The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
90s U67 on eBay... Condenser Microphones
Old 28th September 2015
  #1
90s U67 on eBay...

Long time lurker, first time poster. Eyeballing the 90s reissue U67 currently on eBay as a "flagship" mic for my studio. No clue what I might want to offer for it. Listed at $11,700. Any input from you great folks? Thanks in advance.
Old 28th September 2015
  #2
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehusseyband View Post
Long time lurker, first time poster. Eyeballing the 90s reissue U67 currently on eBay as a "flagship" mic for my studio. No clue what I might want to offer for it. Listed at $11,700. Any input from you great folks? Thanks in advance.
I've been looking at it also. It looks really amazing. I thought it would be long gone by now. A buddy of mine paid close to 10k recently for an almost perfect vintage one from the 1960s. So this isn't far off in terms of price. You would really need to ask someone that has heard the 1990s version and done some tests vs. a 1960s just how close it is in terms of its sound. I don't know of any users personally that have that kind of experience with the 1990s U67 but I bet someone on GS has used them both, and can verify whether the sound is there.
Old 28th September 2015
  #3
Lives for gear
 
KIDBILL's Avatar
 

I think 11000$ for a U67 is pretty high

Last edited by KIDBILL; 29th September 2015 at 11:27 PM..
Old 28th September 2015
  #4
Lives for gear
 

Also, you might consider a Neumann M269c, if you like the U67 sound. They pop up on eBay from time to time. It's considered the brother to the U67, (some of the same boards internally) except with an AC701 tube instead. And part of the Klaus Heyne "Big 5" vintage microphones . Also, because of the AC 701 it should technically be worth more than U67 because that tube goes for around $500 now on eBay, for the K version. I know several producers who prefer it over the U67 on singers.
Old 28th September 2015
  #5
You would really need to ask someone that has heard the 1990s version and done some tests vs. a 1960s just how close it is in terms of its sound.

--that's the real problem, isn't it? Lol. It's built to original spec, tube and all from what I can glean from the intergoogle. Since there aren't that many of them should be a great investment piece if nothing else. Just don't know what's a reasonable deal. Kind of a one-of-a-kind, which could work in or favor or against it.
Old 28th September 2015
  #6
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Don't get me wrong, I like my original U-67 (1965), but there are ways to get that sound without spending almost 12K on one mic.

I just did a mic shootout with a friend a few days ago. I had three versions of AKG C-414 (EB, B-ULS & XLII) and one of my vintage U 87's. With the XLII, I EQ'd a little 1.5db bump at 250Hz, a little db 1.5dip at 2K and the mic was completely indistinguishable from the 87. The 87 is 4X the cost of the 414, but it's not four times the sound.

Same thing applies to the U67. You could have a really great mic locker with so many different sounds for the price of the one 67. Unless you're independently wealthy or you just have to have those bragging rights, you're probably best to buy an old 87, bump it a little with EQ around 3k or pick up a tube conversion package for the mic and spend the rest of your 8-9k on something else. If you bought the 67, you'd be spending 9K to chase that last 1 or 2% of sound and that's IF the reissue is identical to the original series (I suspect it is).

Last edited by voodoo4u; 28th September 2015 at 06:13 PM.. Reason: info error
Old 28th September 2015
  #7
Well, my offer was accepted for substantially lower than the ask. I will be sure to report back on this one after I get a chance to run it through the motions. Thanks for the input. Really love this site. I cannot tell you how many hours I have spent here.
Old 28th September 2015
  #8
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehusseyband View Post
Well, my offer was accepted for substantially lower than the ask. I will be sure to report back on this one after I get a chance to run it through the motions. Thanks for the input. Really love this site. I cannot tell you how many hours I have spent here.
Guaranteed, six months from now, you'll be wondering what all the hype was about. But then again, you'll be able to sell it for what you paid for it or more. Congratulations on your purchase.
Old 28th September 2015
  #9
Thanks! We shall see I suppose. Worst case scenario I sit on it for 5 years and sell it for more than I paid. Like I said, I will report back after it has been through a few sessions.
Old 28th September 2015
  #10
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevehusseyband View Post
Well, my offer was accepted for substantially lower than the ask. I will be sure to report back on this one after I get a chance to run it through the motions. Thanks for the input. Really love this site. I cannot tell you how many hours I have spent here.
Odds are, you're going to love it! It looks really great. Please share some vocal samples on GS. It is very easy to upload samples directly GS, no third party hosting is required.
Old 28th September 2015
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
Don't get me wrong, I like my original U-67 (1965), but there are ways to get that sound without spending almost 12K on one mic.

I just did a mic shootout with a friend a few days ago. I had three versions of AKG C-414 (EB, B-ULS & XLII) and one of my vintage U 87's. With the XLII, I EQ'd a little 1.5db bump at 250Hz, a little db 1.5dip at 2K and the mic was completely indistinguishable from the 87. The 87 is 4X the cost of the 414, but it's not four times the sound.

Same thing applies to the U67. You could have a really great mic locker with so many different sounds for the price of the one 67. Unless you're independently wealthy or you just have to have those bragging rights, you're probably best to buy an old 87, bump it a little with EQ around 3k or pick up a tube conversion package for the mic and spend the rest of your 8-9k on something else. If you bought the 67, you'd be spending 9K to chase that last 1 or 2% of sound and that's IF the reissue is identical to the original series (I suspect it is).
I disagree. I'd rather spend 10k on a great vintage mic, than spread the money around on other outboard gear at this time. Your sound starts with the microphone. If you don't have the best sound to start with, everything else, preamps compressors, ADCs, those can't make a signal better if you start with something that is phasey or poor quality.
Old 28th September 2015
  #12
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by SharpKillerCable View Post
I disagree. I'd rather spend 10k on a great vintage mic, than spread the money around on other outboard gear at this time. Your sound starts with the microphone. If you don't have the best sound to start with, everything else, preamps compressors, ADCs, those can't make a signal better if you start with something that is phasey or poor quality.
I agree with you, and if you read any of my other posts you'll see, that it starts at the mic and the mic is tres important. If I had 10K I certainly wouldn't spend it on cheaper outboard gear. But there's no fairy dust in this mic (I know I've looked). There's no mark of the Holy Grail stamped on the bottom. It's just metal and wires. It sounds good. Very good. But some of the new offerings by people like Dave Pearlman or a Manley reference or Beeznees or any of the other high end boutique builders are probably going to match this mic and they're selling theirs for closer to what the correct market value should be. A third or a quarter of what the 67 is.

I've been tempted to sell mine lately and if I did, I'd probably pick up 2 used Coles 4033's 2 Neumann KM 54's or 56's and a Pearlman TM 250 and I'd probably still have change left over and get a better recording than I could with one mic.

Of course some think: 5 great sounding mics, $10,000 . But U-67 bragging rights? Priceless.
Old 28th September 2015
  #13
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
One more thing: When it comes to microphones, I think the law of diminishing returns applies. And I'm guessing it probably kicks in around $5,000.00. If you can't nail it with a $5,000 mic, another 5 or $10,000 isn't gonna help you.
Old 28th September 2015
  #14
Lives for gear
 
STARSKI's Avatar
 

There was also a 60's vintage one in immaculate shape on eBay as well. For the same price. I was kind of wondering the same thing which would be the better buy. I would have probably went with the vintage one since it would always be an easier sale later on but the 90's one looked really cool and brand new!
Old 29th September 2015
  #15
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by STARSKI View Post
There was also a 60's vintage one in immaculate shape on eBay as well. For the same price. I was kind of wondering the same thing which would be the better buy. I would have probably went with the vintage one since it would always be an easier sale later on but the 90's one looked really cool and brand new!
Boy have I been wasting time and electrons for the past five years.

We crossed that line long ago with this mic. The line between highly useful production tool and shiny bauble/collector's item. Probably when the price exceeded 5K.

Last edited by voodoo4u; 29th September 2015 at 12:38 AM.. Reason: More info
Old 29th September 2015
  #16
Lives for gear
 
Mike O's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
I agree with you, and if you read any of my other posts you'll see, that it starts at the mic and the mic is tres important. If I had 10K I certainly wouldn't spend it on cheaper outboard gear. But there's no fairy dust in this mic (I know I've looked). There's no mark of the Holy Grail stamped on the bottom. It's just metal and wires. It sounds good. Very good. But some of the new offerings by people like Dave Pearlman or a Manley reference or Beeznees or any of the other high end boutique builders are probably going to match this mic and they're selling theirs for closer to what the correct market value should be. A third or a quarter of what the 67 is.

I've been tempted to sell mine lately and if I did, I'd probably pick up 2 used Coles 4033's 2 Neumann KM 54's or 56's and a Pearlman TM 250 and I'd probably still have change left over and get a better recording than I could with one mic.

Of course some think: 5 great sounding mics, $10,000 . But U-67 bragging rights? Priceless.
While I think there might be SOME validity to what I understand your general sentiment to be I'd make the observation that no 4033, KM54/56, or Manley Reference (nice list of useful mics BTW) sounds anything like a U67. Don't know about Peralman or Beeznees; never heard them.

Re: "closer to what the correct market value should be" - Good luck with that; this is not how the world works.

Old 29th September 2015
  #17
Lives for gear
 
mattcollen's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by STARSKI View Post
There was also a 60's vintage one in immaculate shape on eBay as well. For the same price. I was kind of wondering the same thing which would be the better buy. I would have probably went with the vintage one since it would always be an easier sale later on but the 90's one looked really cool and brand new!
Boy have I been wasting time and electrons for the past five years.

We crossed that line long ago with this mic. The line between highly useful production tool and shiny bauble/collector's item. Probably when the price exceeded 5K.
Everyone differs, I guess. In my case, I'd rather pay 10K for a U67 than the 8K+ dealers are asking for the C800G Sony and the Telefunken stuff. Those mics are not collector's items, and they are priced close to U67s. To my ears, M269Cs and U67s are my type of ear candy.
Old 29th September 2015
  #18
Lives for gear
 

Congrats on the U67. I have no experience with the 90s reissue but my vintage U67 is an incredible mic, I can't imagine the 90s version being any less incredible.
Old 29th September 2015
  #19
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
samples

Here's samples of 3 different mics on vocals. The tracks are raw, unmixed and the vocals are dry,unprocessed and not done on the same pass but I think they get the point across. Try to pick the U67. The other two are also classic mics.
Attached Files

Mic Test A.mp3 (2.58 MB, 2843 views)

Mic Test B.mp3 (2.58 MB, 2827 views)

Mic Test C.mp3 (2.58 MB, 2780 views)

Old 29th September 2015
  #20
More cowbell!
 
natpub's Avatar
Im gonna guess B is the 67. Reason being that the sibilance is heavily rolled off, a fav feature of mine about the 67, which does it smoother and nicer than anything out there. That said, I guess C also controlled the sibilance nicely, but not quite as strongly as B. I don't know what the other 2 mics are, so I'm shooting in the dark here. A is definitely the brightest, so Im guessing that is not the 67. Something like the Telefunken CopperHead also defeats sibilance strongly, but is sooooo dark it's kinda over the top (no pun intended, lol!).

Honestly, to be fair you should tell us what the other two mics are, that would make the guessing more reasonable :-)
Old 29th September 2015
  #21
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by natpub View Post
Im gonna guess B is the 67. Reason being that the sibilance is heavily rolled off, a fav feature of mine about the 67, which does it smoother and nicer than anything out there. That said, I guess C also controlled the sibilance nicely, but not quite as strongly as B. I don't know what the other 2 mics are, so I'm shooting in the dark here. A is definitely the brightest, so Im guessing that is not the 67. Something like the Telefunken CopperHead also defeats sibilance strongly, but is sooooo dark it's kinda over the top (no pun intended, lol!).

Honestly, to be fair you should tell us what the other two mics are, that would make the guessing more reasonable :-)
The other two mics are a U47 and U87.
Old 29th September 2015
  #22
Lives for gear
 
roger's Avatar
 

You can get a vintage U87 + a flea 47 & 49 for similar money......hey! That's THREE flagship mics!
Old 29th September 2015
  #23
Thank you very much for the samples !

A = 87
B = 47
C = 67



R.
Old 29th September 2015
  #24
There's a huge difference between the mics!
All mics are more than good.
Interesting comparison.

Is the U47 the version with the M7 or K47 capsule ?


But what is what ?

R.
Old 29th September 2015
  #25
Lives for gear
 
roger's Avatar
 

...there's also a differences between the takes/performance. All good though.
U87 is obvious (A)
The 47 (B) pushes his chest resonance a lot compared to the 67 but the tops are similar between the 2 (which is what Neumann we're going for wasn't it?!).
They're all great.
But I really like the U87 - it's finished. I would open the top up a bit with the other 2.
Old 29th September 2015
  #26
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
I didn't set these audio samples up to be a perfect comparison between mics. We were experimenting with mics and rooms and positions on the mic. The example of the U47 didn't really get a fair shake because it was in a live room (the other 2 were in a vocal booth) and the client had really backed off the mic so it sounds brighter and thinner(it was sample A), but it was the only sample I had for this tune. The client thought he wanted a roomier tone to his vocal. He changed his mind when he heard it.

Natpub got it right the U67 was B. The kind of warmth and chestiness and smooth top end that a good tube mic excels at.

Of course that leaves C which is an old 70's U87. I thought it held up surprisingly well considering I could buy 3 or 4 of them for the price of one "B".

We ended up using the 67 for this track.
Old 29th September 2015
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Mike O's Avatar
 

I hope not to offend, but similar to most 'shoot outs' (or comparisons) on the web. IMO, virtually useless.

Not only are there the differences that you point out (now) with regard to rooms, etc. But we don't know what the source sounded like in the room and therefore how we might take advantage of patterns, proximity, 'reach', etc. for each particular mic to reach the goal.

So your selling your 67 to buy more 87s? I suspect not, since you chose the 67. And it is these differences that cause people to value the 67 (or ANY other mic for a particular purpose).
Old 29th September 2015
  #28
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
I hope not to offend, but similar to most 'shoot outs' (or comparisons) on the web. IMO, virtually useless.

Not only are there the differences that you point out (now) with regard to rooms, etc. But we don't know what the source sounded like in the room and therefore how we might take advantage of patterns, proximity, 'reach', etc. for each particular mic to reach the goal.

So your selling your 67 to buy more 87s? I suspect not, since you chose the 67. And it is these differences that cause people to value the 67 (or ANY other mic for a particular purpose).
I already left a disclaimer that it wasn't a shootout, but an actual working situation and it was raw. I provided them to make a point and I did. If most trained engineers can't pick it out in a quasi random line up do you really need to spend the extra money on a collector's item?

On this particular track, we picked the 67. On a few other tracks we used the 47 and I think on one other track the 87 worked best, but really, it was mostly down to best performance (as it should be), not the quality of the mic.

I don't need any more 87's, I already have a nice old pair. If I did sell the 67 it would be to buy the mics I've already listed earlier.

By the way, the two best mics I've ever heard on vocals were a Tele USA ELAM 251 and a Gefell UM 92. Easily on par or exceed a 67.
Old 29th September 2015
  #29
Lives for gear
 
Mike O's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo4u View Post
I already left a disclaimer that it wasn't a shootout, but an actual working situation and it was raw. I provided them to make a point and I did. If most trained engineers can't pick it out in a quasi random line up do you really need to spend the extra money on a collector's item?

On this particular track, we picked the 67. On a few other tracks we used the 47 and I think on one other track the 87 worked best, but really, it was mostly down to best performance (as it should be), not the quality of the mic.

I don't need any more 87's, I already have a nice old pair. If I did sell the 67 it would be to buy the mics I've already listed earlier.

By the way, the two best mics I've ever heard on vocals were a Tele USA ELAM 251 and a Gefell UM 92. Easily on par or exceed a 67.
I attempted to acknowledge your disclaimer, but still don't understand what if any point you made:

What I understand you to be saying: "I'm keeping my 67 because most people can't tell the difference and a Tele Elam or Gefell 92 is on par or a better mic anyway." And a direct quote: "Do you really need to spend the extra money on a collector's item?"

Alrighty then...........if I understand correctly, some interesting logic there.

And now you add Tele 251s and UM 92s into the discussion. A 251 is really NOTHING like a 67. While both are fantastic they are certainly not "interchangeable". If your point is that the U67 is not the best mic for all sources then I'm sure everyone can agree but still don't understand why they are now be interjected.

But hey it's 2015 on GS. What can one expect? No money to be made in the industry (by and large) so the new consensus is "you can't tell the difference anyway". Or can you? Because I'm keeping mine!

And yes I agree "performance" is the most important. But that really doesn't having anything to do with whether one mic or another is best on a particular source in a particular situation or is "more useful on more sources" than another mic.
Old 30th September 2015
  #30
Lives for gear
 
voodoo4u's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
I attempted to acknowledge your disclaimer, but still don't understand what if any point you made:

What I understand you to be saying: "I'm keeping my 67 because most people can't tell the difference and a Tele Elam or Gefell 92 is on par or a better mic anyway." And a direct quote: "Do you really need to spend the extra money on a collector's item?"

Alrighty then...........if I understand correctly, some interesting logic there.

And now you add Tele 251s and UM 92s into the discussion. A 251 is really NOTHING like a 67. While both are fantastic they are certainly not "interchangeable". If your point is that the U67 is not the best mic for all sources then I'm sure everyone can agree but still don't understand why they are now be interjected.

But hey it's 2015 on GS. What can one expect? No money to be made in the industry (by and large) so the new consensus is "you can't tell the difference anyway". Or can you? Because I'm keeping mine!

And yes I agree "performance" is the most important. But that really doesn't having anything to do with whether one mic or another is best on a particular source in a particular situation or is "more useful on more sources" than another mic.
Alright, I'm going to as direct as I can and hope the moderator doesn't think I've gone too far but some people really need to see it spelled out.

For the time being I'm keeping my U67. I like this mic. I like it a lot. BUT I DIDN'T PAY $11,000.00 FOR IT! In today's US dollars, I payed less than half that. I bought it just a few years ago. GS and other sites by no fault of their own have been hyping these mics far beyond their worth lately. These things are tools, just devices to get the results we need. To borrow a phrase from the guitar world, "Are you a player or a collector?"

Of course these high end mics are to a degree interchangeable. They're all great mics at a certain level and for most voices most will work. This boutique thinking is just silly, "which mic pre will work best with by blah blah mic. I don't think this compressor's appropriate for my blah blah pre." Just silly stuff. Every once in a while there's a voice we identify with a particular mic, but for the most part, people are still thinking inside the box. This person sounds a little like Sinatra so a U47 would be the best mic. This person's Streisand like so maybe we need an M-49. Innovators don't think this way.

There only three main reasons I can think of to why some one would buy a high end 5K+ mic:

1. Utility. "It's a good mic, it's a practical choice. I'll get the sonic results I'm after, I've always liked that sound and I can AFFORD IT."

2. Status. "My little basement studio is struggling. I need to find a way make myself look like the pros so I'll buy a flagship mic for my studio and everyone will know I'm a serious player. Especially me"

3. Client request. I once had an artist I wanted to work with and she said to me, " For the records I've done in the past, I found my voice really responds well to a U 47." So because I wanted to do this record for her, I picked up a U47 (plus maybe a little of #2 ). Also for less than half of the price of the U67 we've been discussing.

I'll say it again, there are far too many good mic choices available today to be sinking 11K into a U67. IT'S A WASTE OF ABOUT $5,000.

My apologies to the OP. My rant is not directed at you. I really hope you enjoy your new mic. I also hope you didn't buy it with a credit card at 20% interest.

Have I been clear Mike O?
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump