R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?  (Read 32909 times)

TrueThomas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« on: August 22, 2010, 07:22:13 AM »

After exchanging a couple of emails with Klaus on the subject I am considering a U89 (or pair) as an upgrade from C414s as a general purpose mic, mostly used for close micing fairly bright acoustic instruments. It is a very expensive potential upgrade so I want to know a lot more about it!

for context I have a C414B-ULS which I have modded to be transformerless (ie same as C414B-TL).  I am also considering changing the amp entirely to an 414EB design.

I am seeing the U89 in purpose/intent as similar to a 414 but at a higher quality level, is this a fair/correct assessment?

I am surprised there is so little discussion of the U89 here or anywhere, it is one of only 2 models of fet neumann mic made the "real" way with discrete components and a transformer, yet it seems to gather only very moderate interest or discussion.

I note that the U89 has a more complex circuit than the U87, is this an asset or a liability?

Does it sound good because of the extra complexity or despite it?

How does a U89 capsule sound on a simpler circuit such as a U87?

is the smoothness and lack of hype that the U89is known for an attribute of the capsule or the amp or their interaction or what?

thanks in advance! Tom
Logged

studiochap

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2010, 08:04:33 AM »

TrueThomas wrote on Sun, 22 August 2010 12:22

 as a general purpose mic, mostly used for close micing fairly bright acoustic instruments.


Although I haven't used one for ages, in the past I was usually more instantly gratified with the result of bringing up the fader on a U-89 as opposed to a 414.  BTW The very first time I ever used a U-89 I thought immediately " This is nicer than U-87".

Hoping the following isn't OT, as bigger isn't necessarily better - unless you're talking vocals.

Given your intended main use, the question begs whether you've considered SDC mics? Their faster transient response as opposed to LDC's should surely make them contenders here for acoustic instrument recording? A pair of SDCs with both omni and cardioid capsules will cover you for most anything instrumentally ( except MS of course).

I don't think I would be alone on this forum if I say that there is serious pleasure to be had from recording acoustic stuff with SDC omni's.

In a close-mic  situation , the lack of proximity effect and resulting natural timbre of the instrument can be both attractive and organic, and a level playing field for starting to EQ. When I've used omni's on solo acoustic instruments the player has often asked "what's that mic? Sounds great!" Further out you get the improved bass response a over a cardioid, which may or may not be desirable or applicable to you, and in a "normal studio session" close-mic context you can block off the back pickup of an omni with any diy shield ( eg leather jacket suitably supported, reflexion filter etc.)

Just my 2c...

Cheers,

Gwyn


Logged
Gwyn Mathias
Odessa Wharf Studios ( now down the tubes after 14yrs...RIP )
Pro Audio Survivor...Smile

"What,Me Worry?" Alfred E. Neumann (...or was it Newmann?Smile

Electrical Theory by Joseph Lucas (inventor of the Self-Dimming Headlamp):
"Smoke is the thing that makes electrical circuits work; we know this to be true because every time one lets the smoke out of the electrical system, it stops working"

TrueThomas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2010, 08:19:55 AM »

yes i guess it's marginally off topic, but I have considered SDCs. I maybe haven't got anything good enough. See my other thread about KMS105 too.

I have modded oktava MK012, peluso CEMC6, and akg C451. They get used on violin and cello, but not guitar and bouzouki (too bright)

the only SDC that's really blown me away on first listening on an instrument with plucked metal strings was a DPA4011 in someone else's studio 10 years ago, I don't know what the rest of the signal chain was, and I was a less experienced listener then than now, so don't know what I would think now. Selling all my current SDCs wouldnt even fund one DPA4011 let alone a pair. So it would be either/or with that or the U89.
Logged

gk

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2010, 09:57:52 AM »

The 4011 is one of my go to mics for this
Logged

Eric H.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #4 on: August 22, 2010, 06:06:06 PM »

I use the U89 very often at my day job.
I would say that it is very different than a C414. First, it is a small diaphragm, unlike the C414. Then you have 5 patterns. The overall sound is also very different, as the C414 will underline and back up both top and low range, whereas the U89 is very very even all along, with a good deal of mid range honesty.
I use the U89 primarily because of its hypocardio pattern and also because it is great on bright instruments (violin soloist with aggressive sound, or harpsichord) playing in not very good room.
Logged
eric harizanos

Geoff Emerick de Fake

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 348
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2010, 07:45:30 AM »

Eric H. wrote on Sun, 22 August 2010 17:06

I use the U89 very often at my day job.
I would say that it is very different than a C414. First, it is a small diaphragm, unlike the C414.
Are you sure? The mic body is smaller than a U87, but the capsule seems to be the same size. But the significant difference is that the 89 is an edge-terminated capsule, whence the 87 is center-terminated.
Quote:

 I use the U89 primarily because of its hypocardio pattern and also because it is great on bright instruments (violin soloist with aggressive sound, or harpsichord) playing in not very good room.
An edge-terminated diaphragm, being unsupported at the center, tends to have a lower resonant frequency and to break up earlier than a center-terminated one (all things being equal, diameter, thickness, tension).
That may explain this.
The 414 is also edge-terminated.
Logged

MI

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1292
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #6 on: August 23, 2010, 09:32:27 AM »

Geoff Emerick de Fake wrote on Mon, 23 August 2010 07:45



Are you sure? The mic body is smaller than a U87, but the capsule seems to be the same size. But the significant difference is that the 89 is an edge-terminated capsule, whence the 87 is center-terminated.



No, the U89, TLM 170 and TLM 193 share the same KK89 capsule. It is smaller than the KK87 capsule and a totally different design.

I will try to take a picture of mine and post.

edit: here's is one from Saturn Sound

index.php/fa/15277/0/

MI
Logged

TrueThomas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #7 on: August 23, 2010, 10:07:05 AM »

what Eric said above about the U89 being good on bright instruments is an attraction for me.

whether it is much like a 414 probably depends a lot which 414 you compare it to, as they vary massively.

Can anyone answer any of the more technical questions in my original post? is the sound of this mic primarily in the capsule or in the electronics or in the interaction of them?

what's the worst thing about the U89?

can anyone suggest good alternative very neutral/smooth/dark sounding mics with excellent detail? or is this the best of them?
Logged

jetbase

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2454
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #8 on: August 23, 2010, 07:11:03 PM »

In my experience the worst thing about the U89 is that in lower frequencies it can sound muddy & undefined. This is possibly why you like it on bright instruments.

The best alternative I can think of would be a Schoeps mic amp/capsule system. If you're looking for something a little closer in price you might want to try out one of the Milab microphones. I would probably prefer one of the older C414's, like an EB, to the U89. Not sure about the newer ones. I also think I might prefer a TLM170 to a U89, but it's been so long since I've used a TLM170 I can't be sure.
Logged
sleep is not an option

jwhynot: "There's a difference between thinking or acting dogmatically and drawing from experience."


Glenn Santry
http://www.myspace.com/glennsantry

piedpiper

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #9 on: August 23, 2010, 07:41:38 PM »

In case it's not obvious, the picture shows it clearly that although the capsule is a bit smaller than the KK87, it is only slightly smaller, and as such, is still a large diaphragm capsule.
Logged
Tim Britton

row, row, row your boat...

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #10 on: August 23, 2010, 07:50:47 PM »

The reason I never much liked the U89 is the same I never much liked the fet47 (aside of its very worthy role as a speciality mic on kick and brass): the complicated, phase-shifting, discreet op-amp chuck full of transistors and other goodies in the signal path (the U89's amp is almost identical to the one in the fet47 and some of Neumann's shotgun mics). The response is so slow, it kills resolution on contact.

It would indeed be a fun project to install a K89 capsule in a (modified) U87 and see how much less electronic high end attenuation I may have to perform, due to the mellower K89 capsule response. It may be a killer mic that way, or it may be an unattractive in-between of two worlds.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Diocletian

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #11 on: August 24, 2010, 01:53:51 AM »

Please imagine picking up a piano trio (furinstance) with violin, cello, and piano with a stereo pair in a concert hall with noise from the heating system in the back of the hall...you're going to have to lean on a dishy reverb...

The violin is stereo left of the pianist (so he can visually communicate with both the pianist and the cellist), and the cellist is almost nestled to the right of the bentside of the piano.

The piano fills the hall, (no doubt), and you need to balance the two string instruments with it.

Try that with a great pair of omnis...muddy, with too much piano and too much piano in the room (remember, you're picking up two whole spheres of sound with them).

Try that with a pair of large diameter directional condensers like the U87...ragged off-axis response on the highs, and too much LF information to maintain clarity.

Try that with a pair of small diameter directional condensers like the KM84...things are tidying up nicely now, but how about that low end rolling off and the piano is still too prevalent in the mix?

Try that with an ORTF (or reasonable semi-coincident equivalent) pair of U89's or TLM170's set to hypercard? (in the right place...there's the art to all of this)

The off-axis response is less ragged and peaky on the high end, so it's much more kind to the strings, and the piano, especially if it's voiced on the bright side.

The low end response doesn't roll off as quickly as a SD cardioid condenser, and with the hypercard pattern with the on-axis pickup favouring the strings, you're partially rejecting the piano (balance, anyone?), and you've got something decent to send to your reverb.

A couple of dips in the on-axis frequency response of the microphones that don't make the strings too screechy helps, too.  The audience goes nuts with approval and that WAY-off axis stuff actually sounds like something in real life...not overly-coloured.

Yes...the electronics are about as grey and lifeless as they can be, but ask many classical recordists, and the K89 Neumann mics (U89 and TLM170) will pull the job off with minimal  EQ (or the ideal...NO EQ), and hell, you might even have to put a couple of SD cards on the piano because it's relatively further away and needs presence.

A fun project...K89 capsule, and minimal-phase-shift/minimal feedback (same thing?)/low-noise electronics (I'll take transistors or tubes), and I'd have a mic I'd be happy to use when the acoustics are less than ideal and I can't use a great pair of omnis.
Logged

TrueThomas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #12 on: August 24, 2010, 06:35:49 AM »

this is rapidly heading towards the position I always end up in: if they won't build it how you want it, build it yourself.

all my mic pres were built myself on that basis, and I'm pretty happy with them. Half my monitoring and  quite a few of my instruments also have a large dose of this philosophy involved in their creation.

seriously, why not just build a mic and buy a U89 capsule for it? would probably end up cheaper too.

will neumann sell just the capsules and what do they cost? about half the price of the mic?
Logged

Eric H.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2010, 06:08:39 PM »

(...) the U89s are good for getting me a nice overall picture without too much reflection, but i would use them in the Hypo-cardioid pattern, and not hyper-cardio. With the hypercardio, I would probably get some weird reflection coming from behind and depending on the angle would get a less than ideal piano sound. The bass roll-off would also be more drastic than with cardios.
So did you really mean Hypercardio?
It is my understanding the the TLM70 does not show the low end mess, but may also too bass shy. I unfortunately never heard it.
On another note, I have no idea of how the proximity effect is on the U89.
On yet another note :it is so true that the U89 is very slow, but sometimes, a detailed representation is not what you want to hear...hum.
Logged
eric harizanos

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #14 on: August 24, 2010, 07:52:57 PM »

Quote:

(...) but i would use them in the Hypo-cardioid pattern, and not hyper-cardio.



What is that supposed to mean?  Can you technically explain these two patterns to me? I am only familiar with hyper cardioid- a very tight, focussed cardioid, derived by adding a small portion of the rear capsule side's polarization voltage to the cardioid pattern, polarity-reversed.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Barry Hufker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8228
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2010, 09:25:32 PM »

I suspect the term "hypo-cardioid" is what many of us would term "sub-cardioid".  No matter what the term, I imagine the reference is to a pattern between omni and cardioid.


Logged

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2010, 09:43:10 PM »

The proper term for that pattern in the mic business would be "wide cardioid" or, as Neumann calls it, "wide-angle cardioid".
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Barry Hufker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8228
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2010, 11:11:19 PM »

Yes, "wide cardioid" is the industry standard term by manufacturers, but "sub-cardioid" is in common usage among audio professionals, even appearing in professional audio magazines.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep00/articles/direction.htm


Barry
Logged

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2010, 11:15:42 PM »

"Wide cardiod" makes the most sense to me.

And to think I was technically referring to it as "a click or two towards omni..."
Logged

Geoff Emerick de Fake

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 348
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #19 on: August 25, 2010, 06:16:55 AM »

MI wrote on Mon, 23 August 2010 08:32

Geoff Emerick de Fake wrote on Mon, 23 August 2010 07:45


Are you sure? The mic body is smaller than a U87, but the capsule seems to be the same size. But the significant difference is that the 89 is an edge-terminated capsule, whence the 87 is center-terminated.

No, the U89, TLM 170 and TLM 193 share the same KK89 capsule. It is smaller than the KK87 capsule
Thanks for the pix.
Quote:

 and a totally different design.
Yes, that's what I meant by edge-terminated vs. center-terminated.
Logged

David Bock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2010, 06:16:28 PM »

Theoretically, that mid sized capsule has some ideal compromises. I wonder if anyone has tried it with either a simple fet amp (a la u87) or tube amp, as it seems to have only been implemented in "high parts count" amps (that rarely receive the love the simpler amps get) so far.....?

TrueThomas

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2010, 06:29:55 PM »

dbock wrote on Wed, 25 August 2010 23:16

Theoretically, that mid sized capsule has some ideal compromises. I wonder if anyone has tried it with either a simple fet amp (a la u87) or tube amp, as it seems to have only been implemented in "high parts count" amps (that rarely receive the love the simpler amps get) so far.....?


my thoughts exactly, i'm up for building such a mic - especially if people here can help with advice and info.
Logged

compasspnt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16266
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2010, 07:21:01 PM »

I have an 89 I've never liked, and never use.

Maybe I will gut it...
Logged

Oliver Archut

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1125
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2010, 10:57:51 PM »

Spare the U89s life Terry, a mic like that sounds good in theory, but transplanted on a U87 amp it does sound thin with no articulation at all.

Best regards,
Logged
Oliver Archut
www.tab-funkenwerk.com

We are so advanced, that we can develop technology that can determine how much damage the earth has taken from the development of that technology.

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2010, 11:15:14 PM »

Certainly true with the stock, high frequency-compensated U87 processor. But I am stil curious what a clean processor, without the broadcast compensation and other anomalies, would do to this capsule.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #25 on: August 25, 2010, 11:15:15 PM »

Certainly true with the stock, high frequency-compensated U87 processor. But I am still curious what a clean processor, without the broadcast compensation and other anomalies, would do to this capsule.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Oliver Archut

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1125
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #26 on: August 26, 2010, 12:17:16 AM »

Hello Klaus,

I forgot to mention that the filters were disconnected...

Best regards,
Logged
Oliver Archut
www.tab-funkenwerk.com

We are so advanced, that we can develop technology that can determine how much damage the earth has taken from the development of that technology.

Diocletian

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #27 on: August 26, 2010, 12:28:08 AM »

I recall a Gotham Audio ad for the U89 in REP exclaiming "Remember the M49?"

Is that the sound Neumann was searching for, or was that wishful thinking on Mr. Temmer's part?

As David has suggested, the capsule does have some ideal compromises...could a simple tube or FET circuit give it some sonic legs?

Ron Yachimec
Logged

Didier Brest

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 49
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #28 on: August 26, 2010, 03:48:53 AM »

Diocletian wrote on Thu, 26 August 2010 06:28

I recall a Gotham Audio ad for the U89 in REP exclaiming "Remember the M49?"

Is that the sound Neumann was searching for


In that case, Neumann would have used a K49. I think that the K89 is more neutral than the K49.
Logged

Eric H.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 557
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #29 on: August 26, 2010, 08:22:39 AM »

The term hypocardioid is related to cardioid, with the use of the greek prefix 'hypo', the very same way you use hypercardioid.
This is the way it is taught in France.
The prefix 'hypo' means 'sub'; 'hyper' would mean 'over'?
Anyway, it is a very useful pattern for recording music in a room.
Logged
eric harizanos

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #30 on: August 26, 2010, 02:21:29 PM »

Back to the topic:
When I look at a schematic of a multi-patten, dual-diaphragm mic, I make note of the one pattern selectable that does NOT involve portions of rear-capsule side polarization voltage added to the pure cardioid of the front.

Usually, the theoretical advantage of the precise electronic shaping of the front side pattern through adding rear pol. voltage- whether it is to get the pattern wider (in phase addition) or narrower (out-of-phase addition)- is reduced by the audible artifacts these electronic manipulations bring with them.

That's quite audible in the case of the AKG 414 and Neumann U89 in hyper-cardioid; it's also audible in the case of the M149, whose true electric front side-only operation is in wide cardioid. In cardioid, a small amount of rear side voltage is added out of phase, in an attempt to mitigate the perceived shortcomings of the relatively wide acoustic cardioid pattern of the K49 capsule.


Make some tests for yourself and decide which pattern in these multi-pattern mics sounds most natural and engaging.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

David Bock

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #31 on: August 26, 2010, 02:32:10 PM »

Quote:

Diocletian wrote on Thu, 26 August 2010 06:28
I recall a Gotham Audio ad for the U89 in REP exclaiming "Remember the M49?"
Is that the sound Neumann was searching for
In that case, Neumann would have used a K49. I think that the K89 is more neutral than the K49.

mmmmmmm I installed a k49 on my tlm 170 and finally made it useful. It's actually better than a fet 47 on kick drum in a live combo setting since it cuts out more room than the fet 47, yet retains the essential mids and 'tick' sound of a kick on a 47fet. Surprising, in a good way. Haven't even thought of trying it on anything else.

Schallfeldnebel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 816
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #32 on: August 26, 2010, 06:43:17 PM »

Klaus you wrote:" In cardioid, a small amount of rear side voltage is added out of phase, in an attempt to mitigate the perceived shortcomings of the relatively wide acoustic cardioid pattern of the K49 capsule."


It is the opposite. The pattern of the K49 when only used on one side is a cardioid with a tendency to super-cardioid in the higher regions, and to make the narrow pattern more wide, a positive charge is put on the backside of the capsule.

SFN

I quote Mr. Martin Schneider from Neumann:

The standard K47/49, just like the M7 is an in-between capsule. Cardioid somewhere below 1kHz, super/hypercardioid the higher you go. That's the way the capsule came out of the design process in 1935. And that's why the manual for U47fet said 'supercardioid'.
Thus, the M147 has the polar pattern of a U47 or U47fet, tendency towards super/hypercardioid, as there's no polarisation voltage on the rear half.
In the M149, when set to cardioid, we put some volts on the rear half, so the setting 'cardioid' does mean 'best possible cardioid for this capsule', and does NOT mean 'zero volts on the rear'.
For 'zero volts on the rear' in the M149 you have to select the intermediate setting between cardioid and hypercardioid.
Note: The M49 had a potentiometer. There, 'cardioid' meant 'zero volts'. Interestingly, to my knowledge, the M49s were mostly used not at 'zero volts' but at 'best cardioid' setting. Some users even made marks on the potentiometer at 'best cardioid' setting. That's why we chose the above approach with M149.
Best regards, Martin Schneider Neumann Mic. Development
Logged
Bill Mueller:"Only very recently, has the availability of cheap consumer based gear popularized the concept of a rank amateur as an audio engineer. Unfortunately, this has also degraded the reputation of the audio engineer to the lowest level in its history. A sad thing indeed for those of us professionals."

Klaus Heyne

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3154
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #33 on: August 28, 2010, 01:16:41 PM »

You are right. I should have said:
"In cardioid, a small amount of rear side voltage is added in phase, in an attempt to mitigate the perceived shortcomings of the relatively narrow acoustic cardioid pattern of the K49 capsule."

Interestingly, my incorrect description was derived from my personal experience with these capsules: rather wide cardioid in the low-mid frequencies.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Jim Williams

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1105
Re: Neumann U89: Why So Little Discussion Compared To AKG 414?
« Reply #34 on: August 30, 2010, 11:29:25 AM »

Having reworked many U89 circuits and their similar counterparts in the fet 47 and KM81/82 shotguns, it's not a bad circuit. It's esentially a discrete opamp design. The parts are lacking. The BC series bipolar transistors spit in the high mids, very un-flattering. The Wima polycarbonate coupling capacitors are also spitty and hard on transients.

There are also frequency response fixes and some bandwidth adjustments. Once reworked, it's a very open and smooth mic. The output transformers damp the tops more than the circuits do once one addresses those problems.

If you want to hear a U89 capsule without that circuit, check out an original TLM170 made in the late 1980's.
Logged
Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

Martin Kantola

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 362
Re: U89? why so little discussion? compared to 414?
« Reply #35 on: August 31, 2010, 05:19:02 PM »

dbock wrote on Wed, 25 August 2010 23:16

Theoretically, that mid sized capsule has some ideal compromises. I wonder if anyone has tried it with either a simple fet amp (a la u87) or tube amp


Have built a tube mic with this capsule, did not sound bad to me.

Martin
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.038 seconds with 16 queries.