Any U67 clone mics in the works?

[cheu78]

Originally Posted by xj32

Ok...here is hoping the U67 gets the Tribute treatment!!!

The T-1 is one of my favorite mics in my collection and needs a sibling!!!

XJ

I know I've already posted it, but to me the Mahalia is rather close to the sound of a U67.. it's not a clone, and the headbasket is different from the U67.. You could check the files following this link..on the vocals the real U67 might have an edge, but on the ac gtr is absolutely undistinguishable from the Mahalia.. at least to my ears.

Beesneez Mahalia Tube Microphone



Cheu

[illacov]

Originally Posted by NothingTheory

I belive in EU and in the US there is a way to get a 20 year extension but im not certain of the circumstances needed for that. In any case since the mic was originally built in 1960 that still doesn't hold water for 2012.

You cannot build a new device simply to re-patent an old idea. You can make improvements and patent the improvement, but it has to be novel in some way. And that olny protects the improvement not the original design. In fact if I could make a novel improvement on the design I could patent that myself, thats how the system works.

So im going to have to call BS on the headbasket patent thing until someone can prove me wrong and show me the active patent, which should be public and searchable if it exists. There seems to a lot of tribal knowledge out on the web on this topic but few hard facts.

Not that I actually even want to reproduce one, but after doing some searching and seeing 50 tribal posts on how a 52 year old item is supposed to still be patented is annoying me.

Nothing, I think what may be falling through the cracks here is that while the patent is a good place to see if someone were safe to reuse the design, it is not the only way intellectual property can be protected.

If the headbasket is a distinctive feature of a Neumann product and it definitely is, then it may indeed be considered trademark worthy. If it is trademarked then I believe that doesn't expire unless the trademarked feature is not used for a predetermined period of time.

Considering that Neumann is still making the U87AI and as well the TLM67 is still pretty darn new, they are well within their rights to at least claim that a product looks like a Neumann U87 or a TLM67. Perhaps it would not be on the sole grounds of a patent, but at the trademark level they definitely have a case because the headbasket (which is what we are all talking about here) is a distinguishing feature of Neumann's products. There's no doubts about that. Its their Swoosh.


Peace
Illumination

[anguswoodhead]

Originally Posted by mics

Watch this Space.....

Originally Posted by cinealta

I'm listening....

Originally Posted by xj32

Ok...here is hoping the U67 gets the Tribute treatment!!!

The T-1 is one of my favorite mics in my collection and needs a sibling!!!

XJ

[thenoodle]

Originally Posted by illacov

but at the trademark level they definitely have a case because the headbasket (which is what we are all talking about here) is a distinguishing feature of Neumann's products. There's no doubts about that. Its their Swoosh.


Peace
Illumination

Lots and lots of talk here. Has anyone thought to simply ask Neumann for an okay to create a similar headbasket for third party use? So far, I have not heard of one single person/company who have actually asked. Maybe you're all making this too complicated. Maybe Neumann would say "yes".

[Fleaman]

Originally Posted by thenoodle

Lots and lots of talk here. Has anyone thought to simply ask Neumann for an okay to create a similar headbasket for third party use? So far, I have not heard of one single person/company who have actually asked. Maybe you're all making this too complicated. Maybe Neumann would say "yes".

I think, no I'm convinced, you'd get the same answer that you'd get from any company in which you're attempting to copy one of their products (current, past or future product), NO!

It doesn't even have to be legally correct, but the safe thing to say for ANY company is 'No'.

Now, if you're talking about licensing, that's a different thing, and like everything, there's a price point at which I'm sure they'd license it, but that price point will probably be too high for anyone (in a rational business model).

[NothingTheory]

Originally Posted by illacov

Nothing, I think what may be falling through the cracks here is that while the patent is a good place to see if someone were safe to reuse the design, it is not the only way intellectual property can be protected.

If the headbasket is a distinctive feature of a Neumann product and it definitely is, then it may indeed be considered trademark worthy. If it is trademarked then I believe that doesn't expire unless the trademarked feature is not used for a predetermined period of time.

Considering that Neumann is still making the U87AI and as well the TLM67 is still pretty darn new, they are well within their rights to at least claim that a product looks like a Neumann U87 or a TLM67. Perhaps it would not be on the sole grounds of a patent, but at the trademark level they definitely have a case because the headbasket (which is what we are all talking about here) is a distinguishing feature of Neumann's products. There's no doubts about that. Its their Swoosh.


Peace
Illumination

There are utility patents ( functionality ) and there are design patents ( look and feel ). You cannot trademark what is essentially might be considered a utility or design patent. I think the headbasket is both actually since there seems to be opinions that the shape has functionality.

I do agree though that on a certain level none of that matters, and it comes down to how deep are Neumann's pockets compared to yours. Its certainly possible for a company to sue another on a claim with no basis with the sole purpose of putting that company out of business or getting them to stop making a competing product solely based on legal fees involved. Monster Cable company does this as a primary tactic and it works most of the time.

[Brad McGowan]

I know for a fact that Sennheiser (Neumann) sells microphone body parts for the U87, because I bought a new body for my U67 a few years ago. My original one was pretty dinged up and I wanted it to look nice, so I splurged. They even put a black badge on it so it would look like a vintage U67 (black vs. purple). Was it pricey? Yep. Does it look f-ing sweet, now? Yep. I'm pretty sure they would sell a customer a replacement U87 head basket as well.

My question is this: If I buy a U87 body and head basket from Sennheiser, can JJ Audio make me a Jasper using these parts?

Or option #2: There is currently a DIY U67 project on Groupdiy.com. The body/grill the guy is making looks to be very U87-ish with the proper angled grill. Can I get JJ Audio to make me a Jasper using these parts?

thanks,
Brad

[legato]

with the u67 i have to watch my 2k-4k presence so to speak

Exact opposite experience here.

Full agreement on it being a fantastic microhone.





Henk

[Brad McGowan]

I think choice of tube impacts the mids a lot. I put a GEC tube in mine initially...mids were too much. Got a Telefunken...smooth as butter.

Brad

[illacov]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

I know for a fact that Sennheiser (Neumann) sells microphone body parts for the U87, because I bought a new body for my U67 a few years ago. My original one was pretty dinged up and I wanted it to look nice, so I splurged. They even put a black badge on it so it would look like a vintage U67 (black vs. purple). Was it pricey? Yep. Does it look f-ing sweet, now? Yep. I'm pretty sure they would sell a customer a replacement U87 head basket as well.

My question is this: If I buy a U87 body and head basket from Sennheiser, can JJ Audio make me a Jasper using these parts?

Or option #2: There is currently a DIY U67 project on Groupdiy.com. The body/grill the guy is making looks to be very U87-ish with the proper angled grill. Can I get JJ Audio to make me a Jasper using these parts?

thanks,
Brad

We can put into that body as far as I'm aware, the main issue is we cannot offer that as a product. So it would be the body you provide with a Jasper circuit but not the JJ Audio Jasper.

Regarding the DIY 67 build, you would have to purchase that body yourself and provide it to us since that vendor does not sell to other commercial outfits, only to private individuals.

The Neumann body is definitely an option however I would recommend that a person thoroughly investigate the ways to obtain those bodies. More likely than not we would not be approved for that sort of thing because we are a competitor. We do service Neumann microphones but we are not an authorized service center so idk how things would progress if we were to call them and request bodies. It may be one of those things where again the customer has to obtain those things on their own and provide them to us.

Peace
Illumination

[Brad McGowan]

Agreed. A customer would have to procure those bodies/parts and provide them to JJ to do the mod. The DIY parts would definitely be the most economical. Neumann would freak you bought a number of them and offered them as a product.

It might be worth it to buy a used U87 for the capsule, mechanical parts, and then turn it into a U67. What's Neumann KK67 go for these days?

Brad

[tskguy]

Why not build a u67 yourself, You know about that thread over at groupDIY Its an exact component replica of the u67. Even the crazy transformer. What I have heard so far is pretty amazing. And it isnt has hard to build one as you think

[legato]

Nah, can't be any good.




Henk

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by tskguy

Why not build a u67 yourself, You know about that thread over at groupDIY Its an exact component replica of the u67. Even the crazy transformer. What I have heard so far is pretty amazing. And it isnt has hard to build one as you think

I'm not sure if you are addressing me or not, but I'm seriously considering picking up all the parts even if I don't get to it for a while. I've even sourced a whole set of the vintage Wima caps. Anyone care to comment on the options for high end K67 capsules? I'd be tempted to splurge for a Neumann.

Thanks,
Brad

[legato]

Go for it, Brad.





Henk

[tskguy]

D-U67 Tube Mic Complete PCB Kit (Pre-Order) New U87 PCB for U67 body

Check it out, I actually just finished the second one ever... It was actually a pretty easy build. You just have to be carefull around the over 200vdc. I think it may be the only u67 clone ever to use the original syle transformer. I am actually building capsules for this project that I think sound pretty close to the original. For sure sounds better than the chinese stuff. I would never try to stear you away from a Nuemann though!! If you can stomach the price go for it!

Eric

[illacov]

Originally Posted by tskguy

D-U67 Tube Mic Complete PCB Kit (Pre-Order) New U87 PCB for U67 body

Check it out, I actually just finished the second one ever... It was actually a pretty easy build. You just have to be carefull around the over 200vdc. I think it may be the only u67 clone ever to use the original syle transformer. I am actually building capsules for this project that I think sound pretty close to the original. For sure sounds better than the chinese stuff. I would never try to stear you away from a Nuemann though!! If you can stomach the price go for it!

Eric

I believe Wunder Audio's CM67 and the Jasper both use transformers that have the old style transformers with the tertiary winding.

I know we use the AMI T67.

The Wunder CM67 has been around for a brief while now and the Jasper for a few months.

The kit is definitely not the first clone to incorporate the transformer. But I think that's a minor issue.

More so the proper voltage from the PSU, the proper voltage type from the PSU, the proper transformer, the proper filtering, the proper capacitors (investigate what was used in the original), good quality resistors, get a nice high quality K67, get a good EF86 (Valvo, Amperex, Telefunken etc), oh yeah and put that all together correctly and you've got a kick ass microphone waiting to happen.

The kit is a great project for someone who has the skill set and the time to put together a U67. I definitely think this is more of a Jedi level build though. Definitely much more difficult than a GSSL or a mnats 1176, between the fabrication, level of detail and degree of difficulty when its all said and done. Definitely a labor of love, you can verify that with Jim.

However if you've got the chops for this sort of project and the time, energy then by all means

*I'd get laughed off the phone if I told the majority of my customer's to build their own microphones.

Peace
Illumination

[anguswoodhead]

BeesNeez K67 capsule as used in the U67

"Product Information

The BeesNeez K67 is drilled, hand single lapped with beveled blind holes.
This is a copy of the capsule used in the U67 as used in the Mahalia.

Price: $343.85"

[tskguy]

No suprise Wonder Audio makes a accurate clone. And hats off to you for actually taking one Mic building past the DIY world.. Not an easy task, and making a u67 with the AMI tx, very very cool, That TX has a great meaty tone.
If you guys check the thread over at groupdiy you can see some pretty detailed pics of the build I just finished. It is for sure no the easiest build but once Dany (aka poctop) and the 2nd beta builder (Wave) are finished we will have a very detailed step by step PDF posted for all of the builders. The High Z section alone will be a bunch of pages. Anywho, I am also offering capsules built by me for this build, I am not in this for the money I was just trying to fill a gap between the crappy chinese capsules and the other DIY options out there. ie Peluso Beezneez. etc. My capsules are machined and tuned by me 100% made in the USA. So far I am pleased with my capsules. I just spent the last 5 evenings tweeking all of the final details. Here is a clip of my u67 and my very brave wife singing. Its through a 312 pre in to my fireface. No eq but I did volume normalize the file in my wave file editor. Let me know what you think? I think its close maybe a touch sibilent. Opinions welcome.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/55530129/female%20vocal.wav

[mics]

Originally Posted by tskguy

My capsules are machined and tuned by me 100% made in the USA. So far I am pleased with my capsules. I just spent the last 5 evenings tweeking all of the final details.

Can i see some pics of your handy work with the capsules? i'm looking forward to seeing them. thanks. ben

[tskguy]

Here a is a pic of some of my backplates that I completed recently, And a completed capsule that I just finished for an 87, Again this is strictly a hobby thing for me. And Ben I would love any opinons, PM me if you would like.
Did you listen to the clip?

[illacov]

Originally Posted by tskguy

No suprise Wonder Audio makes a accurate clone. And hats off to you for actually taking one Mic building past the DIY world.. Not an easy task, and making a u67 with the AMI tx, very very cool, That TX has a great meaty tone.
If you guys check the thread over at groupdiy you can see some pretty detailed pics of the build I just finished. It is for sure no the easiest build but once Dany (aka poctop) and the 2nd beta builder (Wave) are finished we will have a very detailed step by step PDF posted for all of the builders. The High Z section alone will be a bunch of pages. Anywho, I am also offering capsules built by me for this build, I am not in this for the money I was just trying to fill a gap between the crappy chinese capsules and the other DIY options out there. ie Peluso Beezneez. etc. My capsules are machined and tuned by me 100% made in the USA. So far I am pleased with my capsules. I just spent the last 5 evenings tweeking all of the final details. Here is a clip of my u67 and my very brave wife singing. Its through a 312 pre in to my fireface. No eq but I did volume normalize the file in my wave file editor. Let me know what you think? I think its close maybe a touch sibilent. Opinions welcome.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/55530129/female%20vocal.wav

Are you willing to sell to commercial outfits?

I'd love to evaluate a capsule

Peace
Illumination

[NothingTheory]

Originally Posted by illacov

Are you willing to sell to commercial outfits?

I'd love to evaluate a capsule

Peace
Illumination

I'd love to hear Illacov's evaluation of a capsule.

[tskguy]

Wow,

I guess I havent put to much thought in to that, But I am open. I will PM my details and maybe we can chat offline.
Did you listen to the sample??
Thanks,
Eric

[anguswoodhead]

I listened to the sample which was real nice but as you hinted at it was a tad sibilant.
Maybe that was the singer, maybe it was the capsule...

[popmann]

No singer is sibilant.

Sibilance is a misinterpretation by the transducer of a gust of transient air hitting the cap. Now, some singers have more air released-thus the experience that some singers may be more prone...but, the point is only a mic "hears" sibilance. It's an electrical phenomenon.

While I understand that's a bit semantics...in this particular discussion, it's an important one. The negative feedback is to counteract this phenomenon, which was new at the time--singers didn't get close enough for airs teams to hit the cap. And why tuning the cap to be less responsive to high end is not the same thing as having it VERY sensitive and THEN using the feedback to pull off highs when they fall out of balance.

It was an intentional design for that very purpose. the entire design purpose of all the "color" of the mic was Neumann trying to maintain the "intimacy" that was becoming all the rage in the late 60s close mic'ing while counteracting the "side effects" maintaining the natural balance. Which is why many people don't like it...they like the bigness of the proximity effect--they like the sexy sizzly highs enough to DeEss and dePop vocal tracks...

The secret to airy pop/rock vocals is having a more EVEN (due to the feedback) high end response...thus allowing you to boost (post compression) more than you could with an unchecked high end dynamic--which includes transient airstream misinterpretation.

[Philip S Bova]

Originally Posted by popmann

No singer is sibilant.

I don't agree.
Are you refering to sibilance being defined only as an electronic distortion in the mic itself? I agree that some shitty mics can crap out on excessive Esses. I've recorded vocalists who were extremely sibilant
ie: their esses and shhhh's way to loud relative to their actual voice acoustically in the room and that translated into a sibilant vocal sound through any vocal mic of course. One male vocalist in particular was so sibilant and it didn't matter what mic I put on him, ribbon, dynamic, LDC, etc... Call it bad vocal technique or whatever you want but HE was sibilant and it wasn't the microphones' faults or any electronic distortions. Maybe your definition of sibilance is different than mine....

[tskguy]

Interesting conversation about sibilance, I agree that a singer can have sibilant tendencies as well as other factors that can add beyond the sound of the microphone itself, room, pre amp etc.
That being said I did some further testing and even smoothed out the 10k sibilance that my capsule had a touch of even more. I think it’s pretty spot on at this point. I did the tests with a couple pres and even changed the tubes as well. I did the test at a buddies studio and I am waiting for him to dropbox the clips. As soon as I have them I will post a link.
Thanks to those that gave my clip a listen,

Eric

[kidvybes]

Originally Posted by popmann

No singer is sibilant.

Sibilance is a misinterpretation by the transducer of a gust of transient air hitting the cap. Now, some singers have more air released-thus the experience that some singers may be more prone...but, the point is only a mic "hears" sibilance. It's an electrical phenomenon.

...if that's the case, I must have sibilant eardrums, as I have heard the presence of sibilance with particular singers on more than one occasion, before even powering up the microphone...


Sent from my SPH-M820-BST using Gearslutz App

[hop.sing]

Originally Posted by thenoodle

Lots and lots of talk here. Has anyone thought to simply ask Neumann for an okay to create a similar headbasket for third party use? So far, I have not heard of one single person/company who have actually asked. Maybe you're all making this too complicated. Maybe Neumann would say "yes".

I heard that the old Rhode NT2, which has a very similar headbasket design to the u67/87, was discontinued because of legal problems with Neumann. On the other hand it was a really spitty, sharp sounding mic anyway, they forgot to implement the deemphasis network with a kk87 copy capsule.