FAB 87 Neumann 87 Blind Comparison Test

Thanks for that. We will reveal the answers after a few weeks. I should have asked this initially in the post - did you have a favourite order?

Nsming them and in order of preference. . .
2. Neumann Rev 15-16
3. Fab 87
1. Neumann Rev 20

If memory doesn't fail me, the 20 revision had the crunchy top end and the 15-16 range was smoother, which is what you are probably trying to emulate and coming very close to.

Edit: stupid typos

Here's some female vocal. Mics in cardiod, direct no fx. Guess which is the FAB, Rev 16 and Rev 20 Neumann and give us your preferred order.


Female Voc Cardiod 1.mp3 (483.26 KB) 


Female Voc Cardiod 2.mp3 (483.26 KB)


Female Voc Cardiod 3.mp3 (483.26 KB)

Hi Chad

No different order this time - this is a photo showing the set up we used to record everything with the 2 Neumanns facing each other and the FAB to one side. 

Great samples and nice mics. These are all very close in the vocal sample. Trying to AB it’s easier to hear similarities. If you told me they were all the same sample, I wouldn’t be surprised.

1 was my fav, has that live in the studio BBC style feel. Full body roundness and a tiny little more ambience than the others. It might be catching a surface better than the others.

2 I feel like it has tiny more detail and mouth sounds, like when a mic is closer to the chin. Seems to be a teeny bit less round in the lows, but that might be because the capsule is reacting more from the highs.

3 I really liked this one. It feels a little darker and full. The highs don’t feel so much as detailed as 2, so I’d expect the capsule to be older. Or it could the transformer is a beast, in a good way... feels it might have a tiny more proximity effect going on.

As far as which is which, I could take a guess but I don’t know that it matters. If I heard any of them and wanted to match them I’d alter the position a little or do a little EQ

These are all interesting. On acoustic I preferred 2, on the vocal probably 3, and on spanish guitar 3 jumped out to me.

I was kind of surprised that the guitar wasn't a Taylor...

Thanks for your comments Ward it's much appreciated. We are going to reveal the answers to the 3 samples on Friday. The comments so far have been helpful and thanks to everyone who posted. 

I’m not experienced enough to know the intimate details of different revisions, so that makes it just a guess. I could theorize the newest mic should have the most dynamics to the top end, since the capsule is new. So I’d guess 1 is the clone, 2 is the oldest 87, 3 is the newer 87. Or I might say 1+3 are u87s because they sound similar and 2 is sort of different. Really I just want to say 2 was my favorite for this example, it has something dreamy going on that I like. 1+3 sound really good though, so it’s kind of tough.

The term 'modern' referring to sound, is a moving target anyhow. In the 90s, the dull nature of an AKG C414ULS was considered modern, Then it had to be flat, then overly hyped, then back to flat, now mid-forward and/or hyped.

What I can suggest is to try and build a collection of non-trendy tried-and-true microphones that take EQ and compression very well. Like the Neumann U87i and the U87ai (with the daughter board?) maybe, but also KM84s and 85s and certain 414s, and certain 421s . . . and 441s in general.

And a certain U47 reproduction would really be great, or a certain ELA M251 would also be great. But I don't wish to further derail the thread.

With regards to FAB's 87, if they hit everything a vintage U87 does and do so at a great price point, them bully to ya! (that's a cheer I picked up in the UK).

There are some fantastic boutique microphones on the market now from Heiserman and mics Beeznees, and it would be just fab if FAB's 87 clone was also amongst that group. We want solid, nothing 'weird', if you follow me.