BeezNeez BU67

Kind of a misstatement here. I have two BU67’s. One has issues and Ben is supposedly sending a replacement. The other is Seawells. I thought the noise floor on both were higher than my MK67. “How bad the noise floor is” leads one to believe maybe something else. Great mics, btw. I do wish the noise floor was as low as my other mics.

Yeah, that Korby Kat 49 head was something custom my friend had made when he bought the system. I even talked to Shannon about it way back and he remembered making that cap. My friend had the 12, 251, 67M, and 47, but all were custom tweaked or tweaked with recommendations by Korby.  I believe the 67M was based on a specific Abby Road modified U67, which was a bit more open than a stock U67. Loved the 251 and really liked the 67M on both Emily and I. I didn’t try the 47 cap, as he had a Wagner U47W with a real M7, BV8, and VF14 tube, and basically said it wasn’t even worth considering the Korby 47 with the U47W around. On my voice the Korby 49 beat out the Wagner though. The FleA 47 I’ve used in my videos reminds me a lot of that Wagner, but with a lighter low end. That session was a fun one. 

Tempted to get this mic. I really love the u67 sound from all the clips I’ve heard so far, such a balanced sound and has that Neumann mid range my ears are growing to love. It doesn’t have the hifi sound of the u87 but similar in the middle. I’m saving a bit more so I can purchase a mic in the u67ri, SU-017, 47 range but this is truly tempting.

If anyone has both a u67 (Ri or vintage) and a BU67, or tested both, please share your thoughts on how it matches up with the real deal. Thanks.

I have not directly compared the BU67 to a reissue, but the samples I've heard seems to have a lot more top end than the original 67's. I have to agree with chessprov. The BU67 is a mellow sounding mic. It has a nice top and plenty of lowes. It is a full sounding mic. I have not played with the internal switches on mine either. I did compare it to a wa67.I found that the wa67 has a bigger build up in the low mids. I also notice that the proximity effect is much more pronounced on the wa67. The BU67 is actually very surprising. You can get right up on it and it doesn't seem to bother the mic.

Thanks MM, I'm actually flattered by your asking me...
Considering the powerhouse posters (compared to me), active on this thread.

But I make up for my relative "un-expertise" with genuine enthusiasm! ,

IMHO you can make fine sounding, professional level recordings, with the BU67.

Honestly for my personal use, it makes more sense than further waiting/saving up for the 67 Reissue. This includes the occasional "important" vocal recording and/or VO project.

I still have the greatest respect for those, where their taste is such, that only a Neumann will do. I do however, think that the BU67 clarity is excellent.
Chris
P.S. One of my best friends, sounds fantastic on 57/58... Even the SM48 I gave her as a gift recently!
(I believe this is an "exception"-not the Rule-BTW)

I'm not sure what the A Weighted S/N is, for the BU67 but...
If you're close mic-ing it, as the 67 was designed for (over the 47*),
it's moot anyway IMHO.
Chris
*IIRC a Neumann 47 tube mic's S/N seems pretty high, by today's standards.
But I haven't returned any Sinatra records yet.

That's the only issue with all these cottage industry mics made all around the world, you have to buy direct so those no realistic chance of a home demo first, it's one area where the bigger players have a distinct advantage.

Haven’t really put it through its paces yet but been really enjoying the BU67 so far. Much darker than any tube mic I own. Have only used on dirt guitars and mono overhead thus far. I have never had the pleasure of using a real 67 but always suspected I would dig it. So far, so good with this thing.

Haven’t made use of the mod switches just yet - they’re all in stock position.

Honestly, I was floored by how small it was - compared to my Lawson’s, Stam 47, mic rehab 251s and cathedral pipes, hell, I think my Royer mod MXL2001s might even be bigger. Are real 67s smaller as well?

Honestly, the small size makes changing the tube and using the switches a bit of a pain.

I think it definitely provides a different sound than the stock 67 sound. It’s a little leaner and more open. Still, it’s not nearly as open as my RMS269 was.  The RMS is a soundalike, not a clone. Still it had that big mid thing, with the added sparkle on the top end that I expected it to.  The RMS269 was certainly closer to the M269C that I had used. Maybe a touch more open.

My whole setup is different now as I’ve switched from an Apollo Silverface to a Carbon and replaced my foam panels with GIK. So even if I tried to replicate things I had recorded with the RMS269, it wouldn’t be an accurate fight.  I imagine the RMS269 would sound a lot less woofy and more even with my new set up, with a cleaner less peaky top end. So it wouldn’t be apples to apples even if I tried really hard to match an old vocal performance. 

After more than 5 months of unkept promises of sending a replacement BU67, with the latest broken promise stating "it's on it's way, will have tracking for you tomorrow", he has now backpedaled on his word and wants me to send the mic to him for repair (which would have made sense if he said that to begin with). I was upfront on all aspects of this mic on day one, being that I bought it secondhand. It was his offer to send me a replacement, asking me to send the noisy mic back once I received it.

Given all the unkept promises, I don't think I'd see this mic again if I sent it.

It's not my intention to bad mouth, but rather just sharing the facts of my frustrating experience so that others may make an informed decision.