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
Can I get the U47 sound for under a grand?
Old 1 week ago
  #241
Lives for gear
 
foldback's Avatar
I'm a huge fan of the C-414b-ULS, I have four of them and use them daily. It is mildly humorous to me to see folks comparing the sound of any 414 to a U-47. The capsule design of these two models are polar opposites, one has center termination and one has ring termination.

I've built several custom microphones for our studio using both capsule designs and regardless of whether you source the capsule from Thiersch in Germany, Ben in Australia or premium Chinese via Microphone-parts.com the two designs have a very different sound from each other.

The center termination style leans in that mid-forward direction and the ring termination is much more uniform with an accent in the higher registers. I'm really thankful for the various DIY forums and all the options for building microphones, I've learned a lot and my kit of mic's has taken a big step up in performance as a result.

Just my take on this discussion. It's all ok with me, whatever you like that makes good music for you is all that really matters.

If you want an inexpensive 47 type microphone that seriously is amazing then check out the lowest priced model from Beeznees, the Oliver. It's an absolutely stunning boutique mic for an incredible low price.

Good music to all!
Old 1 week ago
  #242
Gear Maniac
 
Vesta's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
I don't know how the technology works in either of these mics. What I really wanted was presence without harshness. AKG delivers it in spades. There are a lot of mics with presence boost; in fact most seem to be designed this way. But they sound harsh to me. Mics like the Rode NT1-A (extensively discussed here) and many others give great sound and real hell in post when you have to deal with sibilant tracks. But when you choose a warmer mic, sibilance is gone but so is the presence that works so well with vocals in the mix. With the AKG, I found that I actually like the sibilant parts; they sound sweet and musical and not harsh at all... Before stumbling upon this AKG model, I'd only heard this type of performance in a U47. The B-ULS model I had was nice, with lovely timber; it just didn't have the natural presence of the II model - something I seem to need in all vocal tracks.
Old 1 week ago
  #243
Gear Nut
 

I would take a Mojave MA-200 for a bit more than 1000 USD. I had a MA-300 for a good year, but sold it for money reasons. My grand piano needed a renovation. Its a phantastic microphone, and if there would be a Neumann label, it would cost triple the price.

Another cheaper idea is the Oktava MKL 2500 for around 500€. Also a good idea to check it out. Got the capsule in my MK 101, which have a really unique vintage sound. I am scared about the Rode NT-1A and his aggresive highs, but the newer NT-1 would be okay for a cheap mic.
Old 1 week ago
  #244
Lives for gear
 
mics's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by foldback View Post
I'm a huge fan of the C-414b-ULS, I have four of them and use them daily. It is mildly humorous to me to see folks comparing the sound of any 414 to a U-47. The capsule design of these two models are polar opposites, one has center termination and one has ring termination.

I've built several custom microphones for our studio using both capsule designs and regardless of whether you source the capsule from Thiersch in Germany, Ben in Australia or premium Chinese via Microphone-parts.com the two designs have a very different sound from each other.

The center termination style leans in that mid-forward direction and the ring termination is much more uniform with an accent in the higher registers. I'm really thankful for the various DIY forums and all the options for building microphones, I've learned a lot and my kit of mic's has taken a big step up in performance as a result.

Just my take on this discussion. It's all ok with me, whatever you like that makes good music for you is all that really matters.

If you want an inexpensive 47 type microphone that seriously is amazing then check out the lowest priced model from Beeznees, the Oliver. It's an absolutely stunning boutique mic for an incredible low price.

Good music to all!
Thanks for the kind words. The Oliver is a wonderful mic.

Cheers
Old 6 days ago
  #245
Gear Addict
 
Spectralwaves's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by foldback View Post
If you want an inexpensive 47 type microphone that seriously is amazing then check out the lowest priced model from Beeznees, the Oliver. It's an absolutely stunning boutique mic for an incredible low price.

Good music to all!
Hi,

Do you mean the Oliver FET or the Oliver Tube? ( The Oliver FET is the lower priced model of the Oliver mics)

Im currently trying to decide on one or the other, if you do actually mean the Oliver FET ,then thats the one Im going for. I hope so.

The Oliver Tube looks identical in exterior design , but is apparently directly inspired by the U47 ,as far as I understand from Beesneez description on their website, which is why Im asking .(& Im aware that the U47 can be a FET mic too)
This one being a tube condenser seems to be more in line with the U47 design ,not that Im in any way knowledgeable about large condenser mics ,(but Im eager to learn & I know what sounds good to me)

Good music & best wishes to you too & thanks

Last edited by Spectralwaves; 3 days ago at 04:44 AM..
Old 6 days ago
  #246
Gear Maniac
I'm actually shopping for one those vintage classic aswell.

Take a look at the 3U audio offering.

I'm still making some research but theres a pretty interesting thread in here about those.

It's also interesting to know who's behind their built
Old 5 days ago
  #247
Lives for gear
 
foldback's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectralwaves View Post
Hi,

Do you mean the Oliver FET or the Oliver Tube? ( The Oliver FET is the lower priced model of the Oliver mics)

Im currently trying to decide on one or the other, if you do actually mean the Oliver FET ,then thats the one Im going for. I hope so.

The Oliver Tube looks identical in exterior design , but is apparently directly inspired by the U47 ,as far as I understand from Beesneez description on their website, which is why Im asking .(& Im aware that the U47 is a FET mic too)
This one being a tube condenser seems to be more in line with the U47 design ,not that Im in any way knowledgeable about large condenser mics ,(but Im eager to learn & I know what sounds good to me)

Good music & best wishes to you too & thanks
Mine is the Oliver Tube Model, funny I never even looked at the FET version.

For a center terminated capsule Oliver has a wonderful uniform frequency response. It does not have a huge proximity effect but it takes EQ very well and sounds great with either the KT or Warm EQP after it.

I have a baritone vocal range and I really like how this mic keeps it fat without getting cloudy or foggy in the lows.

I've mic'd vocals, guitar amps and bass amps with it and the sound has been excellent in every case. My Martin D-35 sounds fabulous with the Oliver.

My Oliver came with the Beeznees multi pattern power supply as well, though the mic itself is cardioid only.

The included shock mount is a cheapie from China but the mic mounts beautifully in a Rycote suspension mount. The included shock mount works fine if you're careful.

The Oliver Tube mic is on sale too, it's only $499AUS if you click purchase now. That's the equivalent to under $400 US at the moment, a killer deal. Mine included free shipping too. It took 10 days to get to Florida, definitely worth the wait, it was packed well and survived the shipping in pristine condition.

It's one of Bens own handmade K7 capsules (cardioid only version), it's tube, great Australian power supply, the detailing on the mic is beautiful for such an inexpensive piece. I love the grille, it appears to be nickel plated and it's a nice mesh.

Compare it directly to other offerings in this price vicinity and you'll begin to see the bargain here.

Compared to the fit and finish of say an AA CM48T the Oliver is a stunning work of art. The Oliver is not a hot rodded Chinese catalog mic. You don't get a flimsy gray briefcase with the Oliver. You don't get figure 8 and omni on the low priced Oliver either. You do get a cardioid LDC tube microphone that sounds, to my ears, a lot better than the Peluso 2247LE, another 47'ish clone built from Chinese parts I've had experience with.

Oliver delivers really excellent sound quality in a beautifully constructed, hand made, Australian-built microphone. It's got some serious heft to it also, it feels extremely solid in your hand, again, not at all like inexpensive Chinese construction.

I don't work for Ben, never talked to him or Veronica. I like budget equipment that really delivers performance and this is one of those rare finds where the performance is through the roof, excellent! This microphone really delivers what a mic should, great sound (incredible value is included, no extra charge).

Beeznees is putting the other budget mic vendors on notice, they're serious about delivering a better, handmade boutique, mic for an amazing and very competitive price. I want another one because I like this one so much.

Good luck and good music to all!
Old 5 days ago
  #248
Here for the gear
This is an interesting question and one that I was asking myself a couple of years ago. I was using a Rode large condenser then — the NT2 which like the NT1 is a very good mic for the money. However, I wanted something better and was interested in how close I could get to the U47.

I think there are an increasing number of options. I went with the Mojave 301 FET which is designed by David Royer. This new range are designed to exploit the full value of digital recording. It is a great all rounder, fabulous on vocals. In all honesty I feel this is as good as a U47 and better than the cheaper Neumann's I think. This is a fabulous range of mics. There will be other options as well — the U47 is not quite the Holly Grail that it was once!
Old 5 days ago
  #249
Gear Nut
 

Its good that there are really much options in these times. For me, a Neumann U 47 is a completely overrated mic, when you think about the money you can invest in a complete studio setup. If you want to spend a bit more, you could also consider the Audio Technica AT 4060, which is a really amazing mic. In Sound&Recording, there was a test between U47 and AT 4060 years ago, and the U47 was only a bit brighter. I still love this fantastic mic made in Japan.
Old 5 days ago
  #250
Gear Addict
 
Spectralwaves's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by foldback View Post
Mine is the Oliver Tube Model, funny I never even looked at the FET version.

For a center terminated capsule Oliver has a wonderful uniform frequency response. It does not have a huge proximity effect but it takes EQ very well and sounds great with either the KT or Warm EQP after it.

I have a baritone vocal range and I really like how this mic keeps it fat without getting cloudy or foggy in the lows.

I've mic'd vocals, guitar amps and bass amps with it and the sound has been excellent in every case. My Martin D-35 sounds fabulous with the Oliver.

My Oliver came with the Beeznees multi pattern power supply as well, though the mic itself is cardioid only.

The included shock mount is a cheapie from China but the mic mounts beautifully in a Rycote suspension mount. The included shock mount works fine if you're careful.

The Oliver Tube mic is on sale too, it's only $499AUS if you click purchase now. That's the equivalent to under $400 US at the moment, a killer deal. Mine included free shipping too. It took 10 days to get to Florida, definitely worth the wait, it was packed well and survived the shipping in pristine condition.

It's one of Bens own handmade K7 capsules (cardioid only version), it's tube, great Australian power supply, the detailing on the mic is beautiful for such an inexpensive piece. I love the grille, it appears to be nickel plated and it's a nice mesh.

Compare it directly to other offerings in this price vicinity and you'll begin to see the bargain here.

Compared to the fit and finish of say an AA CM48T the Oliver is a stunning work of art. The Oliver is not a hot rodded Chinese catalog mic. You don't get a flimsy gray briefcase with the Oliver. You don't get figure 8 and omni on the low priced Oliver either. You do get a cardioid LDC tube microphone that sounds, to my ears, a lot better than the Peluso 2247LE, another 47'ish clone built from Chinese parts I've had experience with.

Oliver delivers really excellent sound quality in a beautifully constructed, hand made, Australian-built microphone. It's got some serious heft to it also, it feels extremely solid in your hand, again, not at all like inexpensive Chinese construction.

I don't work for Ben, never talked to him or Veronica. I like budget equipment that really delivers performance and this is one of those rare finds where the performance is through the roof, excellent! This microphone really delivers what a mic should, great sound (incredible value is included, no extra charge).

Beeznees is putting the other budget mic vendors on notice, they're serious about delivering a better, handmade boutique, mic for an amazing and very competitive price. I want another one because I like this one so much.

Good luck and good music to all!

Thanks very much for your detailed & very useful reply. I was leaning towards the Oliver Tube anyway until I read your previous post which I thought was @ the Oliver FET & was delighted to think I was going to be saving @ $100 .

I would love to hear the difference between both Olivers , but for now I will just go for the Oliver Tube I think, especially after reading your experience with it.

Be well
Old 4 days ago
  #251
Lives for gear
 
mics's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectralwaves View Post
Thanks very much for your detailed & very useful reply. I was leaning towards the Oliver Tube anyway until I read your previous post which I thought was @ the Oliver FET & was delighted to think I was going to be saving @ $100 .

I would love to hear the difference between both Olivers , but for now I will just go for the Oliver Tube I think, especially after reading your experience with it.

Be well
Hi there. If you want to hear the sound of both Oliver's, it can be found on our site. Same artist and song, just different olivers!

Thanks

Ben
Old 4 days ago
  #252
No mic maven here but I have an Oktava 2500 tube and a 319 (FET). I'd always considered tubes to be a cut above transistors. The tube mic actually doesn't work for my rather dull voice. It needs the FET sheen. Where the tube mic excels is on a female vocalist who brings out all the harmonics and depth the mic has to offer. I know this is probably a "duh" observation to the pros on here, but unless you've used both, the FET mic may surprise you....I wouldn't assume that tube is always better.
Old 4 days ago
  #253
Lives for gear
 
Lance Lawson's Avatar
 

If it was me I'd get a set of plans for the U47 and build one. It'll get you closer than anything else will.
Old 4 days ago
  #254
Gear Addict
 
Spectralwaves's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mics View Post
Hi there. If you want to hear the sound of both Oliver's, it can be found on our site. Same artist and song, just different olivers!

Thanks

Ben

Ok, thanks Ben, I will give them a listen, take care.

edit: later after many repeated listens to both Olivers mics ...I like them both.

I like the hi-mid presence lift/ clarity/sheen of the FET ,but also the pleasant warmth & slight distortion of the Cardoid Tube on the female singers voice in your demos. (if you will pardon the naiive adjectives)

I do not prefer one over the other from the demo examples, perhaps the Tube on her voice, but on mine who knows , perhaps the FET would be a better fit. ? The acoustic guitars sound equally pleasing too on both, with less of a difference between the mics to my ears in this case.

I wouldn't know anyway until I tried both personally, (which is not likely to happen anytime soon), but I will most likely go for one of them & Im sure either of them would be perfect for my needs.

Last edited by Spectralwaves; 3 days ago at 05:03 AM..
Old 3 days ago
  #255
Lives for gear
 
Matti's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Lawson View Post
If it was me I'd get a set of plans for the U47 and build one. It'll get you closer than anything else will.
It won´t be this cheap to source parts not available anymore, but for some 2000 € you can build a mic very close to an original one with premiun capsule and transformer etc.

Matti
Old 3 days ago
  #256
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectralwaves View Post
Hi,

Do you mean the Oliver FET or the Oliver Tube? ( The Oliver FET is the lower priced model of the Oliver mics)

Im currently trying to decide on one or the other, if you do actually mean the Oliver FET ,then thats the one Im going for. I hope so.

The Oliver Tube looks identical in exterior design , but is apparently directly inspired by the U47 ,as far as I understand from Beesneez description on their website, which is why Im asking .(& Im aware that the U47 can be a FET mic too)
This one being a tube condenser seems to be more in line with the U47 design ,not that Im in any way knowledgeable about large condenser mics ,(but Im eager to learn & I know what sounds good to me)

Good music & best wishes to you too & thanks
Thanks to foldback's post, I bought an Oliver Tube cardiod mic from Beesneez today. I didn't have a good tube U47-type mic & this is priced at a point that's hard to turn down. Thanks for the opinion, waiting patiently for it to arrive.
Old 3 days ago
  #257
Gear Addict
 
Spectralwaves's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by eh91311 View Post
Thanks to foldback's post, I bought an Oliver Tube cardiod mic from Beesneez today. I didn't have a good tube U47-type mic & this is priced at a point that's hard to turn down. Thanks for the opinion, waiting patiently for it to arrive.
Nice one, congrats , hope you do great recordings with it.

Im going to be in the same position shortly, but will have a bit longer to wait for its arrival.
Old 3 days ago
  #258
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by eh91311 View Post
Thanks to foldback's post, I bought an Oliver Tube cardiod mic from Beesneez today. I didn't have a good tube U47-type mic & this is priced at a point that's hard to turn down. Thanks for the opinion, waiting patiently for it to arrive.
When you get it, i'd appreciate if you could post some vox clip unprocessed with it.
Thx
Old 3 days ago
  #259
Lives for gear
 
mics's Avatar
 

Old 3 days ago
  #260
Here for the gear
My very simple answer to the original post: yes you can. Rent a U47.
Old 3 days ago
  #261
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ardis View Post
No mic maven here but I have an Oktava 2500 tube and a 319 (FET). I'd always considered tubes to be a cut above transistors. The tube mic actually doesn't work for my rather dull voice. It needs the FET sheen. Where the tube mic excels is on a female vocalist who brings out all the harmonics and depth the mic has to offer. I know this is probably a "duh" observation to the pros on here, but unless you've used both, the FET mic may surprise you....I wouldn't assume that tube is always better.

Absolutely ! I got a fantastic Microtech Gefell M930 here, and for shure, there are situations where I prefer this mic rather then my AT 4060. I love both really much, wont sell them in my life So no need to spend 10.000 Dollars or Euros in an old mic. The MK319 or MK101 ( I got a pair MK101) got really good capsules and sound authentically vintage with creamy mids.
Old 3 days ago
  #262
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by mics View Post
Hi there.

On the bottom of this page there are unprocessed samples.

Enjoy!

Tube Condenser Microphone | K47 - Oliver | Beesneez Microphones
I'm impressed by the difference between the FET and the Tube.

Its 2 totaly different beast.

Sounds like the Tube one has a massive LPF at 10K.

The FET is so sweet....god damn, I never knew that design was so silky smooth.

congrats on that FET.

What was your signal path when your recorded Bang Bang ? DAc ? Pre ?

Thx for the info btw
Old 3 days ago
  #263
Lives for gear
 
jazzcabbage's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Lawson View Post
If it was me I'd get a set of plans for the U47 and build one. It'll get you closer than anything else will.
+1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matti View Post
It won´t be this cheap to source parts not available anymore, but for some 2000 € you can build a mic very close to an original one with premiun capsule and transformer etc.

Matti
2000 €? One can be built for less than that. I'm in the process of building one with the best parts and body that can be currently sourced and I'll be in it for a little over $1k USD when all is said and done.
Old 3 days ago
  #264
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzcabbage View Post
+1



2000 €? One can be built for less than that. I'm in the process of building one with the best parts and body that can be currently sourced and I'll be in it for a little over $1k USD when all is said and done.
I'm very interested in the process, parts and scheme if youre willing to share.

I've never built or solder anything but I believe we all have to start somewhere, right ?

Anyways, If you have some infos i'm definitely a taker here

Thx
Old 2 days ago
  #265
Lives for gear
 
jazzcabbage's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martel80 View Post
I'm very interested in the process, parts and scheme if youre willing to share.

I've never built or solder anything but I believe we all have to start somewhere, right ?

Anyways, If you have some infos i'm definitely a taker here

Thx
You can get started with any of these projects

AMI U47 Kits and Parts
Vintagemicrophonepcbkit.com D-EF47
Vintagemicrophonepcbkit.com D-47
http://wiki.diyrecordingequipment.co...mk47-tube-mic/

There's others but those seem to be the most popular with support on the diy forums.

I wouldn't say those were advanced, but definitely intermediate projects. Due to the cost of the parts I might suggest doing a few other projects to get your feet wet. If you accidentally ruined something you could stand to be out some cash.
Old 2 days ago
  #266
dzb
Gear Nut
 
dzb's Avatar
No offense to the original poster meant here, but I could hardly believe I read this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vesta View Post
To me, the difference between a U87 and a Rode NT1-A is negligible


To me that statement indicates your first order of business should be focused on your monitoring chain - investment there seems vital before anything else. The U87 is not even in the same sonic ballpark as the NT-1A (and for reference, I am not a fan of the U87, and have owned multiples of both mics over the years). So, if you don't hear a difference, then something is lying to your ears - big time. Both are useful mics, the NT1-A finding its way into being respectable mic for acoustic guitars when combined with a small condenser - and, I have heard very nice recordings with the U87 (first hand, not just records we all know) - there are a number of mics in that entire price range that I would use before either one of those for vocals. For me, a bit of discomfort occurs when I have a mic that is $2K + sitting not getting used regularly or when on multiple comparisons with artists in the studio find that a mic in the $500 to $1K range wins, or does a completely satisfying job that I don't even think of reaching for the bigger $ mic.

For anyone out there that is new to this industry or these mics in particular, the next statement by the original poster borders absurd, and again points to a badly needed investment in monitor chain or room, etc. because if life were as simple as this statement, the U87 would barely exist:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vesta View Post
and I'd probably be able to make an NT1-A sound the same as a U87 with a quick eq move.
"Quick eq moves" to reshape the entire sonics captured by one mic that emphasizes high end to "sound the same" as an industry staple very mid-forward sounding mic... wow, now that EQ I want to get my hands on! Heck, I'd even want the upgraded version that can get me to "sound the same" as a 47 or 251. The word "probably" in real world equates to highly unlikely... I'd put the use of that word in similar context of a buddy who always says he could probably score with a supermodel...

Sorry, feeling cheeky here - but just trying to put some perspective on such bold statements.

Even if a trick EQ move were the case for making a mic that's 1/10th the cost/value to sound like the other greater $ mic, the whole exercise of going through that EQ move (likely has to be saved as a user preset for one source only found through a painstakingly comparison process) would require a completely different EQ move for another source to "sound the same".

One main point with my post here is to ensure other people don't get loured into this thought process: that a "quick EQ move" is going to solve the mic selection issue. Use your ears, learn your mics. Listen to other mics, and listen to the source, and consider where you want what you capture to sit in a mix. One quick EQ move is magic that exists mainly in theory when it comes to sculpting what is captured with different mics.

And, for the record, I, too, have often found myself a skeptical over the decades for the $ difference between gear in various parts of the recording chain - mics, dynamics, pres, EQ's... however, at each point of the personal plight to find the right gear for my set-up, I have learned my gear by using it thoroughly, along the way doing a wide range of comparisons (and even still do to keep perspective sharp) and found that there are very sound reasons (pun intended) that a lot of mid to higher end gear is worth the investment. Once you start approaching that $2k range (thinking used U87) - whether it is a guitar, a mic, a hardware EQ, compressor, etc - you have access to fantastic options. At sub $200 (the NT1-A), well... great tools at that price range become a much more rare find - still possible, though - all depends on the goal of the recording.

Last - to answer the original post question seeking sub $1K mic close to U47 sound - a number of options out there - I landed with a combination of mic capsules from Violet that I am fairly content with - especially for the $ invested. And, I do concede my periodic revisit of similar quest to find a magic mic and get stiffled when that $1500-$2K figure comes around - and even have given very serious consideration of mics twice that price range. Decision process/pulling the trigger often comes down to what is the goal for the recording(s). From reading the posts in this thread, it sounds like you have a few steps to make before you get settled into the right mic for your goal - don't worry, it's just part of the process.
Old 11 hours ago
  #267
Gear Maniac
 
Vesta's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Normally I ignore the all too common 'it's-your-monitoring-system-or-your-ears' posts, but I'll have to tell the above poster and others who might have missed my last posts, that I've already found another mic which delivers the sound I need and I am no longer seeking a cheaper U47-type mic.

Those who are impressed by the price tags of old, popular studio microphones could keep in mind that it's trivially easy for modern technology to produce excellent mic components these days, inexpensively. There is nothing absurd about a $300 modern mic producing sound quality that matches yesterday's cherished flagships. My ears are OK. If you believe yours are golden, take a blind test. You'll learn something.
Old 10 hours ago
  #268
Gear Maniac
Vesta, I think their point was that microphones have very specific character.

Whats best for one might not work for another and vice versa...add to that the necessity in different instrument captured.

That brings a lot of diffferent microphone for very different situation.

A one mic do it all '' best'' type of microphone doesnt exist.

I guess the 47 has a very specific application for different sound engineer.

Maybe its of no use for you and I can understand that but we cant deny its usability specificaly based on the number of reknown recording that were made in part with one of those.

Music is sadly not linear and not because its new that its better.

Thats also a verifiable fact.
Old 9 hours ago
  #269
I'd think one of the problems using eq to make a mic sound like an 47, is the fact that 47's take eq well......
Old 6 hours ago
  #270
dzb
Gear Nut
 
dzb's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vesta View Post
I've already found another mic which delivers the sound I need and I am no longer seeking a cheaper U47-type mic.
That is great that you found the mic to suit your goal - I should have mentioned congrats in my preceding post - I see that it was AKG C414 XL II.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vesta View Post
An interesting thing happened recently. A vocalist/colleague of mine asked if he could come by my studio and record a song bringing his own microphone. He said he had an AKG C414 XL II and he liked his voice on that mic. I said he didn't have to bother bringing the mic because I already have a c414. It's a decades old BULS model and I like it quite a bit for its nice, smooth tone. He ended up coming with his mic regardless, and seeing the new shiny updated mic with a golden grill, I was curious to see if it sounded any different from the old model I have. So I tested them both.

What did I find? I found that his AKG had exactly the sound I was looking for in my U47 search. That pleasant, smooth upper-midrange bump which makes certain vocals sound endearingly present without the usual harshness in the highs... I don't know out of which U47 I had first heard that sound but I know I'd been restlessly seeking it ever since. This AKG turned out to be it. My search is over.
Guessing that a lot of engineers would not have made the connection to a U47 with that particular mic C414 XL II. That AKG is a great mic - an excellent staple recommended for any studio. It's a mic I usually recommend first to anyone interested in building any form of studio.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vesta View Post
Those who are impressed by the price tags of old, popular studio microphones could keep in mind that it's trivially easy for modern technology to produce excellent mic components these days, inexpensively. There is nothing absurd about a $300 modern mic producing sound quality that matches yesterday's cherished flagships. My ears are OK. If you believe yours are golden, take a blind test. You'll learn something.
Certainly appreciate your perspective. No golden ears here, sadly. Educated ears through a few decades of recording experience with 20+ years of owning/operating a studio in a commercial location, though. And, regular blind tests for the dozens of aspiring engineers that have come through over the years as well as clients. Guess I should have mentioned that earlier, as well. I fully concur that a $300 modern mic can produce a very nice and worthy sound quality, heck, in some of the blind tests, I've gone with the sub-$300 mic over far more expensive because it fit into the song & mix better. Not a proponent of spending big $ if you don't have to... but, conversely, many people spend big $ because they want to. No judgment, it's usually our preference that drives the decisions. I've mentioned in other posts how I've owned a pricier level name badge a couple of times and have never gained business because of that name badge, and the goal of owning it was part sound, part industry standard, and not for drawing clients - finally let go of them (although I did have one client shoot their promo video using the big $ name badge mic for show even after cutting the record with... wait for it... AKG C414 XL II, Avantone CV-12, and Rode NT-2000 as his lead vocal mics for the entire record, even though we had ample other mics ranging in $$ to work with... it came down to where our ears lead us).

I found the follow-up response to take an approach about what many might call 'expected' - I actually had hoped my prior insight would be perceived more constructively, but that's ok - these discussions can be lightly 'spirited', and thankfully, they are discussions we are lucky to be able to share with each other - regardless of any of our levels of experience. Since there are varying levels of tenure and depth of experience of people that read and post to GS, we all have something worthwhile to share, after all, that's why we are here

Your {Vesta} posts help me reflect on time spent doing finite comparisons of mics (pre's, etc) with aspiring (and experienced engineers) in the studio over many years. For a couple moments I paused - thinking maybe energy spent on those 'blind' tests where I really should have been learning from have been less than worthwhile (p.s. thanks for the tip!). Maybe I should be looking at these advances in technology & design + manufacturing improvements that created 'modern' versions of gear (and far less expensive than their industry ancestors) simply as the tools that are reshaping our industry away from the staples of prior decades (including this millennial)... Some ears won't be hearing the same things many engineers worldwide have been used to hearing... (no, this isn't going to evolve into a MP3 / Vinyl / plug-in / hardware / DAW / Summing / Analog discussion, but with a few beers it could... sorry, that was for those who might appreciate that humor )...

Then again... I read an awesome post like this from Martel80 and appreciate the accurate insight and diplomatic approach to the post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Martel80 View Post
Vesta, I think their point was that microphones have very specific character.

Whats best for one might not work for another and vice versa...add to that the necessity in different instrument captured.

That brings a lot of different microphone for very different situation.

A one mic do it all '' best'' type of microphone doesn't exist.

I guess the 47 has a very specific application for different sound engineer.

Maybe its of no use for you and I can understand that but we cant deny its usability specifically based on the number of renown recording that were made in part with one of those.

Music is sadly not linear and not because its new that its better.

Thats also a verifiable fact.
That's an awesome way to put it.


And last -

As a note, the number of blind tests I have done with mics (& pres and other hardware) is dizzying yet always worthwhile - part of my self-inflicted continuous education and personal search for improvement... (and way to share insight and foster fruitful discussion at the studio) - plus, a good way to keep my ears sharp (and keep a reference point over time)... these ears probably won't reach golden... but I'll take silver or bronze, heck, nickle, steel, or iron ears

Here's a sample recap screenshot of painstaking {blind} mic tests (somewhere I mentioned what went into these tests on GS, I think)...

Cheers.

New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+  Submit Thread to Reddit Reddit 
 
Topic:
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