Print

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

[Eric H.]

J.J. Blair wrote on Sat, 13 October 2007 03:00

I only know one big engineer who uses the M149, and he only uses it on piano, and nothing else.

what about this:

When Bruce Swedien was asked on the Gearslutz forum what new microphone would he buy today (he previously had spoken of his love for his 2 U47 and his old ribbon mics), he wrote:"Hand me my Neumann catalog please!"

I know he uses often the M149 for stereo recording and vocals.
Could he be wrong?

[John Stafford]

  Karen Carpenter + U87 =

[kats]

Barry Hufker wrote on Sun, 14 October 2007 20:03

I understand David's starting (started) a new company.  I wonder why he isn't producing this model?  First things first or does he not own the design? Barry

Lack of popularity I think, as the internet killed the ifet7

A small handfull of those mics were shipped with a faulty switch (IIRC) and eventhough they were all fixed, it wasn't enough to stop the questioning of QC IRT that particular model all over the forums(which is silly IMO, why would a company have QC bias on a particular model to model basis?)

Anyhow, a bit of a shame. While I'm not a big SD fan (horses for courses and all that) the ifet7 is a great utility mic. It can handle hi SPL elegantly, never sounds bad, and can be used on any source. I think it's the perfect mic for a project studio that could also find it's way in many uses in a more pro enviroment.

Personally I have a good collection of mics, but the ifet7 is always used on bass amps, gtr amps (if I'm using an LDC), and kick drum. If I had a "screamo" vocalist where I would opt for an SM7 type mic, the ifet7 can handle that role very well. It's just one of those mics, that while it might not be the "magic" sound, always works in a crunch.

[compasspnt]

The 87 is not my favourite microphone of all time, but it could be the only mic that I had on a desert island (wait, I live on an island...never mind that now), and I could get along just fine.

I did all vocals for Mavis and the other Staples on such things as "I'll Take You There" and "Respect Yourself" with an 87.

Vocals on "If Loving' You Is Wrong (I Don't Wanna Be Right)" were on an 87.

Billy Gibbons sang on one many times.

I recorded Billy Eckstine on an 87, and he sounded pretty darned good.

Do I use it for lead vocals as a matter of course today?  No.

If I were to buy new microphones today (stop me, please), would I purchase an 87?  No.

But thank goodness Neumann still make at least a semblance of that microphone, something with a  transformer, even if a holdover from the past that they can't quite kill yet, at least.

[Andy Simpson]

I was at a respected radio studio here in Poland recently and the mic box had a few U87s in it. The chief engineer said he liked them because they were 'compressed sounding' and 'smoothed off the peaks'. He also said that they are more reliable than the old '67s.

Andy

[rphilbeck]

compasspnt wrote on Mon, 15 October 2007 12:29

Do I use it for lead vocals as a matter of course today?  No. If I were to buy new microphones today (stop me, please), would I purchase an 87?  No.

Terry,
Thank you for the constructive feedback.  What do you prefer and why?

[J.J. Blair]

RPhilbeck wrote on Sun, 14 October 2007 21:17

J.J. Blair wrote on Sun, 14 October 2007 12:57 Klaus answered this.  In the last 20 years, they have not designed a mic with a transformer.  This was specifically my point. Thank you for clarifying your earlier statement

Quote:

Quote: Who can blame them?  Well, try listening to their new mics against their old ones.  And they DON'T have the upper end covered.  If they did, people would be buying TLM49s and not spending upwards of $6,000 on vintage U47s. Can you confirm the sales figures for the TLM49? My common sense tells me that people buy U47's for reasons other than finding the current Neumann production line unsatisfying.

Robert, I can only tell what I know from people who own or run professional studios.  Since the release of the TLM49, I've been in a bunch of LA's top studios, and nobody has bought the TLM49.   I do happen to know from talking to Neumann reps that the TLM49 are selling like gangbusters at Guitar Center.  In fact, it took forever to get one to review, because they were on back order.  Furthermore, anybody I know who is familiar with the "good" Neumann mics has not cared for the TLM49.

 

Quote:

Quote: And the "for the money" argument doesn't work.  If I'm making a record, and I'm renting a studio for $1,200 and up, $1,200 a day does NOT qualify as a studio on a "TIGHT BUDGET" as I indicated would be a fit for something like the TLM-103.

And as I indicated, there are mics half the price of the TLM103 or TLM193 that sound five times better.  But the 103 is just that, a budget mic, that you won't see in a serious session.  AFAIC, it's overpriced for what you get.  

[J.J. Blair]

Please point out where I said the U87 sucks?  I didn't.  I said it's a very usable mic, in a lot of applications.  It can do it all.  I think the U67 can do it all, better, though.  

I also think that as far as FET designs go, there are better sounding mics.  And most importantly, GIVEN THE HISTORY OF NEUMANN AND THE MICS THAT THEY HAVE BUILT OVER THE LAST 70 YEARS, THEY SHOULD BE OFFERING SOMETHING BETTER THAN THE U87 AND THE M149.  For god's sake.  It's Neumann!  

Yes, a lot of great records have been made using U87s.  They were a god send to people sick of fixing tube mics.  And because the engineers were great, they managed to get listenable sounds out of these mics.  Karen Carpenter might have sounded good on a U87, but imagine how she would have sounded on a good 251!.

The point about Swedien actually makes my case.  The question was if he couldn't have his first choice mics, which are OLDER NEUMANNS, not new ones.  Take a M149, and put it up against a properly working U47 or M49 on vocals, piano, drums, upright bass, saxophone, guitar amps, and anything else you can think of.  Then tell me that U47 or M49 doesn't win on almost every single category.  They are simply a better mic.  

If Bruce is using M149s for stereo recordings, I would hazard a guess that it's easier to get a matched pair of M149s than vintage mics.  But ask him if he prefers the M149 over a U47 or M49.  I've used the mic.  It's usable.  Hell, I can even use a C12VR to great effect.  That doesn't make that a great mic.  And the M149 isn't either.  It's a good mic.  It's better than a lot of new mics, even.  But after all this time, Neumann could have done better.  And part of what my beef is, that you would see if you would stop defending the U87 as the best mic ever <hyperbole>, is that the designers have their hands tied by the accountants.  Essentially, they are giving us mics that look like this:



Neumann is capable of making better mics.  Most of the experienced, working engineers whom I know would like them to make better mics.  The U87 and M149 should not be the two best mics that a company like this offers.  They should be the middle tier mics.  

I conclude that they are not listening to, or soliciting feedback from people who make records when designing new mics.  (I take it they no longer consult German broadcasting, either?)  I also conclude they are only consulting their marketing and accounting departments.  

[schneidm]

Hello again,

Transformer mics: you might also mention KMR81 & 82, shotguns.

Exotic upper class: ever tried KU100 dummy head, or M150Tube and TLM50 omnidirectional, KM120 single-diaphragm figure-8, KM131 flat omni, KM143 subcardioid, GFM132 boundary layer, RSM191 stereo shotgun? If we only did mics like those, we'd never survive. But we do keep making them, for some specialists amongst the sound engineers.

TLM49 as "vocal mic": we do know that this mic has more applications than just vocal. Basically, you can use most of our mics for everything, you just gotta put them in the right place. My prefered question is: "what's your BEST grand piano microphone"? Gimme 10 hours, and I'll go into the details of our 25 mics for that application...
On the other hand, you got to give a name to the baby. And the main intended application WAS vocals. BTW, the U47fet was never designed as a kick drum or double bass mic, it was the sound engineers who found out that it's a fine mic for that application. When people will tell us that the TLM49 excels as a dobro mic we might even put that in the documentation.

Freq.Response: (see the attached file, showing some responses, at 1m distance from a coaxial speaker system, in OUR measurement chamber, etc etc etc) I double checked (yes, I did!), comparing the last 10 U47fet we had in service with the curves of the first batch of TLM49, and.... U47fet response was 0...1 dB lower, from 100Hz on down. What does that tell us?
A. Your specific U47fet(s) might be bass-heavy.
B. Kick drum, in your specific positioning, might saturate the U47fet electronics/transformer (depends also on the setting of attenuation switches, pre-amp load, 50ohm or 200 ohm output setting etc. etc.) Have an oscilloscope, an analyzer and the exact levels while you're recording, and one can tell on which part of the amplifier's curve you're working.
The old manuals of U47fet (all available on our website...) show the gradual roll-off. But do keep in mind that the shown curve was the "intended median curve" at the time of printing. What was shown in the 70s as a small step in the mid lows is now more correctly shown as a gradual slope. BTW, to my knowledge the U47fet wasn't very popular at the time it was manufactured....

Evaluation: Yes, we even test digital electronics in U47 housings, and compare that to old U47s, and old U47s in modern housings, and so on. So the engineer and artist do NOT know what they're working with. BTW, the old U47 does not always fare best.

Self-testing: Actually, I do like the sound of TLM49. I also do have a U47fet at home.

TLM193 and sound preferences: there are actually people who like that microphone, believe it or not. They might be working in voice over studios, or use it for strings, or high pitched female voices, or brass. It might not be your prefered mic. But that's why we do make quite a lot of different (!) microphones, and not just one model. And every once in a while you might find one of the new ones to your liking. Perhaps even one of the "cheap" ones. Shall we leave it at that?

I'm off for 3 weeks now, in a no-mail & no-microphone area (!), so I won't be able to answer further questions during that time.

Best regards,
Martin Schneider / Neumann Mic. Development

[J.J. Blair]

Martin, thank you for posting the graph and for taking the time to participate.  That graph most certainly does not represent what I remember hearing from a Fet47.  I will admit to being wrong in that respect.  Perhaps it is, as you suggest, a saturation issue.  

However, this is a good time to point out that most people use the Fet47 in conjuction with another mic, at a different distance to the kick, so there is a good deal of constructive interference between the two in the low end, which could be a lot of why some of us think of it has having more bottom end.  I was using a U47 in that position, until I got tired of people kicking it, or knocking into it, so I decided a FET mic was a safer bet in that situation.  

If you recall from my review, I tended to prefer the TLM49 over the U87 for vocals.  It was just on everything else where I wasn't the most excited about it.  And it most certainly had less low end than the U87!

But honestly, if you had your druthers, would you rather produce a tube mic with a transformer or a TLM mic with a PCB amplifier?  Doesn't it bother you in the least that almost everybody says they prefer the KM84 to the 184?  And we're not even talking about exotic or specialty mics.  

The U47, M49 and U67 were great mics that did so many things well, and could be used in so many applications.  They were the mics that, when you put them up against other mics, would be the ones you pick.  Doesn't Neumann want to make a new mic that people choose as "the best sounding mic" once again?  

The only reason I'm holding Neumann's feet to the fire is because I have used so many mics that I have loved with the Neumann label on them.  I keep hoping that I'm going to plug in a new Neumann mic and get that same sense of excitement I got when I listened to a U47 or a M49 for the first time.  I'm looking for that magic, and I'm not getting it.  And I don't know if specs and response graphs are telling the whole story.  

I think Klaus was on to something when he suggested "specs vs. sex appeal."  There is a sex appeal to my older tube Neumanns that I'm not hearing in the current crop.  And I'm not sure that relying on empirical evidence can explain that, or counter the assertion properly.  I know what I'm hearing.  I just wish that we could use less esoteric terms than "sexiness."

[Klaus Heyne]

J.J. Blair wrote on Mon, 15 October 2007 13:44

...I think Klaus was on to something when he suggested "specs vs. sex appeal."  ...I know what I'm hearing.  I just wish that we could use less esoteric terms than "sexiness."

"How Sex Trumps Specs" -the title for our AES Master Class in New York- does NOT imply that approaching the design for a good sounding mic through the judicious application of specifications is principally wrong.

It is indisputable that a decent mic has to have a relatively distortion-free performance, a low noise floor, and a frequency response wide enough to not be an obstacle in a recording session.

However, my contention has been all along that we have not found out yet what specifications are meaningful in the design for a good sounding microphone.

And if Neumann/Sennheiser or other large companies knew what specifications were meaningful, we would have a lot more better sounding mics rather than just mics which perform adequately, or even superbly, along the specification parameters we currently use and know.

The KM184 is a good example: its specs "outperform" the KM84 in every respect: better head room, better noise floor, etc.
And yet, because it is widely regarded as sounding hard and strident in comparison to its predecessor, the buying public rewards the predecessor with a 2:1 price ratio in the market place over the KM184.

I assume, Neumann knows this, and their designer(s) are not ignorant of how to at least attempt a simulation of the old magic in their current designs: the M149 uses its tube strictly as a "flavoring agent" in front of a massive op amp processor that could do just fine by itself, even without the tube. And the TLM49 introduces enough of a phase hash in the mids to make it appear to have some definition and texture there.

But simulations and flavoring agents only go so far in microphone design, and the bottom line is: most discriminating ears will not choose these mics over their name sakes from the past

Why was the fet47 discontinued? Even at the time of its highest popularity when in production, this model was a dud, because it was constantly compared to its tube namesake.
Never mind what became of it since, (an insanely priced kick drum mic!) Neumann will not put any R/D dollars in reviving the complicated, high cost fet47 discreet circuitry op-amp with oodles of components, high-cost big-boy transformer, funky switches and so on..

Finally, I can only speculate why we have not improved the field of measurements and more meaningful specifications in microphone design in light of their obvious shortcomings: The people who by and large are in charge of microphone development in larg(er) companies or divisions of companies are recruited from the left-brain crowd: engineering schools. The ear training that is required there is about as rudimentary as is psychological training for MDs.

[Markus Aalto]

J.J. has really good and rational arguments. I've wondered many times the same things. I believe many others too and not only here! Neumann still have even fine capsules unlike AKG at these days. It is really respectable that Martin  from Neumann has guts to join this discussion! I really hope the message is going to the factory what professionals are talking here (and not just only couple of people here). I hope this will be noticed. Not just reissues from old classics but also some different perspective for developing new models. Some different option to the top end models wanted.

I've used old "battery" U87's, M147, KM184 and i like them. Sure there are many uses for mics like TLM103, etc... Anyway the first "own" Neumann i have is old real tube U47. I've focused all the resources for getting one. It is not in the working condition yet and i have still long way to go... I don't have any other Neumann microphone (yet). Much easier if there was some as fine microphone available from the Neumann dealer. New microphone in reliable working order with warranty.

Maybe there are empty space for one or some different microphones in Neumann selection that need to be filled but i hope also something less expensive than M150!

TLM49 is interesting microphone in TLM series but it is just one perspective to large diaphgram studio microphones. Hopefully it is not going to be only perspective at Neumann in the future. I really hope that i don't see TLM103 anniversary model when Neumann celebrates 100 years!

Respectfully, Markus A

[compasspnt]

RPhilbeck wrote on Mon, 15 October 2007 13:40

compasspnt wrote on Mon, 15 October 2007 12:29 Do I use it for lead vocals as a matter of course today?  No. If I were to buy new microphones today (stop me, please), would I purchase an 87?  No. Terry, Thank you for the constructive feedback.  What do you prefer and why?

That's hard to say specifically, because it would depend upon what the purpose was for which a new microphone purchase was to be made.

I haven't bought a *new* Neumann since 1985 or 86.  Probably won't ever again, unless they make something I want.  And I already have 10 old 87's, so why would I ever want a new one?  I have 84's, 86's, 48's, 49's, several fet 47's, so why would I ever want a TLM sim-version?

New condenser microphone purchases since '86 have been from Soundelux, AKG (the dreaded C12VR, also my last of that one), R

[James Lugo]

I have kind of a Chris Cornell type of voice and I just shot out about 20 mics for the lead vocal tracks on my new record. CM7, U47, U67, M49, M149, U195, 251 etc... And the one we chose was a new U87ai. It had a cut and a midrange to it that sliced thru the guitar tracks like a hot knife thru butter. It has an ergency that was so intense I could feel a difference in the headphones while I was singing.

U87ai>LTD-1>La2a

I've been lurking around here for years and just want to say this place is awesome! Thanks Klause.

[Fibes]

I'm not a fan boy for the U87 by any means but I do have one of the earlier ones with the Tuchel that I believe to be one of the good ones.

For the money I have in it and the variety of sources I use it on, I can see the desert island reference being a solid one but I can't say that for all of the other U87s I've heard.