Al
Alecio,
I'm writing to thank you for making this interesting topic available for all to see in every forum on REP, and the rest of the internet. God forbid someone should miss it.
Oh, thanks Bud!
My impressions...
I recorded two takes with the TLM 103 and the At4050 at cardioid pattern.
I ran both thru a Sebatron mic pre (VMP200VU) , using the same cable, (Monster cable) , no inserts, no processing.
I decided to track a very familiar source.. my own voice... So, I read a 1 minute text.
After this, we auditioned both, inserted Waves PAZ, made some readouts at PEAK and RMS modes.
IN both microphones we had a slight bump around 7246hz , which probably is my natural sibilant region.
The TLM provided a deeper tone towards 378Hz, which made my voice warmer. However, I Have not had the opportunity to test it on a real world vocal session and a mix situation.
Although the TLM would sounded nicer in my voice, I think that a baritone voice would provide not the very same good results.
Right after we added Compressor Banks CB2 and a bit of reverbers from Yamaha SPX models so as to to verify a final tone as if we were mixing the source.
I am going to test it against the AT4040.However, I do not have the U87 and the TLM 193 here for more tests. Anyone?
We also tried testing them thru the Yamaha 02R V2 mic pres and we reached similar results. Everything was recorded to a PT Mix Plus OS 9.2/5.1.3 rig.
THanks
Alecio, I say this with all sincerity: Fuck Neumann and AT. Buy yourself a Langevin CR2001 (made by Manley). It kicks any solid state Neumann's ass any day of the week (except for maybe the FET47). And I've got to say that sitting here with a pile of AT 40 series mics that got sent to me, they all sound papery.
| J.J. Blair wrote on Fri, 24 June 2005 12:11 |
Alecio, I say this with all sincerity: Fuck Neumann and AT. Buy yourself a Langevin CR2001 (made by Manley). It kicks any solid state Neumann's ass any day of the week (except for maybe the FET47). And I've got to say that sitting here with a pile of AT 40 series mics that got sent to me, they all sound papery.
|
Didn't you just said at Klaus' forum that the AT4060 was the best thing ever for vocals?
I said that the AT4060 was the surprising dark horse. It sounded great on vocals and mono mic'd piano. I did not say it was the best thing ever. It was hardly the best of the sixteen mics I tested. It was the one that really surpised us at how good it sounded, meaning based on the way the other mics sounded we expected less. Besides, it's tube, not solid state. And it sounded papery on acoustic guitar. I'm not a fan of the solid state ATs that were mentioned. And, I still like the Langevin better than the AT4060.
| J.J. Blair wrote on Fri, 24 June 2005 09:11 |
Alecio, I say this with all sincerity: Fuck Neumann and AT. Buy yourself a Langevin CR2001 (made by Manley). It kicks any solid state Neumann's ass any day of the week (except for maybe the FET47). And I've got to say that sitting here with a pile of AT 40 series mics that got sent to me, they all sound papery.
|
Hi J.J.,
US$800.00 for the Langevin too! That's not bad at all. I noticed Manley Labs' web site speaks of it being a versatile mic. Have you found that it shines on anything in particular?
Thanks,
Paul
thanks guys. In fact a "famous ex-Sony Music female singer" chose the TLM 103 over the 4050 due to its "cool boom" around 378 hz here at my recording studio in this afternoon.
I imagine the TLM will sound horrobly muddy on baritone vocals.
I am eagr to test the TLM 193, which people have been telling me it uses the same capsule of the U89.
The U89 is very good for voice-over work.
$800 is the list price for the Langevin. I bet the street price is much better. Besides, they wind their own transformers and they sound great. This whole transformerless craze is a crock of shit. A transformer is one of the most important parts of mic, when it comes to adding character to the signal.
The Langevin is literally great on everything. I have used it it on vocals, piano, overheads, toms, acoustic guitar, electric guitar, mandolin, you name it. I haven't found anything I didn't like it on. It kicks any TLM mic's ass, IMO.
Thanks JJ; and thanks to alec, I thought the questions were very usefull. Shame on you Robert!
Funny thing, when I auditioned the Langevin mic I didn't think it was all that. It was run through one of those remake Langevin micpreamps however so perhaps it's the combination that didn't appeal to me.
Just looking at the Langevin mic, it seems to be a better buy than the Manley Cardioid all things considered... so it'd be either the Langevin or the Manley Reference Gold, as far as best buy goes.
As always YMMMV (talking about microphonemileages here)
/Danko
JJ,
What kind of mic pre do you like on the Langevin? I find that can make a very large difference in my mic choice. A good match vs. a bad one can sometimes change my mind on a mic.
I haven't heard this mic. I'm going to try to find one to check out next week. Thanks for the comment.
| EyreSpace wrote on Sat, 25 June 2005 01:15 |
Thanks JJ; and thanks to alec, I thought the questions were very usefull. Shame on you Robert!
|
I agree. I just find the cross posting inconsiderate.
I tend to use it with Neve 1073s, API 512s and actual vintage Langevin AM16s, not the new ones. I haven't used the new ones, but as far as I understand they sound nothing like the originals.
U89 is very different from U87.
U87 is perfect for solo parts.
U89 is one of the best mics for panoramic recordings (choirs, orchestra..) because it can record at wide angles without losing the response, instead it's not well suited for solo voice because when at proximity the bass is muddy and the highs are unclear.
Well, all I know is my TLM-103 sounds great on my baritone voice through great river preamp. Needs very little eq, most of the time none at all.
| Quote: |
A transformer is one of the most important parts of mic, when it comes to adding character to the signal.
|
I agree with you JJ, about there being more character in a transformer-based condenser mic.
The funny thing is that the character partly or mostly appears as a result of passing unscathed through the amplifying circuit.
The opposite is usually the case (more dead sounding) for transformerless-type mics because of the added complexity and less-than-ideal working impedances in the circuit.
Using a transformer reduces electronic components inside and better matches impedance between the inside electronics and the outside pre.
Watch out for crafty manufacturers who use inferior transformers: the trasformer is one of the hardest and most expensive components to manufacture properly. A good trannie sounds great.
I hear Eddie Murphy is really into trannies, too.
Anyone else using the tlm 193?
TLM 193. Another piece of crap designed by Neumann's accountants and marketing office.
by the way...
what would be a fair price for a U89? Could buy one but not sure about the price...
cheers
steveeastend
Al
Gefell kicks Neumann's ass any day of the week, too.
I like lots of solid state Neumanns for various things... 87's, 47fets, KM-84's, KM-86's...
but not a single one of the transformerless ones is worth a dam.
For what USED to be the Neumann sound, I'd buy Gefells.
(edited to correct my own spelling... as I remembered the original expression is "worth a tinker's dam"... not 'damn'. Pedantic, ain't I?)
I have 103's and AT's and they are "ok". In fact I use a TLM-103 on my ham station. But I have to give it to W.W. on that one.
I did hear a transformerless mic i liked once. Doug Sax's brother built these 2 tube, line level ck-12's's that had no iron. They made some pretty awesome Sheffield albums. +) jus messin!
In fact I am facing that horrible situation of the Brand boutique crap. This singer I am tracking recorded with the "Big guys in NY" where they just used Neuamman mics on her previous SOny Music/Virgin albums. She already enjoyed the TLM 103 ( !!) and now I am stuck with Neumann. She complains about brands...
Very boring situation
>(
Al
Well you could explain that this "much nicer Gefell, is really the East German Neumann..."
There isn't a TLM I like on anything.
Tell your clients that Gefell is Neumann. Gefell is the town in East Germany that Georg Neumann had as his second manufacturing plant, and is the only company in the world that makes actual M7 capsules, which were the original Neumann capsule used in everything from the CMV3 to the U47 and M49.
Here, read about it yourself: http://www.gefell-mics.com/gefell_history_1.htm
BTW, I stand corrected by William, the KM84 and KM86 are excellent mics. I still am not a U87 fan, though. They don't suck like the TLMs do, but for that kind of money, there are such better options.
But I will say I have not heard a single mic made by Neumann after they were purchased by Sennheiser, that I thought was worthy of the Neumann brand name. If your clients are hung up on name brands, tell them the TLM 193 is really a Sennheiser.
thanks giys, you really helped me cheer up!lol
BTw.. what is Frigg?
| J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 28 June 2005 17:15 |
But I will say I have not heard a single mic made by Neumann after they were purchased by Sennheiser, that I thought was worthy of the Neumann brand name. If your clients are hung up on name brands, tell them the TLM 193 is really a Sennheiser.
|
As far as I know the TLM193 was already there before Sennheiser overtook Neumann.
The TLM193 is a U89 only with cardiaod pattern. It is like the U89 a dark sounding microphone.
I like the U89 more than the U87, becaucse it has more datailed highs (at hte same time smooth and not sharp at all) - everything sounds finer to me.
Well, at least somebody likes the U89.
| wwittman wrote on Tue, 28 June 2005 12:11 |
There isn't a TLM I like on anything.
|
Toms. The TLM103 is very convenient for this use. Of course, nothing beats a U47FET for percussion, but it's no longer being made.
TLM or not, red or purple logo, Neumann mics are still a better option than those Hoang-Ho mics flooding the market today.
And if your artist still requests that particular non-convenient mic, put whatever you know is better, turn the lights off and say it's a custom edition of it. 
Folks,
Before I begin- I am relatively new to the Pro Sound World, and I dont do this for a living... yet. Once upon a time, I worked in FM Radio as talent, production and techie.
Now- I own a Studio Projects C1 LDC mic, and a C4 SDC kit.
I use the C1 for voiceover, and vocals, and the C4's have been used as live recording ambience mics (ORTF, XY), overhead XY for small Chamber Ensemble, and sometimes individually for mic'ing acoustic guitars.
A C4 pair with omni capsules in ORTF formation gave me a marvelous airy expansive, and yet intimate sound. (The plates and forks and glasses clinking faintly in the background of an acoustic Coffeehouse set)
I have worked with various Neumans before from radio, and I always found them a little tubby-sounding on announcers.
To me, if I can't trust my ears, I can't trust very much. On that basis, I really like the SP mics, because they have given me such a consistently pleasing sound.
And for what they cost, there is not a better deal in pro mics anywhere, IMNSHO. Forget the name appeal and brand cults... I LOVE 'em!
Another well-kept secret is the Samson C01, which really kicks ass for live vocals. EVERY vocalist at my coffeehouse has gushed about the way they sound, and the great sensitivity allows me to place them farther away, so the talent feels much less crowded. They are equally lovely when micing acoustic guitars. While I would not normally use LDC's in a live open-mic venue, the $80.00 price tag makes them practically "expendable," and besides, if they ever crap out, you can always use them to hammer nails or subdue unruly patrons. The silly, blindingly-bright blue LED is easily tamed with a snip of masking tape, if the vocalist does not wish to wear sunglasses.
I would love to hear any comments based on actual experience and comparisons to other units.
Thanks!
Now there's a character!
| J.J. Blair wrote on Wed, 29 June 2005 08:27 |
Well, at least somebody likes the U89.
|
And guess what. The reason is not only taste.
If you use microphones for recording acoustical ensembles the off-axes frequency response is very important - regardless if you use the mics as a main pair / main arrangement (Tecca Tree, surround arraya) or as spot mics.
If the off axes response is not good you will have no chance to make a good recording with a main pair/array. And also it is difficult to integrate the spot mics in the mix. Instruments coming from off axis sound very colored and you do not really know how to equalize, because instruments on axis sound right.
With Neumann or Schoeps microphones you do not have this problem. There are of course a lot other companies making good microphones, but some cheap models which can sound great on single sources are useless for recordings decribed above.
The U89 behaves great as main system or spot microphone - at least. 
| Radi0welle wrote on Wed, 29 June 2005 17:28 |
A C4 pair with omni capsules in ORTF formation gave me a marvelous airy expansive, and yet intimate sound. (The plates and forks and glasses clinking faintly in the background of an acoustic Coffeehouse set)
|
It is impossible to built a ORTF formation with omnis.
ORTF means the microphones are spaced 175 mm wide at an angle of 110 degrees. The idea is based on the research of Williams and the relation between time and level of the 2 microphones.
With omnis you only had time differences and almost no level differences, even when an instrument/voice comes from far left/right.
I believe that you can really get a "marvelous airy, ... " sound because of the relatively norrow spaced pair of omnis, but that has nothing to do with the idea implemented in ORTF.
Thank you for pointing out the precise definition of ORTF, which I am already familiar with. That's precisely why I said "Formation"- it was an experiment that yielded good results. I used the 110 deg, etc. formation, but with omni capsules. I should have been more clear in my original description.
The singer insists on singing glued to the pop screen. Blergh!
Boominess and other proximity sideeefects... and claims it is intimacy!!!I really did not enjoy this TLM 103...for this specific application...
I shall be picking a TLM 193 just to satisfy her Brand boutique dilemma request
Sounds like you should buy an RE20 while you're at it ... so that you can club the singer ove the head with it.
Al
Sure I tried it also.. but the talent insists to glue.
Maybe she thinks that the pop screen is the Neumanns Condom!LOL
Blowed jobbed vocals!
| J.J. Blair wrote on Thu, 30 June 2005 11:23 |
Sounds like you should buy an RE20 while you're at it ... so that you can club the singer ove the head with it.
|
I prefer the MD421 for bashing singers over the head. I have yet to screw one up, although I did dent the grille slightly on one with a conehead that I had to bash last month.
| Radi0welle wrote on Wed, 29 June 2005 23:31 |
Thank you for pointing out the precise definition of ORTF, which I am already familiar with. That's precisely why I said "Formation"- it was an experiment that yielded good results. I used the 110 deg, etc. formation, but with omni capsules. I should have been more clear in my original description.
|
Now I am sorry If i sounded like a super clever teacher.
Al
she hates reverbers and chorus-hehee
the last thing one engineer would want is to end up with room verb into her tracks...LOL
There are some cases when you can say, sorry, I?m in charge of the sound here, and since you are not going to be responsible if the sound is not good enough to (you name it, the label, the producer, the boss, etc) then I get to choose the tools to work with; no considerations for brand or name, and just going for the sound. So let my make my choices and only AND if you are not diggin the sound, THEN you can speak your mind regarding the subject.
Good Luck
Hans
Many thanks guys. In fact her first album was released under Sony Music International, tracked, mixed and masterd by you gurus from NY.
LOL, kein Sorg, Hr. Roland, aber viele Dank!... ich verstehen
(bin einer Lehrer, auch!)
mit freundschaft,
-Daniel
ok... so what is the final veredict..
Tomorrow morning is the deadline!LOL
Hope this 193 sounds completly different from AT4050s, 4040s, C3000Bs, GTs and from the 103.
a)TLM 103
b)TLM 193
Thanks
|
|
|
|
