AT4050 vs TLM103 clips attached HMMMMMMM don't know

[MREVOL]

Hey guys, so I just got a new at4050 and decided to throw it up with my TLM103. Im going to be selling the loser.

Both mics are right next to each other ran thru a TG2 at the same settings. This is just one performance.

Which do you like better????

BTW I just sang how far I was from the mic to get some vocals going on. **DISCLAIMER** IM IN NO WAY A SINGER SO LISTEN TO FIDELITY AND NOT PERFORMANCE

[BrianHanke]

The mics sound almost indistinguishable at 1 feet and 3 feet. B seems to have more proximity effect up close. I prefer A in that case since it sounds a little tighter.

[MREVOL]

Might be just me but I think there's a big differance.

Interested to see what more people think.

[Tha Govna]

I prefered clip A all the way through. I also hear a significant difference, with A being the one I prefer. I want to believe clip A is the 103 based on the name alone, but AT makes some hella quality stuff too, even at the lower price tag.

[didier.brest]

I listened to 3 and 1 foot takes and preferred B. More presence and clarity. Significant difference indeed. I also just have got an AT4050 and I'm not impressed up to now. I don't have a TLM 103. I guess that B is the TLM 103.

[mobius.media]

Listened to 1 ft. Preferred B.

[MREVOL]

I for sure hear the mid differences.

[Tha Govna]

Okay, time to leave the PC speakers and take these into the studio.

[dysenterygary]

B all the way. I hope its the at4050! I've been looking for an excuse to buy that one.

[BlueGoldKeys]

i like B the most, especially at one foot. I will put all my chips in saying that B is the TLM103

[flober1970]

A more metalic
B warmer

prefer B!

F

[dustyreels]

Honestly I didn't like the way either of them sounded. I love my 4050 for acoustic guitar but paired with a sdc. The guitar overpowered the vocals too much to get a fair vocal comparison. I also really like the 4050 on a wide range of vocals. In general I think 4050s blows the 103s out of the water on just about anything. I'm in no way knocking you abilities, I'm sure this test was done casually. I listened with my laptop hooked up to a old Technics stereo listening through a pair of Senn HD 280 headphones, so take that for what it is. If your not in a huge hurry to sell one or the other you could allow yourself some time to see which one will work best for you. Peace...

[MREVOL]

Hey Dusty sounds like you have some love for the 4050. I understand. The test is casual but it shows the sonic imprint both of the mics will have on a recording. To me A has a little more mid push to it while B has a little more air on top and low mid push.

More opinions while you all don't know the answers bwah haa haa haa

[dustyreels]

Originally Posted by MREVOL

Hey Dusty sounds like you have some love for the 4050. I understand. The test is casual but it shows the sonic imprint both of the mics will have on a recording. To me A has a little more mid push to it while B has a little more air on top and low mid push.

More opinions while you all don't know the answers bwah haa haa haa

Please know by no way was I bashing you recording abilities.

[hankdrummer]

Mic A sounds somewhat flat
Mic B has a presence boost i don't like

condenser mics straight to digital sounds really cold to me

[lakeshorephatty]

I will say I'm guessing A as the AT and B as the Neumann.

Reasons.. I once tried the TLM103 and as a mic it sounded brittle and broken to me. kind of like B. Not something i could ever see using for anything. Albeit that was about 5 years ago and only one time.

Now that could be room related more than mic so i could definately be wrong.

A actually sounds quite usable and balanced given a better source and performance. I am hoping it is the 4050. I have kept a 4050 and will continue to do so so i'm hoping i can hear what it sounds like.

If A is the neumann that i got rid of i'm glad my ears have come a long way since then and maybe i should consider getting rid of the 4050!

Russell

[lakeshorephatty]

Originally Posted by lakeshorephatty

I will say I'm guessing A as the AT and B as the Neumann.

Reasons.. I once tried the TLM103 and as a mic it sounded brittle and broken to me. kind of like B. Not something i could ever see using for anything. Albeit that was about 5 years ago and only one time.

Now that could be room related more than mic so i could definately be wrong.

A actually sounds quite usable and balanced given a better source and performance. I am hoping it is the 4050. I have kept a 4050 and will continue to do so so i'm hoping i can hear what it sounds like.

If A is the neumann that i got rid of i'm glad my ears have come a long way since then and maybe i should consider getting rid of the 4050!

Russell

Oh, and you can interchange the word "broken" with "no mids"....

[6strings]

Originally Posted by hankdrummer

Mic A sounds somewhat flat
Mic B has a presence boost i don't like

+1

Can hear the boost a bit, but don't know if that's a bad thing. Guess it depends on the application. I'd keep A I guess...

[RiKi]

I prefer B for the 3 feet (more sentimental sounding "warmth")
A I prefer on 1 feet (more aggressive sounding suits better)

If it where me I would go for B because I like the warmth sound on it well it sound
little smoother.
A sound good too depends on the style of music you play thumbsup

[MREVOL]

Well heres the answers folks

A=at4050
B=Tlm103

By all the slamming of the 103 and praise of the 4050 I though it was going to be an easy choice but now hearing them side by side they both have something I like.

[hankdrummer]

not a big surprise

while the presence boost of the TLM 103 is a problem for many people (me included), i think it still has a Neumann vibe. That vibe is what makes Neumann so popular i guess.

the AT4050 has a more "faithfull" frequency response, but it doesn't have a very appealing sound. It sounds a bit dry, and "grey". the TLM 103 is more colorful.

specs & curves don't tell the whole story !

[lakeshorephatty]

Originally Posted by hankdrummer

not a big surprise

while the presence boost of the TLM 103 is a problem for many people (me included), i think it still has a Neumann vibe. That vibe is what makes Neumann so popular i guess.

the AT4050 has a more "faithfull" frequency response, but it doesn't have a very appealing sound. It sounds a bit dry, and "grey". the TLM 103 is more colorful.

specs & curves don't tell the whole story !

Dude, sorry i can't agree. The mids on the TLM sound like pure mush, thats its real problem, there's not much there. I have a U87 and its mids are superb, and my cm7-gt neumann clone is also great in this range.

On the test in general.. phew. glad to hear that my ears rejected the right mic all those years ago.

Russell

[Angler]

I don't get it.

Listen to these mic shootouts.

Mic Comparison

Even the author said he wondered if the upgrade
in gear made THAT much of a difference.

I put all the mics in 4 batches. You'll hear similarities
because of placements. Batch 3 I think sounds a bit
duller....only because of placement because he uses
a $50 Behringer as a reference.

There is so little difference in the vibe, and sound,
that I could simply EQ the difference in.

I.E. Didier Breast who does mic shootouts here, did a
comparison between a Rode K2 and an AT 4047, on
acoustic guitar.

I made them sound practically identical with EQ. The 4047
has a midrange dip and folks will say "it's a warmer mic"

I fixed that with eq in 30 seconds.

So, my question is this.

How are these guys getting such great guitar sounds?

These bouncy and light sounds. I've seen the mics make
not much of a difference. Sure, some guitar sound different
than others, but not to the extent I'm hearing in the recordings.

Can a preamp have this much power of the sound? Because this
is what I've narrowed it down to at this point.

[hankdrummer]

Originally Posted by lakeshorephatty

Dude, sorry i can't agree. The mids on the TLM sound like pure mush, thats its real problem, there's not much there. I have a U87 and its mids are superb, and my cm7-gt neumann clone is also great in this range.

On the test in general.. phew. glad to hear that my ears rejected the right mic all those years ago.

Russell

i don't think we're disagreeing that much, i didn't say i would buy a TLM 103.

i don't like the mids as well in the samples, but that could be the mic placement ...
never used the mic so i can't really judge it.

btw, is it me or most low-end mics have a shitty mid-range ?

[lakeshorephatty]

Originally Posted by hankdrummer

i don't think we're disagreeing that much, i didn't say i would buy a TLM 103.

i don't like the mids as well in the samples, but that could be the mic placement ...
never used the mic so i can't really judge it.

btw, is it me or most low-end mics have a shitty mid-range ?

Cool. Yeah I think there are a number of different typical problems with lower end condensers. If it works it works and i don't question it but I haven't found many that do. I'd rather use a dynamic or ribbon if the mic is at all in the low end category.

Russell

[lakeshorephatty]

Originally Posted by Angler

I don't get it.

Listen to these mic shootouts.

Mic Comparison

Even the author said he wondered if the upgrade
in gear made THAT much of a difference.

I put all the mics in 4 batches. You'll hear similarities
because of placements. Batch 3 I think sounds a bit
duller....only because of placement because he uses
a $50 Behringer as a reference.

There is so little difference in the vibe, and sound,
that I could simply EQ the difference in.

I.E. Didier Breast who does mic shootouts here, did a
comparison between a Rode K2 and an AT 4047, on
acoustic guitar.

I made them sound practically identical with EQ. The 4047
has a midrange dip and folks will say "it's a warmer mic"

I fixed that with eq in 30 seconds.

So, my question is this.

How are these guys getting such great guitar sounds?

These bouncy and light sounds. I've seen the mics make
not much of a difference. Sure, some guitar sound different
than others, but not to the extent I'm hearing in the recordings.

Can a preamp have this much power of the sound? Because this
is what I've narrowed it down to at this point.

Forgive something you've probably seen around here before but:

great player
great guitar
great room
great mic placement (manage proximity/location and find the best pattern)
great mic (preference here, but usually LDC or Ribbon with IRON or tubes in it for me)
good pre
good conversion
small amount of corrective eq for the mix

Band limit unagressively any unneeded lows or highs

if you don't like pick noise very much, search and destroy techique it but don't overdo any of the eq'ing.

You should be good to go.

Personally. I've never found the sound i want with sdc's. Ldc's or ribbons are good for me, usually not transformerless. Many pre's can get you there, its just preference. The room is also key and a good room sound blended in subtly is often easier than trying to find a spot pulled back. If your room isn't stellar do a mid side. an AT4050 is an amazing room/side mic for something neutral. You can eq the crap out of the room mic to remove highs and lows and get a good ambiance blended in.

Do you do some of/all of those things? I don't agree that most mic differences can be eq'd for. Mic's have a certain tonal character that can't be eq'd around. A good capsule and circuit passes the sound with an strong or enhanced quality to the signal. Often a cheap circuit passes a weak signal with a distinct lack of dimension. Something not really noticed on computer speakers but brutally evident on a good system in a mic with several elements.

Russell

[hankdrummer]

in a way, a Neumann U47 doesn't sound "better" than a Behringer ECM8000.

it's like saying red is better than blue. any color can be used to make music.

for example, Josh Homme (QOTSA), Jack White (White Stripes), Sonic Youth... they all have some plastic / chinese made guitars in their collection, and i'm sure they use them more than we think.

The Rip by Portishead was done with a 5$ guitar
recorded with a U47 though

ah
you get it

[MREVOL]

Originally Posted by Angler

I don't get it.

Listen to these mic shootouts.

Mic Comparison

Even the author said he wondered if the upgrade
in gear made THAT much of a difference.

I put all the mics in 4 batches. You'll hear similarities
because of placements. Batch 3 I think sounds a bit
duller....only because of placement because he uses
a $50 Behringer as a reference.

There is so little difference in the vibe, and sound,
that I could simply EQ the difference in.

I.E. Didier Breast who does mic shootouts here, did a
comparison between a Rode K2 and an AT 4047, on
acoustic guitar.

I made them sound practically identical with EQ. The 4047
has a midrange dip and folks will say "it's a warmer mic"

I fixed that with eq in 30 seconds.

So, my question is this.

How are these guys getting such great guitar sounds?

These bouncy and light sounds. I've seen the mics make
not much of a difference. Sure, some guitar sound different
than others, but not to the extent I'm hearing in the recordings.

Can a preamp have this much power of the sound? Because this
is what I've narrowed it down to at this point.

Im kind of the opposite. As I think mic's are a big deal. I agree that you can put two mics up and eq them to sound more identical but theres no way your going to eq a 58 to sound like a u87. You also have to take in the fact that when you mic something are you throwing a couple mics up so you know what to eq for.

Im really old school as its all about mics, pres, placement, and players. Lets save the eq'ing for last.

[Me2]

Originally Posted by MREVOL

Hey guys, so I just got a new at4050 and decided to throw it up with my TLM103. Im going to be selling the loser.

Both mics are right next to each other ran thru a TG2 at the same settings. This is just one performance.

Which do you like better????

BTW I just sang how far I was from the mic to get some vocals going on. **DISCLAIMER** IM IN NO WAY A SINGER SO LISTEN TO FIDELITY AND NOT PERFORMANCE

B sounds as though it has been "Pre-EQ ed" if you know what I'm trying to say. So at first listen at 1ft it's attractive but then it isn't as flexible if you want to do your own EQ'ing. Second time listening it sounds like there's something bloated in one part of the upper mids and lower frequencies are missing. At 3ft it just sounds thin.

A sounds much flatter and truer and perhaps even boring. I'd take A though as you could process it the way you wanted for the song.

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by Angler

I don't get it.

Listen to these mic shootouts.

Mic Comparison

Even the author said he wondered if the upgrade
in gear made THAT much of a difference.

I put all the mics in 4 batches. You'll hear similarities
because of placements. Batch 3 I think sounds a bit
duller....only because of placement because he uses
a $50 Behringer as a reference.

There is so little difference in the vibe, and sound,
that I could simply EQ the difference in.

I.E. Didier Breast who does mic shootouts here, did a
comparison between a Rode K2 and an AT 4047, on
acoustic guitar.

I made them sound practically identical with EQ. The 4047
has a midrange dip and folks will say "it's a warmer mic"

I fixed that with eq in 30 seconds.

So, my question is this.

How are these guys getting such great guitar sounds?

These bouncy and light sounds. I've seen the mics make
not much of a difference. Sure, some guitar sound different
than others, but not to the extent I'm hearing in the recordings.

Can a preamp have this much power of the sound? Because this
is what I've narrowed it down to at this point.

Howdy, thanks for pulling up my old mic test.

I'm not sure if you're asking about the guitar sound on these clips. If so I'd be glad to discuss those recordings.

I've done a few other comparisons since then and posted them here:

3 Lower priced LDs

Schoeps vs CAD and Shure

Fran