Originally Posted by Karloff70

Maybe one day you will see someone recreating the exact sound of a good vintage 87 in a production model offering. If it happens it won't be anytime soon as it would indeed need some serious magic to make that happen...lol

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

First of all, truly accurately reproducing the great capsules has been approached but never accomplished to the satisfaction of the cognoscenti. This is partly to do with expertise and sometimes with availability of exact materials. The K47 and K67 are still in production but no one but Neumann has succeeded in replicating Neumann's particular qualities, not being privy to their proprietary methods.

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

A good example of a success story, is the Pulse Techniques Pultec clone, which is one of the very few pieces that deserves the name "clone" as it is exactly that, an extremely painstaking replica of the original, down to every possibly relevant detail. They spent many years in R & D. They are expensive but slightly less than the originals go for, and they are new with warranty. Indeed, many people are selling their originals and replacing them with the new ones. There are a few other products like that, but not many. The AEA R44 and KU4, are another, but they are much simpler to do right.

Originally Posted by legato

Drumslinger wrote:


Five to one.

Originally Posted by hhamilton

Do you know the reason Neumann doesn't make the U87, or other mics in the same original fashion? I believe the U47fet is an exact recreation. I've seen comments about Neumann not being the same company, and their mics are overpriced based on the name, but it seems crazy they themselves wouldn't want full reign on the market seeing as they can actually do it (in many cases).

Originally Posted by Piedpiper

You're missing the point. It's not that these things are truly magic, or that they are technically not reproducible. It is that the elements necessary to reproduce them accurately are inaccessible. The fact that you are unaware of this is a testimony to your ignorance of the specifics of the subject, which is what Karloff was pointing at, first respectfully, then in response to your own condescending tone. If you were to take this up with the 6 top classic mic experts in the world, they would all tell you the same thing.

First of all, truly accurately reproducing the great capsules has been approached but never accomplished to the satisfaction of the cognoscenti. This is partly to do with expertise and sometimes with availability of exact materials. The K47 and K67 are still in production but no one but Neumann has succeeded in replicating Neumann's particular qualities, not being privy to their proprietary methods. The original CK12 capsule, of which there are many consequent official but different versions, is perhaps the most elusive to replicate effectively. Though many have tried with varying success, again, none have succeeded completely in capturing the "magic" of the original. Transformers are similar. Replicating materials, designs and techniques is a lot easier said than done. Tubes are another matter. Some are plentiful and affordable, others extremely rare and prohibitively expensive. Reissuing the famed VF14 has been discussed ad nauseum and is out of the question, given the narrow market, especially considering the extreme quality control required to select the few with low enough noise to be useful for microphones. The other tubes that can be used in its stead simply don't sound the same in ways that are considered inferior, even though they may sound perfectly workable in their own right. The word "sexy" is often used to describe the "magic" of the original. The particular capacitors and resistors also contribute to the sound and are often impossible to get or elusive to replicate.

Regarding quality, there are three issues, as I see it. The "magic" referred to is just a word to describe the coalescing of many factors that contribute to some very particular sounds that many have come to know and love. And there is a lot of agreement that these qualities are "superior". New mics could of course be "better" in some way to some person in some context. There are two issues with that. One is just apples to oranges, the idea that what a person likes is purely subjective. There is nothing stopping someone from preferring a "bad" trashy sound. Plenty of music is made to be aggressively distorted, or affected in some way that creates a mood that has nothing to do with transparency or sweetness, etc... The other is that there are some objective qualities that have to do with fidelity to the source, or that if you want a brighter sound, for instance, that a brighter mic is simply a better tool for that particular job.

Originally Posted by Karloff70

You confirmed my hunch with bells on. Do enjoy your logic beliefs. Maybe one day you will see someone recreating the exact sound of a good vintage 87 in a production model offering. If it happens it won't be anytime soon as it would indeed need some serious magic to make that happen...lol

Originally Posted by miscend

Guys I've been following Klaus Heynes posts and interviews. He's one of the foremost experts on vintage German mics. Even Dirk Brauner and Neumann trust his opinions. There's nothing about these holy grail vintage mics that can't be recreated or reproduced. Klaus modifies modern German mics to sound just as good as the best examples of vintage German mics all the time.

A lot of this stuff is shrouded in myths. Possibly to jack up prices of vintage gear. At the end of the day a mic is just a tool. There is no mic that performs magic on its source material.

Originally Posted by bringmewater

There may be magic in the way they sound but there is no wizard putting spells on them on the production line.

Originally Posted by legato

I know what Dennis would have said.
(I hope no one minds me saying this.)





Too bright in position three even?

If too nasal(ly), I'd look at one of the edge terminated mics, like the Warbler IV.

Originally Posted by legato

How close are you to the mic?

Originally Posted by legato

I assume you're in cardioid. (?)

Have you tried figure eight?

Originally Posted by legato

Right.

Sample?

Originally Posted by legato

Wait, we had a similar discussion about a month ago, didn't we?
Save the Joly that is.

Originally Posted by legato

Hey, that sucks man. Get well soon!

Anyway, if you're not completely happy with the MKVI, there's gonna be some solution I'm sure.
Last month I think I suggested a trade with someone who had a MKI that was too dark for him.
A MKIV might work too, though. Less "telephonic" if that makes sense. And plenty detail.

You could also mail Guosheng. He can give some good advice and will likely trade without too much financial pain.

Originally Posted by legato

I'm not a big fan, but the proof is in the pudding.

Also, in an untreated room, the Shure has some advantage.

Originally Posted by philsaudio

I got the plastic $4.59 shock mounts today, exactly 13 days from China to Atlanta GA USA..

Totally use able IMHO.

The unit is some kind of high impact nylonish plastic with the exception of the silver metal nut and bolt on the swivel adjustment and the brass sleeve insert on the part that attaches to the mic stand; and of course the bunji / shock chords that provide the shock absorbing. The shock cord actually touches the mic and in a way is responsible for the way the unit grips the conical CM-1

The mount is pretty light weight and there is no "binder clip" like lock on the part that holds the mic, BUT it grips the CM1-Teals conical like body like a champ. I tested it and it will hold the CM1 in the upright, sideways or upside down positions just fine. The plastic part that hugs the mic contours along the cone. I just pushed the mic in up to where it almost hits the mics switches.

When hanging it from an overhead stand/bar over the drums, it balances the CM1 nicely. The basket actually rotates more than 180 degrees maybe like 115 degrees each way. Makes it easy to tilt the capsule just like you need it.





I think this accessory is perfect for these incredible sounding "hundred dollar" mics.

Originally Posted by miscend

Guys I've been following Klaus Heynes posts and interviews. He's one of the foremost experts on vintage German mics. Even Dirk Brauner and Neumann trust his opinions. There's nothing about these holy grail vintage mics that can't be recreated or reproduced. Klaus modifies modern German mics to sound just as good as the best examples of vintage German mics all the time.

A lot of this stuff is shrouded in myths. Possibly to jack up prices of vintage gear. At the end of the day a mic is just a tool. There is no mic that performs magic on its source material.

Originally Posted by guitarboy94

Thanks! Yes, I did bypass the pre's on the UH-700 to use the B173. I do like the B173, but it's also up for sale.

Originally Posted by mtl777

I'm considering to buy this shock mount but what I don't understand is how its holding diameter can expand as needed to fit different mic sizes if it does not have a "binder clip" like lock? Could you please explain the mechanism that it employs to be able to fit different sizes of mic?

Originally Posted by doom3crazy

So I currently own a warbler mk6. Great mic. Super clean and clear. I have a random question. Has anyone ever A/B'd any of Mike Joly's oktava mics against any of the 3u microphones? I am sorta tempted to pick up his "hulk 990" mic which is a mod of the mxl 990 microphone. It's his best seller and most popular for hip hop/rap.

The comparison clips of the mic against a u87ai are impressive but the mic is 430$. I am just wondering if I should stick to 3u mics. Especially if they are better and Guosheng gives us such a steal on cost with his microphones.

I am looking to add something to my mic locker but just not sure what to get. I have a tenor ish voice, slightly nasally but nothing that stands out, but more highs in my voice than lows. I do mostly hip hop/rapping. At the moment I just feel like the warbler 6 adds a bit too much air to my voice since I have more highs than I do low's in my voice. Would a darker mic like a warbler II be more fitting? My biggest fear with darker mics is losing that clarity and transient response. I tend to get very intricate lyrically and sometimes rap fast so I need all those lil fine details.

Originally Posted by doom3crazy

Thanks man appreciate it! i am in recovery now. getting better day by day. Lemme ask you this::::

What is your opinion on the ShureSM7b? Ive read A TON of people praising the shiii out of it for it's use in the rap/hip hop application. I understand that it does lack that top end "air" but lots of people have said its easy to add post recording. Oh and the fact it needs a beefy pre amp to power it(At least 60db)