|
|
Post by hazmatstrat on Feb 8, 2014 14:31:16 GMT -6
Attachment Deleted  Attachment DeletedHere are some pics of the modded mic. All of the components are high quality parts. The boards are cleaned and sealed for optimum performance. As you can see all of the components have been replaced. The circuit is from the Vintage U87i with no DC to DC converter. I have different capacitor values for filtering each capsule that I have used in this circuit so that each mic has a consistent top end. Resistors: Dale, Vishay, Ohmite, Draloric and Takman. 1%-2% Capacitors: Silver mica, Polystyrene, Seimens stacked film, Phillips MKT, Panasonic and Mil spec Solid Tantalum. Transformers: Jensen, AMI  Jim Jacobsen
JJ Audio
|
|
|
|
Post by deehope on Feb 11, 2014 6:02:52 GMT -6
There's a crazy deal on Facebook for pensado students where it's $475 in a group buy for the JJ greyhound (U87i)
|
|
|
|
Post by hazmatstrat on Feb 12, 2014 6:07:42 GMT -6
I made a test yesterday with a JJ Audio Greyhound and a Neumann U87i. The Greyhound is made from the V67g (or similar) microphone. This mic has the stock capsule , the JJ Audio mod to the circuit and a Jensen transformer. The U87i is one that I serviced about three years ago and is in great condition. This is the neuman with P48 voltage to the capsule and a battery pack for Phantom power. The guitar is a 1972 Martin D28 and the mics are 12" @ the 12th fret.
Please let me know your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchtower on Feb 12, 2014 9:20:37 GMT -6
They sound very similar on that guitar, Jim. Sounds really good. Guitar2 has a tiny bit more sparkle, almost like the sound you'd expect if the strings on the guitar were new compared to Guitar1. I'd wager that Guitar2 is the Greyhound only based on the old adage that MXL would be brighter stock than a Neumann.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2014 9:42:28 GMT -6
Yeah - that sounds really close!
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 12, 2014 9:48:53 GMT -6
They sound very similar on that guitar, Jim. Sounds really good. Guitar2 has a tiny bit more sparkle, almost like the sound you'd expect if the strings on the guitar were new compared to Guitar1. Nailed it. 100%. Guitar 2 sounds like new strings. Bit more sparkle. I'm just on my cheap desktop computer speakers right now, but I think they sound very different in the highs. |
|
|
|
Post by deehope on Feb 12, 2014 12:01:23 GMT -6
There was a thread on GS years ago where with a neumann capsule the files were almost canceling out. The best part of aJJ mic is Jims custom tuning, so If you wanted that sparkle he can do that.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 12, 2014 12:34:58 GMT -6
I prefer #2, slightly. Pretty close though, both are definitely usable.
Had to bust out the LZ boots after hearing the clip. Listening to him ramble around the fretboard, it is amazing that Page was so often just barely in control of his playing on stage. Even sitting down . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 12, 2014 13:27:21 GMT -6
I think saying that they're close is off base. I'm sure that everyone here could name each one 10 times in a blind test. I'm not bashing the performance of the mic, but saying they sound the same or even similar is wrong. They really sound like 2 different guitars played the part.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Feb 12, 2014 14:00:54 GMT -6
Guitar 1 sounds a little more even and balanced, I'm going to guess Neumann. Guitar2 has a little hype I'm going to guess it's the Greyhound.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 12, 2014 14:12:52 GMT -6
I'm gonna be honest (jerk), neither sounds good to me, and why o why post a mp3 on a naked acoustic track?? mp3s sound bad. Post a wave file, or better yet, an 88.2 or 96/24 bit and really show us a diff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Feb 12, 2014 14:19:52 GMT -6
I thought the guitar itself sounded a little wonky, it's true. 128 MP3 will be mucking up the high end some, 320 would be more appropriate for critical listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 12, 2014 15:29:20 GMT -6
I keep telling you guys that chinese capsules CAN be really good depending on getting one with a good tension.. Once they figure out to do tensioning right, all bets are off!
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Feb 12, 2014 15:31:09 GMT -6
I'm gonna be honest (jerk), neither sounds good to me, and why o why post a mp3 on a naked acoustic track?? mp3s sound bad. Post a wave file, or better yet, an 88.2 or 96/24 bit and really show us a diff. agreed, but I think it's something to do with the ambiance, not the file. It sounds like it was recorded somewhere there is a lot of close and early reflection.. Sounds totally boxy. |
|
|
|
Post by winetree on Feb 12, 2014 16:21:07 GMT -6
Having never used or heard either mic in person. The posted samples sound different from each other.
#1 rolled off low end, more upper mids on up. Brighter sounding mic
#2 more low end, slightly scouped upper mids, even highs. Fuller sounding mic
Guess #1 modded mike
#2 Neumann
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2014 16:48:10 GMT -6
I'm gonna be honest (jerk), neither sounds good to me, and why o why post a mp3 on a naked acoustic track?? mp3s sound bad. Post a wave file, or better yet, an 88.2 or 96/24 bit and really show us a diff. Well, samples are hard...you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. Can't please everyone all of the time. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 12, 2014 17:18:33 GMT -6
I finally had an abscessed molar pulled after 2 snow storm cancellations, so im a big cry baby more than usual..8/
I Hear a big diff between 44.1 16bit and 96k 24 bit on acoustic guitar on my own rig, mp3s are not a good medium for anyone anymore IMO, especially with all the storage capacity available today, its certainly not an option in my world, really never was.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 12, 2014 17:46:34 GMT -6
I finally had an abscessed molar pulled after 2 snow storm cancellations, so im a big cry baby more than usual..8/ I Hear a big diff between 44.1 16bit and 96k 24 bit on acoustic guitar on my own rig, mp3s are not a good medium for anyone anymore IMO, especially with all the storage capacity available today, its certainly not an option in my world, really never was. This one isn't even worth worrying about. The difference between the samples is noticeable as is. Sure, with something that has very subtle differences, wav is better, but this doesn't sound that subtle. |
|
|
|
Post by hazmatstrat on Feb 12, 2014 18:31:16 GMT -6
Thanks for all of the great feedback!! The recording was a down and dirty set up in my mic shop. Early reflections, computer noise and the room is not treated. I had the U87 for about an hour and needed to get it back to its owner. MP3: I tried to post the WAV file and it was too big. Thanks again!! |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Feb 12, 2014 19:36:08 GMT -6
Hey Jim - yeah...I have a 3MB limit on uploads...and thinking about downgrading that. It's easy enough to post on Soundcloud for free and then link it here. You can highlight the Soundcloud URL, press the "soundcloud" button on the edit page and it embeds the soundcloud player within the post...Just FYI for everyone...
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 12, 2014 19:55:41 GMT -6
Thanks for all of the great feedback!! The recording was a down and dirty set up in my mic shop. Early reflections, computer noise and the room is not treated. I had the U87 for about an hour and needed to get it back to its owner. MP3: I tried to post the WAV file and it was too big. Thanks again!! To be clear, I'm a fan of Jim Jacobsen, he does great stuff, I'm not a fan of mp3s, they have a way of making good mics sound bad, and bad mics sound bad. |
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Feb 12, 2014 20:23:39 GMT -6
I can't identify a 320 MP3 from a 44.1khz 16 bit WAV file in a blind A/B test, and apparently hardly anyone if anyone can, so, I think 320 MP3 is a safe general bet.
I'm actually confused as to why anyone is using 128 kbps MP3 in 2014, especially a high end mic builder. 320 is marginally (hardly at all) more computer intensive, and a lot better sounding.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 12, 2014 20:33:21 GMT -6
I keep telling you guys that chinese capsules CAN be really good depending on getting one with a good tension.. Once they figure out to do tensioning right, all bets are off! No way! The day a Chinese capsule touches a handmade/tuned Tim Campbell C12 capsule, or a Sinsay Shannon mic rehab capsule, is the day a monkey flies out my butt 8) Edit; not u monkee lol |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Feb 12, 2014 20:44:21 GMT -6
I can't identify a 320 MP3 from a 44.1khz 16 bit WAV file in a blind A/B test, and apparently hardly anyone if anyone can, so, I think 320 MP3 is a safe general bet. I'm actually confused as to why anyone is using 128 kbps MP3 in 2014, especially a high end mic builder. 320 is marginally (hardly at all) more computer intensive, and a lot better sounding. I've heard this claim, primarily from jazz, but I disagree with his criteria. I can hear a diff on my rig, and to me, the only rig that matters is MY RIG. I can hear the diff between 44.1/16 and 96/24 no problem on my rig, I'd say if you can't, monitoring or some other shortcoming must be considered? Contrary to some, higher resolutions and bit depths are there for a reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Feb 12, 2014 21:07:21 GMT -6
I can't identify a 320 MP3 from a 44.1khz 16 bit WAV file in a blind A/B test, and apparently hardly anyone if anyone can, so, I think 320 MP3 is a safe general bet. I'm actually confused as to why anyone is using 128 kbps MP3 in 2014, especially a high end mic builder. 320 is marginally (hardly at all) more computer intensive, and a lot better sounding. I've heard this claim, primarily from jazz, but I disagree with his criteria. I can hear a diff on my rig, and to me, the only rig that matters is MY RIG. I can hear the diff between 44.1/16 and 96/24 no problem on my rig, I'd say if you can't, monitoring or some other shortcoming must be considered? Contrary to some, higher resolutions and bit depths are there for a reason. I have heard differences too, but in the rare occasion I attempt a blind ABX test, I can't reliably back up what I'm hearing, so I'm a little bit doubtful. Honestly downloading the ABX program and trying to prove yourself right can be slightly eye-opening. However it really may be, you must admit, the line between 320 MP3, 16 bit WAV, and 24 bit WAV is starting to get kind of thin, and at the very least, it's not "night and day." They all sound "pretty good," all things considered, all else being equal. I'm not militant about this at all, by the way. I'm not going around trying to cram this down anyone's esophagus. |
|
