R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => The Acid Test => Topic started by: mgod on September 28, 2008, 11:20:33 am

Title: Pearlman church mic
Post by: mgod on September 28, 2008, 11:20:33 am
http://www.pearlmanmicrophones.com/church_mic.html

Anyone able to do a comparison? JJ, you must have an original.

DS
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: J.J. Blair on September 28, 2008, 06:02:30 pm
I don't have an original.  

I did try the Pearlman, in its first incarnation, and it didn't do anything that made me go "wow."  Dave has since done a revision, I believe.  I don't know what it was.  It's a simple circuit, based on a 6072 tube and a Triad transformer.  

But what I described about what I didn't like about the sound to people who have used a real Church, seemed to concur with their findings.  If you imagine a U47 without the midrange presence and the bass, then you have the Church.  It was designed for being able to mic actors on soundstages from distances greater than you would use on any singer.  It may have better reach than a U47, but this clone lacked the texture and warmth that make me love U47s.  

That doesn't mean that somebody else won't like it.  

But I'd love to hear the revision.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Steve Hudson on September 28, 2008, 11:06:03 pm
I had Dave's prototype for a month and had the same reaction that J.J. did. Once J.J. shared what the original application was for the Church mic, i understood why it didn't have the magic I was looking for.
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: maarvold on September 28, 2008, 11:25:57 pm
It's probably a bit too early for this topic to be explored fully.  I arranged a loan of 2 Church mics to Dave recently and he says he's been checking them out very thoroughly.  Based on what he found, he made it sound like he's done a pretty substantial redesign of his model and I don't know if anyone's heard it yet except him.  He sounded very excited about it, though.  I'll email the thread link to him--maybe we can get him to check in.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: maarvold on September 30, 2008, 12:02:15 pm
Dave Pearlman called me yesterday afternoon.  He says he always has trouble logging in to these forums (Internet Explorer/PC--he said he would also try Firefox).  He was rushing to prep for AES (manning a booth with Pete Montessi/A Designs - Booth 1415, fyi).  He sounded excited to post about what changes he's made to his original design and also said he's try to post from the show if he couldn't get on before he left.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: maarvold on October 01, 2008, 10:44:00 am
Dave Pearlman emailed this to me this morning:


Michael,
   I still haven't been able to get on that site.  Oh well.   Here's the deal:

The older version of the Church type mic that I built I tried to utilize my existing power supply and changed a couple of resistors in the voltage divider to get approximate voltages correct for the mic.  Although the mic worked well it lacked a bit of low end as stated by Steve and J.J.. I went back to the original schemos and put the voltage back up so now it's much higher and the mic sounds completely different.  I hope to get samples to both Steve and J.J. after AES so that they can compare and evaluate.  I will make the mics with both M7 (Thiersch) and K47.  We also (Mr. Aarvold and myself) did a lot of listening to different versions of 6072 tubes (when I built a different mic for him; five star, etc...) and I will be picking the very best sounding tubes that I can find.  I'm still using the Triad JO23 that is being made just for me from the original papers by the original company. Interestingly enough I have in my possession an early (maybe prototype) Church that has a completely different schematic; it's the only one like it that I have seen.  It uses a 6AU6 and the circuit is more like a U47 than a Church.  Hmmm........


Please feel free to post...      Thanks,   Dave
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Larrchild on October 01, 2008, 01:49:31 pm
They (original) can be exceptional on acoustic guitar.
Try that.
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: J.J. Blair on October 01, 2008, 04:48:38 pm
I will say that the lack of bottom end on the first version did sound great on acoustic, where the bottom end of a U47 usually makes it the reason I never choose a U47 on acoustic.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Brian Kehew on October 20, 2008, 01:51:57 am
I once used JJP's Church mic for a while and it was exceptional on vocals. Not lacking in bass at all. Quite the opposite.
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: maarvold on November 06, 2008, 09:00:16 pm
Today I met Dave Pearlman at my buddy, Carlos Castro's studio.  Our mission was to somewhat informally check out Dave's latest version of the Church Mic (with M7 capsule; Dave said it was a Thiersch).  We put up one of Carlos's U47s which, I believe, was restored by Martins at BLUE.  I have to say, through my Gordon Audio mic pre, these 2 mics sounded quite close.  The low bottom on the U47 was just barely a hair bigger.  Dave's mic felt just a hair more open in the 400 Hz area (which, for me, is a plus) and--again, just a hair--more extended on top.  But these 2 mics felt more like 'brothers' than the 'cousins' that they really are.  I could see Carlos's wheels turning as he tried to figure out how he was going to buy one, which he said he would do.  YMMV.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Sean Eldon Qualls on November 07, 2008, 10:33:05 am
maarvold wrote on Thu, 06 November 2008 21:00

We put up one of Carlos's U47s which, I believe, was restored by Martins at BLUE.  I have to say, through my Gordon Audio mic pre, these 2 mics sounded quite close.


If the BLUE47 is like any other BLUE47, it has nothing to do with a U47 except on the outside. Just saying...
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: maarvold on November 07, 2008, 12:48:31 pm
It's not a BLUE 47.  I'm pretty sure Martins worked on it way before those, but I'll try to find out from Carlos.  I would also say that, for around 3-4 years now I have been paying attention to the sound of every 47 that I come into contact with (here in L.A.) and I've only found 2 that really remind me a lot of each other; one is from a rental company and was worked on by Klaus, the other is stock and is owned by some friends who own a studio and a rental company.  At some point I want to get Dave's Church mic in the same room as one of those two.  FWIW, Carlos's mic reminds me more of those 2 than several other stock 47s I've used and therein lies the problem: what if it turns out that Carlos's mic is a BLUE 47, but still sounds more like one of the 2 I've used that seem quite similar than other stock 47s?  If that is the case, what is the standard?  How do we define the standard?  Since nobody, including Klaus, seems to be able to agree on a proper, repeatable way to test microphones where more than a handful of people can share in the results--because everything is suspect, from source material to recording methodology--we are left with a situation where all we can go by is what individuals who use these things report about them; hopefully they report truthfully and with a deep enough 'rudder of experience' that their judgements have merit.  But I'd be the first to admit, I still learn new things every single day.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: J.J. Blair on November 07, 2008, 09:08:49 pm
Does anybody know what year the Church mics were built?  

My experience with the Blue47 which I owned was that it sounded a great deal like a 47 from about 1kHz on up.  It was on the low mids and low end that you could hear the difference.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: maarvold on November 08, 2008, 01:15:05 pm
J.J. Blair wrote on Fri, 07 November 2008 18:08

My experience with the Blue47 which I owned was that it sounded a great deal like a 47 from about 1kHz on up.  It was on the low mids and low end that you could hear the difference.  


I did find out that Carlos's 47 IS NOT a BLUE 47.  It was, as I had remembered, rebuilt/restored by Martins Saulespurens prior to the BLUE 47s being made.  To my ear, Carlos's mic has just a bit more air and top than the 2 similar 47s I've used (mentioned in my previous post).  It does seem pretty similar from 120-700 if my sonic memory serves me correctly.  And I'm not saying there would be an indiscernible difference between it and the 2 other 47s--actually I feel like it is just a little 'cleaner' (or 'purer') sounding somehow; but I would also think there would be discernible differences between each of the 2 other 47s as well.  But this is why I'd like to also compare Dave's mic to one of the other 47s--to see how close it feels to that one.  
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Billy Yates on March 16, 2009, 07:19:28 pm
J.J. Blair wrote on Fri, 07 November 2008 20:08

Does anybody know what year the Church mics were built?  

My experience with the Blue47 which I owned was that it sounded a great deal like a 47 from about 1kHz on up.  It was on the low mids and low end that you could hear the difference.  

JJ...
I believe they were built in the mid to late 50's and around 200 units were built, until Gotham Audio decided to quit supplying Stanley Church the parts needed to build them. I would like to stress that not all Church mic's are the same. If you remember my Church mic thread on Whatever Works, mine had the 6072 and a different Triad transformer (small) than the other two that I had in my shop, which were Nuvistor types with the larger Triad transformer. Those two mic's sounded nothing like the 6072 version I had. Like you, I didn't like it on Vocals, but it excelled on Cello and acoustic guitar. It also worked very well as a room mic with a lot of detail, so the point about it's "reach" is plausible. Mr. Bock would be our resident authority on this subject.
Back to Dave's mic...
Wonderful guy and his mic's are very beautifully built but I have yet to use one! I would guess that his new version rivals a good vintage example and maybe surpass it.
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Dominick on April 12, 2009, 09:45:51 pm
Check out Welk on Benny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cM3rEm8kIg
I count 6 of them on this set up
Myron, drums, bass, 2 on the reeds, Larry's pop
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Silvertone on April 16, 2009, 08:29:18 am
Dominick wrote on Sun, 12 April 2009 20:45

Check out Welk on Benny
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cM3rEm8kIg
I count 6 of them on this set up
Myron, drums, bass, 2 on the reeds, Larry's pop



Nice RCA ribbon on the horns as well!  Very nice...

On a related not my moms cousin Orie Amodeo played Clarinet for Lawrence for over 20 years (a few shows even feature him as he was a producer as well and Lawrence would let him bring on some of his acts). It's fun to watch those shows.
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: Brian Kehew on April 17, 2009, 03:41:53 am
I have seen various Church mics - about 6 in person. And most were different physically from each other on the outside. So - makes sense that he built them for the moment with what was around. Much as Pearlman adapts his mic for new reasons, I bet Church did the same, various changes over time.

That being said, I think they are fine for secular music, too (*joke*)
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: u47guy on May 10, 2009, 12:54:49 pm
Very cool Jack Benny clip!
Title: Re: Pearlman church mic
Post by: RMoore on May 29, 2009, 08:10:55 am
Silvertone wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 14:29

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cM3rEm8kIg


Wow - the footage of the orchestra is amazing in so many ways,

Thnx for that link!