Print

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

[plughead]

Hi Folks,

I'm interested in user opinions on this mic: what does it excel on? What are its weaknesses?

Is there much difference between the USM69 and SM69 (FET) models?

Lastly, are there any known issues with this mic?

I did a few searches, but came up with very little (i.e. the thread about fixing the broken multi-core connector cable, and little more...)

Thanks a lot!

 

[Schallfeldnebel]

OK, my 2 cents.

I'm interested in user opinions on this mic: what does it excel on? What are its weaknesses?
I think it is too sharp.

Is there much difference between the USM69 and SM69 (FET) models?
Noise and headroom. The USM69 has better specs than the SM69FET, selfnoise is lower in the USM69 and the max SPL is higher in the USM69.

Erik Sikkema

[plughead]

Eric,

Thanks for this info. I have heard the SM69 FET is a bright microphone - with the same capsule as the U67, I thought it might share some similarities, tho I know it is attenuated and implemented differently.

Cheers

[J.J. Blair]

Because the U67 is dark-ish, the misconception is that the K67 is a dark capsule.  Actually, it is a very bright capsule.  Much more strident than a K47.  

[plughead]

J.J. Blair wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 20:30

Because the U67 is dark-ish, the misconception is that the K67 is a dark capsule.  Actually, it is a very bright capsule.  Much more strident than a K47.

IME, I haven't found either of the U67's I've worked with to be dark - on the contrary, they can be very edgy on certain voices/styles.

That said, I'm totally interested in the "mids" of the K67 - can it(SM69) anywhere near resemble the U87/67 for "meat" in this register?

Thanks,

[Barry Hufker]

I wonder why there's never been a stereo U-47... Seems it might have (have had)great appeal.

[J.J. Blair]

PlugHead wrote on Wed, 09 April 2008 22:25

IME, I haven't found either of the U67's I've worked with to be dark - on the contrary, they can be very edgy on certain voices/styles.

Then they must be broken.  (Just kidding.)

When I say dark, I don't mean dark like a RCA 44.  I mean dark compared to a 47 or especially a C12.  That's why I said dark-ish.  67s have a steeper roll off in the high end than any other of the famous tube mics of the era, mandated by German broadcast specifications.  

[J.J. Blair]

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 08:14

I wonder why there's never been a stereo U-47... Seems it might have (have had)great appeal.

Barry, imagine the size of a mic that could accommodate two VF14s and two BV8s.  Maybe they figured it's just easier to use two U47s.  LOL.  At least with the SM69, you have AC701s, and a way smaller transformer.

[Barry Hufker]

All you've said is true enough, I'm just picturing the beast in my head and how cool it would be...

[jensenmann]

Barry Hufker wrote on Thu, 10 April 2008 17:14

I wonder why there's never been a stereo U-47... Seems it might have (have had)great appeal.

When it was invented there was no stereo

[drknob]

Maybe no 'official' stereo. Stephen Temmer once played me a stereo orchestral recording recorded somewhere in Germany at the end of WW2. A bit of artillery in the background.... (Seriously!)

[Barry Hufker]

There has been stereo since Cl

[J.J. Blair]

Barry, the U94, courtesy of Photoshop:




But it's more likely you'd want a stereo 48, so that you could do Blumlein.

[MagnetoSound]

That's nice work, JJ,

but shouldn't the top capsule be rotated 90

[J.J. Blair]

Actually, I rotated the capsule of the bottom one in photoshop.  You just can't see it under the grill.