|
Post by sirthought on Apr 9, 2019 10:38:01 GMT -6
They both sound really nice. I think the REDD mic sounds a bit more full and finished, but that could be easily changed with some EQ. The Stam sounds really good.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Apr 9, 2019 10:42:31 GMT -6
^ I prefer the Redd. The 67 sounds a bit murky to me.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 10:52:45 GMT -6
I'd need some more time to work with it and perhaps a little EQ would help. That track was pretty straightforward. I may not be showing the SA67 in the absolute best light here, but figured people might get a basic idea of it. The Chandler is actually quite bight, so I had to work the EQ on that mic quite a bit to before arriving at the sound you hear now. With the SA67, I did only a quickie channel EQ, only HPF a bit, that 's all.
I'll be doing a shootout with some vintage U67's in a couple of weeks at a great studio, that should help us to make a better comparison.
|
|
|
Post by drumhead57 on Apr 9, 2019 10:56:52 GMT -6
The SA-67 definitely sounds good. I'm hard pressed to tell the difference.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 10:57:57 GMT -6
I think with a little EQ it'll hold up nicely, this was done quite flat, just for the demo.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Apr 9, 2019 11:03:41 GMT -6
The SA-67 definitely sounds good. I'm hard pressed to tell the difference. Really? Huh. The differences were pretty apparent to me.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on Apr 9, 2019 11:04:21 GMT -6
The Redd sounds huge and flawless. An epic up-to-date tube mic for recording artists who hope to get noticed and make money. I feel it might be a smart purchase for a commercial space. Although I would send it to someone like Klaus or Shannon to tweak if you wanted to, then maybe you'd really have some super killer modern/vintage beast? That's a thought for those who are serious about recording others.
The Stam about halfway through the song something started to click for me, this is how I personally like my favorite mics to sound. Yeah I know its old and dated, its midrange focused, 70's era kind of sound. And yeah I'm stuck in the 70's. I'm so tempted, even pre-order would take forever,... unfortunately real estate in this area is a giant vacuum of all my resources.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 11:09:33 GMT -6
Funny you should say that christopher. The same thing happened to me, at a certain point I got it, it sounded like a 70's era Neumann and it felt like it too. I believe Stam meant it to be like the vintage models, a bit darker than modern mics.
|
|
|
Post by drumhead57 on Apr 9, 2019 11:16:17 GMT -6
The SA-67 definitely sounds good. I'm hard pressed to tell the difference. Really? Huh. The differences were pretty apparent to me. Really! however, my ears are shot, so there's that EDIT: I need to listen on my studio monitors, not my computer speakers
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 11:17:21 GMT -6
Perhaps I shouldn't have posted it next to the REDD. The REDD's brighter, but by itself, the SA67 might have been listened to differently. Funny, I love the Chandler, but the SA67's growing on me too. That's why I figure with a little time getting to know it better and a little EQ tweaking, it might just be great.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Apr 9, 2019 11:26:46 GMT -6
unfortunately real estate in this area is a giant vacuum of all my resources. <<sigh>> Yup. And one that will pay off 100:1 better than any microphone. Martin - sounds good. Both are nice, and your voice really tells the story. I'm guessing you'd sound great on an SM58.....
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 11:29:43 GMT -6
Funny you should say that Dr.Bill, I use the 58 ALL the time! I even like it as a small amp mic!
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Apr 9, 2019 12:16:42 GMT -6
They both sound quite good but I'd take the 67 over the REDD. It's got that rich, inviting midrange that puts you right in the narrative of the vocal. Both of those mics work on your voice but I'd take the 67 given the choice.
|
|
|
Post by 000 on Apr 9, 2019 12:30:43 GMT -6
I'm definitely hearing more proximity effect with the SA67. Like everyone else says - both mics sound fantastic - the REDD take sounds more polished and "studio" ready. The Stam is just ooozing character and I would prefer it in this situation depending on artistic direction. I'm wondering if Josh will let me add a second to my order and ship them both together?
|
|
|
Post by seawell on Apr 9, 2019 13:54:58 GMT -6
The 67 sound is my favorite, I always seem to come back to it. Martin, check out an old Korby KAT systems with a 67 head if you haven't yet. It has an extended top end that would be like if you took these two clips and did a mash up
|
|
|
Post by NoTomorrow on Apr 9, 2019 14:01:05 GMT -6
If you listen to the REDD track first then the SA67 track sounds kinda boxy. If you listen to the SA67 track first then the REDD sounds too bright lol
What preamp did you use with the SA67 here? Obviously the REDD has a great pre built-in
Also, did you order your Stam with the NOS tube?
There was an SA-67 on Reverb the other day for a few hours..... until I bought it! It just happened to show up in my feed when I logged on so I decided to try it before going with the Kircher mod.
I'll upload some tracks versus a 1981 U87 when I get it.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 9, 2019 14:26:02 GMT -6
Martin has the stam 73 so likely used that ?
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 14:39:32 GMT -6
Congratulations NoTomorrow, and welcome to the forum! Let us know how it goes.
In this case, I used the Dizengoff D4 preamp. It's basically the same circuit as the one in the Chandler, so I figured that would help with the comparison.
* I just reversed the order and put the SA67 tracks first, and it does seem to sound a little better if listened to that that way!
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Apr 9, 2019 15:53:00 GMT -6
Try it with HOFA'S A/B plugin (free)
|
|
|
Post by clumsycongregation on Apr 9, 2019 16:27:18 GMT -6
Redd owner here. I prefer the 67 on your voice. It's more tangible in some way. All of that glistening high end clarity on the Redd doesn't necessarily help, IMO. The 67 sits just right.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Apr 9, 2019 16:50:00 GMT -6
Congratulations NoTomorrow, and welcome to the forum! Let us know how it goes. In this case, I used the Dizengoff D4 preamp. It's basically the same circuit as the one in the Chandler, so I figured that would help with the comparison. * I just reversed the order and put the SA67 tracks first, and it does seem to sound a little better if listened to that that way!I think it's because the REDD is so bright. It's sort of like jacking up the brightness on your monitor all the way. It's sort of impressive for a minute and if you then take it back to a normal level it seems dim. But the normal level is actually more comfortable for your eyes and lets them focus on the actual images, not the brightness.
|
|
|
Post by mike on Apr 9, 2019 16:58:46 GMT -6
Sounds good Martin, Both are nice mic's even if they're different. I also found my impression differed a little the 2nd time around when I played the 67 first and the Redd 2nd after taking a break. while I like them both, I like the 67
I wonder the same as 000 about Proximity as it sounded like the 67 had more proximity effect, did you sing about the same distance from both mic's?
Can't wait for my SA67 to arrive!
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 17:08:44 GMT -6
I sang closer to the mic when using the SA67 than I did with the Chandler. The Chandler loves some distance, and the SA67 likes some proximity. Given time, I might back up a little on the 67, but last time I did, I preferred it closer. I'm still experimenting with it. The was a one take vocal, no comping.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 9, 2019 17:15:35 GMT -6
Just for reference, here's a rough guitar and vocal track I did with a vintage U67 at The Barbershop Studios with Jeremy Gillespie when I was shooting out some mics. It's not as loud as the other tracks I posted, so turn it up a bit. There's no EQ, just some reverb.
This was in a treated room through the SSL 9000.
https%3A//soundcloud.com/martin-john-butler/mic-shootout-1-u67
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Apr 9, 2019 17:23:05 GMT -6
I prefer the 67 mic. It has a good round tone.
The REDD mic is impressive and engaging at first, but I feel that repeated listens, someone that loves your song or album, would favor the 67 more over time.
REDD sounds a bit "pre mixed" and I would think that applying a normal vocal mix chain to the 67 mic would produce similar results, but then you have your own choices during the mix rather than being presented with a finalized sound, which could possibly work out even better, although I am hypothesizing.
There's just a basic philosophy that I like to be able to boost highs, and I don't like having to cut highs in a mix. I can't give an academic reason, but it seems to hold up in practice.
|
|