|
|
Post by hadaja on Feb 2, 2017 17:20:12 GMT -6
I ordered a beesneez Shelise cheaper then there producer series stuff u67 capsule style mic.
I will be looking forward to hearing how that sounds. But i now notice that beesneez use there own transfromers now. will keep you posted when it arrives.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 2, 2017 17:26:05 GMT -6
I ordered a beesneez Shelise cheaper then there producer series stuff u67 capsule style mic. I will be looking forward to hearing how that sounds. But i now notice that beesneez use there own transfromers now. will keep you posted when it arrives. I thought the Shelise was CK12 style? |
|
|
|
Post by hadaja on Feb 2, 2017 21:31:01 GMT -6
Yes it was but current model must have changed as I was told that the Shelise now has the Custom K6 capsule. beesneezmics.com/studio-series/shelise.htmlSeems a little odd that they dont mention any internal spec's. And yes it seems like a its a big change in a specific model to go from a CK12 to a K6 capsule. |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 2, 2017 21:51:46 GMT -6
Yes it was but current model must have changed as I was told that the Shelise now has the Custom K6 capsule. beesneezmics.com/studio-series/shelise.htmlSeems a little odd that they dont mention any internal spec's. And yes it seems like a its a big change in a specific model to go from a CK12 to a K6 capsule. That page doesn't mention capsule at all. Strange. |
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Feb 2, 2017 21:58:27 GMT -6
Yes it was but current model must have changed as I was told that the Shelise now has the Custom K6 capsule. beesneezmics.com/studio-series/shelise.htmlSeems a little odd that they dont mention any internal spec's. And yes it seems like a its a big change in a specific model to go from a CK12 to a K6 capsule. A "hyper extended top end" is not a 67 style mic. That would be a C12. You sure you're after the right mic? |
|
|
|
Post by hadaja on Feb 2, 2017 22:18:59 GMT -6
Spoke to them via Email and was told a K6 capsule. That the Shelise now did not have a CK12 capsule. NOw maybe I might have mis-understood, I can be a bit thick sometimes, but I was chasing a K6 not a Ck12 so it suited me fine. I have plenty of C12 alternatives at the moment. If it really concerns any users I would suggest contacting Beesneez and finding out. But yes the current description does lends itself to a C12 styled mic. But hey if I dont like it....then out it goes..
|
|
|
|
Post by topshelfmg on Feb 3, 2017 2:22:50 GMT -6
I didn't quite read through the rest of the thread, so I'm sorry if this was mentioned already... but I HIGHLY suggest the Advanced Audio CM67se. It is most likely my favorite microphone that I own.
|
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Feb 3, 2017 6:15:58 GMT -6
I received the kit yesterday. My first impressions are really positive. I'm going to hold off on a full review until I have some more time to really do some testing. Very interested to hear your impressions of the mod, and comparison to your AA CM67. |
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Feb 3, 2017 6:27:44 GMT -6
I didn't quite read through the rest of the thread, so I'm sorry if this was mentioned already... but I HIGHLY suggest the Advanced Audio CM67se. It is most likely my favorite microphone that I own. I own a custom one. It's an awesome microphone. The stock sound is closer to the M269. It's much brighter than a U67. I also have a custom mod on mine that gives me a more vintage, darker tone using the rolloff switch as the mode selector. I also have a good video shoot out comparison with the CM67se, CM12se, U87AI, and a modded Studio Projects C3 posted in another thread if you're interested. In this thread we've been discussing finding the closest mic to a vintage, unmodified U67. I just grabbed the Max Kircher I/O Audio MK67 Mod for the U87AI or TLM 67. It uses the Neumann capsule of the mic and gives you a replica of the circuitry in the U67. It also has a bright mode similar to the CM67se. I have both of these and am going to compare them. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 3, 2017 9:57:28 GMT -6
Can't wait to hear your impressions Vincent!
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,083 
|
Post by ericn on Feb 3, 2017 11:35:18 GMT -6
We need to convince max to build a WA87 conversion kit !
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 3, 2017 12:12:51 GMT -6
Not a bad idea I think. The WA87 does sound really good already from what I can tell. It would be cool if Max could be done less expensively, although I'm well aware you usually get what you pay for with mics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Feb 3, 2017 16:24:56 GMT -6
U67 Style Microphone Testing
I spent the better part of this morning working with my new I/O Audio MK U67, my Advanced Audio CM67VE, and my Slate VMS. I admit up front that I didn't perfectly align the capsules for a scientifically accurate shoot out, but I put the mics close enough to get an idea how each of these sound verse each other.
A couple of notes:
1. As a studio vocalist I've used a lot of mics over the years. As an engineer I've spent the last few years obsessing over both mine and my wife's vocal chains. We've tried all sorts of mics; Peluso 2247SE, AKG 414, Korby 67, 12, 251, custom 49, U87AI, U87, Wagner U47W, Bock 251, a slew of budget mics, etc.
2. I have never used a real U67, only the Korby 67M. After using it I invested in my custom CM67VE, because I loved the sound of the 67M, but needed something darker in that vein. The CM67VE provided both options.
3. The mod that Advanced Audio gave me on my microphone uses the rolloff switch to allow me to switch between the M269/modded U67 sound and the vintage U67 sound. When in vintage mode it engages a circuit mod that boosts the low end and rolls off the top.
4. My I/O Audio Kit includes the Modded U67 mode, also using the rolloff switch to control which mode you're in.
Modded U67/M269 Sound:
I don't particularly like this style mic on my operatic vocals, so I tried the bright modes while doing a pop vocal. If you're looking for this brighter U67 sound I can't say enough good things about the AA CM67SE. It seems to have a fuller sound than the MK U67 or the FG269, while also being crisp and detailed.
Vintage U67:
I recorded another pop take and two quick operatic takes. The FG67 is based on a moddified U67. While not as bright as an M269, it's much brighter than a vintage U67. It's still not a bad sound, just not what I've been looking for. It sits a little closer to the CM67SE than a vintage U67.
After going back and forth between my CM67VE and the MK U67 I found they are as close and different as I imagine any two vintage U67 mics would be. I would not hesitate to use either of these mics on the same sources. That said there are notable differences.
While both have rich mids, the MK U67 emphasizes slightly lower mids than the CM67VE. The result is a beefier and big sound on the MK U67(that may actually need a little taming with EQ) and a slightly clearer more defined sound on the CM67VE.
Another difference is the MK U67 does slightly better in the extremely high frequencies. The CM67VE seems to rolloff the top end at a steeper slope. To combat that I've often made use of the 9 polar patterns that come with the CM67VE. One notch toward Omni gives the mic a slightly wider cardioid and provides a bit more open top end, while retaining a nice low end and rich mids. This makes the mic sound as if it has been EQed, but not necessarily in a bad way. This is the setting I often use when recording big, legit male vocals.
IMHO, if you're looking for a natural sounding mic, with a mellow top end, and rich mids, either of these will do well for you. The MK U67 is closer in circuitry to the original, but the CM67VE is no slouch, and is a more economical option. I hope to get both of them up against a real U67 at some point. We'll see. I'm a little under the weather at the moment, but I'll try to put some clips together when my voice comes back. Right now I am very happy with my two U67 style microphones.
***Quick edit.
I do think the MK U67 sounds a bit more expensive than the CM67VE, but a lot of that fades away in the mix.
|
|
|
|
Post by aamicrophones on Feb 3, 2017 17:23:21 GMT -6
I’m starting to do some homework about a couple of microphones and I would love to get some thoughts about them. It’s taken me a while to figure out my preferred signal chain for my voice, as well as my aesthetic as an engineer. After numerous shoot outs I found that I loved the sound of an ELA M 251 style microphone on my wife’s voice, as well as most female vocalists that have come into my studio. I also found that I love the way my voice sounds on a U67 style microphone. As of right now I have a CM251 and a custom CM67 with a vintage mod from Advanced Audio Microphones and they do the job really well. Maybe it’s a gear head thing, but I’m curious what the best of the best clones or tribute mics are for the U67 and how some of the less expensive 67 style mics are. The 251 is easy, Telefunken Elektroakustic makes a solid replica which everyone says is amazing and the Bock 251 comes up a lot too (and I’ve used it on my wife, so I know how that one sounds). However, the U67 tribute mics are kind of rare, but there are a couple I’m looking at with curiosity if nothing else. Wunder CM67S There seems to be a lack of anything on this mic. In fact many of the videos I’d seen of it have seemingly been pulled off of YouTube or don’t work. I’ve heard it’s in the family of the U67, but brighter. The new Supra version apparently have a darker setting from what I’m reading. Anyone have any experience with this? This is at the higher end of the spectrum and Wunder microphones has a pretty good reputation. Peluso P67 I’ve heard some mixed info about them. When originally released it was brighter than an original by a bit, not unlike many of Peluso’s offerings. I had reached out to War at Zen Pro to ask about a Mod they once offered allowing for bright-neutral-dark settings. He told me that after the first round of shoot outs came out, John Peluso started making the microphones darker to match the originals more closely. Any one use one? TLM 67 Not a tube mic, I know. Kind of sounds like a U87ai & a U67 had a baby from what I’ve heard. I have a friend who said the mids on this microphone were horrible, but I’m not sure if that was the mic or the vocalist he had testing it. Been kind of intrigued about this mic, and was curious about other’s experiences with it. Korby 67 Not sure if Korby closed, looks like they did. Their mics aren’t readily available anymore. I had tried the Kat system and loved the head I tried. I only tried the 67M head, but I’ve heard great sample of their 67. Anyway, would love to hear some thoughts. Attachments:
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,083
|
Post by ericn on Feb 3, 2017 17:54:40 GMT -6
U67 Style Microphone Testing I spent the better part of this morning working with my new I/O Audio MK U67, my Advanced Audio CM67VE, and my Slate VMS. I admit up front that I didn't perfectly align the capsules for a scientifically accurate shoot out, but I put the mics close enough to get an idea how each of these sound verse each other. A couple of notes: 1. As a studio vocalist I've used a lot of mics over the years. As an engineer I've spent the last few years obsessing over both mine and my wife's vocal chains. We've tried all sorts of mics; Peluso 2247SE, AKG 414, Korby 67, 12, 251, custom 49, U87AI, U87, Wagner U47W, Bock 251, a slew of budget mics, etc. 2. I have never used a real U67, only the Korby 67M. After using it I invested in my custom CM67VE, because I loved the sound of the 67M, but needed something darker in that vein. The CM67VE provided both options. 3. The mod that Advanced Audio gave me on my microphone uses the rolloff switch to allow me to switch between the M269/modded U67 sound and the vintage U67 sound. When in vintage mode it engages a circuit mod that boosts the low end and rolls off the top. 4. My I/O Audio Kit includes the Modded U67 mode, also using the rolloff switch to control which mode you're in. Modded U67/M269 Sound: I don't particularly like this style mic on my operatic vocals, so I tried the bright modes while doing a pop vocal. If you're looking for this brighter U67 sound I can't say enough good things about the AA CM67SE. It seems to have a fuller sound than the MK U67 or the FG269, while also being crisp and detailed. Vintage U67: I recorded another pop take and two quick operatic takes. The FG67 is based on a moddified U67. While not as bright as an M269, it's much brighter than a vintage U67. It's still not a bad sound, just not what I've been looking for. It sits a little closer to the CM67SE than a vintage U67. After going back and forth between my CM67VE and the MK U67 I found they are as close and different as I imagine any two vintage U67 mics would be. I would not hesitate to use either of these mics on the same sources. That said there are notable differences. While both have rich mids, the MK U67 emphasizes slightly lower mids than the CM67VE. The result is a beefier and big sound on the MK U67(that may actually need a little taming with EQ) and a slightly clearer more defined sound on the CM67VE. Another difference is the MK U67 does slightly better in the extremely high frequencies. The CM67VE seems to rolloff the top end at a steeper slope. To combat that I've often made use of the 9 polar patterns that come with the CM67VE. One notch toward Omni gives the mic a slightly wider cardioid and provides a bit more open top end, while retaining a nice low end and rich mids. This makes the mic sound as if it has been EQed, but not necessarily in a bad way. This is the setting I often use when recording big, legit male vocals. IMHO, if you're looking for a natural sounding mic, with a mellow top end, and rich mids, either of these will do well for you. The MK U67 is closer in circuitry to the original, but the CM67VE is no slouch, and is a more economical option. I hope to get both of them up against a real U67 at some point. We'll see. I'm a little under the weather at the moment, but I'll try to put some clips together when my voice comes back. Right now I am very happy with my two U67 style microphones. ***Quick edit. I do think the MK U67 sounds a bit more expensive than the CM67VE, but a lot of that fades away in the mix. You need to talk to Shannon Rhoads. |
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Feb 3, 2017 18:15:32 GMT -6
You need to talk to Shannon Rhoads. Probably will at some point. |
|
|
|
Post by aamicrophones on Feb 3, 2017 18:19:29 GMT -6
Hi Vincent, Thanks for using our microphones. I tried replying but my post seems to have disappeared but the attachment remained??? What you are hearing in the U67 compared to the CM67 is the 15db of negative feedback used in the U67 to get the EF86 tube to operate like the U47/U48 circuit.
The U67 was also designed specifically for close vocals and everything below 40hz is eradicated by the circuit. The negative feedback acts a bit like a "limiter" and tightens the dynamics. There is also de-emphasis to reduce the HF rise.
It hard to build an exact clone because a custom transformer must be wound with a 7:1 ratio which has a 200 ohm output plus a winding to produce the 15db of negative feedback. Messing with negative feedback is a bit more tricky to deal with than a standard U47 type circuit.
My design criteria is to give the engineer/producer everything and let them decide how much to reduce the dynamics and limit the frequency response. Our CM67 feeding variable hp filter, a 2:1 compressor and a Shelving EQ cutting 10khz 3db will yield a U67 like sound.
The CM67CE already has the 3db cut at 10khz. So, it should sound pretty close with a good analogue compressor in line with a low compression ratio.
Pop producers love our CM67se so I don't want to mess with it too much. However, I will be introducing a CM269T microphone just before the Summer Namm Show in Nashville. The CM269T part of our new "T" series its a 3 pattern U67/M269 emulation.
However, it has a more traditional single stage U48 circuit based on a 7-pin sub-miniature GE/JAN 5654W tube. We roll out the 12khz rise 3db in he V(U67) setting and leave the rise there in the B(CM269) setting. Like the CM48T the CM269T will sell for $595.
The new CM48T/CM269T circuit has a bit more tube "compression" because it drives the transformer from the plate of the tube and the damping factor is as fast as the CCDA circuit we use in our other builds.
I have been able to fit the 7-pin tube and circuit into our CM48FET/CM87 body and have source the tubes for $8 each in lots of 100. Like the U67 the polarization pattern is passive in Cardiod with the CM269 while in our CM67se has 9 patterns and the rear capsule is polarized.
I heard our CM67se on a grand piano against a U67. The piano needed some regulating and the U67 seems to even out the dynamics while the CM67se show more of the flaws of the piano as some hammers where striking a bit harder than others.
The U67 did make the piano sound better while the CM67se made it sound like the piano did out in the studio with all the harmonics and detail fully present. So, I know there's definitely some processing going on with the U67.
To get that U67 sound from a microphone you need to make sure the clone has the EF86 and negative feedback and a hard HP filter at 40hz. The more components like in the U67 circuit the more variable there are between microphones.
Tube gain differences will be magnified by the 15db of negative feedback in the circuit.
It a lot of work to try and build the exact U67 "replacement". The verdict is still out as whether its worth the time to try and build an exact U67 clone. I am 69 and need to pick my battles carefully. I think I would try it with the 5654W tube rather than the EF86 though!!!
Cheers, Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 3, 2017 18:51:02 GMT -6
Hi Vincent, Thanks for using our microphones. I tried replying but my post seems to have disappeared but the attachment remained??? What you are hearing in the U67 compared to the CM67 is the 15db of negative feedback used in the U67 to get the EF86 tube to operate like the U47/U48 circuit. The U67 was also designed specifically for close vocals and everything below 40hz is eradicated by the circuit. The negative feedback acts a bit like a "limiter" and tightens the dynamics. There is also de-emphasis to reduce the HF rise. It hard to build an exact clone because a custom transformer must be wound with a 7:1 ratio which has a 200 ohm output plus a winding to produce the 15db of negative feedback. Messing with negative feedback is a bit more tricky to deal with than a standard U47 type circuit. My design criteria is to give the engineer/producer everything and let them decide how much to reduce the dynamics and limit the frequency response. Our CM67 feeding variable hp filter, a 2:1 compressor and a Shelving EQ cutting 10khz 3db will yield a U67 like sound. The CM67CE already has the 3db cut at 10khz. So, it should sound pretty close with a good analogue compressor in line with a low compression ratio. Pop producers love our CM67se so I don't want to mess with it too much. However, I will be introducing a CM269T microphone just before the Summer Namm Show in Nashville. The CM269T part of our new "T" series its a 3 pattern U67/M269 emulation. However, it has a more traditional single stage U48 circuit based on a 7-pin sub-miniature GE/JAN 5654W tube. We roll out the 12khz rise 3db in he V(U67) setting and leave the rise there in the B(CM269) setting. Like the CM48T the CM269T will sell for $595. The new CM48T/CM269T circuit has a bit more tube "compression" because it drives the transformer from the plate of the tube and the damping factor is as fast as the CCDA circuit we use in our other builds. I have been able to fit the 7-pin tube and circuit into our CM48FET/CM87 body and have source the tubes for $8 each in lots of 100. Like the U67 the polarization pattern is passive in Cardiod with the CM269 while in our CM67se has 9 patterns and the rear capsule is polarized. I heard our CM67se on a grand piano against a U67. The piano needed some regulating and the U67 seems to even out the dynamics while the CM67se show more of the flaws of the piano as some hammers where striking a bit harder than others. The U67 did make the piano sound better while the CM67se made it sound like the piano did out in the studio with all the harmonics and detail fully present. So, I know there's definitely some processing going on with the U67. To get that U67 sound from a microphone you need to make sure the clone has the EF86 and negative feedback and a hard HP filter at 40hz. The more components like in the U67 circuit the more variable there are between microphones. Tube gain differences will be magnified by the 15db of negative feedback in the circuit. It a lot of work to try and build the exact U67 "replacement". The verdict is still out as whether its worth the time to try and build an exact U67 clone. I am 69 and need to pick my battles carefully. I think I would try it with the 5654W tube rather than the EF86 though!!! Cheers, Dave You should check out Max (Kircher)'s work, Dave. I think you'd be impressed. He's about as painstaking as it gets. He's winding the transformers himself there in Austria. His 67 is a true 1:1 replica. Opinions vary about how it AB's with various U67s (they tend to vary sonically at this point) but I find it to be an amazing mic. And you're right about the gentle self compression. It's one of the things that makes it so magic. And I've never heard a mic that takes EQ like it. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 3, 2017 19:22:53 GMT -6
Ragan said, "I've never heard a mic that takes EQ like it".
That's exactly what Jeremy Gillespie from The Barbershop Studios said about the U67 we used in my high end mic shootout, and he uses them all the time.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,083
|
Post by ericn on Feb 3, 2017 19:43:15 GMT -6
Hi Vincent, Thanks for using our microphones. I tried replying but my post seems to have disappeared but the attachment remained??? What you are hearing in the U67 compared to the CM67 is the 15db of negative feedback used in the U67 to get the EF86 tube to operate like the U47/U48 circuit. The U67 was also designed specifically for close vocals and everything below 40hz is eradicated by the circuit. The negative feedback acts a bit like a "limiter" and tightens the dynamics. There is also de-emphasis to reduce the HF rise. It hard to build an exact clone because a custom transformer must be wound with a 7:1 ratio which has a 200 ohm output plus a winding to produce the 15db of negative feedback. Messing with negative feedback is a bit more tricky to deal with than a standard U47 type circuit. My design criteria is to give the engineer/producer everything and let them decide how much to reduce the dynamics and limit the frequency response. Our CM67 feeding variable hp filter, a 2:1 compressor and a Shelving EQ cutting 10khz 3db will yield a U67 like sound. The CM67CE already has the 3db cut at 10khz. So, it should sound pretty close with a good analogue compressor in line with a low compression ratio. Pop producers love our CM67se so I don't want to mess with it too much. However, I will be introducing a CM269T microphone just before the Summer Namm Show in Nashville. The CM269T part of our new "T" series its a 3 pattern U67/M269 emulation. However, it has a more traditional single stage U48 circuit based on a 7-pin sub-miniature GE/JAN 5654W tube. We roll out the 12khz rise 3db in he V(U67) setting and leave the rise there in the B(CM269) setting. Like the CM48T the CM269T will sell for $595. The new CM48T/CM269T circuit has a bit more tube "compression" because it drives the transformer from the plate of the tube and the damping factor is as fast as the CCDA circuit we use in our other builds. I have been able to fit the 7-pin tube and circuit into our CM48FET/CM87 body and have source the tubes for $8 each in lots of 100. Like the U67 the polarization pattern is passive in Cardiod with the CM269 while in our CM67se has 9 patterns and the rear capsule is polarized. I heard our CM67se on a grand piano against a U67. The piano needed some regulating and the U67 seems to even out the dynamics while the CM67se show more of the flaws of the piano as some hammers where striking a bit harder than others. The U67 did make the piano sound better while the CM67se made it sound like the piano did out in the studio with all the harmonics and detail fully present. So, I know there's definitely some processing going on with the U67. To get that U67 sound from a microphone you need to make sure the clone has the EF86 and negative feedback and a hard HP filter at 40hz. The more components like in the U67 circuit the more variable there are between microphones. Tube gain differences will be magnified by the 15db of negative feedback in the circuit. It a lot of work to try and build the exact U67 "replacement". The verdict is still out as whether its worth the time to try and build an exact U67 clone. I am 69 and need to pick my battles carefully. I think I would try it with the 5654W tube rather than the EF86 though!!! Cheers, Dave Dave I agree 100% but if he's chasing the sound of the Korby, he's looking for something between a stock and a Steven Paul mod. Since Shannon is the man behind that Capsule I say Talk to Shannon! Im not sure but I believe in the KAT the sound is all in the Capsule I think it's not a True 67/87/870 with demphis, but Shannon would know! |
|
|
|
Post by aamicrophones on Feb 3, 2017 20:07:08 GMT -6
Ragan said, "I've never heard a mic that takes EQ like it".That's exactly what Jeremy Gillespie from The Barbershop Studios said about the U67 we used in my high end mic shootout, and he uses them all the time. George Cumbee and old client that recorded a lot of acapella and Gospel in Nashville swore by his U67's also. I think George had 6 of them at one time. I image the already "processed" sound could help if you are recording vocal groups or a choir. I would think is should sound really good on trumpet but I see Miles playing into a M49 and U47. Cheers, Dave |
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Feb 4, 2017 10:53:39 GMT -6
Hi Vincent, Thanks for using our microphones. I tried replying but my post seems to have disappeared but the attachment remained??? What you are hearing in the U67 compared to the CM67 is the 15db of negative feedback used in the U67 to get the EF86 tube to operate like the U47/U48 circuit. Hey Dave, keep making such great mics and I'll keep using them. I have 3 custom microphones built by you, two of which never leave their stands, the CM251 & CM67VE. The diagram you were talking about is a few posts above. Makes sense. I was literally taken a back by how close the mics were. The mod you gave me which allows for both your standard sound and the more vintage sound, is wonderful. Max's kit, which on this forum came up numerous times as being the closest you can get to the stock U67, utilizes my U87ai's K67 Capsule and a recreation of the original U67 circuit. The microphone can use a provided PF86 or an EF86 with the flip of a switch. What shocked me was how close they were. My comments above were very much me nitpicking to emphasize their differences. The MK U67 has a beefier mid range. It sounds huge a times on my warm voice. Your custom CM67VE was clearer, requiring less EQ. Both had a similar high end, with yours being a little darker up top. What I often do when using your mic is use the polar pattern selector to widen the cardioid by one notch for a more open sound that needs less EQ up top. The U67 was also designed specifically for close vocals and everything below 40hz is eradicated by the circuit. The negative feedback acts a bit like a "limiter" and tightens the dynamics. There is also de-emphasis to reduce the HF rise. It hard to build an exact clone because a custom transformer must be wound with a 7:1 ratio which has a 200 ohm output plus a winding to produce the 15db of negative feedback. Messing with negative feedback is a bit more tricky to deal with than a standard U47 type circuit. My design criteria is to give the engineer/producer everything and let them decide how much to reduce the dynamics and limit the frequency response. Our CM67 feeding variable hp filter, a 2:1 compressor and a Shelving EQ cutting 10khz 3db will yield a U67 like sound. The CM67CE already has the 3db cut at 10khz. So, it should sound pretty close with a good analogue compressor in line with a low compression ratio. Pop producers love our CM67se so I don't want to mess with it too much. However, I will be introducing a CM269T microphone just before the Summer Namm Show in Nashville. The CM269T part of our new "T" series its a 3 pattern U67/M269 emulation. However, it has a more traditional single stage U48 circuit based on a 7-pin sub-miniature GE/JAN 5654W tube. We roll out the 12khz rise 3db in he V(U67) setting and leave the rise there in the B(CM269) setting. Like the CM48T the CM269T will sell for $595. The new CM48T/CM269T circuit has a bit more tube "compression" because it drives the transformer from the plate of the tube and the damping factor is as fast as the CCDA circuit we use in our other builds. I have been able to fit the 7-pin tube and circuit into our CM48FET/CM87 body and have source the tubes for $8 each in lots of 100. Like the U67 the polarization pattern is passive in Cardiod with the CM269 while in our CM67se has 9 patterns and the rear capsule is polarized. Don't mess with the CM67SE. It's a fantastic mic. I've used it on my voice and on others in my studio. I featured it on my "Granada" Live in the studio video. What I love about you guys is your openness to provide customization on your mics for only a small fee. My CM12 & CM67 both have vintage modes, which is awesome. I'm looking forward to trying your CM48T out. Looks like a great line of mics for your guys. It a lot of work to try and build the exact U67 "replacement". The verdict is still out as whether its worth the time to try and build an exact U67 clone. I am 69 and need to pick my battles carefully. I think I would try it with the 5654W tube rather than the EF86 though!!! Cheers, Dave There are a lot of guys on this forum looking for that sound. The custom mod you made for me is definitely an option, especially at the price point. |
|
|
|
Post by topshelfmg on Feb 5, 2017 3:30:53 GMT -6
I didn't quite read through the rest of the thread, so I'm sorry if this was mentioned already... but I HIGHLY suggest the Advanced Audio CM67se. It is most likely my favorite microphone that I own. I own a custom one. It's an awesome microphone. The stock sound is closer to the M269. It's much brighter than a U67. I also have a custom mod on mine that gives me a more vintage, darker tone using the rolloff switch as the mode selector. I also have a good video shoot out comparison with the CM67se, CM12se, U87AI, and a modded Studio Projects C3 posted in another thread if you're interested. In this thread we've been discussing finding the closest mic to a vintage, unmodified U67. I just grabbed the Max Kircher I/O Audio MK67 Mod for the U87AI or TLM 67. It uses the Neumann capsule of the mic and gives you a replica of the circuitry in the U67. It also has a bright mode similar to the CM67se. I have both of these and am going to compare them. That sounds like it would be right down my alley! Do you know what the mod consists of. I may end up paying Dave to perform the mod. |
|
|
|
Post by topshelfmg on Feb 5, 2017 3:40:09 GMT -6
I didn't quite read through the rest of the thread, so I'm sorry if this was mentioned already... but I HIGHLY suggest the Advanced Audio CM67se. It is most likely my favorite microphone that I own. I own a custom one. It's an awesome microphone. The stock sound is closer to the M269. It's much brighter than a U67. I also have a custom mod on mine that gives me a more vintage, darker tone using the rolloff switch as the mode selector. I also have a good video shoot out comparison with the CM67se, CM12se, U87AI, and a modded Studio Projects C3 posted in another thread if you're interested. In this thread we've been discussing finding the closest mic to a vintage, unmodified U67. I just grabbed the Max Kircher I/O Audio MK67 Mod for the U87AI or TLM 67. It uses the Neumann capsule of the mic and gives you a replica of the circuitry in the U67. It also has a bright mode similar to the CM67se. I have both of these and am going to compare them. Nevermind! Just saw your response further into the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Feb 5, 2017 15:45:07 GMT -6
I took another quick listen to the files today. When listening to the pop tracks I found that the Slate FG67 sounds very close to the Advanced Audio CM67SE in standard mode, and the Slate FG269 sounds close to the MK U67 in bright mode.
I reaffirmed that the MK U67 in standard mode is beefier than the CM67VE in Vintage mode. I still maintain they are quite close.
|
|
