Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[maarvold]

Len wrote on Fri, 28 September 2007 06:13

maarvold wrote on Mon, 17 September 2007 05:16 ...my TM-2 had the "reediness" I believe Klaus referred to; the TM-1 doesn't have that quality.  I would refer to the "reediness" as a big, baritone quality.  I'm guessing that Klaus's characterization as "reediness' refers to the fullness and richness that a bass clarinet can produce in the middle and low registers.   4. The "reediness" is apparent on the mic that doesn't have a KK47/EF-14: the TM-2.  The TM-2's head basket is also much closer to a U67 head basket than a U47. I appreciate both the TM-1 and TM-2/LE are probably great mics, but are you saying that you prefer the TM-2 because it has that "reedy" quality? I have a low tenor/high bariton type of voice and wonder if this might be the mic for me.  Pity I live in England and would not be able to actually test the mic! Len

I would say that, as an engineer, if you asked me to get an enhanced sense of fullness and power on a male voice (without muddiness) I would probably put up my TM-2 first.  Maybe you could work something out where you buy the mic with a 3 day return policy if it doesn't work out.  It also sounds great on female voices, although no mic [unfortunately] is perfect on every voice.  

[TMmics]

Steve (et al) one of the cool things about the CHURCH type mic is that one can change the tube easily.  Try different versions/makes of 12AY7 and 6072 and switch them out with 12AU7, 12AT7 and 12AX7 for output and tonal variations. A different tube might fit ones voice better than another.   Dave

[Len]

maarvold wrote on Tue, 25 September 2007 01:38

Dave Pearlman just emailed me the following:    The TM-2 was made to be a more affordable version of the TM-1 and used a smaller (Peluso 32mm) capsule, a 6AK5 pentode and a similar circuit. It is shaped more like a U67.    The TM-LE is a similar mic to the TM-2 (in shape and circuit with a few diffs) with a Neumann K67 capsule. Mike Aarovld has a prototype of this mic.  This mic is being sold right now through www.petesplaceaudio.com (Please note: the above message was emailed to me by Dave Pearlman).

Interesting that the TM-LE is more expensive than the TM-1 itself.

[Ryan Slowey]

does the regular TM-2 also have the low-pass filter feature?

i dig that idea.

-ryan

[maarvold]

slow ryan wrote on Mon, 01 October 2007 14:09

does the regular TM-2 also have the low-pass filter feature?

Yes, although I had him make mine more gentle than stock and I still don't see myself using it.  If I wanted something with less/slower top I'd switch to a ribbon/dynamic.  

[J.J. Blair]

Len wrote on Mon, 01 October 2007 13:06

Interesting that the TM-LE is more expensive than the TM-1 itself.

As I understand it, the TM-LE uses a reconditioned Neumann K67, whereas the TM1 uses a Peluso K67 capsule, which is likely less expensive.  That might be the difference.

[Ryan Slowey]

maarvold wrote on Mon, 01 October 2007 18:23

slow ryan wrote on Mon, 01 October 2007 14:09 does the regular TM-2 also have the low-pass filter feature? Yes, although I had him make mine more gentle than stock and I still don't see myself using it.  If I wanted something with less/slower top I'd switch to a ribbon/dynamic.

What is the dB/octave slope on the stock filter? Where does it kick in?

-ryan

[TMmics]

All of the mics are fitted with the low pass switch which kicks in around 3-4k.  (very gently).   The TM-LE does come stock with the K67 which makes it more expensive than the stock TM-1 (which can be upgraded).  Call anytime!

[J.J. Blair]

I have been playing with the Church 47.  It uses a reconditioned Neumann K47.  The timbre is identical to my U47, but the frequency response is quite different.  It sounds about 2dB less from 200Hz down, but about almost 2dB more from around 8kHz up.  Very interesting.  A little airier and crisper than a real 47, with a little less "whoomph".  More along the frequency response of a C12, but with a different timbre.  For $2,700, it's absolutely one of the best mics out there in that range.  I'm really impressed.

[Steve Hudson]

JJ, that's my exact experience with the Church prototype Dave sent me. We had to add some low end and tame the highs to make it sit where we wanted on my voice and on other sources we tried it on. In contrast, the Wunder CM7 I selected from among ten that Mike Castoro allowed me to audition needed no eq at all to bring smiles to our faces. Granted, the Wunder is more than twice the cost of the Pearlman Church mic; the lesson here is that Dave has done a pretty remarkable job to make a mic that sounds as nice as the Church for the money.

[J.J. Blair]

Well, the CM7 is going for that Neumann vibe.  On acoustic, I actually prefer the Church to the Neumann.  When I get a chance to put a chick singer on the mic, something tells me I'll prefer it as well.  U47s generally aren't my favorite for females.  

[compasspnt]

J.J. Blair wrote on Thu, 04 October 2007 13:33

U47s generally aren't my favorite for females.

Ah, but the 49's...

[Steve Hudson]

The two of us who put the Church mic through its paces both thought the Church was too sibilant on female vocals as well as on my own high tenor voice. But as Dave has pointed out, there is some variation in tone due to tubes, diaphragm tensioning, etc. so maybe you got a smoother-sounding version than we did.

[J.J. Blair]

Steve, I have found even C12s or my Manley Gold to be too sibilant at times, but then I just tilt the mic off axis about 30˚, and it solves that.  Did you try that?

[Steve Hudson]

Nope, but I will. Thanks for the tip.