Post by: Klaus Heyne on April 05, 2006, 02:06:26 PM
"Neumann Intros TLM 49 Retro Microphone Suitable for instrumental applications in professional production studios and with home recordists (March 31, 2006)
Neumann USA announces the introduction of the long-awaited TLM 49 large diaphragm, cardioid, studio microphone with its roots firmly planted among the classic Neumann M 49 and M 50 microphones of the 50s. The TLM 49 combines Neumann's esteemed engineering and precision manufacturing to produce an innovative transformerless microphone that is optimized for that very special, warm, Neumann vocal sound.
Given the retro look, Neumann's proven transformerless circuitry technology, low self-noise, high gain levels, great sound and a reasonable price, the TLM 49 is poised to become yet another Neumann legend in vocal and speech recording. It is also suitable for instrumental applications in professional production studios and with home recordists.
The TLM 49 features the famous K47 capsule used in the M 49 and U47 microphones. The capsule has a linear frequency response up to the upper mid-range. Above 2kHz there is a gentle presence boost up to 3dB. The capsule is enclosed by a large, acoustically open, neutral sounding head grille. The large 34mm diaphragm cardioid capsule has a tendency towards supercardioid performance due to the special capsule construction. TLM transformerless technology ensures good common mode rejection, prevents RF interference and suppresses noise signals affecting balanced modulation. And the TLM 49 operates at SPLs of up to 114dB without distortion and a dynamic range of 102dB (A-weighted)."
Dawn Birr, Product Manager for Neumann/USA adds that suggested retail price in the U.S. will be $1699.- including shock mount (my guess: ca. $1499.- 'officially sanctioned' street price), and that already 300 pieces were sold so far.
The initial product guide mentioned that it was a "tube" mic, which it is not. I have just received the corrected release and included it as JPEG:
This is page one. Neumann's TLM 49 product guide continues a couple of posts further down...
Post by: Oliver Archut on April 05, 2006, 02:18:06 PM
that is really good news, let's hope that they follow up with a "TLM 47" so that we finally can lay all those 50 year old junk mics to rest!
Best regards,
Post by: Barry Hufker on April 05, 2006, 03:09:05 PM
BTW, is this new mic tube or solid state? And if tube, is the power supply better made than the one for the M149?
Barry
the power supply does not come standard (but several types are listed as accessory options.)
The original literature I copied above (which I will replace, as soon as I get the upoload from Sennheiser) mentions the word "TUBE" but only once. I confirmed it with Neumann today: THIS IS A SOLID STATE MIC, NOT A TUBE MIC!
Post by: compasspnt on April 05, 2006, 04:11:49 PM
First, thank goodness it has a "retro look!" That works for me.
And second, thank goodness there is no old fashioned transformer in it to "go bad!"
I note that they are marketing it as a home recordist, semi-pro mic, from the very beginning!
All of this is very reassuring to me. I can finally (as Oliver already mentioned) throw away my tiresome old M-49 pair, yet still look retro.
Post by: Schallfeldnebel on April 05, 2006, 05:53:57 PM
- A new large membrane mike, call it the TLM 148.(149+147)/2=148. The microphone should be solid state, have the K49 capsule, and be switchable between the cardioid of the classic U47Fet and the cardioid of the M49. .... when this microphone can be put on the market for the price of the TLM127 or less. ....
I cannot believe it, hurray !
Erik Sikkema
P.S. But which cardioid setting has Neumann decided for, the "warmer" more cardioid one from the M49 or the more hyper cardioid one from the U47? (in other words, do they use a bit from the backmembrane?)
Post by: Klaus Heyne on April 05, 2006, 07:39:09 PM
Post by: Klaus Heyne on April 05, 2006, 07:40:09 PM
Post by: matucha on April 05, 2006, 08:04:45 PM
Post by: Arf! Mastering on April 05, 2006, 08:29:04 PM
Post by: Markus Sauschlager on April 05, 2006, 08:46:51 PM
| matucha wrote on Thu, 06 April 2006 02:04 |
and finally... how does it sound? |
...rich, powerful and brilliant, while remaining balanced and transparent (at least on vocals)- so says the sales brochure!
And probably the first TLM with a max. SPL of a low 114dB!
So recording high SPL sources with it may be a problem...
But a retrofit tube preamp like the one Innertube Audio offers for the U87 could be nice.
Post by: J.J. Blair on April 06, 2006, 12:13:43 AM
To misquote Casey Kasem:
"Is Dawn on the phone? Get Dawn on the phone!"
Post by: Schallfeldnebel on April 06, 2006, 03:38:54 AM
When you talk specifically about the cardioid setting of the M149, then the rear membrane IS active, that is about the biggest difference between the M147 and M149.
BTW, the TLM 49 has a quit high noise level of 12 dB ref to 1 Pa, compared to all other newly designed Neumann LDM, and a low 114dBA max. level for 0,5 % harmoonic distortion. This suprises me bit. In the techincal doc the word "retro" is used, is this a microphone with a simple FET input stage, no DC-DC converter, 48 V max as capsule bias, therefore the worse specs? Is this a U47FET with TLM output?
Erik Sikkema
Post by: Markus Sauschlager on April 06, 2006, 06:15:36 AM
Take the housing of the M150 (that gets cheaper with increasing production volume), add the K47 and add a cheapo circuitboard like the one in the TLM103. Viol
Post by: Schallfeldnebel on April 06, 2006, 06:33:54 AM
Post by: Tim Campbell on April 06, 2006, 02:55:15 PM
Post by: Klaus Heyne on April 06, 2006, 04:05:13 PM
Post by: Schallfeldnebel on April 06, 2006, 04:06:31 PM
You are right, if we compare the M147 which has 12 dBA selfnoise ref. to 1 Pa. Still 0.5% distortion at 114 dB SPL is a rather limited headroom value. This is about the same as the M147.
Is there a tube inside, powered with 48V ? Only the transformerless output stage is mentioned, I cannot find anything about the first stage, except from that the TLM49 sounds warm.
Erik Sikkema
Post by: Tim Campbell on April 06, 2006, 05:01:38 PM
Klaus excuse my nit picking, but doesn't this mean you agree with me. This capsule has lower output and so requires additional gain. None of us said this was a terribly noisy mic. On the other hand none of us are sure what kind of an amplifier is used to achieve this additional gain adding to the noise of the mic.
Post by: Sean Eldon Qualls on April 06, 2006, 05:02:14 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on April 06, 2006, 05:56:53 PM
Post by: Schallfeldnebel on April 06, 2006, 06:15:55 PM
Erik Sikkema
Post by: Klaus Heyne on April 06, 2006, 06:37:26 PM
But here is a daring theory:
Maybe the low headroom, i.e. propensity to distort, is intentional?
Maybe the goal was to immitate some type of overdrive behavior that was deemed by the designers to "sound attractive"?
Maybe this was a deliberate departure from Neumann's usual 'clean'-philosophy, into the terrain which the Neumann/Sennheiser management by now must be painfully aware of:
Users want sounds that connect emotionally. A sound which, judging from the countless responses on this and the Neumann forum, customers largely don't believe they are getting from current "clean" products...?
Then, of course, the big question remains: can you engineer that kind of emotional attraction into a (prosumer) mic design through emulation? Or do you actually need a characterful mic with characterful components to begin with?
Post by: Lars Farm on April 07, 2006, 05:34:35 AM
| Klaus Heyne wrote on Fri, 07 April 2006 00:37 |
Then, of course, the big question remains: can you engineer that kind of emotional attraction into a (prosumer) mic design through emulation? Or do you actually need a characterful mic with characterful components to begin with? |
I don't get it. Please explain. How is characterful mic defined? How is characterful components defined?
Post by: maxdimario on April 07, 2006, 07:45:50 AM
Post by: danickstr on April 07, 2006, 07:59:35 AM
Post by: John Monforte on April 08, 2006, 02:16:00 AM
I, for one, will reserve all comments of the merits of this mic until after I have heard one.
I will be interested to see if the sonic character is unique and well colored. I don't want a mic that sounds identical to either a U47 or M49. I already have those. There are many good things you could do with a K47 and unfortunately all the boutique brands seem to offer is their attempt at duplicating Neumann's old mics.
I am holding on to the hope that the sound is right, the mic is well built, and the price combines to give real value to the user. Wouldn't that be great?
If the only correct answer is a U47 (or M49) then this mic will surely disappoint. I am longing for some creative thinking in mic design.
Post by: Schallfeldnebel on April 08, 2006, 10:03:31 AM
Erik Sikkema
Post by: Gustav on April 08, 2006, 11:44:59 AM
Like posted above PDF reads like no voltage on the back of the capsule because of the more super cardiod pattern the m7 can be more a true cardiod with a voltage on the back.
This is funny the gefell 930 with a M7 or M9 with a solid state transformerless output. The TLM 49 is a K47 with a TLM with a different grill for I would guess a different sound.
Gustav
Post by: J.J. Blair on April 08, 2006, 01:47:23 PM
Post by: Jørn Bonne on July 20, 2006, 10:59:10 AM
J
Post by: J.J. Blair on July 20, 2006, 02:17:49 PM
Post by: thephatboi on July 24, 2006, 02:00:25 PM
ps. I'll bet the "bad" noise specs have to do with the "tube emulation" circuit.
Post by: J.J. Blair on July 28, 2006, 02:23:48 PM
Post by: rphilbeck on July 29, 2006, 10:32:15 AM
First thing to do is discontinue the current "inferior products", which pretty much leaves us with the U87 and U89 to sell. Then we'll sack about 90% of the staff.
Low volume, high quality. Let's see if we don't go bankrupt...
Put your money where your mouth is.
Post by: The Resonater on July 30, 2006, 02:23:59 AM
Post by: MI on August 01, 2006, 06:00:29 PM
| J.J. Blair wrote on Fri, 28 July 2006 14:23 |
... I'll give you guys some general impressions, but for the full scoop, I have to save it for my article. Hope you understand. |
Sure J.J.
Will that be in EQ?
Any guestimate when?
Mario
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 02, 2006, 03:13:39 PM
Here's some initial findings that I thought I'd share:
If you look at that response graph, there's a steady descent in frequency resonse from 5kHz all the way down. They really seem to have optimizied this thing for vocals, with that low end taper. You can hear it too, when it's up against the M49 or the U87.
Some other observations are that this preamp of the mic is completely surface mount ICs, like the RODE NT2A or the new AKG C414s. And unlike one of the other Neumann surface mount mics, the TLM193, the capacitors are also surface mounted, so forget about ever doing maintenance yourself, or even modifying the thing.
Another strange difference between the TLM49 and the M49 is that the capsule sits almost an inch lower in the basket on the TLM49. I've asked Neumann to find out if this was done for any particular acoustic reason.
So far though, it sounds like a pretty good $1,300 fixed cardioid FET mic. Nothing ground breaking, but a really genius marketing idea. Take a classic look, a great capsule, an inexpensive but very respectable sounding pre amp circuit, and a price that you won't choke on. The thing is goingto sell like hot cakes.
Today we try it on instruments, though. We'll see if it's good for anything beyond vocals.
Post by: MI on August 02, 2006, 10:53:16 PM
| J.J. Blair wrote on Wed, 02 August 2006 15:13 |
I'll probably write the article and turn it in within five or so days, then it's up to Craig Anderton. |
We'll put the pressure on Craig!
| Quote: |
And unlike one of the other Neumann surface mount mics, the TLM193, the capacitors are also surface mounted, so forget about ever doing maintenance yourself, or even modifying the thing. |
Mods, the only mod I can think of is gutting it, get a new transformer from Oliver, and finding a good AC701k tube, then rebuilding it to be as close to a M49 as possible!! Hehehehe.... now we're talking modding!!!
It would cost a lot, but probably well worth doing in the end if you can get the real M49 sound!
Let me go check my bank account...
Seriously, you say $1300 for the mic, that gets you a shell, capsule and P.S. (not bad), drop another $250 for a BV12 (IIRC), $300-500 for a AC701k, and about another $50 for various caps etc. Plus time & effort, and you get yourself a NICE mic. And if the capsule is dual sided, you can get multipattern option in there.
I'm still thinking about it.
Mario
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 03, 2006, 12:22:10 AM
Don't forget the $250 - $400 of a Telefunken N52a PSU, Mario.
Post by: MI on August 03, 2006, 01:10:02 AM
| J.J. Blair wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 00:22 |
My bad, it's $1,500. Sorry. Don't forget the $250 - $400 of a Telefunken N52a PSU, Mario. |
Ahh...you'll find them for $1000 soon enough after the hype just like the M147 and TLM103 droped in price.
Yeah I too just remebered the P.S.! So that brings us up to abt $2200-2500 (with taxes, transport, etc).
J.J., do your M49's have K-47 or M7 capsule?
Just curious, how close are the dimensions to the M49?
Mario
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 03, 2006, 12:01:48 PM
Post by: Klaus Heyne on August 03, 2006, 01:42:56 PM
As has already been alluded to, one would need to gut everything in this mic but the capsule and the housing.
Then buy a well-working AC 701 tube (a royal pain to find), then manufacture a circuit board with all necessary components a nd traces or wiring harnesses that also contains the mechanical structure for a capsule mount / amp hood.
Then find a suitable transformer that not only fits inside the mic, can be mounted solidly, but also performs absolutely identical to the famous one found in the M49. Then one needs to find and wire up a suitable XLR 6-pin connector that can fit and interface with the existing connector opening on the mic. Then one needs to find a high-quality power supply suitable for supply the very fickle AC 701's needs.
Now you have a mic that still will not sound like an M49, because of basket/housing dimensions and different basket weave configuration.
What's the point of this? I've seen so many butcher jobs like it, and every time the owner wanted to sell it, there were no takers:
A bastard like this typically would have very little dollar value beyond the price of the (Neumann-original) capsule and tube.
Post by: IvoQQ on August 04, 2006, 03:04:09 PM
New member, first post here. I was directed to this forum by a gearslutz member. I'm currently doing a review of the Neumann TLM49 and I'm not sure how to read the claim on the Neumann site that the TLM49 "Uses the capsule of the legendary M 49 and U 47". I'm not particularly at home in the history of capsule design but I have a feeling I've come to the right place to ask...
After I read the sticky posting by Klaus Heyne on the M7 capsule, I surfed to the Gefell website which says:
"The M7 was responsible for the legendary sound of the Berlin manufactured U47, U48 and M49 microphones. Today, under the technical supervision of Mr. Kuehnast's son, the Company still produces the M7 capsule in exactly the same way Mr. Neumann taught the elder Kuehnast in the 1940's."
On the Neumann site, about the TLM49, I found:
"The TLM 49 uses the famous K 47 capsule, which was also used in the M 49 and the U 47.
What I make of this is that there at least two U47 and M49 models: 1) U47 and M49 models with M7 capsules, manufactured in Berlin and 2) M49 and U47 models with a K47 capsule.
Since the legendary sound is attributed to the M7 capsules, wouldn't the statement:"Uses the capsule of the legendary M 49 and U 47" imply that the TLM49 uses an M7 capsule?
How do the K47 and M7 capsules differ? And is the K47 capsule in the TLM49 indeed the exact same capsule as the ones used in (certain versions of the) M49 and U47? Or is it a newer design, based on the original?
Thanks for any help,
Ivo
Post by: Klaus Heyne on August 04, 2006, 04:19:10 PM
U47 and M49 did indeed come with two different capsules ex factory:
From 1949 until ca. 1960, all Neumann large diaphragm mics came with M7 PVC capsules.
Due to the instability of PVC, the capsules were from then on replaced with the K47, which was made with Mylar diaphragms. Mylar (generic name: polyester) does not, at least up to now, seem to show any sign of aging or deterioration.
There is and always will be a robust debate whether one capsule is better than the other.
Some prefer the "in your face" presence of the M7 (but hate the slow deterioration and hardening of the material over time and use,which changes the capsule's performance), others prefer the frequency-balanced, fuller sounding K47 (but would not mind a bit more "top end".)
In the end, the quotes you cited by both companies are correct:
The K47 is indeed a "famous" capsule which has been making sweet music in the majority of M(2)49 mics, quite a few U47/48, the fet47, the M149, the M147, and now, the TLM49.
Microtech Gefell is also right: the mics cited that were equipped with the M7 do have a "legendary" sound. This capsule, which is still made by the company today, is mostly responsible for Gefell's success as a mic manufacturer.
It is ironic to note, that neither company would be nearly as competitive in the market place (or may not even exist anymore) if they would not have been smart enough to continue making both of these capsules as the core ingredient in their large diaphragm mic models.
Post by: IvoQQ on August 07, 2006, 04:53:59 AM
Ivo
Post by: stevieeastend on August 09, 2006, 12:51:32 PM
Tried the mic today on lead vocals and acoustic guitar. Unfortunately I have to say that it´s not at all what I hoped it would be sounding.
Compared to my U87i it´s like somebody cut off the body and the lows. Highs are on the border to hurt the ears. I never experienced a microphone with such hyped HF response, very strange and artificial sound. Take the frequency response of the TLM 103 and the "character" of a new U87ai and you can imagine how the TLM49 sounds.
cheers
steveeastend
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 09, 2006, 03:54:15 PM
Post by: stevieeastend on August 10, 2006, 12:25:14 PM
To be honest, I only tested a TLM (103) once and it was clear to me that this microphone was not intended to be some sort of high quality. But during the last month I got my hands on a new U87ai and this TLM49, and I have to say that the difference to my U87i is frightening to say the least.
Back on topic
Today I recorded vocals for a radio spot with the TLM49 and for this purpose it seems to work pretty good. The hyped 5k to 10k, almost no bass and this strange kind of compressed sound made the voice almost finished for a commercial. Because of its frequency response it's very hard to process though. I imagine it has to be THE nightmare mic for vocals in music. Hell, what a strange mic..
cheers
steveeastend
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 10, 2006, 03:07:43 PM
Post by: thephatboi on August 19, 2006, 12:44:21 AM
ps. my other option is to buy another M149 to make my stereo pair..would love your opinion on that quandry
Post by: J.J. Blair on August 19, 2006, 01:26:32 AM
Get yourself a pair of those Langevin CR2001s I like so much for less than half the price. Even has a nice transformer, and sounds awesome in so many applications, rather than sounding OK in one.
Post by: stevieeastend on August 19, 2006, 06:23:36 PM
| thephatboi wrote on Sat, 19 August 2006 05:44 |
JJ, is it really that hyped? I was told by a reputable mic afficianado that it was less hyped than my M149, and smooth sounding, Perhaps I should not take his advice any more. Was thinking of getting a couple TLM49s for vox and stereo drum rooms. i currently only have a pair of TLM103s for stereo rooms and am not too happy with them, of course the brittle top end... thanks , Sean ps. my other option is to buy another M149 to make my stereo pair..,Would love your opinion on that quandry |
... "less hyped than an M149".. sorry but this is just nonsense.
This microphone works really well for recording a speaking voice for ads. That?s all.
It's almost impossible to process this microphone as it already provides an almost finished sound that you either like or dislike.
Recording OH with this mic has to be the ultimate nightmare in mixing.. sorry.
cheers
steveeastend
Post by: thephatboi on August 22, 2006, 10:55:44 PM
Thanks again:) Sean I
Post by: Klaus Heyne on August 23, 2006, 12:17:09 AM
| thephatboi wrote on Tue, 22 August 2006 19:55 |
Ok, thanks alot JJ and Steve for your advice... This saves me a lot of hassle, as I was pretty serious about getting the TLM49s. |
It would in my opinion be an unwise move to base one's buying decision on the opinion of strangers, regardless of how reputable they may be or how convincing they argue their cases.
This is about the worst way to use a forum like this: To believe you can shortcut, by reading, your own tedious but necessary work of personally checking out what new mic will work for your ears, facility, equipment and application.
Life does not work that way. You will not save time with this approach, but you will add extra work and confusion to your life.
Get the mic in your hands, into your studio and into your ears. Then decide.
Sorry for being blunt.
Post by: Rimskidog on February 12, 2007, 06:08:46 PM
Thanks
T
Post by: J.J. Blair on February 12, 2007, 07:09:01 PM
Post by: Rimskidog on February 13, 2007, 06:38:19 PM
Post by: J.J. Blair on February 13, 2007, 10:13:10 PM
Post by: Mike P on February 14, 2007, 03:50:07 AM
Post by: compasspnt on February 14, 2007, 05:30:29 AM
EDIT: I have personally used both many "vintage" and several "new" Neumanns (that is, the microphone in question, as well as the other TLM series), and the comparison is not good.
Or, in the words of the Wise Man, "Don't get fooled by the Neumann badge and the retro appearance; it is still a TLM design based upon IC/Chips with all the advantages and problems..."
Brauner, Langevin, Gefell, and several others have much superior current microphones.
Post by: J.J. Blair on February 14, 2007, 01:58:37 PM
Post by: Oliver Archut on February 14, 2007, 08:40:18 PM
how about Don't get fool by the Neumann batch and the retro appearance, it is still a (current) TLM design based upon IC/Chips with all the advantages and problems. That should meet the ground rules...
After so many statements by Neumann that they do not want to 'revisit the past' and look over the shoulders what they did 40 years ago, they still hold on to it with their marketing approach.
Why?
To capitalize on their glorious past (even if they never actually developed the M49/50 by themselves!)
They lost the ability to build great mics, and now they walk the same path that AKG started to go 20 years ago: Now everybody can afford a Neumann!
Maybe they should call it the "VOLKSMIKROFON" a secret weapon to outsell all the new Microphone Makers !!!
Is the TLM49 a great mic?
Maybe it is for the price... and with a real Neumann capsule from the golden days, but wait... it is not even a real K49/47 capsule, it is just a striped down version of it.
Sennheiser should have saved money on the brass housing (all that brass is probably to make up for the missing weight of the real M49's working parts) put it instead in a new-style body and offered it for $650. In my opinion that is a good price point for what that mic delivers.
But the historic inspired appearance, nearly identical in measurements to the M49 (of course now with an XLR) makes this $650 mic a $1500.- list and $1100 street Future Classic...
Post by: J.J. Blair on February 14, 2007, 11:05:44 PM
In my own experience of shooting out the CR3A against the U87, the CR3A was better in every single application. This is why I say that it "kicked the 87's ass." The Brauner sounds even better than the CR3A, to my ears. But costs about four or fives times as much.
Post by: Klaus Heyne on February 14, 2007, 11:28:35 PM
| Oliver Archut wrote on Wed, 14 February 2007 17:40 |
Sennheiser should have saved money... put it instead in a new-style body and offered it for $650. In my opinion that is a good price point for what that mic delivers. |
You are too kind, Oliver!
I just wonder if they mind your tongue in cheek endorsement and generally lukewarm press it's gotten here, or if they couldn't be bothered, given the supposedly high sales figures (the actual number of which I don't have):
Neumann's former director of sales voiced her opinion recently that the mic has been a stunning success worldwide, from the day it was introduced.
I will try to audition one.
Post by: J.J. Blair on February 15, 2007, 12:05:25 AM
Post by: compasspnt on February 15, 2007, 07:26:45 AM
Post by: Alan Meyerson on October 09, 2007, 11:21:28 PM
It works great for that, where I just want the spots to cut through just a little.
Post by: plughead on June 29, 2008, 09:44:14 AM
Any more users of this mic? Further comments by folks who've had some time with them and care to comment?
I'm seeing a few of these selling used and wondering if I should consider picking one up...
Thx!
Post by: J.J. Blair on June 29, 2008, 01:43:43 PM
Post by: seedyunderbelly.com on June 29, 2008, 02:10:55 PM
Of course so is a AKG C1000.(or a SM57/MD441!) It is not M49,C12 etc.
I have a friend who does some great work with a 4trk and a 57 He does not ask me for Thousands of dollars and tell me he is giving me an improvement on a classic feat of engineering.
Outperformed for a 1/4- 1/2 the price.
j
Post by: plughead on June 29, 2008, 02:21:49 PM
| J.J. Blair wrote on Sun, 29 June 2008 13:43 |
Jay, there are better mics for less money. You only have to have this mic if you need to see a Neumann badge |
Thx J.J. - I was expecting that comment, and know there is something special lacking in most of the TLM range. I do like the TLM193 for acoustic instrument micing, but falls short for being a 'character' mic, as that is not it's forte.
So, in your own opinion of other 'contenders' within this price range, what are your suggestions? The mic does not have to be relegated strictly to 'vocal' duties, but in general, a good mic that isn't necessarily a one-trick pony.
BTW - I have a Pearlman TM-1, and def. hear it will have it's uses for a variety of subjects, but am looking at another LD tube or condenser to help round out an otherwise anemic LDC locker selection. Opinions are welcome.
thx,
Post by: seedyunderbelly.com on June 29, 2008, 02:40:52 PM
They can be affordable and I think you may find it interesting comparing with the 103.
j
Post by: J.J. Blair on June 29, 2008, 02:45:23 PM
None of them look anywhere as cool, but you should really try that Chameleon.
Post by: plughead on June 29, 2008, 05:04:28 PM
Not heard the TS-1, nor the Mojave mics - might have to consider both - according to a few others, the TS-2 has something special sonic-wise, but sounds like the design is lacking forethought with the dials on the mic hidden behind the shockmount?!?
BTW - anyone heard the Lauten mics? Hearing very good responses with this mic:
http://www.lautenaudio.com/horizon-tube-microphone.htm
cheers,
Post by: plughead on June 29, 2008, 06:59:51 PM
Not tried or heard the 582/M62 - tell me more! I am totally in love with the nickel capsules' sound, and most def. would seek one out IF it were cost effective, and less problematic re: repairs/restoration...
Post by: studio1117 on June 30, 2008, 01:36:36 AM
Often you will read threads where people mention all these cheaper mics that are so much better. It just ain't so. The capsules are still well built, the grill is the same design as the M49/M50 range and is well built also. It's just a much better built better sounding mic than the ones some of the others have mentioned.
Just so as we can avoid the typical response to all my posts dealing with Neuamnn...YES I AM A NEUMANN DEALER. That affects my opinion in no way on this mic. I bought mine before I was a dealer and have dug it all along.
I don't think I need to state the obvious that "to each his own" but for me, I really, really dig it. (BTW I own about 20-25 vintage Neumann's)
I don't look at this mic the way some others do. I never expected it to replace an M49. I just expected it to be a good little mic, which it is.
As for uses, I've mic'd up acoustics, rooms, vocals & a harp and have liked it on all.
Post by: J.J. Blair on June 30, 2008, 02:59:07 AM
I know this much: Tthere were many applications for which I found the TLM49 not so good. It was OK on some vocals, hated it on OH, hated it on piano, it was not bad on acoustic and electric. I'd be shocked if you thought it was a better mic than the TS2, honestly. Better looking perhaps. Not better sounding.
Post by: Tomas Danko on June 30, 2008, 08:17:01 AM
Post by: maarvold on June 30, 2008, 11:03:27 AM
| Tomas Danko wrote on Mon, 30 June 2008 05:17 |
So far I find the TLM49 to be the least useful microphone among the TLM models, it's disappointed me in several ways everytime I've used the one here in our studio. One should not even compare it to, say, the TLM193 or TLM170 etc. |
The TLM170/193 represent the misunderstood part of the Neumann line. These mics are designed to be 'reality' microphones, not 'color' microphones. Neumann doesn't even bother to display the 170 at trade shows any more--at least not the last 2 I went to (the most recent being NAB/Las Vegas earlier this year). As one of the people staffing the booth told me, "people don't want reality, people want a microphone with 'tits and ass'." IMO, the place you're more likely to find the next classic microphone is from a boutique mic maker, not from a company that has balance sheets, monthly sales goals, marketing strategies, etc.
Post by: J.J. Blair on June 30, 2008, 11:21:30 AM
Post by: Tomas Danko on June 30, 2008, 12:01:38 PM
| maarvold wrote on Mon, 30 June 2008 16:03 | ||
The TLM170/193 represent the misunderstood part of the Neumann line. These mics are designed to be 'reality' microphones, not 'color' microphones. Neumann doesn't even bother to display the 170 at trade shows any more--at least not the last 2 I went to (the most recent being NAB/Las Vegas earlier this year). As one of the people staffing the booth told me, "people don't want reality, people want a microphone with 'tits and ass'." IMO, the place you're more likely to find the next classic microphone is from a boutique mic maker, not from a company that has balance sheets, monthly sales goals, marketing strategies, etc. |
I agree. They are not trying to be anything they aren't, and we've recorded a lot of material with those. They don't seem to hold up very well though, we've had lots of problems with a bunch of them.
FWIW, they were being used for the VO in the computer game Battlefield: Bad Company released last week. (It's scored the best computer game audio ever, so far)
For a current project that had more up-close and intimate VO they lost out to the Rode K2 however.
That would be my two cents regarding the question "what less expensive microphones are better than the TLM49?", then.
Again,
TLM193 and TLM170 = good and very useable.
TLM103 = boring and overpriced but useable.
TLM49 = unpleasant surprises after the recording sessions and even more overpriced.
And yes, I have been using these microphones a lot and I'm not a "Neumann Hater".
But when I record music I'd take even a new U87ai over the TLM's any day.