|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 1, 2017 12:51:12 GMT -6
I liked you’re voice on that Flea49. If you stop there you’d still be golden.
Don't forget, your benchmark recordings were probably done in great rooms. My favorite benchmark recordings were done in amazing rooms, and there's no workaround that can quite get that same sound for you, besides the sound quality, the room itself is often inspiring and changes your vibe.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 1, 2017 17:50:19 GMT -6
I liked you’re voice on that Flea49. If you stop there you’d still be golden. Don't forget, your benchmark recordings were probably done in great rooms. My favorite benchmark recordings were done in amazing rooms, and there's no workaround that can quite get that same sound for you, besides the sound quality, the room itself is often inspiring and changes your vibe. I get that. I remember the first time I ever sang into a U87ai in a concert hall. I never thought much of the U87ai on my voice and suddenly I was in shock at how I sounded. Same goes for recording with the U87ai in a large church. There is a clip on my website of a live recording made on Easter in 2014 I think and the sound is just wonderful.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 13, 2017 6:36:55 GMT -6
My usual dealer Calistro Music informed me that he has demo units of the Flea 49. One is stock with the M7 Capsule. The other has the M7 Capsule and an AC701 tube, which is an additional option FLEA offers. They also offer the VF14 when you buy their FLEA 47. Having used a Wagner U47 with an M7 and VF14 as well as used the FLEA 47 with an EF12 I have heard the sonic differences the VF14 brings to the table, particularly in the low end. What does the AC701 bring to the table sonically? Is it a high end shimmer thing? I feel like most microphones known for using the AC701 are brighter microphones; ELA M251, M269, etc. I'll get to hear it next week, but I was curious to hear anyone's thoughts or experiences.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 13, 2017 6:59:51 GMT -6
My usual dealer Calistro Music informed me that he has demo units of the Flea 49. One is stock with the M7 Capsule. The other has the M7 Capsule and an AC701 tube, which is an additional option FLEA offers. They also offer the VF14 when you buy their FLEA 47. Having used a Wagner U47 with an M7 and VF14 as well as used the FLEA 47 with an EF12 I have heard the sonic differences the VF14 brings to the table, particularly in the low end. What does the AC701 bring to the table sonically? Is it a high end shimmer thing? I feel like most microphones known for using the AC701 are brighter microphones; ELA M251, M269, etc. I'll get to hear it next week, but I was curious to hear anyone's thoughts or experiences. I have two mics fitted with AC701's but they are both SDC's (KM54 and an AKG C60) so they are in the bright camp anyway. A Flea 49 with an AC701 and a M7 is probably going to get you closer to an early M49 (depending on the transformer) than most other current offerings I would think. I wouldn't expect the AC701 to cause the Flea 49 to be overly bright with the M7 as the Flea F7/M7 capsules tend to be more mid focused than the K47/49. The original M49's were never considered as bright say as a C12 from anything I've read (not having compared the originals)
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 13, 2017 7:13:47 GMT -6
I don't think it will make the mic overly bright, just add a little shimmer on the top that the stock Flea 49s may not have. Just curious if that thought is true. rowmat , thanks for your thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 13, 2017 7:30:23 GMT -6
I don't think it will make the mic overly bright, just add a little shimmer on the top that the stock Flea 49s may not have. Just curious if that thought is true. rowmat , thanks for your thoughts. You know what they say... "One man's shimmer is another man's...etc."
|
|
|
Post by adamjbrass on Nov 13, 2017 8:14:08 GMT -6
I don't think it will make the mic overly bright, just add a little shimmer on the top that the stock Flea 49s may not have. Just curious if that thought is true. rowmat , thanks for your thoughts. thats all it is, plus a headache if it gets noisy, other than that, some delicate non-linearity but otherwise, AC701k mic Isnt needed or required plus replacement will cost you stupid money later on...unless Flea covers it,
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 13, 2017 8:23:43 GMT -6
I don't think it will make the mic overly bright, just add a little shimmer on the top that the stock Flea 49s may not have. Just curious if that thought is true. rowmat , thanks for your thoughts. thats all it is, plus a headache if it gets noisy, other than that, some delicate non-linearity but otherwise, AC701k mic Isnt needed or required plus replacement will cost you stupid money later on...unless Flea covers it, Yeah that fact will be a factor in my decision. If I find the M7 too beefy I'd probably be better off with a K47 to add top end detail rather than the AC701k, but since it's an option and the demo microphone is there, I may as well try it out.
|
|
|
Post by rowmat on Nov 13, 2017 8:28:25 GMT -6
I don't think it will make the mic overly bright, just add a little shimmer on the top that the stock Flea 49s may not have. Just curious if that thought is true. rowmat , thanks for your thoughts. thats all it is, plus a headache if it gets noisy, other than that, some delicate non-linearity but otherwise, AC701k mic Isnt needed or required plus replacement will cost you stupid money later on...unless Flea covers it, But not quite as stupid money as a VF14!
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 13, 2017 8:44:33 GMT -6
By all means try all the options you can Vincent. The Flea sounded best for you, so once you settle on which tube/capsule combo you like, you're good to go.
I have only a little experience with the AC701 tube, but if I had to describe it, I'd say it's bit more articulate than some others. I could sing softer with greater intelligibility, and it would still cut through a mix without pushing the level. I could also be the combination of that tube and a Tab/Funkenwerk transformer, because of course, it's a system. not parts in isolation.
|
|
|
Post by adamjbrass on Nov 13, 2017 10:01:35 GMT -6
thats all it is, plus a headache if it gets noisy, other than that, some delicate non-linearity but otherwise, AC701k mic Isnt needed or required plus replacement will cost you stupid money later on...unless Flea covers it, But not quite as stupid money as a VF14! I guess it depends on who is selling it and testing it for you. Last I checked, [..I don't check often] these were pretty expensive. VF14M do carry hefty price tags. But having asked a few techs about the AC701k, most say that it is VERY hard to obtain GOOD ones and wont even try. Based on this, and after listening to other similar sub-miniature tubes in these circuits, all I have to say is......AC70 who? :-P LOL
|
|
|
Post by adamjbrass on Nov 13, 2017 10:05:36 GMT -6
thats all it is, plus a headache if it gets noisy, other than that, some delicate non-linearity but otherwise, AC701k mic Isnt needed or required plus replacement will cost you stupid money later on...unless Flea covers it, Yeah that fact will be a factor in my decision. If I find the M7 too beefy I'd probably be better off with a K47 to add top end detail rather than the AC701k, but since it's an option and the demo microphone is there, I may as well try it out. Tube rolling is always a subtle afair IMHO even at this level. Not as big as the difference between K47 and M7 capsules, But, you may find another deciding factor in your purchase
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Nov 13, 2017 10:48:38 GMT -6
I say def try out the 701 version. I'm guessing it will be discernably better. Quite possibly the difference between - yeah that's a good clone - and OMG, that's amazing and the closest I've ever hear to a M49. (Cause nothing I've ever heard sounds like a good M49 - period.) AC701's are not THAT expensive. Last time I checked in the $600-800 range? It's been awhile, but they are nowhere near as rare as VF14's.
|
|
|
Post by jakeharris on Nov 13, 2017 19:56:20 GMT -6
AC701's are not THAT expensive. Last time I checked in the $600-800 range? It's been awhile, but they are nowhere near as rare as VF14's. Bingo. They're not rare at all, with apparently a few very large batches amassed in Europe by 'investors'. Once the market explodes like the VF14, AC701's will suddenly become abundant with all these lovely 'investors' cashing in on their retirement funds... But if you get a good one, which you would from Flea, there's a very high probability the tube will outlive you. AC701's last forever as long as you regularly service the PSU to make sure you never overheat it. Service is just checking the heater voltage, and adjusting a trimpot if it's off. Takes 5mins.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 13, 2017 23:10:23 GMT -6
But if you get a good one, which you would from Flea, there's a very high probability the tube will outlive you. AC701's last forever as long as you regularly service the PSU to make sure you never overheat it. Service is just checking the heater voltage, and adjusting a trimpot if it's off. Takes 5mins. That was my thought as well. Thanks for the PSU tip. I'll keep it in mind if I go down that route.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 20, 2017 19:04:50 GMT -6
Well, I got in front of the FLEA 249 with the stock M7 and stock tube. The 249 is exactly the same as the 49 except the cable connector. I also got in front of a FLEA 49 with the stock M7 and an AC701k tube. I'll post my thoughts when I have a brain. It's a trek to get out to Orange, CT from my place on Long Island. There were differences in the set up he had and that I have, but I think the biggest difference was the room, which was much more live than my room.
What I will say is I thought the difference between the K49 capsule and the M7 was really minor. What struck me is how much of a difference the AC701k made. It was about as different from the stock tube version as the CM49 was from the FLEA. Gotta sit on everything a few days and make a decision.
|
|
|
Post by jakeharris on Nov 21, 2017 8:55:12 GMT -6
How much more for the 701 version?
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 21, 2017 12:12:30 GMT -6
A little under $1000.
|
|
|
Post by aamicrophones on Nov 21, 2017 14:51:37 GMT -6
Well, I got in front of the FLEA 249 with the stock M7 and stock tube. The 249 is exactly the same as the 49 except the cable connector. I also got in front of a FLEA 49 with the stock M7 and an AC701k tube. I'll post my thoughts when I have a brain. It's a trek to get out to Orange, CT from my place on Long Island. There were differences in the set up he had and that I have, but I think the biggest difference was the room, which was much more live than my room. What I will say is I thought the difference between the K49 capsule and the M7 was really minor. What struck me is how much of a difference the AC701k made. It was about as different from the stock tube version as the CM49 was from the FLEA. Gotta sit on everything a few days and make a decision. Hi Vincent, I don't think you are hearing the tube make a difference. It is more likely C6 which was placed on the output of the AC701 to roll-off the HF rise at 10khz. Notice both these schematics use a AC701 but one has a 150pf roll-off and one has a 600pf roll-off capacitor. There are also another schematic of an M49 version I have seen without C6 installed. C6 would affect the shimmer more than any tube difference. Also, one schematic has negative feedback and one doesn't. Negative feedback increase the gain so the input capacitance in a tube circuit is multiplied by that gain. The higher the resultant input capacitance the lower the HF cutoff point of the amplifier circuit. Tubes do not have a "sound signature" of their own. However, they react differenctly with different component choices, different bias methods, different plate supplies and different circuit configurations. The difference between these two circuits both with AC701a tubes is not only C6 but one has fixed bias and one has cathode bias. According to Klaus there were of 1/2 a dozen different M49 circuit variations. Again, which one is the "holy grail" of M49 circuits? I just got my T49 transformer sample. So, I will be starting to do measurements and testing with our M49 AC701 replacement circuit and the larger T49. Cheers, Dave Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 21, 2017 22:27:33 GMT -6
Thanks aamicrophones. Insightful as always. I'm really looking forward to hearing what your CM49 sounds like with the new transformer. I still have my CM49. It is still one of my favorite microphones on my voice and I'm not parting with it anytime soon. I can't wait to hear how the T49 improves on it's already solid sound. As for the FLEA 49, I've sent some samples to my most trusted engineer friends and music friends who are not engineers. We all unanimously agreed that the demo mic I tried from VK with the K47 capsule and the stock tube suited my voice the best. The M7 gets a little too mid heavy for my already mid full voice. It seems to emphasize my vibrato in a bad way. ericn pointed out in another shoot out how the Flea 49 and CM49 seemed to push my vibrato out a bit more than the MK U67 I had it next to, but it wasn't necessarily a bad thing just something I should watch for. Well, the M7 was even worse. The K47 provided a polish to the sound, even if it's a little smaller sounding than the M7. As for the AC701k tube, the FLEA 49 with the M7 surely out shined the FLEA 249 I tried with the stock tube and M7 capsule. It was a bit mellower, probably due to much of what Dave said above. When I played with the EQ I found a larger bottom end at 200hz or so. The top end seemed similar between the two. There was a dimensional difference though. I do wish I had tried one with a K47 and AC701k...., but I think I've exhausted all options on trying the FLEA 49. I could probably find an actual M49b in a studio in NY with a K47 and an AC701, but that's still guessing to say it will sound like the FLEA. Every company has their own ideal version of each mic that they base their mics on. They'll be on sale at VK this week, so I have a decision to make.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 23, 2017 12:31:11 GMT -6
After reviewing the samples I made and a lot of thinking, I'm going to go with the FLEA 49 with the K49 capsule and the AC701k tube. For me the M7 capsule tended to emphasize my vibrato a bit too much, something all of the 49 style mics I've tried do a little bit. I felt with the M7 it was a little too much. As for the tube choice, the AC701k just brought a 3D quality and richer low end to the sound. It was very easy for me to rule out the stock FLEA 249 with the M7 capsule. The FLEA 49 with the M7 and AC701 was wonderfully 3D, but the FLEA 49 with the K49 was the best representation of my voice. I figure it will be the best of both worlds.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 30, 2017 23:25:58 GMT -6
So what's the big difference between the M49B and M49C? The FLEA mics I've been in front of so far were all M49B circuits and my AA CM49 is based on the sound of the M49C. Tonight I got in front of a beautiful, black M49C with a K49/47 capsule and an AC701 tube. It sounded incredible. On my voice it killed everything else in the studio, and let me tell you this was an expensive shoot out; U67, M49C, M269C, C37a, U47 FET, MK U67, AA CM49 and just for fun an RCA44 and Coles 4038.
Anyway, I know FLEA can make their 49 with either circuitry, although their stock version is the M49B circuit. I am just curious about the differences.
|
|
|
Post by jakeharris on Dec 1, 2017 6:23:42 GMT -6
B is fixed bias. C is self bias. C12, 67, 49A/B, U47 are all some form of fixed bias, with cathode tied directly to ground. 250/251 and M49C are self bias and use cathode bypass circuits... You can read up on the differences online.
But in general, self bias mics are softer sounding and have less noisy circuits. Fixed bias microphones have better/deeper low-ends, and more midrange clarity. This clarity makes them a bit punchier, and when well designed, they can be just as quiet as self bias.
The main difference is in how they handle dynamics. A fixed bias mic won't change tone whether you push soft or loud notes. Self bias will change tone, as the operating point of the tube changes depending on source volume. Some guys call it pinching when they hit a mic with a loud note and the sound changes, but it's just the operating point moving around. Mics with weaker PSU's (more affordable mics) will struggle with louder notes as the mic draws more power. But self bias also needs a much less complicated PSU that is cheaper to build, which is why all affordable tube mics are self bias. Fixed bias needs a very good and well designed PSU to not be noisy, and that's expensive...
Then as the tube in a mic ages, its ideal operating point moves around. A self bias circuit will adapt itself to the tube without any service needed. Fixed circuits need to be manually adjusted over the years to match the tube as it drifts. In other words, a fixed bias mic can lose performance if you don't service it regularly'ish. Same when you replace a tube in a self-bias mic, the circuit will adjust itself. In a fixed mic, you have to readjust everything manually.
Don't be surprised you loved the M49C though – that's a real Neumann M49, with Neumann capsule, transformer, and a 701 tube. A good specimen was never going to sound anything but amazing.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Dec 1, 2017 7:06:38 GMT -6
So what's the big difference between the M49B and M49C? The FLEA mics I've been in front of so far were all M49B circuits and my AA CM49 is based on the sound of the M49C. Tonight I got in front of a beautiful, black M49C with a K49/47 capsule and an AC701 tube. It sounded incredible. On my voice it killed everything else in the studio, and let me tell you this was an expensive shoot out; U67, M49C, M269C, C37a, U47 FET, MK U67, AA CM49 and just for fun an RCA44 and Coles 4038. Anyway, I know FLEA can make their 49 with either circuitry, although their stock version is the M49B circuit. I am just curious about the differences. M49B is widely regarded as noisier but better sounding, a subjective evaluation - but there it is. Nobody mentions the M249
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,013
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Dec 1, 2017 8:38:52 GMT -6
B is fixed bias. C is self bias. C12, 67, 49A/B, U47 are all some form of fixed bias, with cathode tied directly to ground. 250/251 and M49C are self bias and use cathode bypass circuits... You can read up on the differences online. But in general, self bias mics are softer sounding and have less noisy circuits. Fixed bias microphones have better/deeper low-ends, and more midrange clarity. This clarity makes them a bit punchier, and when well designed, they can be just as quiet as self bias. The main difference is in how they handle dynamics. A fixed bias mic won't change tone whether you push soft or loud notes. Self bias will change tone, as the operating point of the tube changes depending on source volume. Some guys call it pinching when they hit a mic with a loud note and the sound changes, but it's just the operating point moving around. Mics with weaker PSU's (more affordable mics) will struggle with louder notes as the mic draws more power. But self bias also needs a much less complicated PSU that is cheaper to build, which is why all affordable tube mics are self bias. Fixed bias needs a very good and well designed PSU to not be noisy, and that's expensive... Then as the tube in a mic ages, its ideal operating point moves around. A self bias circuit will adapt itself to the tube without any service needed. Fixed circuits need to be manually adjusted over the years to match the tube as it drifts. In other words, a fixed bias mic can lose performance if you don't service it regularly'ish. Same when you replace a tube in a self-bias mic, the circuit will adjust itself. In a fixed mic, you have to readjust everything manually. Don't be surprised you loved the M49C though – that's a real Neumann M49, with Neumann capsule, transformer, and a 701 tube. A good specimen was never going to sound anything but amazing. Good job but to nail it start with in theory!
|
|