|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 2, 2018 18:24:45 GMT -6
You can't go wrong with that! You can do anything with a U67. It's a no compromise mic, just great on most everything. The few files I've heard of the reissue sounded great. If that's your choice but you fall short of cash or can't wait any longer, I'd suggest the Chandler REDD. It's very similar, and most definitely a world class flagship kind of mic. The REDD very similar to the U67? No, not here. Very different. Not in the sense of it having a huge sound. The U67 has the biggest sound of any mic I've ever heard, and the REDD is just about the same in that way. It's similar in that it has great detail and transparency, and versatility. Tonally, it's closer to a 47 mated with a 251, but it's the only non- Neumann I've used yet that didn't feel "lesser than" if you know what I mean. So, in the context of a thread about flagship mics, if the 67 reissue is too pricey, the Chandler needs no apologies and is considerable less expensive. How would you describe it?
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Nov 2, 2018 18:36:43 GMT -6
The REDD very similar to the U67? No, not here. Very different. Not in the sense of it having a huge sound. The U67 has the biggest sound of any mic I've ever heard, and the REDD is just about the same in that way. It's similar in that it has great detail and transparency, and versatility. Tonally, it's closer to a 47 mated with a 251, but it's the only non- Neumann I've used yet that didn't feel "lesser than" if you know what I mean. So, in the context of a thread about flagship mics, if the 67 reissue is too pricey, the Chandler needs no apologies and is considerable less expensive. How would you describe it? Different in the top end compared to a 67. Different in the mids. Different in the bottom. They are similar in that both are nice mics. But they do not sound similar. Not to me, at least.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 2, 2018 22:02:46 GMT -6
For me, the vintage 67 is the best fit, and the Chandler was the only one that made me sing as well as the 67 did. Sure, they have to be different, but the effect was kind of the same in that it sounded huge, handled dynamics perfectly, wasn't excessively sibilant, and low level detail was so good, I could sing softer when needed and not lose intelligibility. I've only used one 67, and a few "in the style of" mics, so my comparison isn't the last word.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Nov 3, 2018 19:38:33 GMT -6
Ward, with all the chat here, regarding new & old classics... How highly do you still rate the TLM 102, on vocals? Thanks, Chris Honestly, Chris. It's still a really good little microphone in my opinion. I find it really good on backing femvox. I wouldn't use it on a lead vocal. I find it shines on hi hats, ride, and hand percussion
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 4, 2018 10:50:18 GMT -6
Thanks! Chris
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Nov 4, 2018 18:15:41 GMT -6
Have any of you tried Lewitt mics? Just curious if you have and what was your experience? These mics are starting to create a buzz
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Nov 4, 2018 20:08:25 GMT -6
Have any of you tried Lewitt mics? Just curious if you have and what was your experience? These mics are starting to create a buzz When Shannon and I (and Tony and Winetree) were at NAMM a few years back, Shannon was really excited about this company and spoke highly of their microphones. That was enough of a ringing endorsement for me . . . and yet, I haven't bought any to date
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Nov 4, 2018 21:35:27 GMT -6
Have any of you tried Lewitt mics? Just curious if you have and what was your experience? These mics are starting to create a buzz When Shannon and I (and Tony and Winetree) were at NAMM a few years back, Shannon was really excited about this company and spoke highly of their microphones. That was enough of a ringing endorsement for me . . . and yet, I haven't bought any to date I heard a couple of them and was very impressed by the prices and how they sounded at the level of prices. Clearly a better mic for the money. I have all my bases covered currently and I'm not wanting for a microphone...That's what I keep telling myself. Repeat after me - In a positive, stern, happy voice... "mic locker covered" with a smile - reinforcement!
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 5, 2018 6:59:02 GMT -6
Everything I’ve heard online of the Lewitt mics puts the in the league of the moderately priced Audio Technica and R0DE mics. They sound fine and balanced, but on the sterile side. I haven’t used them, so that’s just my impression from videos and clips. I’d love to hear more clips of them next to other mics whose sound I’m more familiar with.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 5, 2018 7:15:46 GMT -6
Depends which Lewitt you're referring to. They have an extensive line which gets confusing. Their 440 is a bit like you described, but so well balanced, it's a steal at the price. Their 640 is another story though. I've often had access to AKG 414's, but used them sparingly. They're nice on acoustics, and occasionally great on vocals, but often a little bit thin. The Lewitt 640 fixes that. It's like a 414, but with a full and balanced low end. It's one of the best mid-priced mics I've heard yet.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 5, 2018 9:07:10 GMT -6
Depends which Lewitt you're referring to. They have an extensive line which gets confusing. Their 440 is a bit like you described, but so well balanced, it's a steal at the price. Their 640 is another story though. I've often had access to AKG 414's, but used them sparingly. They're nice on acoustics, and occasionally great on vocals, but often a little bit thin. The Lewitt 640 fixes that. It's like a 414, but with a full and balanced low end. It's one of the best mid-priced mics I've heard yet. Now that sounds intriguing.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 5, 2018 9:59:57 GMT -6
Yes, check out the 440, when Warren Huart uses it on a singer vs. his vintage U47. (On his YouTube channel) Chris
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 5, 2018 12:59:26 GMT -6
Yes, check out the 440, when Warren Huart uses it on a singer vs. his vintage U47. (On his YouTube channel) Chris You know, I saw that video and I thought the U47 was just so wrong for his voice. That doesn't tell me the Lewitt is a great mic, just that it was a better fit. A U87 or 251 or even a 414 would have been a better fit. I think the Lewitt sounded fine, but still bland in that video. I saw a video R0DE had posted once of a female singer with a U47 and a R0DE NT2000 or NT2A. I said the same thing in the comments of that video, that is sounded like the brighter mic with less mid push was better and that a U87 may have been a better and closer comparison.
The same could be said about my voice and certain mics. Martin John Butler and I tried the same U67 and M49 at the same studio. Martin found the U67 to sound huge on his voice and the M49 a little muddy and bright. On my voice those same two mics had quite a different effect. The U67 sounds fine, but maybe a touch dark and neutral, while the M49 on my voice sounded huge and present.
But as I've said, I haven't had any direct experience and can't comment much.
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 5, 2018 13:50:41 GMT -6
Thanks so much Vincent, I'll relisten to that video, to train my ears better.
The 440 is a very nice mic,for my voice, as is the Lauten LA-220.
I may add a U47 FET style mic eventually, as that's terrific for my voice (like my U195). Chris
P.S. After relistening, I'd be tempted to use something like a 44 or 77 ribbon on David Ottestad's voice. IMHO the U47 sounded "good" (not great), and the 440 "very good". Oddly enough, I have a very thick sounding Oktava 319-that'd be comparable to the 440 on (David's voice) IMHO. Not quite as "pure" sounding as the 440, but would add weight/vintage tone to that voice.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent R. on Nov 5, 2018 16:11:28 GMT -6
Thanks so much Vincent, I'll relisten to that video, to train my ears better. Don’t feel like you have to thank me. In fact you are perfectly welcome to disagree with me and tell me why you love it. There is no magic mic. Just mics that work or don’t within the contexts they are being used. I have friends who charted on billboard where the lead vocal and acoustic guitar were recorded with a Blue Baby Bottle.
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Nov 5, 2018 16:40:15 GMT -6
Yes, check out the 440, when Warren Huart uses it on a singer vs. his vintage U47. (On his YouTube channel) Chris Warren Huart was using that 440 pure with a generic Audient ID-44 preamp in the interface. I would like to hear that mic through a nicer preamp. If it sounds that nice on a you tube video, I can guarantee it’s fine in any decent recording environment using better preamps and converters. And no other company is going to beat that price for that kind of quality for a mic.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 5, 2018 19:58:47 GMT -6
The 440 is as I said a good mic, no weirdness like so many Chinese capsule pretty boys with cheap parts. But, it's the 640 and their top of the line that are serious mics, do not overlook it.
|
|
phil
Full Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by phil on Sept 24, 2021 6:51:59 GMT -6
I've decided that while I love that there are a lot of affordable mics/clones that can get you 90% of the way towards a classic sound, I really need a flagship/standard/workhorse/no brainer vocal mic. The studio is geared towards classic rock / folk rock / americana. I already have the mandatory hipster SM7B (which I happen to really like, by the way). I'm looking for the kind of "first call" mic that will be right or even awesome for most singers. Then once we have that baseline, we can experiment with more exotic or cheaper mics. I'm thinking of these options: -Neumann U87 Ai. It is what it is, it's out there in every studio, it's expected. Probably the right choice. -Neumann U87 P48, serviced. It's 600 GBP more than the current U87. Not sure if it's worth the extra expense or not. -Chandler REDD. It doesn't have the same brand recognition as the Neumann but I'm sure it sounds impressive anyway. Expensive! -Neumann U67 reissue. I will need to wait a few months on it. However, if it saves me from buying two 3,000 € mics, or six € 1,000 mics, it will be money well spent. -AEA R44. I will need to wait a few months on it as well. A ribbon is probably not the right choice for my intended use, but I'm interested in hearing your thoughts. I'm using these condensers: Advanced Audio CM47, JZ Vintage 67, Michael Joly LDC "67 inspired" capsule for Oktava body. Ribbons that I've used for vocals include Stager SR-2N, Royer R101 and Xaudia Reslo Beeb. And of course, the usual dynamics. I also have the Stam 67 on order, but I think it will be more of the same. Hi stormymondays!! At the moment I am facing the same choice as you once did. I was wondering which microphone did you end up buying? I once had a vintage u87 but returned it to the owner (there were some problems with the microphone). Now I am thinking to either save up to buy a u67 reissue, or buy a vintage u87. There is a seller next to me who sells a vintage u87 for the price of a new u87ai. The microphone looks very good for its age, but the capsule is not in the best condition and I will have to buy a new capsule from Neumann if I buy this microphone. I don’t know what to do...
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Sept 24, 2021 8:34:16 GMT -6
IMHO just get a Serrano 87. Chris
|
|
phil
Full Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by phil on Sept 24, 2021 9:24:55 GMT -6
IMHO just get a Serrano 87. Chris Thanks for the suggestion, but I would like to have at least one "flagship" microphone and then experiment with different clones if necessary. I've never worked with the u67 Reissue unfortunately, from the samples I've heard, the u67 sounds very smooth but a bit dark for my taste. I've read that many people say that this can be easily fixed by a simple high shelf. What I love about the vintage u87 is that it is a very versatile microphone, and it has better headroom than u87ai. And it seemed to me that it has a better low end and proximity effect than the u67 Reissue, but I could be wrong. If I am wrong, perhaps the u67 Reissue samples that I listened to were with the s2 jumper enabled? When I listened to various shootouts, I got the feeling that with the u67 Reissue the voice sounds a little distant, while when listening to a recorded samples with a vintage u87 it felt like the microphone was in the throat of the singer lol.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Sept 24, 2021 9:40:16 GMT -6
Phil, FET will always feel a bit more forward than a tube mic. The U67 has the biggest sound of any mic I've ever heard, yet it doesn't stray into an almost omni mode like a few mics I tried.
Perhaps your preference is not to have quite so much room sound. Comparing a vintage U87 to a U67 is a champagne problem though, they're both great.
I'd say the U87 might be considered more versatile, if that's important. Me, I don't care about that, I want the best vocal mic for my voice. I can deal with other mics for acoustic guitars and miking amps.
My Stam 67 gives you that Abbey Road sound on acoustic guitars, but I have the Soyuz 0-19 when I want a different flavor.
|
|