sound charateristics tlm 193 vs akg 414 b uls

[king2070lplaya]

Wondering if someone might be able to describe the sonic differences between the c414b/uls (with or without the AudioUpgrades mod) and the tlm193. Both exhibit a slight hi-mid dip, and a slight 10kish raise (more on the akg than the neumann). Wondering from those who've used both, the sonic differences between these two mics specifically.

Please don't compare to other 414 models, ie vintage EB's or TLII/XLS, etc. I cannot afford a vintage one with ck12 and/or repairs, and I do NOT want a modern/hyped 414. I am talking specifically about the model found HERE.

It will be used for my trumpet, for opera and classical singers, and as a general purpose mic. I know people love hyped/eq'd mics for "character" but I am not one of those people.

If you have any insights, I'd love to hear em. I'm pretty set on the tlm 193 but I thought i'd ask as the akg's can be gotten for a bit cheaper on the used market.

Thanks, have a nice one!

KB

[jnorman]

both are very nice mics, both are fairly neutral, and both are excellent for acoustic instrument micing and as main pair for near-field stereo micing of small ensembles. the akg is perhaps a tad more transparent, while the 193 has a bit of the neumann coloration (which i like quite a bit). the 193 has a bit more subdued top end which helps it excel at strings, horns and winds, while the 414 ULS seems to do best at piano, acoustic guitar, and more distant placement situations. these are both mics which the pop/rock crowd find absolutely boring, which speaks well of their abilities to capture acoustic music in a nice neutral, un-hyped way. you really cannot go wrong with either of these fine microphones.

[666666]

The TLM193 is transformerless and is super clean, quiet, detailed and accurate.

The 414 B-ULS has a transformer, and it sounds like it has a transformer. There's a slight bit of compression going on, a little bit of harmonic distortion, etc.... or, in other words, it yields a bit of "mojo" and is less accurate / less clear compared to the TLM193.

If you want premium fidelity and accuracy, get the TLM193... hands down.

If you are more interested in a mic that offers a bit of color and character, a bit more of an "analogish" kind of vibe, the 414 B-ULS might be more your thing.

Then there's always the 414 TLII which is the older transformerless model. This one is cleaner and quieter than the transformer version, but also has a certain frequency curve that can be great on some things and perhaps not so great on other things. It was marketed as a "vocal" mic, in theory the curve is dialed in for vocals. I find it works just fine for many things. This mic is not overly expensive on the used market, and they're very reliable, so don't rule this out.

They're all excellent mics, just depends on what you're goals are. I use `em all.

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by 666666

Then there's always the 414 TLII which is the older transformerless model. This one is cleaner and quieter than the transformer version, but also has a certain frequency curve that can be great on some things and perhaps not so great on other things. It was marketed as a "vocal" mic, in theory the curve is dialed in for vocals.

And there is a rare variety called 414 B-TL, which is transformerless and flat... I chanced upon two, had them redone and they are now an excellent matched pair, lovely...

[666666]

Originally Posted by d_fu

And there is a rare variety called 414 B-TL, which is transformerless and flat...

Wow! Cool!!! Those must be really nice.

Now if only AKG mass produced these. Why is it that a lot of the big manufacturers seem to stifle truly excellent professional products and then instead offer stuff that is not desirable to the professional?

AKG is a perfect example... just listen to their new stuff . Sadly, a name like AKG, which is theoretically synonymous with "professional audio", seems to market entirely to the Guitar Center crowd these days and leave the professionals empty handed. It's a real shame.

I'm sure that 414 B-TL is a very worthy professional tool... why can't I buy a new one now? I would if I could!!! AKG, make that mic again and I'll buy a few now!

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

Wondering if someone might be able to describe the sonic differences between the c414b/uls (with or without the AudioUpgrades mod) and the tlm193. Both exhibit a slight hi-mid dip, and a slight 10kish raise (more on the akg than the neumann). Wondering from those who've used both, the sonic differences between these two mics specifically.

Hi there: The current graphs on the AKG site for the 414 B/ULS were redrawn some years ago-and it would be hard to imagine that they weren't redrawn to mirror the graphs for the U89-which they do. The first time I stumbled across the changed graphs, I had a laugh! In the past, the 414 generic marketing graphs were quite different and, in fact, were quite like the product really is-and very much like the individual calibration documents included with each microphone. If my recollection is correct (I haven't revisited the site recently), the polar plots remain pretty accurate, they just completely fictionalized the frequency response graphs for the no longer manufactured microphone.

The 414 B/ULS and TLM193 are just fundamentally different microphones, and they serve up very different sorts of sounds. Both mic's are quite "accurate," but neither is "accurate" for everything. And sometimes one might prefer something that isn't accurate for the usefulness and/or aesthetics of the recording.

The coloration of the 193 is heard in the beautiful rendition of female voices, especially sopranos, and it's got that very traditional and recognizable tenor range typical of Neumann LD mic's-though one notices that mostly on men's voices, and not other sources. It's a very good spot mic on too many things to mention.

One could argue that the 414B/ULS is a more "accurate" microphone on the greatest number of sources, but that doesn't mean it's the best or most desirable microphone. Nor does it mean that it is not. It is fantastic on plucked instruments, even including harpsichord (you'd think it would be brutal!), and gets a great "resin" sound from a DB. Fantastic guitar, harp, and a surprisingly good piano mic! But the 193 has its surprises too, including being a surprisingly "fast" microphone.

I wouldn't agree with this description:

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

Both exhibit a slight hi-mid dip, and a slight 10kish raise (more on the akg than the neumann).

The 414 B/ULS certainly doesn't have a slight hi-mid dip. In fact, is has two hi-mid peaks, and rather prominent ones at that! The 414 B/ULS has that noticeable rise at 10k mostly in the omni mode only, where the two "mid-high" peaks are relatively minimized. In other patterns, there are two prominent bumps in the mid range, which occur in different "shapes" and amplitude that varies by pattern-though the bumps are in the same places for figure 8, hypercard, and card. No 10k bump in those other patterns.

Likewise, the low end is significantly different between the patterns from the 414B/ULS. The pattern that is most unlike the others is the omni, where the response actually rises for some time as the frequency drops.

Try to get the AKG H15/22 shock mount-the smallest, most durable, most effective, and easy to use mount AKG ever made for this mic.

The diaphragm of the 193 is somewhere between small and large, if that matters. The mic is quieter than the 414, and has a vast low end and a bigger, smoother, overall sound. Relative to the 414 B/ULS, the sound is significantly darker and a little less present or "close." It is as heavy or heavier than the transformer equipped 414. All of the weight is in the mic housing. There are a variety of shock mounts from Neumann and third parties like Rycote. You'll probably need them!

More than almost any other two microphones of any design from any two manufacturers, you do need to hear these to compare. They really are that different.

BTW: In my limited experience with the "TL-ULS" versions, the sound is pretty much the same. There is no obvious transformer saturation or timbre change that occurs (with transformer 414 B/ULS), and the lower end remains quite open even at high SLP levels. My own "high SPL" spectrum is orchestra, organ, percussion,-and, of course-opera sopranos! (How do they produce that much sound?!) I've never had to pad the microphone (B/ULS) to retain timbre, clarity, or LF extension. On rare occasions, *and when used relatively close in,*it can get just a bit less open with extremely dense forces and relatively high SPL, but padding the mic (the transformer) doesn't improve anything. Without putting the TL version in exactly the same situation, place, and forces, one can't tell if it would be better. It might be. If it is, one can't immediately blame the transformer. When used at a normal distance for a classical music pair, no such change ever occurs. As mentioned earlier, no problems with opera sopranos at relatively close ambient distances.


I've had the 414 B/ULS for many years. More recently I've added the 193's, and those long after after two handfuls of other fairly truthful SD mic's from the well known manufacturers that have a following in the classical/jazz/acoustic music communities. There are a surprising number of classical musicians who like the 414's better than I do.



Edit: Just checked the AKG site. Those frequency response graphs are complete fiction. They are not even averaged, optimistic, or smoothed out plots. Try to find the original marketing documents.

The polar plots, however, seem to be unchanged from the original documents, and do represent the performance of the mic.

[king2070lplaya]

Thanks all!

I think this decision is gonna come down to whether I can get a used 414 uls and have it modded for less than I can get a tlm 193 for. Gotta say though, I love that neumann..... color? I don't know what it is, but it sounds sweet in my experience. It's not realistic necessarily, but it's a really nice sheen.

Btw on the topic of AKG frequency charts, I had a laugh when I got my "new" pair of used 460b's with ck61's and found the original frequency graph for one under the foam. Not even close to what is stated on the akg site, like, not even remotely similar.

Thank you capitalism for destroying integrity! Yeah low-overhead and all hail the high profits!

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

I think this decision is gonna come down to whether I can get a used 414 uls and have it modded for less than I can get a tlm 193 for.

I might have one for you - depends on where you are, how you'd pay, etc... PM me if interested.

Btw on the topic of AKG frequency charts, I had a laugh when I got my "new" pair of used 460b's with ck61's and found the original frequency graph for one under the foam. Not even close to what is stated on the akg site, like, not even remotely similar.

What did you expect, a perfectly straight line? The graph on the site is mostly to indicate that the mic does not have a "character" by design. The graphs for my CK 61 are pretty straight, BTW.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

Btw on the topic of AKG frequency charts, I had a laugh when I got my "new" pair of used 460b's with ck61's and found the original frequency graph for one under the foam. Not even close to what is stated on the akg site, like, not even remotely similar.

Not to beat this to death, but every manufacturer (with some exceptions-remember the marketing graph for the SM81) generously smoothes their plots, but basically they are mostly honest. Beyer recently changed their marketing graphs for the MC930 to what the mic's have become in their evolution over the past couple of years.

But the C414B/ULS graphs are really beyond the pale.

I'm a bit surprised at your experience with the ck61's, however. I had those many years ago. At the time, that mic had a unique response: plotted on a frequency response chart, it was almost a perfect diagonal line very gently slopped upward from 60 or 70 Hz to about 20K. The individual calibration charts showed that those capsules had excellent QC. That "diagonal" partially accounted for its (then) unique sound. It also had a taut and clean and open low end reminiscent of a good omni-the only difference was that it was slightly attenuated relative to an omni, and its cardioid pattern remained remarkably intact into quite low frequencies.

Since you mention 460's and not 480's, perhaps your capsules date from an earlier era-or not.