Neumann U67 and Shannon Rhoades modded CV4

Changing mic patterns is as easy as applying voltage to the backplate or diaphragms of the capsule, or grounding them.

I think you guys were misreading what donr was asking...I'm pretty sure he knows how to change the pattern on a mic...

No - the first two clips are the U67 vs. a modded CV4. Neither eq'd. While I realized they sounded a little different, I was shocked at how similar the two sounded, so I thought I would post it. I then posted the third clip - which it the same modded cv4 with my attempt at EQing it to more closely match the original U67 clip.

My intention in posting this was not to say "omg - This mic sounds exactly like a 67". It was more like, "omg - this mod was done without ever hearing this U67 and listen to how close they are." No one is trying to say you should never buy a vintage 67. If it's in your budget, you SHOULD.

This is spot on. it was apparent on first listen with crappy desktop computer speakers. The eq'd sound was more in the ballpark, but still more like the way the Raiders and A's play in the same park.

Why would u want to make the cv4 cardioid only? 

I wouldn't. I thought that's what John said Shannon did to his. If that's accurate, then it's probably for the small benefits of "true cardioid" and the fact that John is mostly/only singing with the CV4, from what I understand.

That CV4 clip does sound nice on your voice John. A lot different and better than the stock ones I've heard. I'm curious what the mod entailed? Did he replace the capsule?

There's still something about the U-67 that's smoother in the top end. I certainly wouldn't be ashamed to use the CV4 you have however.

Thanks, unit7...I'm blushing...

Like wiz said...I hear the differences...I agree - I think you can objectively say that the 67 sounds "better" compared to the CV4 without EQ. But - IMHO, comparing the 67 with the EQ'd file, I think the preferences are subjective. Between those two, I think the Modded CV4 with EQ sounds better. I'm sure some don't. Now, I'm sure once you slap EQ on that U67, it could possibly sound even better...BUT - folks, we're not talking HUGE differences here. I would venture to say that there are MANY 67's that don't come close to sounding as good as either of these two examples.

I've listened to both the 67 and eq'd cv4 in equal parts since you put it up?? 

I know Shannon put one of his killer capsules in the cv4, was there any additional mods or component swaps done to the power supply or the mic circuit itself? I know i've done some mic modding where the power supply was less than stellar, the effects of which were a lurchiness, or a jumpyness in the dynamics. As a general rule, the mic goes as the psu goes, as a matter of fact, almost any piece of audio gear goes as the psu goes, you'd get a 99.999% consensus over at Groupdiy on that one.

the main reason i mention the mods is because if you have NOT had them done, that mic is worth having them done, even if it makes it only marginally better IMO 

I thought the eq'd version of CV4mod was "closer" and most definitely more than useable...it's good.
But... I will say that the beauty of a great u67 is that it tames those peaky harsh notes in a beautiful way. Eq gets it close, but not quite same thing. Blah, blah... end of day either mic works.
Shannon does fabulous work on vintage mics and his new creations. Great to have him so close by!!

*sends back CV4 for free guinea pig treatment*

I'm gonna tell you the two qualities about the 67 that make it special for me. The combo of bright cap with the negative feedback means the highs are EVEN--which means all you do it compress and add Pultec plug and you can boost so much there's nothing BUT air...which is different than brighter airier MICS OR darker MICS--where the highs are less even, this you can't boost to taste--you hit a wall--and the compression on a bright mic tend to make the highs even MORE uneven..,

Second part is that it breaks up when you belt it. I've put some of McBride's 67s to the backplate...I'm kinda loud...but, assuming no ones thinned the Mylar (likely the case with the ones fom there I've used)...it gets this kind of saturation in the middle when you belt it--makes it seem "louder" even once it's leveled--allowing it to take more leveling before the life is gone.

If you're building one..Id find a tube that does the air like a 269. They're wholly better than straight 67s...my understanding it there are some other tubes that sound close to an ac701 without having to put such a rare expensive tube in there.