|
|
Post by sonnycheebs on Mar 9, 2020 0:34:28 GMT -6
I currently use a stellar mics cm 6 as my workhorse mic. I do like it and it works for most vocals but just good not great. I had been considering a Pearlman tm1 but this Mic rehab Charter oaks 538 has been Eye balling me. Does anybody have any insight on this mic? I have heard great things about what he has done for the cv4. I have also heard about his issues. I’m not concerned with that. Anything else in the $1500 lane I should consider? I don’t have a voice inMind I’m just a studio owner looking to upgrade my workhorse mic. And yes I do have a sm7 that I never use.  |
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Mar 9, 2020 3:54:06 GMT -6
Welcome to RGO, sonnycheebs. You might want to consider a gain booster for your SM7. My experience is that it improves performance quite a bit.. That would give you another tasty flavor for your mic locker. Plus the SM7’s pattern tends to minimize room sound, which can be helpful. Folks here have mentioned good results from several brands. I use a Cathedral Pipes Durham.
I don’t have anything to say about the Charter Oaks mic you mentioned, but you might want to include a link or more detailed description to assist others who might want to weigh in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 9, 2020 6:23:33 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Mar 9, 2020 6:35:54 GMT -6
The Charter Oak rep seems about as good as Shannon's these days. If you run into issues, you're double screwed. Doesn't seem like a smart buy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 9, 2020 6:56:09 GMT -6
Here's a useful video . . . since we're in '47' territory here.
|
|
|
|
Post by sean on Mar 9, 2020 7:19:29 GMT -6
I had a couple stock CharterOak SA538Bs a long time ago and they were good microphones. Definitely impressive to look at too. But that company is in shambles and I’d avoid them, and Mic Rehab as well at the moment (although Shannon had done great work on several Neumann microphones for me in the past)
Signal Art can probably make you a U47 inspired microphone for $1500. I’d also check out the Lawson L47, Soyuz Bomblet, Groove Tube MD2 or MD3, Bock 195, Blue Mouse, Brauner Phantom, Neumann U89, Gefell UM70 / UM70S, Roswell Colares...those are the best sub $1500 new or used microphones I’ve used.
|
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Mar 9, 2020 12:17:14 GMT -6
One of the funniest posts ever!  Chris P.S. Great list Sean. |
|
|
|
Post by schmalzy on Mar 11, 2020 11:39:22 GMT -6
I'll take that SM7 off ya'! If you never use it I'm sure it's not worth more than $80. You probably also have an SM57 that you never use that gets right about the same price on the used market!
My SM7 is one of the most versatile mics in my studio. Put it anywhere near a reasonably loud source and you're probably going to get something usable! Kicks, snares, toms, rooms, guitars, bass amps, aggressive vocals, tambourines that need to blend rather than stand out.
I'm not pretty enough to be a hipster but I'm not above allowing people with cool ideas to come into my place and make cool music no matter their look.
I can reinforce the Pearlman TM1 being awesome. A friend of mine has one and loves it.
I'm a huge fan of my Vanguard V13. At $800 it's a steal. It sounds lovely and unhyped and full and it's been immensely useful in my tracking process.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 11, 2020 15:33:08 GMT -6
I bought a TM-1 a few years ago. About a year later I bought another. They get a lot of use - far more than my pre-Sennheiser Neumann U87 or my brass capsule C12A.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2020 15:54:53 GMT -6
I had a pair of Pearlman TM-2s for a while. I sold them because the output was INSANE on them and I record a lot of loud stuff, so they were almost unusable a lot of the time. Talking pad in on the mic pre, gain at zero and just praying it didn't hit red in PT on anything remotely loud (singers included).
When I was able to use them to good effect, they sounded fantastic though.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 11, 2020 19:03:35 GMT -6
I had a pair of Pearlman TM-2s for a while. I sold them because the output was INSANE on them and I record a lot of loud stuff, so they were almost unusable a lot of the time. Talking pad in on the mic pre, gain at zero and just praying it didn't hit red in PT on anything remotely loud (singers included). When I was able to use them to good effect, they sounded fantastic though. I've never had a problem like that with my TM-1s and I use them quite a bit on drum kit. |
|
|
|
Post by sonnycheebs on Mar 11, 2020 19:33:34 GMT -6
Ok before I moved to Atlanta I used the sm7 from time to time. But since being in Atlanta in 5 years I have recorded 3 actually instruments. Everything else has been rappers and singers with a few voiceovers and movie over dubs here and there. I have a few good mics for different things. One day I hope it will change but it makes money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2020 8:12:50 GMT -6
I had a pair of Pearlman TM-2s for a while. I sold them because the output was INSANE on them and I record a lot of loud stuff, so they were almost unusable a lot of the time. Talking pad in on the mic pre, gain at zero and just praying it didn't hit red in PT on anything remotely loud (singers included). When I was able to use them to good effect, they sounded fantastic though. I've never had a problem like that with my TM-1s and I use them quite a bit on drum kit. Good to know. |
|
|
|
Post by jasontodd on Mar 12, 2020 17:44:45 GMT -6
I had a pair of Pearlman TM-2s for a while. I sold them because the output was INSANE on them and I record a lot of loud stuff, so they were almost unusable a lot of the time. Talking pad in on the mic pre, gain at zero and just praying it didn't hit red in PT on anything remotely loud (singers included). When I was able to use them to good effect, they sounded fantastic though. Couldn’t you just go in at line level for hot sources? |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 13, 2020 9:03:17 GMT -6
I had a pair of Pearlman TM-2s for a while. I sold them because the output was INSANE on them and I record a lot of loud stuff, so they were almost unusable a lot of the time. Talking pad in on the mic pre, gain at zero and just praying it didn't hit red in PT on anything remotely loud (singers included). When I was able to use them to good effect, they sounded fantastic though. Couldn’t you just go in at line level for hot sources? There is always the ability to use a line attenuator. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2020 9:39:31 GMT -6
Couldn’t you just go in at line level for hot sources? There is always the ability to use a line attenuator. Yes and yes, but back then I didn't really know better and also, it's kind of ridiculous to HAVE to do that with every thing you track. Just wasn't the right pair of mics for my general use. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934 
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Mar 13, 2020 17:49:56 GMT -6
Couldn’t you just go in at line level for hot sources? There is always the ability to use a line attenuator. Yeah but if the pads before the mics amp it can keep you from overloading the mic amp, of course if the problem is after the mic amp the outboard attenuator is best. |
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Mar 14, 2020 13:17:15 GMT -6
There is always the ability to use a line attenuator. Yeah but if the pads before the mics amp it can keep you from overloading the mic amp, of course if the problem is after the mic amp the outboard attenuator is best. And a line attenuator will not pass through phantom power (I checked mine) . . . so it would have to be after, if you're going to try that with condensers. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,934
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Mar 14, 2020 13:34:09 GMT -6
Yeah but if the pads before the mics amp it can keep you from overloading the mic amp, of course if the problem is after the mic amp the outboard attenuator is best. And a line attenuator will not pass through phantom power (I checked mine) . . . so it would have to be after, if you're going to try that with condensers. Somebody the Savrt or Steiger can correct me if I’m wrong again but I think it depends on the type of pad. I seam to remember that there is at least one type of pad that will pass phantom. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 14, 2020 14:43:45 GMT -6
There is always the ability to use a line attenuator. Yes and yes, but back then I didn't really know better and also, it's kind of ridiculous to HAVE to do that with every thing you track. Just wasn't the right pair of mics for my general use. So you probably wouldn't get on well with an original U-47, either. Or a lot of other top quality tube mics, many or most of which have the ability to drive the line level input on a professional tape machine.
Remember, unlike phantom powered mics, tube mics with their external power supplies get along well with pads/attenuators inserted on the line.
|
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 14, 2020 14:45:31 GMT -6
Yeah but if the pads before the mics amp it can keep you from overloading the mic amp, of course if the problem is after the mic amp the outboard attenuator is best. And a line attenuator will not pass through phantom power (I checked mine) . . . so it would have to be after, if you're going to try that with condensers. To reiterate - tube mics don't use phantom power.
I'm really surprised that neither of you guys caught that.
You wouldn't use the pad on the 7-pin line anyway, and there's no power on the 3 pin mic connection to the console.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2020 15:07:34 GMT -6
Yes and yes, but back then I didn't really know better and also, it's kind of ridiculous to HAVE to do that with every thing you track. Just wasn't the right pair of mics for my general use. So you probably wouldn't get on well with an original U-47, either. Or a lot of other top quality tube mics, many or most of which have the ability to drive the line level input on a professional tape machine.
Remember, unlike phantom powered mics, tube mics with their external power supplies get along well with pads/attenuators inserted on the line.
That has not been my experience actually. Haven't encountered any other mics, tube or otherwise where it was enough of an issue to prohibit use. I use a U47, 251, GT MD1A on a regular basis. Have used several others. U67's as drum OH's... stuff like that. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 14, 2020 15:31:09 GMT -6
So you probably wouldn't get on well with an original U-47, either. Or a lot of other top quality tube mics, many or most of which have the ability to drive the line level input on a professional tape machine.
Remember, unlike phantom powered mics, tube mics with their external power supplies get along well with pads/attenuators inserted on the line.
That has not been my experience actually. Haven't encountered any other mics, tube or otherwise where it was enough of an issue to prohibit use. I use a U47, 251, GT MD1A on a regular basis. Have used several others. U67's as drum OH's... stuff like that. So you're claiming that a TM-2 has greater output than an original U47?
And yeah, it's generally not a problem. This is the first I've heard of it, anywhere. Although even if true it's not a problem - just insert a resistive pad between the power supply audio out and the mic input of your console or preamp.
BTW, are those U-47s and ELA M251s real or clones? Clones may not have the same output specs as originals, especially since most clones don't use the same tube. And I've never heard of a vintage mic made by Groove Tubes. Aspen must have been much older than he looked. IIRC he was about my age, give or take a year.
Original U-47s had a very high output by modern standards because they were often used straight into the recorder, as it was considered good practice to keep the signal path as simple and uncluttered as possible, especially for classical recordings.
|
|
|
|
Post by damoongo on Mar 15, 2020 10:01:39 GMT -6
Original U-47s had a very high output by modern standards because they were often used straight into the recorder, as it was considered good practice to keep the signal path as simple and uncluttered as possible, especially for classical recordings. [/div][/quote] An original u47 has around the same output level as a u67 within a few dB. Not substantially different from most other Neumann tube condensers. This is assuming all the mics are strapped for the same output impedance, and no internal pads installed. Often, mics for export to US were strapped for 50ohm, and Gotham (Neumann’s US distributor) installed outpost pads in the PSU. This would make them much lower output than a u47 strapped for 200ohm output and no pad network installed. But most of those pads in the PSU’s have been removed my now. |
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Mar 15, 2020 11:58:11 GMT -6
Original U-47s had a very high output by modern standards because they were often used straight into the recorder, as it was considered good practice to keep the signal path as simple and uncluttered as possible, especially for classical recordings. [/div][/quote] An original u47 has around the same output level as a u67 within a few dB. Not substantially different from most other Neumann tube condensers. This is assuming all the mics are strapped for the same output impedance, and no internal pads installed. Often, mics for export to US were strapped for 50ohm, and Gotham (Neumann’s US distributor) installed outpost pads in the PSU. This would make them much lower output than a u47 strapped for 200ohm output and no pad network installed. But most of those pads in the PSU’s have been removed my now. [/quote][/div]
So could the TM-2 have a similar internal pad that should have been engaged to lower the output?
EDIT: For some reason I found it impossible to get th site to do the quotation thing correctly on this thread. Dunno why.
|
|
