|
|
Post by ragan on Dec 3, 2017 3:09:02 GMT -6
Although it's the capsule of the MK67 that's the most "authentic" part of it, being the actual Neumann. Yeah but 2 very big things to remember 1 they literally don't make them like they use to, Neumann has automated the production as much as possible! 2 while in most cases an automated production line is more consistent, in this case it seams those old German ladies were better at compensating for the imperfections in diaphragm material. Per Klaus and my own experience the 87/67 Capsules while still the best examples are not as consistent as in the old days! I will add my favorite flavor of 67 is Shannon's take on it in the Korby KAT, as much as dealing with Tracy has always been like a colonoscopy, since meeting Shannon I have considered buying a used KAT and using DR Shannon to keep it up and running! That’s not how I’ve seen Klaus characterize it. He chimed in to sort of ‘correct’ that notion on a GS thread. His claim (as I recall) was that for a couple years in the early 90s the Neumann k87 capsules were a dB or two light in the low end but that they corrected it. |
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 3, 2017 10:07:42 GMT -6
For what it’s worth, the mk67 was way closer to the real deal than any 47 clone I’ve ever heard. Still needed some work, but it was really quite nice. I agree, it was close. The MK67 had some low end beef where the U67 didn't. The U67 had some high end sheen where the MK67 lacked. I'll try to post some samples later. I was still more impressed by the M269C than either of them. That mic was special. |
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,086 
|
Post by ericn on Dec 3, 2017 17:08:17 GMT -6
Yeah but 2 very big things to remember 1 they literally don't make them like they use to, Neumann has automated the production as much as possible! 2 while in most cases an automated production line is more consistent, in this case it seams those old German ladies were better at compensating for the imperfections in diaphragm material. Per Klaus and my own experience the 87/67 Capsules while still the best examples are not as consistent as in the old days! I will add my favorite flavor of 67 is Shannon's take on it in the Korby KAT, as much as dealing with Tracy has always been like a colonoscopy, since meeting Shannon I have considered buying a used KAT and using DR Shannon to keep it up and running! That’s not how I’ve seen Klaus characterize it. He chimed in to sort of ‘correct’ that notion on a GS thread. His claim (as I recall) was that for a couple years in the early 90s the Neumann k87 capsules were a dB or two light in the low end but that they corrected it. This direct from Klaus on his own forum as of April 2017 Thanks for the reminder to update my initial impressions. As you may know, a constant trickle of factory-new U87Ai come through here- they serve as starting point for my modifications. They also allow me to take the pulse of this model through the years: there are many tiny changes that are continuously introduced in this mic, from the way the attenuation switches are labeled, to the quality of the capsules. I wish I could report that all is well now, and that an overwhelming percentage of K87/870 capsules is now frequency-balanced and full-bodied in the lower register. They probably all pass Neumann's ±2dB test, but there are still too many of these capsules which take the time-consuming effort to "enrich" their low end far enough, so that the overall sonic impression is no longer harsh, midrange pointy, and congested, i.e. lacking musicality, however you want to define this. The reason why this is so frustrating for me: there are current-production K87/870 capsules which sound extraordinary in their musical enticement, right out of the box. These capsules are on par with the best that Neumann produced in the early decades of the model and even during the period of its predecessor, U67. So it's obviously not a systemic issue pointing to a need for a change in design*, but more likely a quality-control or selection issue. I wish I knew how Sennheiser selects and rejects during production, but I don't. But the variable seems to be connected to diaphragm tension, otherwise I would not be able to often dial-in better performance on some of these harsh-sounding capsules by relaxing the diaphragms. Bottom line: Neumann is still capable of making the absolutely best LD capsules in the world, but it's still too much hit and miss for my taste how individual capsules come out. I wish the company would return to the manufacturing methods employed before ca. 2000-whatever they were- when an overwhelming percentage of them was "in the ballpark". *Stephen Paul once wrote a critique of the new lapping method Neumann started using in the early 1990s (?) which replaced the less-exact gapping between diaphragm and backplate through plastic spacers. I do not believe that that change has anything to do with the quality issues discussed in this thread: Neumann has successfully used backplate lapping for decades without any audible detriment, yet this alone has not reigned in the performance tolerances for those capsules leaving the factory. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 3, 2017 18:18:48 GMT -6
I found the same problem with the Thiersch M7 capsules, they were inconsistent.
|
|
|
|
Post by veggieryan on Dec 3, 2017 21:21:05 GMT -6
As I understand it M7 capsules are especially difficult to get consistent. When I bought my Cathedral Pipes Notre Dame U47 I thought the capsule sounded a bit dark even for my ear which I think prefers a darker tone especially at that time. I sent it back and he put a new capsule in it that he was working on that had a slightly higher tension. The difference was very noticeable to my ear. Much brighter than before and fuller sounding. It's my favorite vocal mic to this day with a very finished, smooth and full vintage quality to it. Now I am interested to see how the Stam SA-67 compares given I have read that one of my favorite vocalist, Robin Pecknold of the Fleet Foxes always prefers a U67 on his voice which can tend to be slightly nasal or strident. He has better pipes than me for sure but it's a style that I strive to emulate. I gots U67 on the brain again thanks to this mega-thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 3, 2017 21:47:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by dandeurloo on Dec 3, 2017 22:41:09 GMT -6
I found the same problem with the Thiersch M7 capsules, they were inconsistent. I've purchased 4 Thiersch M7's and they all sound the same... really good! |
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Dec 3, 2017 23:18:39 GMT -6
Very kind of you to post this. I owes ya a beer. Or Makers and Coke. Or if you don't drink, some clam linguini. The u67 is beautiful for sure, and the MK 67 is definitely darker, though seems similar. Would probably suffice for the things I would want a u67 for in the digital age anyway. The M269 is beautiful. It is certainly more open sounding, however I like how the u67 handles your voice a little better on the louder parts. Something seems to get a little resonant in the low mids of the m269. It's subtle though. The openness of the 269 is great, though. I think I would still love that darker u67 on drum overs, electric guitar cabs etc. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Dec 4, 2017 1:18:26 GMT -6
Thanks for posting those Vincent. I think they all sound quite good and I'm not convinced they couldn't all be EQ'd very close to one another. When I have a minute I'll DL them and see what I can do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Dec 5, 2017 4:14:48 GMT -6
Thanks for posting those Vincent. I think they all sound quite good and I'm not convinced they couldn't all be EQ'd very close to one another. When I have a minute I'll DL them and see what I can do. I'm sure you can get them pretty close, but man I loved the starting point of the M269C. My old Advanced Audio CM67SE had a sound like this, but brighter. It had worked really well on my wife, but we leaned toward the U87, because it wasn't quite as bright and worked a bit better. I'm really intrigued at what she would sound like on it. To me it was like a more forward M49. The U67 was nice too. Mellow and natural. I enjoyed it. The MK67 just feels a bit more beefy than the U67. It's not a bad thing, I just found myself leaning another way. |
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Dec 5, 2017 10:59:12 GMT -6
It's my understanding and personal experience that post feedback eq will never sound quite like having a different more open feedback system.
This is what David Bock says also.
So basically the MK 67 will really never sound like a 67 unless paired with a different transformer. Course the M269 has a different tube and amplifier than 67, and I doubt that can be eq'ed either as the dynamic response as well as the frequency response will be different.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,086
|
Post by ericn on Dec 5, 2017 11:25:07 GMT -6
It's my understanding and personal experience that post feedback eq will never sound quite like having a different more open feedback system. This is what David Bock says also. So basically the MK 67 will really never sound like a 67 unless paired with a different transformer. Course the M269 has a different tube and amplifier than 67, and I doubt that can be eq'ed either as the dynamic response as well as the frequency response will be different. Of course MR Bock dose have some skin in the game with his 67 clone! I do respect Dave, but for the $$ the MK67 is as close as your going to get! |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Dec 5, 2017 11:40:14 GMT -6
Nah, I'm certain the right FB modification will get it much closer. I'm nearly there.
|
|
|
|
Post by joseph on Dec 5, 2017 11:43:28 GMT -6
It's my understanding and personal experience that post feedback eq will never sound quite like having a different more open feedback system. This is what David Bock says also. So basically the MK 67 will really never sound like a 67 unless paired with a different transformer. Course the M269 has a different tube and amplifier than 67, and I doubt that can be eq'ed either as the dynamic response as well as the frequency response will be different. Of course MR Bock dose have some skin in the game with his 67 clone! I do respect Dave, but for the $$ the MK67 is as close as your going to get! True! |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 5, 2017 15:37:17 GMT -6
Nah, I'm certain the right FB modification will get it much closer. I'm nearly there. I've lost my place, what does FB stand for EmRR? The MK U67 I heard sounded like a U87 on steroids, smoother, less sibilant, ( not that the 87 is sibilant), and it had some natural compression from the tube. Overall, it's a real Neumann. The vintage 67 sounds bigger, wth a little more presence, but the MKU67 is seriously good. It's a no apologies level mic. |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Dec 5, 2017 15:39:08 GMT -6
negative feedback
|
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Dec 5, 2017 19:29:41 GMT -6
Nah, I'm certain the right FB modification will get it much closer. I'm nearly there. Really looking forward to hearing what you land on! |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Dec 6, 2017 0:16:01 GMT -6
Nah, I'm certain the right FB modification will get it much closer. I'm nearly there. I've lost my place, what does FB stand for EmRR? The MK U67 I heard sounded like a U87 on steroids, smoother, less sibilant, ( not that the 87 is sibilant), and it had some natural compression from the tube. Overall, it's a real Neumann. The vintage 67 sounds bigger, wth a little more presence, but the MKU67 is seriously good. It's a no apologies level mic. I've heard several comparisons between the MK67 and U87s (non AI) and several between the MK67 and U67s now and the MK67 isn't very close to a U87 in my view. It's extremely close to a U67, but a little darker and a little beefier on the bottom. But the U87 just sounds a lot quicker and considerably more forward in the upper mids and highs than the U67/MK67. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Dec 6, 2017 8:17:51 GMT -6
I wouldn't disagree with you Ragan. My description of the MK67 came from using U87's every day for a decade, and the MK67 instantly sounded right to me, with a similar classic Neumann tone. Having only used a couple of 67's, my references weren't comprehensive. Your 67 sounds a little different than Vincent's though. If you had his mic there, you might have agreed with my assessment.
|
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Dec 6, 2017 15:53:55 GMT -6
Do we really need 24 pages of rant? Just slap on a plugin and you have an instant U67! It's as easy as that!!! LOL!
Actually, thank you for the info, this thread is very good!
|
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Dec 6, 2017 19:52:35 GMT -6
I've lost my place, what does FB stand for EmRR? The MK U67 I heard sounded like a U87 on steroids, smoother, less sibilant, ( not that the 87 is sibilant), and it had some natural compression from the tube. Overall, it's a real Neumann. The vintage 67 sounds bigger, wth a little more presence, but the MKU67 is seriously good. It's a no apologies level mic. I've heard several comparisons between the MK67 and U87s (non AI) and several between the MK67 and U67s now and the MK67 isn't very close to a U87 in my view. It's extremely close to a U67, but a little darker and a little beefier on the bottom. But the U87 just sounds a lot quicker and considerably more forward in the upper mids and highs than the U67/MK67. Now if we can tweak that MKU67 to our liking...I need an EQ for my Vocal and my Acoustic Guitar. So many eq’s, so little time to decide! Any suggestions? |
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Dec 6, 2017 19:57:35 GMT -6
Did someone mention Eqing the MKU67 to give it some more mids and top? Innertube Audio also makes a kit for the U87ai and I hear it’s more hifi and not so dark like the mku67. I would like to hear that Mku67 eq’d With some different EQ comparisons to combat that huge thick bottom.
|
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Dec 6, 2017 20:04:38 GMT -6
And for the record...I can get good results with my U87ai, but I don’t particularly like it.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Dec 6, 2017 20:20:01 GMT -6
Did someone mention Eqing the MKU67 to give it some more mids and top? Innertube Audio also makes a kit for the U87ai and I hear it’s more hifi and not so dark like the mku67. I would like to hear that Mku67 eq’d With some different EQ comparisons to combat that huge thick bottom. It'd be a high shelf to taste. Mine appears to measure 6dB down from what it should at 15K using the Neumann test connection, which I had to add to the mic and the PSU. Others have done this and theirs measure exactly right, which points to variables in the transformer winds. So it's on a per-mic basis, it appears. If I take the feedback cap out, mine is still 4dB down. If I implement the high boost mod, it's screaming bright. The mod I'm working on is simple and brightens the top slightly, without disabling the U67 feedback thing like the high boost mod does. The innertube kit by all accounts is a non-equalized amp that leaves the rising treble response of the capsule. Which Max's suggested high boost mod also does. I don't think anyone who has both has commented on similarity. |
|
|
|
Post by delcampo on Dec 7, 2017 12:12:30 GMT -6
Wouldn’t say it’s totally 67ish but still digging the wacky looking Soyuz 017 here. Sometimes mixed / matched w Mr. Samar 65 for extra Vodoo smoothness.
|
|
