Print

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

[compasspnt]

Agreed. That was their design goal.

Not saying the goal was reached 100%, but the intention was that.

[Nick Sevilla]

Hi,

I did not mean to say they are the same mic (KM84 VS KM184), they are not. But, not knowing why the OP wants KM84's specifically, I thought I would suggest these new ones.

I do like my KM184's they have good uses, when I need brighter recordings. I used them to record the top of a leslie organ speaker recently, along with a tube mic on the bottom, and this worked out very well. I did not have to EQ very much at all.

One thing I have noticed once I moved to digital recording, from 2" tape, is that there is still a need to take care in the recording of the top end of the spectrum. I do tend to use less EQ on the way in, and instead choose a mic and preamp that shapes the sound from the start, without introducing as much EQ shaping, because I find that in the DAW it is harder to compensate for an artificially brightened recording, when using darker microphones. Specifically, I find using EQ to brightern a dark mic, increases unwanted high frequency material, that, in some cases can be too much, or not the desired kind or material I wish to have in the mix.

I find adding brightness via an EQ to sometimes end up getting too weird in the top end, when mixing the song. If I do not add the EQ, but instead use a brighter microphone, this results in a more natural top end, that is not quite as harsh, and is easier to place in a mix with other instruments.

But, that is my personal experience, and this may vary from engineer to engineer.

Cheers

[wwittman]

But the NT5-S  is transformerless, no?

also, does IT have a pad?
can you stick it an inch from where the stick hits the snare drum without distortion?

[compasspnt]

Right, the 5 has no pad. The 55 is the same mic with -10 and -20 pads, and two position rolloff.  The 6 is the same mic, has -10 pad, and has the tiny remote mounting capsule.

I believe all are electronically balanced.

I think the M-Mfg KM-69 (haven't used one of those yet) is transformer out, but no pad.

[tuchel]

Bit of a obsessive tale here.  I love the Carlos Vega performance on James Taylor's Hourglass, particularly the high hat sound on "Line 'Em Up" - I knew Frank Filipetti's used a KM 84 through a Yamaha 02R pre-amp.  I happened to become the owner of what was likely the hi hats used in that very session - Vega's Paiste 14" signature heavies, and I went about sampling them today with a rented KM 84.
The rental house sent along an KM 85, helping me in my attempt to replicate the sound. First off with the 84 - it's as dead square the same as I could have hoped and the 84 had a fantastic sound.  The 85 sounded nothing like it.  It wasn't an issue of roll off, I would have trouble believing the same capsule was in each.
So, internet rumor has it that the Beyer MC 930 sounds similar to the 84, and of course Mercenary Audio has improved on the 84 with the KM-69.

Does anybody have knowledge of how those two models perform up against the 84?

Let me just restate the obvious - why can't Neumann just reintroduce the 84?  I understand the the problems of a U47 or U67 - but this should be easier - and what a great mic...

Terry

[Klaus Heyne]

tuchel wrote on Wed, 01 April 2009 18:29

... the 84 had a fantastic sound.  The 85 sounded nothing like it.  It wasn't an issue of roll off, I would have trouble believing the same capsule was in each.

It is not. The K84 is distinct in sound and manufacture from the K85.

Quote:

Let me just restate the obvious - why can't Neumann just reintroduce the 84?  I understand the problems of a U47 or U67 - but this should be easier...

It is not. Anything, from sourcing good FETs to a good transformer, to paying for hand-wired and hand-assembled, discreet components, to the hourly cost, including benefits, for a unionized laborer in Germany, ... none of this adds up to a mic that can be competitively priced on the scale Neumann currently tries to compete in.

There are no large microphone companies left which can do that. The Chinese onslaught with its negligible labor costs, its environmental negligence (paid for by the rest of the world and our children), its lack of democratic freedoms for its citizens which keep working conditions dismal, all these factors are simply too powerful for large European companies to be able to compete against with hand-made mics anymore.

[seedyunderbelly.com]

Hi Klaus,
Does anyone make a new mic that compares to a KM84 to your ears?

thanks,  John

[Klaus Heyne]

If there were such a thing, the value of those 84s would not set new records, year after year (and condition be damned!)

There is something unique about this mic which is hard to copy unless you have access to precisely the same capsule: a roundness of tone which is unequalled by other small diaphragm condenser mics with the exception of the Schoeps CMC5 w/MK4 capsule (though the CMC5-MK4 combo has different, and to some ears, not quite as pleasing, artifacts in the high mids.)

One should never automatically equate artifacts with 'bad'. It's been my contention all along that the right types of artifacts come closer to the human hearing in a primitive reproduction apparatus like a microphone than wrong (or seemingly absent) artifacts.

With other words, the proper 'texturizing' of the signal through the mic is part and parcel of reproduced music's aural attraction.

The KM84 has a very sexy capsule. Plain and simple. So good, in fact, that its diaphragm system was taken over unchanged by subsequent Neumann SD models. Sometimes you need to leave a good thing alone, and not mess with it.  Then you couple that capsule with a very simple, straight-forward impedance converter (one active component), a no-nonsense straight-line circuit, a transformer adapted from the KM54 model, and out the dorr the signal goes...

[seedyunderbelly.com]

Thanks Klaus

[kats]

tuchel wrote on Thu, 02 April 2009 02:29

Does anybody have knowledge of how those two models perform up against the 84?

I'm not sure if this is appropriate to this forum, Klaus will decide. But here is a shootout between a KM84 and a Beyer MC930 on another forum.  I use the Beyer's extensively and was able to pick out which was which instantly. So to that, I think the files posted speak of the relative differences quite honestly.

KM84 vs Beyer MC930:


http://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/375735-acoustic-guit ar-samples-km84-vs-mc930.html

[Barry Hufker]

Tony,

Having just listened to those samples (and I don't want to give anything away here for those who want to listen), I am surprised at the results and the difference.  My choice is other than I expected.

Barry

[tuchel]

I picked wrong, and that makes me think the Beyer might be a good choice for certain 84 type applications or a least checking into it....interesting.

Terry

[Extreme Mixing]

Not a subtle difference.  B sounds like it's already been EQ'd, so I suspect that it's the Beyer.  Not a bad EQ, by the way...

Steve

[tuchel]

Tony - have you used the Beyer's to record drums, and if so, in what way?  Maybe hi hat, and how did that work for you?

Terry

[J-Texas]

"B" all the way. "A" sounds very boomy and hollow.

DAMN. After I pressed "submit", I wanted to take it back, simply because I was helping to turn this thread into a "my personal taste" shootout thing. Sorry. It does sound to me like what I said, but maybe someone might be looking for that sound and doesn't discount the other mic.