|
Post by EmRR on Jan 11, 2018 8:32:40 GMT -6
The circuit is identical, layout, PCB's, everything, with the exception of 1) transformer itself 2) addition of filament switching for the optional tube. If everyone's is like mine, the first thing to do (which doesn't do much) is remove C17 completely. It's not doing anything with this transformer. Does removing C17 affect the sound? If so, how? It brings a slight amount of treble back. With a real 67 taking it out is the 'bright mod'; MK67, it doesn't do much.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 11, 2018 9:37:10 GMT -6
I’ve never heard a 67 that sounds anywhere near this. But have you listened to a 67 in the context of several edge terminated (maybe not the REDD), airy, bright, tucked mids kinda mics? I’ve heard clips or thr MK67 next to OG 67s That are really close. I’m gonna see if they’re still there and post em. Or check out Vincent’s comparison he posted. The MK67 is a little darker than that 67, but they’re not very far off in my view. In other words, the mellow, mid forward 67 sound is always gonna sound way different than very bright, more scooped mics like a 251 and C800 (REDD).
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 11, 2018 9:41:10 GMT -6
Man, if I shelled out $7k for the 67 reissue and it sounds anything like this mic, I think I wouldn't be a happy dude. Then again, I have zero experience with a real U67.
|
|
|
Post by rob61 on Jan 11, 2018 9:42:17 GMT -6
I always regretted not grabbing one or two of the U67s when they were reintroduced in the early 90's for a short time ($3500). So when the Max Mod came out, I bought one and a new U87ai (since my other 87 is vintage). I figured $4600 for a U67 is cheaper than buying an original where you never know the condition. At the time, some guy on the purple site claimed he had an original and used the Max Mod one for a pair, so I thought they must be pretty darn close. I thought the MaxMod/87ai combo was a bit dull (without having an original 67 to compare) but it did have a certain dimension/depth to the sound. So I experimented and added a bit of top shelf which really opened up the mic. Didn't a lot of studios that had original 67's do a mod to it to brighten it up? I don't use the "bright" switch on the MaxMod, I don't like it, prefer flat with some eq. I then replaced the factory tube with an actual ef86 (not Telefunken), and that seemed to help a bit. A recent artist here did a mic shootout and choose the MaxMod mic without knowing anything about it. He tends to be a bit sibilent, so for me it was a win, and helped me deal with what I'd just spent on it I'll post a small piece of a track, mixed so you are hearing the "processed" sound, but that is more what I'm interested in... what will it sound like on the finished product. The MaxMod/87ai seems to have a built-in compression, eliminating some of the nasty peaks and sibilence.... as if on auto-pilot. I dig that. The client was happy with the results, which of course is the whole point. Here is a sample of my MaxMod 67 in a track. soundcloud.com/user-354295198/sing-mku67I will be very interested in comparing the MaxMod to the again re-issued U67. I have a feeling that Neumann, knowing the modern market, will tune the capsules/circuitry to be a bit brighter.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 11, 2018 9:49:18 GMT -6
As an update, I reached out to Max with some samples. He came back at first and said it sounded a little muffled. He asked for additional samples, including another mic for reference comparison. After listening, he said it sounded correct. I should mention that the initial samples had a Bowie sourced Telefunken EF86, vs the stock PF86. So last night I threw up a Warbler MKID alongside the MK67, as it's the closest mic I have to that K67 sound. I also recorded a bit with the stock PF86 and then again with the EF86. MK67 Stock PF86Warbler MKIDMK67 EF86
|
|
|
Post by rob61 on Jan 11, 2018 10:03:14 GMT -6
As an update, I reached out to Max with some samples. He came back at first and said it sounded a little muffled. He asked for additional samples, including another mic for reference comparison. After listening, he said it sounded correct. I should mention that the initial samples had a Bowie sourced Telefunken EF86, vs the stock PF86. So last night I threw up a Warbler MKID alongside the MK67, as it's the closest mic I have to that K67 sound. I also recorded a bit with the stock PF86 and then again with the EF86. MK67 Stock PF86Warbler MKIDMK67 EF86Of the three, I liked the factory PF86 sound the best on your voice (spoken). I swapped my PF86 out with an EF86 (I bought a couple to try) and preferred that. But with your EF86, I prefer the PF86.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 11, 2018 10:21:57 GMT -6
Do you think the EF86 sounds smeared/flat? Listening back and forth, I feel like the EF86 is more blurry/bloated in the low mid mud region, and distorts more easily.
|
|
|
Post by rob61 on Jan 11, 2018 13:06:10 GMT -6
A bit... I bought two different ef86 tubes, tested them both against the included PF86. One I liked more than the PF86, one I liked less. You could try another ef86, or simply use the PF86, I think that sounds good.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 11, 2018 13:37:34 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 11, 2018 14:11:14 GMT -6
Bowie (who is a really cool dude, btw). Doesn't sound like this EF86 is doing this mic any favors. What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 11, 2018 14:44:42 GMT -6
Bowie (who is a really cool dude, btw). Doesn't sound like this EF86 is doing this mic any favors. What do you think? Well I'm one of the ones who thought the MK67 sounded great and was far and away my preferred choice on that voice. I haven't had a chance to listen to the PF86 clip you posted. But I've got a Telefunken EF86 in mine (also from Bowie of course, I don't buy tubes from anyone else) and I love it. I liked the PF86 too though. Hell I even had a Mullard EF86 in mine for awhile and I liked that too. All different of course. Which style EF86 did you get from Bowie? One of them is brighter and leaner and one of them is smoother.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 11, 2018 14:56:01 GMT -6
Bowie (who is a really cool dude, btw). Doesn't sound like this EF86 is doing this mic any favors. What do you think? Well I'm one of the ones who thought the MK67 sounded great and was far and away my preferred choice on that voice. I haven't had a chance to listen to the PF86 clip you posted. But I've got a Telefunken EF86 in mine (also from Bowie of course, I don't buy tubes from anyone else) and I love it. I liked the PF86 too though. Hell I even had a Mullard EF86 in mine for awhile and I liked that too. All different of course. Which style EF86 did you get from Bowie? One of them is brighter and leaner and one of them is smoother. It was a vintage Telefunken EF86. He said they were popular for the MK67.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 11, 2018 14:57:26 GMT -6
Well I'm one of the ones who thought the MK67 sounded great and was far and away my preferred choice on that voice. I haven't had a chance to listen to the PF86 clip you posted. But I've got a Telefunken EF86 in mine (also from Bowie of course, I don't buy tubes from anyone else) and I love it. I liked the PF86 too though. Hell I even had a Mullard EF86 in mine for awhile and I liked that too. All different of course. Which style EF86 did you get from Bowie? One of them is brighter and leaner and one of them is smoother. It was a vintage Telefunken EF86. He said they were popular for the MK67. Right, me too. But there's a silver something or other and maybe a white something or other, both NOS Tele, and they sound a little different from one another. I'm just wondering if which version of the vintage Tele EF86 you have in yours.
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 11, 2018 15:05:02 GMT -6
It was a vintage Telefunken EF86. He said they were popular for the MK67. Right, me too. But there's a silver something or other and maybe a white something or other, both NOS Tele, and they sound a little different from one another. I'm just wondering if which version of the vintage Tele EF86 you have in yours. Hmmm...I have no idea. Just went back to my email and he never mentioned it.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2018 0:53:51 GMT -6
As an update, I reached out to Max with some samples. He came back at first and said it sounded a little muffled. He asked for additional samples, including another mic for reference comparison. After listening, he said it sounded correct. I should mention that the initial samples had a Bowie sourced Telefunken EF86, vs the stock PF86. So last night I threw up a Warbler MKID alongside the MK67, as it's the closest mic I have to that K67 sound. I also recorded a bit with the stock PF86 and then again with the EF86. MK67 Stock PF86Warbler MKIDMK67 EF86I do kinda like the PF86 better on your spoken word clip here. But I tend to like (at least in my case) the NOS Tele EF86 better in use here.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jan 12, 2018 9:12:58 GMT -6
My U 67 was dark but smooth. Worked great on female vox but not much else IMO. That's why I sold it and banked. I've never understood the craze over the 67 personally.
But yes, this mic sounds similar to mine. A bit more edgy (capsule?).
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jan 12, 2018 9:48:46 GMT -6
My U 67 was dark but smooth. Worked great on female vox but not much else IMO. That's why I sold it and banked. I've never understood the craze over the 67 personally. But yes, this mic sounds similar to mine. A bit more edgy (capsule?). What are you using now?
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on Jan 12, 2018 9:50:54 GMT -6
The stock tube sounded the best to me here. As an update, I reached out to Max with some samples. He came back at first and said it sounded a little muffled. He asked for additional samples, including another mic for reference comparison. After listening, he said it sounded correct. I should mention that the initial samples had a Bowie sourced Telefunken EF86, vs the stock PF86. So last night I threw up a Warbler MKID alongside the MK67, as it's the closest mic I have to that K67 sound. I also recorded a bit with the stock PF86 and then again with the EF86. MK67 Stock PF86Warbler MKIDMK67 EF86
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jan 12, 2018 9:59:59 GMT -6
My U 67 was dark but smooth. Worked great on female vox but not much else IMO. That's why I sold it and banked. I've never understood the craze over the 67 personally. But yes, this mic sounds similar to mine. A bit more edgy (capsule?). Should be the same capsules, albeit right off the factory line and not decades old.
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Jan 12, 2018 11:02:04 GMT -6
I bought a slew of used Tele EF86’s and and couple NOS Tele e806f’s which are supposed to be better. I tried them all in the MK67 and it’s amazing how many differences there were even in comparison to the PF86 which sounded quite good. All the tubes spec’ed well on my tube tester... but... they did not all sound excellent. The two best came out of an old used TEAC tape machine. They sounded gorgeous and special. They were night and day above the others and sounded substantially better than the NOS Ef806 which were costly and supposed to sound better. All that to say that with any good tube Mic, it is worth the investment to find the right tube. I’d be interested from bowie with his wealth of tube knowledge, how to best select tubes. I try them all one at a time by ear. It takes a lot of time and I end up with lots of tubes that are less than desirable.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jan 12, 2018 11:27:55 GMT -6
My U 67 was dark but smooth. Worked great on female vox but not much else IMO. That's why I sold it and banked. I've never understood the craze over the 67 personally. But yes, this mic sounds similar to mine. A bit more edgy (capsule?). What are you using now? MK U47, Blackspade UM 17r and Peluso 22251 are my main vocal mics. From darkest to brightest in that order. The Blackspade is probably my go to. It hits right in the sweet spot on most sources.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 12, 2018 12:56:01 GMT -6
I bought a slew of used Tele EF86’s and and couple NOS Tele e806f’s which are supposed to be better. I tried them all in the MK67 and it’s amazing how many differences there were even in comparison to the PF86 which sounded quite good. All the tubes spec’ed well on my tube tester... but... they did not all sound excellent. The two best came out of an old used TEAC tape machine. They sounded gorgeous and special. They were night and day above the others and sounded substantially better than the NOS Ef806 which were costly and supposed to sound better. All that to say that with any good tube Mic, it is worth the investment to find the right tube. I’d be interested from bowie with his wealth of tube knowledge, how to best select tubes. I try them all one at a time by ear. It takes a lot of time and I end up with lots of tubes that are less than desirable. I was amazed at how much different my Upton sounded with an EH 6072 and the Mullard 12AT7 I have in it now.
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jan 12, 2018 15:44:58 GMT -6
I bought a slew of used Tele EF86’s and and couple NOS Tele e806f’s which are supposed to be better. I tried them all in the MK67 and it’s amazing how many differences there were even in comparison to the PF86 which sounded quite good. All the tubes spec’ed well on my tube tester... but... they did not all sound excellent. The two best came out of an old used TEAC tape machine. They sounded gorgeous and special. They were night and day above the others and sounded substantially better than the NOS Ef806 which were costly and supposed to sound better. All that to say that with any good tube Mic, it is worth the investment to find the right tube. I’d be interested from bowie with his wealth of tube knowledge, how to best select tubes. I try them all one at a time by ear. It takes a lot of time and I end up with lots of tubes that are less than desirable. I was amazed at how much different my Upton sounded with an EH 6072 and the Mullard 12AT7 I have in it now. I'll bet it's a lot less sibilant with the Mullard. Those are great tubes. That's what I used in my 67.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 12, 2018 15:59:44 GMT -6
The water's are kind of murky when it comes to assessing vintage mics. I did a shootout in a top of the line studio with a U47, U67, M49, C12 and the Blackspade UM17R. The U47 would be my choice if I was recording different people, it was balanced and simply perfect, but the U67 had a character that suited my voice more. It sounded bigger than any mic I'd ever heard and lent a presence to my voice that was unmatched. The Max Mod Vincent brought over sounded really good, I'd use it all day if I had it, but that said, it sounded to me like a smoother U87, not twice life size and stunning like the original.
So far, only the Chandler REDD had that same quality with my vocals. Now, sounding like a mo' better U87 is a very good thing, but if you handed me the Chandler REDD and the MK67 and said pick one, I'd go with the Chandler. Would I choose it over the original, I don't know, I'd have to have them both side by side to see. You could buy 3 Chandlers for the price of a U67, or any 2, 3, 4. or 5 grreat mics. It's the looking for "The One" that makes these choices difficult.
Good luck indiehouse, I know this ain't easy.
* I should mention the Blackspade was almost identical to the U47, but had less gain. If you modded it to get 4 or 5 DB more gain, you'd be so close as to be negligible, no wonder cowboycoalminer uses it.
This was done with the UM17R..
https%3A//soundcloud.com/martin-john-butler/all-again-mix-9
|
|
|
Post by bowie on Jan 13, 2018 17:17:20 GMT -6
I’d be interested from bowie with his wealth of tube knowledge, how to best select tubes. I try them all one at a time by ear. It takes a lot of time and I end up with lots of tubes that are less than desirable. There's no easy way. That's why tube dealers who are actually trying to make money don't bother. The deeper you go into testing, the more problems you find and why would they sell only half their tubes when they can sell them all at a set price and just take returns from buyers who notice problems? I started out by doing exactly what you are, by listening to them one by one and picking out the good ones. This only became a business because many friends, and friends of friends, and their friends, also wanted good tubes, to the point that it became full time work 10 years ago and I had to take the screening process to another level (or three). The best advice I can give to audio engineers is not to invest too much into equipment or time because there's aspects that go far beyond anything basic gear can evaluate. Plus, without many samples to compare, you don't really have a good basis for evaluation. Further still, the market is getting more saturated with other people's rejects with every passing year. So, don't invest a lot up front and expect it to be smooth sailing. Knowledge is a huge part of it. Like most types of antiques, it's easy to get burnt. The people who know how to find the good stuff aren't selling it cheap. Most of the "tube collections" people try to sell me are just low quality tubes they picked up on ebay as "NOS" but, sadly, there's usually very little of value in them. If you do it yourself, get them cheap (if you still can) and have reasonable expectations. When I started, I had several hundred dollars in testers and thought I was ready to go. It didn't take long for me to realize how inaccurate most vintage testers are and how ineffective they are at detecting certain issues. Tubes can behave quite differently in different circuits (for those that don't know, there are many different ways to run a tube and it's not always the same from one piece of gear to another), and there are quirks inherent to all tubes that you won't understand without years of experience. For instance, a Sylvania 12AX7 will often still test "better than new" when it's aged, noisy, and dying. But, a never-used RCA 12AX7 might test "bad" even though it's essentially new with a full life ahead. A tube might scream with microphonics in one type of gear but not another. Etc, etc. There's reasons for all these things but I'd have to write a book to explain it all. And, I'd have to revise it every year with the new things I learn.
|
|