how the source sits in a track. I think the 67 usually gets the nod when dealing with something like a jangly acoustic guitar, or a overly sibilant source. But the REDD gets chosen first the majority of the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Aug 30, 2020 7:45:06 GMT -6
drsax, I'd like to hear a comparison between the REDD mic and the Heiserman 47 tube with both capsules.
|
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Aug 30, 2020 16:00:30 GMT -6
drsax, I'd like to hear a comparison between the REDD mic and the Heiserman 47 tube with both capsules. I would too brother!!! Now I just need a Heiserman 47 tube mic with both capsules, hah!!! I’ve had my eye on the H47 for a while. Wish I could do it, but it’s just not in the cards right now |
|
|
|
Post by marylin on Aug 31, 2020 3:26:22 GMT -6
Thank you for sharing, nice comparison. REDD is IMHO superb microphone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Sept 4, 2024 15:48:51 GMT -6
Ok guys... a few of you asked... so here ya go. This may be informative for those who want to hear the REDD Mic and 67 Reissue on the exact same source at the same time - Voiceover & Tenor Sax in this case. To shake things up, I processed and level matched a second WAV file of the REDD with similar EQ settings that I often use on the REDD. Please feel free and download the files yourselves - I just ask that you don't use the sax tracks as samples, please, lol. Check them out, compare them, and feel free to see how well each mic takes EQ. Both GREAT mics, and they each offer something a bit different. I think some may be surprised how the REDD with a touch of EQ sounds next to the 67 when dealing with high frequencies and sibilance. Keep in mind that the EQ I used on the REDD was fairly subtle. It will take even more drastic settings beautifully. And of course, the U67 takes EQ very nicely as well, although I didn't do that on this test. Here's a Dropbox Link to some 24-Bit 44.1kHz WAV files: Dropbox Link to WAV Files - Sax & Voiceover - U67 Reissue & Chandler REDD Mic
I included a screenshot of the EQ settings I used on the one set of Chandler files. - Chandler REDD Mic was recorded flat through it's own internal preamp (The Drive was off) - U67 Reissue was recorded flat through the Silver Bullet (A->N) - (Both were recorded directly into a Burl B2 AD straight into Cubase) I hope this is helpful for some of you I think these are both absolutely gorgeous tools. And although I have my personal preferences on various sources, including my sax, you can see what you think. I'll be curious to hear your opinions. P.S. These are pretty closely level matched. But keep in mind that each mic, and even the file with the EQ, changes how transients are handled, so there's really no such thing as a perfect level match. But these are darn close Oh, and on the voiceover, I purposely really overdid the sibilant consonants when I spoke... I think both mics handled it incredibly well. Missed this post the first time through. I prefer the REDD in both instances. It's definitely brighter, but it seems to have more bottom/body too. I kind of miss that top end info (mouth, breathing)...makes me feel like I'm in the room. |
|
|
|
Post by lowlou on Sept 4, 2024 16:29:02 GMT -6
I liked the U67 more, but The Redd is flawless.
It's as if the Redd was the U67 with a +3dB boost on the highband of a W295b.
I'd be curious to hear a comparison between the Redd and a M269.
|
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 5, 2024 13:37:00 GMT -6
BTW... Again like a couple of other Boutique Companies... IMHO the REDD is a Modern Classic. That joins the iconic/long established Styles of Neumann/AKG/original Telefunken etc. Chris |
|
I think these are both absolutely gorgeous tools. And although I have my personal preferences on various sources, including my sax, you can see what you think. I'll be curious to hear your opinions. 
