Why do people dislike the U87?

[elambo]

Originally Posted by LaChunkyStudio

Rubbish!! A U87 can sound great on vocals. Just find the right vocalist.

I can say this and it would also be accurate:

An SM57 can sound great on vocals. Just find the right vocalist.

[5down1up]

because you pay the name bigtime. for the value, there are defenately better options, i still love my 87. but 3ks for a mic like this ?

[ghost]

i have an old 87 great for banking up vox IME

[alternative4]

i don't like it.it's abit harsh to my ears

[Steffmo]

Some people hate them because they can't afford them.

Some people hate them bcause they don't cost 7000.00

My opinion...... How can you "hate" a mic. Don't shoot the messenger. There will be many things an 87 sounds good on, some it sounds great on, some it will not give you what you want on.

But an 87 often sounds very good to excellent. Of course with every mic making using it as a standard to surpass, you will find ysome ou might like better....on some things. You might even find it more to your taste in general.

The mic has a pretty great legacy to hate though And i do hear hate here at times.

[analogjeff]

regarding the original question... i think lots of people hear new 87's and find them too bright and fizzy -- i agree and don't think they're at all worth the price... older 87's, though, are a different mic, in my view... for some voices they consistently win out over lots of the 47 clones and related mics...

real 47's and 67's, as well as some of the really expensive clones, are better, no question, but a good, older 87, which can be had, with some patience, for around $2,000 or so, is an excellent mic in that price range... i've tried a lot of stuff in that range and have sent it all back... although the Pearlman LE is here on trial right now, and it does seem quite nice at this point, and we may buy it -- but it won't replace our 87, just complement it... don't care for the Peluso stuff or the lower priced Telefunken mics, etc. etc. Of course, all depends on the voice, the mic pre, the type of music and the room... and, BTW, 87's can be killer overheads...

my 3 cents

[Omega Arts]

Recorded a smoky blues female singer on a U87 recently with the pre's in my DMX R-100, a ballad, no EQ, no compresion. Sounds like high priced silk.

I hate 414's. Never found anything they sounded good on much less great.
my 2

[tone delux]

i've had great results with new U87s. I was blown away once with a Vintage U87. it had this huge sound. especially when compared to a 414. mic pre was a 737SP. it holds up next to the C-800G i use.

you can always get a klaus heyne modification if your mic overloads with powerful vocalists.

[Zero Point]

I love the u87. Ironically, though, I love it on almost everything but vocals! As an amp mic, as a room mic, wind instruments, etc.

The better u87's are the older ones. But they tend to be really expensive . And at the price point of a vintage u87, a new Sony C-800 is a much better vocal mic.

And it looks like a medical frigate from Star Wars, so that's a plus!

-ZP

[T_R_S]

I love my U87's all 3 if them

[Peacock]

Originally Posted by houndog328

I've heard "boring" and other comments about the U87, obviously it's a high quality mic, why is there so much negative feeling towards it?

I have no hard feelings at all toward the U87. I would use it. For that type of sound I prefer DPA and Gefell omnis . I would not avoid the U87. If you are thinking about buying a mic in that price range I would suggest the Gefell omni or DPA 4006.

I also do not dislike the AKG 414 but mine is the old one (20 years old and my first good mic). I still use it as well but like the omni DPA and Gefell better for my recording style.

[ripper]

Originally Posted by tone delux

i've had great results with new U87s. I was blown away once with a Vintage U87. it had this huge sound. especially when compared to a 414. mic pre was a 737SP. it holds up next to the C-800G i use.

you can always get a klaus heyne modification if your mic overloads with powerful vocalists.

the klaus heyne modded u87 is the only one i've ever liked.

67's smoke a regular 87. THAT was progress?!?!

a pair of 87 as overheads aint bad,

but there are a lot of other mics around for less $$$ that sound WAY better.
good luck.

[jammate]

I have had mine since 1986 and used it as the primary mic 80% of the time. Based on the math I would say I have gotten my money out of it.

Along the way I have added 30+ mics to the closet but I still drag out the 87 on a daily basis.

[reflixtinian]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

I think the same is true for the 414, seldom great on it own, often perfect in a mix.


Well said!

The same here !


Great mic, i like the u47 fet too

[reflixtinian]

I was talking about the 87 , not the 414
Haven´t heard the new 87s thoug

[drbob1970]

I recently got a new U87 and a Peluso 2247LE. I must say, in the recent sessions, I tried both on various sources (guitar amp, sax, trumpet and voice), and in almost all cases the Peluso was prefered, by me and by the artist, over the 87. But the 87 never sounded bad of course, it's just that the Peluso gave a more pleasant sound.
On a female voice, it was really close. In isolation, the Peluso was more pleasing, but in the context of the mix, it wasn't that clear cut.
Most of the time, both mic were plugged into a Portico preamp.
Just wanted to share this experience, as I read in a previous post someone's remark about not even wanting to try Peluso stuff.
Cheers

[nickolo]

Just cannot believe people slag off 87s.Pathetic!!It's a pro instrument end of.Perhaps one prefers a c12 or i don't know sony c800..Same with 414s.These are amazing designs and will work for years if maintained well.All these models will yield great results depending on artists and engineers/prods..Along with 57s,67s,47s and 414s they have recorded and recorded great music and will continue long after this silly debate...Long live people-sound-a mic....

[Tube World]

What I love about the U87ai is the classic Neumann character in the low mid's. With the transformer it has, it adds weight to your vocals. I need that weight with my voice and others who I record. The top end has a nice sparkle as well that is better than the $1,000 mic's out there. It also puts your vocals on top of the mix, giving you a large bigger than life sound. I heard that George Harrison recorded his last record with it. The older ones have less top end, but with today's music, the more top end is what's in. Throw a LA2A or Manely ELOP on top of the vocal track and it's magic.

[Mr. Man]

My one complaint is that people always turn to the U87 as the swiss army knife of microphones without ever trying other mics that might be better suited to the instrument/voice.

This is especially annoying in Film where you can sometimes tell that a line has been ADR'd with a U87 as the character of the voice changes from the raw on-the-set shotgun sound (with its own sonic characteristics) to a smooth ADR iso-room with the water bottle on the table next to them U87 sound. King Kong and Gladiator are huge perpetrators of this.

[videoracer]

The biggest problem is that nobody seems to realize that there's no one mic for every purpose. The Neumann, like any other mic, will sound good on this and not on that. Those here who think it can be thrown in front of anything and will sound great are totally delusional.

A true professional will see to it that the proper mic is used for the given situation. One horn player will sound better on mic X than through mic Y, feeding into the same gear. Playing the same horn. Etcetera, etcetera.

The right mic for the right sound. That is all that matters. Not the brand. That is the mark of a true professional.

[themikesonata]

Originally Posted by oscilloscope

I think that the U87 was, for a long time, a great mic and a great choice for a wide array of sources. I just think that in the past 10 years so many new mic manufacturers have cropped up with some amazing mics... some that would blow the doors off the u87... at half the price! Some manufacturers include Peluso, Charter Oak, Blue, Mojave, Groove Tubes and many others. I bought a Peluso 2247LE last year and although its a totally different mic than a U87 I'll use it above my 87 in a heartbeat... for just about any source. My point is that, you can get a superior mic for the same $$$ as a U87, or buy two great mics with different vibe for the same price as a 87.

YEAH! + 1

[Rich Pell]

I found my 2247LE sucks on Horns . Really squashes the sound. But a U87 can be amazing on horns . I prefer the Peluso on male vocals.. that said, i`m pretty sure Jeff Bukley sang through a U87 for most of "Grace" .... ya neverr know...

[ScumBum]

I think its over priced . I'd pay $1200 for one , thats what I think its worth . And yes on Vocals its boring . For drum overheads I like them .

2 U87s as overheads , 421 on kick and 57 on snare is my favorite .

[redrue]

The complaint I seem to hear most is one of price/performance (value).
And I tend to agree on this point.

I also don't like the presence peak. I think the frequency response on the
mic diminishes an otherwise excellent performer.

A very good mic, just not a 'wow'.

imo

[Chaellus]

i tryed it thought it was harsh,...not a really interesting sound and way over priced.... may work on some voices but i think it'd serve better on OH or gutiars or something like that....but for the price you can get other mics that can go circles around it...IMO

[Igotsoul4u]

I think people don't like it because it doesn't live up to the hype. I like gear that puts a smile on my face instead of "that'll work." People think it works for everything and it really doesn't. I especially hate it on vocals. I have never recorded a vocal with a u87 and liked it. It sounds dull and sterile no matter what preamp I run it through. The high end is not smooth and the high mids (800hz-2k) is unpleasantly forward. I picked up a telefunken ak47 and it blows it out of the water in versatility, sound, and price. I am surprised when I find a source that doesn't sound good in front of it unlike the u87 which usually nets the opposite reaction. The biggest problem I have is the price!!!! Sweetwater lists the u87 at $3k!!!!!! It sounds like a $1000 mic. Bottom line. I would buy one if it was priced right. Its especially hard to justify with so many other great mics in the 1k-2k range that beat up on an 87 cost and sound wise. I could buy both new telefunken mics for the price of 1 87.

[vernier]

Some of the worlds best singers used the 87 exclusively. Thats how good it is.
'

[Fruition2k]

What other studio item has been made continuously for 40 years? Its a respected
studio standard...

[Bradahman]

Originally Posted by Fruition2k

What other studio item has been made continuously for 40 years? Its a respected
studio standard...

The 87's made 40 years ago are actually a lot better... With that, this mic is living on it's past... Seriously, if this mic was invented to today and it did not have the "N" name in front of it, it would be a sub-$1000 mic. Add to that, it would never become a studio standard.

[DJGoody]

I have tried for years to replace using my 87s on overheads, and ambient mics. Sometimes there are more suitable choices, but I still use the 87s on every record I do, So, since I use them on 100% of the sessions I do, and they're on 50% of drum tracks on overheads/ambients, I think they're well worth the price.

To each his own, how can someone say that a mic is BORING. That's absurd. That means the SOURCE is boring. That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. A compressor can arguably be boring, but not a microphone.