R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: UM 92.1S Mod?  (Read 2762 times)

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
UM 92.1S Mod?
« on: February 02, 2019, 12:49:23 PM »

Could anyone who has completed the Archut mod to the MG UM 92.1S please comment on how it changed the sound of the mic?
To me, stock, it has strange artifacts in what I think is the upper mids.  I can only describe it as a distortion that is a little sizzly. It should be noted that I am a sibilant vocalist (high tenor) and I shot it out over 2.5 months against many other high end mics. It was the most tame in the highs and clear in the mid's for my voice. Probably about 20 or so in all. I could provide a list but I don't want to derail this thread or provide additional irrelevant info.

My final contenders were a Manley Reference Silver, Vintage UM 57 and the UM 92.1S. There were others that I liked but they either exceeded my budget and/or weren't quite right for me.

I am in Long Island, NY and I am considering the mod?  Any recommendation's for a good tech to do the work?

I can PM a more extensive list if anyone wants to fall asleep.

Thanks.
Logged

klaus

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2108
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2019, 02:32:37 PM »

I am familiar with the circuit changes Oliver came up with. They are an audible improvement and have been widely discussed on Gearslutz and DIY forums.

But I caution you investing in a modification of this mic unless you are certain that the aggressive mids and sibilance you complain about are not the result of the post-2000 PVC formula that's been used by MG on all their M7 capsules for more than a decade now.

I personally find these capsules too sibilant and mid-forward, and they remind me how brilliant MG's M7 capsules used to be until the change-over.

So, unless you own a very early U92.1S, you may want to reconsider pursuing a modification.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks®
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #2 on: February 02, 2019, 07:14:24 PM »

Hi Klaus,

Thank you for your reply. 

My Um 92.1S is new, purchased within the last few months.

If I am understanding you correctly, the PVC formula changed after 2000, thus affecting the finite details of the sound of the mic's capsule. It contributes to the brightness and forward mids. Thus am I to consider that some of the artifacts I am hearing may actually be the result of changes made to the actual PVC of the M7. I'm sure it's probably been discussed as to why the formula was changed (I am assuming capsule longevity or regulatory management) but if it isn't broken, why "fix" it?

At any rate, it sounds as if the mod will help to tame these issues.

Thank you again.
M
Logged

klaus

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2108
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2019, 12:23:05 AM »

Hi Klaus,
(...) I'm sure it's probably been discussed as to why the formula was changed (I am assuming capsule longevity or regulatory management) but if it isn't broken, why "fix" it?
At any rate, it sounds as if the mod will help to tame these issues.

The formula was changed due to government regulations: the old type PVC used chemicals in the process of manufacturing diaphragms which were deemed highly toxic to anyone working with them repeatedly. As far as I know, longevity was not affected or improved.

The mod will improve the sound of the mic, but with a compromised capsule as front end, its shortcomings can only be modestly mitigated with a modified processor.

Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks®
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2019, 07:08:32 AM »

Thanks Klaus albeit somewhat frustrating.
Logged

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2019, 08:28:31 AM »

Hi Klaus,

I figured I'd throw this out there.

Would a capsule reskin fix the issue? Any recommendations and material specs? Would it be worth it?

Thanks.
Logged

klaus

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2108
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2019, 12:52:59 PM »

A "reskin" (re-diaphragming) of your MG M7 will not make your situation better, but likely worse.
Aside of Siegfried Thiersch, whose current M7 efforts are roughly equal to those of MG, there are to my knowledge no third-party providers who have the skills to put a PVC diaphragm on an M7 with an acceptable (for me) sonic result.
Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks®
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #7 on: February 03, 2019, 03:09:59 PM »

Thanks Klaus. Good information.
Logged

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2019, 10:34:37 AM »

Hi Klaus,

I have been doing some research. 

So I guess I should clarify that after some heavy listening this mic indeed sounds good on my voice.  The upper midsized are a bit prominent but I think it is preferable for my voice.  However, there is a little nasality and the sibilance I can remove with the de-esser on my SPL Channel One.

There is a little bit of nasality (slight, not overwhelming) that I am wondering if it can be removed by mods to the mic. I guess that congestion is what is bugging me most.

Thank you in advance for your reply.



Logged

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2022, 08:50:36 AM »

Hi Klaus,
Thank you for your replies in the past.

I know this is a tenuous subject for you personally, so I'll just ask one simple question:
Reading back in our posts, I am wondering if a capsule that was skinned with the old formula prior to mid 2000's would wipe out the nasality I hear in the tests I did with the mic?

I think this is more annoying than anything else, although I'm certain that what you have discussed in the posts leading to this question is quite contributory to the answer I seek.

Thanks.
Logged

klaus

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2108
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2022, 03:28:19 PM »

We have not (yet) developed a satisfactory vocabulary to describe aural impressions, at least not in the English or any other modern languages.
While populations with intimate connection to the natural world have, over time, developed highly differentiated ways to express sensual observations, our vocabulary describing characteristics of what we perceive aurally is in its infancy.

Words like "creamy" or "airy" are quite awkward to describe a microphone's sound. Even my clumsy attempts to define certain sound characteristics of microphones as having "mid range authority", "reediness" or "robustness" are just primitive approximations to describe what I hear.

You keep describing a certain type of unpleasantness in the mid range of your mic's frequency response as 'distortion that is a little sizzly' and 'congested'. All audio processors, including that of the M92.1 S, contribute artifacts, but nothing defines the sound of a mic as strongly as the capsule.

'Congestion' describes to me what post-2000 MG M7 - both PVC and Mylar - sound like: an inability to process and transport a complex sound in its full timely integrity through the device, without audible losses or unpleasant distortions to the original signal.




Logged
Klaus Heyne
German Masterworks®
www.GermanMasterworks.com

Mishro

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Re: UM 92.1S Mod?
« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2022, 03:18:08 PM »

This is a sensible and fair answer.
A mic "dictionary" would certainly be helpful.
Thank you for taking the time to do your best to present a theory as to why I might be hearing what I think I am hearing.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.229 seconds with 21 queries.