Why do people dislike the U87?

[John Willett]

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?

Jealousy

[AllAboutTone]

Originally Posted by John Willett

Jealousy

yep.

[radkins]

They are good on strings, but on vocals I find then a very bad choice, kinda like the 414, and that is a recording standard as well.

[LaChunkyStudio]

Not expensive and rare enough for the bashers.

Great mic BTW (and I include the new ones in this statement).

[LaChunkyStudio]

Originally Posted by radkins

They are good on strings, but on vocals I find then a very bad choice, kinda like the 414, and that is a recording standard as well.

Rubbish!! A U87 can sound great on vocals. Just find the right vocalist. Oh, and the 414 is a great utility mic - I have 2 original 414s and 2 EBs. Not normally used on vocals but can give good results also if there is nothing else available. They are just not expensive or esoteric enough for the high-end slutz.

[leaper]

In the 80's it was probably the most well known Neumann mic amongst musicians and it felt like on every session the vocalists would express disappointment that our studio didn't have one. Most of them had never used one, BTW.
After a year or so of constant U87 references the studio made the leap and bought one. It took 15 minutes to realize that it was a great mic...but only for some voices and some instruments. We fell for the self created hype, imagining that it would work for everything, and were disappointed.
There was a period when we felt quite bitter and over reacted against the U87 by being negative about it.
Nowadays studios have lots more choice for vocal mics and customers don't wheedle on about 87's so much.
It has it's place in a mic locker even though in many situations it gets outperformed by cheaper mics.

[Herb Utsmelz]

I've never used a U87, but I can't imagine it being worth $3000 more than my AT3035. Heh, maybe I have tin ears...

[Daedalus77]

It is a fine mic. It is a studio standard. It is fairly versatile, but not as much (in my experience) as one might expect, as some previous posters have noted.

At the end of the day, it gets the job done. And if you've got one (or two), consider yourself lucky.

It's a great mic for learning or revealing how minor changes in placement can alter significantly what's recorded.

That said, it is overpriced—both old ones and the new ones—and there are, I think, better options available for the money these days.

Like a couple of the Gefell models.

That's my $.02. Other (more experienced) ears will differ.

[Flymax]

I think a lot of people dont like it because
1) It overloads easily with loud singers and can sound like shyt if the pad's off
2) It's a Neumann and its priced hi for what it is

[yoink]

Originally Posted by Daedalus77

It is a fine mic. It is a studio standard. It is fairly versatile, but not as much (in my experience) as one might expect, as some previous posters have noted.

At the end of the day, it gets the job done. And if you've got one (or two), consider yourself lucky.

It's a great mic for learning or revealing how minor changes in placement can alter significantly what's recorded.

That said, it is overpriced—both old ones and the new ones—and there are, I think, better options available for the money these days.

Like a couple of the Gefell models.

That's my $.02. Other (more experienced) ears will differ.

+1

[dan p]

i have an 87 and its a standard that always sounds pretty good on most things,but my other go to mic is a pearlman tm1.Half the price of an 87 and it sounds warmer imo.I also have some decent preamps and those make a big diffrence.Seems these days that folks are lookin for that boutique mic that sounds like your original u47-67.There are lots of good choices out there.



Dan P

[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.

[Charlie_M]

maybe some of the people who hate their good condition original u87s can shoot me a PM and we can take a stab a solving that little problem

[Tony Shepperd]

It's an okay mic.
When I built my first studio back in 1985, it was at the top of my list for mics.
But now (IMHO), there are so many better sounding mics for the price.

[popmann]

I think a lot of the dislike comes from listening solo'd.

I think it's a pretty killer vocal mic. But, it doesn't make the voice sound "nice" solo'd. What it does it make a voice sit in a mix great...accept whatever level of compression/EQ you need without weird side effects...that "honky" quality is often exactly what a voice needs to sit correctly.

Also, the new ones suffer from a few issues--they're not as consistent, don't have the same headroom as the 87i models, and are priced because of the name/model recognition--not actual quality. Once you're spending close to $3k on a solid state mic, you can find decent tube LDCs, which as a broad generalization, will do a bit better capturing vocals to digital.

If they'd lower the price to $1500-2k, everyone would start loving them again. ...because if you compare it to the competition, even the 87AI (flaws and all) do better than things like Kiwis, UMT70s, 414s...

I think the key to understanding is mentioned above with the Peluso 2247LE--you always hear things like "I like MicX much better...but, it sounds completely different". If you want "that" sound...87 is it.

I also disagree with the "you have to find the right vocalist"...I think it's beauty is that it works pretty well on anyone--no need to try 10 mics...throw up an 87 and hit record. There are almost always "better" mics...but, an 87 will almost always get something that works and works well.

[Daedalus77]

Originally Posted by popmann

...because if you compare it to the competition, even the 87AI (flaws and all) do better than things like Kiwis, UMT70s, 414s..

I've worked with all of these.

Kiwi... Yes.

UMT70S... No way. Not on your life. It's different, sure (the Gefell is "cleaner," the 87 more robust in the low-mids), but the Gefell is a much more "exciting" mic, I think. More "detailed." At least up against the several 87s I've used.

414... it depends.

I suppose it depends on application, singer, etc., but I'd take the Gefell over an 87ai any day.

My $.02.

[Dog_Chao_Chao]

I have a 87, 89, gefell 990, 2247LE and 414 uls. i agree with the fact that the 87 and 89 are not the most exciting mics compared with the gefell and the peluso for example. The thing is, the peluso gives me alot of harshness problems with alot of singers, it can sound scooped and unatural, the gefell also has some issues in the upper end freqs. with some singers. They can sound wonderful or pretty hyped. the 87 and also the 414 dont sound that great in solo but they never sound bad and usually deliver a sound thats easier to use in the mix, no desseing, no eq cuts when you start compressing.... I know people dont like to use the 414 on vocals but I end up using it frequently. Great for singers with less than perfect voice, or sibilant singers, just great. In fact, its the only mic i have that i can say that never sounds ugly.

[Rich Pell]

Theres a ton of mics out there that sound better that an 87 but sometimes not many that work better on the source that an 87 .

For instance, try record a Tenor sax in a booth ( playing medium to loud , volume wize) with a 47 clone and a real U87 side by side. You won`t believe the differance actually . The 47 clone might collapse , recording a thin sound and the U87 should be able to handle the high spl`s and sound big and full .

that said, 87`s are damb expensive these days...

[Mike Caffrey]

I think two reasons.

One is the reason they're everywhere is that they were the 57's of the Neumann brand, so they'll certainly have the place for certain things. There are a couple of brands that give a studio credibility and Neumann is one, so if you want cred, and want to keep costs down, buy and 87.

I had a vintage pair that I just wasn't into. I used them, but was never impressed. I recently traded them for a C12, which blows them away. When VK checked them out, they found that they needed some work, so some of their lacking may have been due to their condition and I'm sure they're not the only vintage pair around in use not up to spec - so the other cause is maintenance issues.

And of course the new ones aren't the same as the old ones....

[squeeks555]

because no matter how hard it tries, its not a U67, and it never will be.

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by popmann

I think a lot of the dislike comes from listening solo'd.

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

Originally Posted by Rich Pell

Theres a ton of mics out there that sound better that an 87 but sometimes not many that work better on the source that an 87 .

Well said!

[LaChunkyStudio]

Originally Posted by squeeks555

because no matter how hard it tries, its not a U67, and it never will be.

?????? It was never meant to be ......

[HeavyG]

The U87...gets to walk in the AKG C1000s shoes. Sheez...tough crowd.

[vernier]

Its the perfect mic for certain vocalists, as are other mics for other vocalists.

[DeepSpace]

Originally Posted by popmann

I also disagree with the "you have to find the right vocalist"...I think it's beauty is that it works pretty well on anyone--no need to try 10 mics...throw up an 87 and hit record. There are almost always "better" mics...but, an 87 will almost always get something that works and works well.

Must say that's been my experience.

When I read people saying an 87 only works on particular sources, I have to wonder what the heck they did with it on the others.

[dick swifter]

Good value? Prolly not. But they sound AMAZING on toms!

[mostlykeys]

Originally Posted by radkins

They are good on strings, but on vocals I find then a very bad choice, kinda like the 414, and that is a recording standard as well.

You should take a listen to the LTD c414. They do not sound like other c414's

Orlando

[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 ?