The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
Affordable LDC Microphone With Multiple Voicings
Old 5th May 2016
  #2941
Here for the gear
 

Someone said, uh wrote, if you want an 87 buy an 87. There is no substitute for the real thing. A clone will never be an original. The diy community is more about the build and learning circuits and the end result can be quite close but not exact in the case of mics. The 3uaudio offerings, as I understand it, are not clones of said mics but mics that are designed to be in the general sound style, with their own personality. If you read the thread, some of the designs were in response to the participants in the thread. If you want a clone, do your research and you can build one. Or have one built...simple solution really. The value here is sound to cost, not to mention build materials and quality...hard to beat.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2942
Gear Addict
 
bringmewater's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron25 View Post
Someone said, uh wrote, if you want an 87 buy an 87. There is no substitute for the real thing. A clone will never be an original. The diy community is more about the build and learning circuits and the end result can be quite close but not exact in the case of mics. The 3uaudio offerings, as I understand it, are not clones of said mics but mics that are designed to be in the general sound style, with their own personality. If you read the thread, some of the designs were in response to the participants in the thread. If you want a clone, do your research and you can build one. Or have one built...simple solution really. The value here is sound to cost, not to mention build materials and quality...hard to beat.
Good advice. Any chance the 3u's are actually better than the vintage mics.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2943
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
All good points but if the model has 67, 251, 12 or 87 in it and the design is very similar and the look is similar it's not a leap to say they are trying to make a clone and to compare it as such.
It's not a leap, it's an assumption. And assumptions usually get you into trouble or lead to disappointment for most things in life. If someone doesn't say something outright, sound advice would be not to assume something unsaid.

Usually with mics people say "Well, what does it sound like?" Now you can say, well it sounds like a mic!...or you can say, well it's warm, flat, thick in the low mids, etc etc etc....but what usually ends up happening is the person asking, "Well what mic would you compare it to?" You seem like a smart guy, you would have to be able to see why people would use this name numbering to describe a vintage voiced microphone in the style of number whatever; it makes complete sense.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2944
Gear Addict
 
bringmewater's Avatar
 

Yeah I do understand and it seems these mics are made with top drawer components and someone with real experience. I'm wondering seriously if they might even be better than the originals. Would love to hear more from people who can A/B with the originals not just from a "how close is it a clone" but also from "which sounds best" perspective. Thanks !!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Conquertheblock View Post
It's not a leap, it's an assumption. And assumptions usually get you into trouble or lead to disappointment for most things in life. If someone doesn't say something outright, sound advice would be not to assume something unsaid.

Usually with mics people say "Well, what does it sound like?" Now you can say, well it sounds like a mic!...or you can say, well it's warm, flat, thick in the low mids, etc etc etc....but what usually ends up happening is the person asking, "Well what mic would you compare it to?" You seem like a smart guy, you would have to be able to see why people would use this name numbering to describe a vintage voiced microphone in the style of number whatever; it makes complete sense.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2945
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
Good advice. Any chance the 3u's are actually better than the vintage mics.
Are you asking if they are better than the vintagemicrophonepcb stuff or better than actual classic vintage mics they are inspired by?

I think you said you were an engineer so let's look at it from a scientific perspective. That question will never lead you to a correct answer; it's subjective. That is something you need to determine for yourself by buying the mic and experiencing it yourself. I don't think they beat a vintage 251 but the gz251 is a super fine mic. You have enough data here in this thread to show you the next logical step is to try one and gain first experience.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2946
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
Yeah I do understand and it seems these mics are made with top drawer components and someone with real experience. I'm wondering seriously if they might even be better than the originals. Would love to hear more from people who can A/B with the originals not just from a "how close is it a clone" but also from "which sounds best" perspective. Thanks !!
I don't have the extra scratch to buy a classic nor do I think it's even worth it to me. But I will definitely be trying to do some rentals once I move because I really enjoy these mics. But for what it's worth a lot of the shootouts with clones that cost over a grand to build and are regarded as quite nice the 3u audio stuff was equivalent or superior to most in this thread.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2947
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by legato View Post
Let's also not forget the MKVI takes over where the MKI leaves off.

So if the MKI is too dark for one's liking or purpose, the MKIV can go quite a bit brighter.

And brighter equals more transient detail, all other things being equal.
This is true...there was a post in here somewhere someone made with a clip using their MKVId on a female voice over a reggae track I think that sounded great! I would imagine the MkVI is a special one too.
Old 5th May 2016
  #2948
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by legato View Post
Hhamiltonwrote:


No surprise there.
Best or most accurate U67 clone?
Right!

Quote:
No one got you. Some people tried to help, that's all. And nobody here makes money from it (except the maker, a bit).
It was a joke, although true, based on what Conquertheblock said about marketing. He said makers put those numbers in to attract attention. People are talking about those classics in this thread, and the maker himself spoke of favorable comparisons with vintage 87s. It attracted my attention.

I appreciate the help but some people seem to take all of this personally or something. All I was trying to do here was listen to the shootouts and not be taken in by marketing or hype, which I believe you accused me of in my thread about frequency responses and u67s.

Quote:
You either take advantage of the possibilities or you move on. Both are fine.
Okay, thanks to Mike110492 for posting that comparison.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2949
Gear Addict
 
Mulmany's Avatar
The comparison clips are on the 3u site, just got to dig a little for them.

I replaced my set of AT4050s with MKID'S and could not be more pleased. I wish Kid was around cause he would know what to say.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2950
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hhamilton View Post
Right!



It was a joke, although true, based on what Conquertheblock said about marketing. He said makers put those numbers in to attract attention. People are talking about those classics in this thread, and the maker himself spoke of favorable comparisons with vintage 87s. It attracted my attention.

I appreciate the help but some people seem to take all of this personally or something. All I was trying to do here was listen to the shootouts and not be taken in by marketing or hype, which I believe you accused me of in my thread about frequency responses and u67s.



Okay, thanks to Mike110492 for posting that comparison.
It's the internet it's hard to interpret the emotion behind text...and also trolling. I don't think anything was taken personally, I have no problem discussing stuff with the little knowledge I have. At the end of the day I think you should just bite the bullet and grab one and share your thoughts. Its worth it in my opinion.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2951
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mulmany View Post
The comparison clips are on the 3u site, just got to dig a little for them.

I replaced my set of AT4050s with MKID'S and could not be more pleased. I wish Kid was around cause he would know what to say.
This I did not know. That's a great discovery for those who are looking!
Old 6th May 2016
  #2952
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
I did read all 98 pages fwiw. Also, no microphone is 'magic'. They are made in factories by humans and machines with materials and with good research a clone should be easy to completely duplicate. I don't see why it seems so hard for them to make clones actually. Btw, my last favorite mics were CAD Audio trion 8000 (loved it and will probably get another) and the SM7B (very nice too).
I'm sorry, but you are showing yourself to not really know much about microphones. I don't mean to sound harsh but some microphones very much do a kind of magic and that magic is NOT easy to duplicate. Just used a great 70's U87 for two days and there was a large shovel of beautiful, husky magic in it that no one today is able to recreate. The W1's here however get in the ballpark of the overall shape of that sort of tone, which in itself is pretty amazing, especially for the price. But they ain't a great 70's 87. If you think along the lines of 'should be easy to replicate' about any 'magic' studio gear you are fooling yourself with lazy 'what seems like logic'. Really.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2953
Gear Addict
 
bringmewater's Avatar
 

Sorry but you are wrong. The term magic can mean a 3 dimensional quality or whatever you want it to mean. But it's a totally vague term. Coming down to reality......the reality is that every U87,47,12,251 was made by machines and humans using materials from this earth (hey, new idea ! moon rock mics) and as such using SCIENCE can be recreated exactly into a clone if someone KNOWS the process. I'm sorry to burst your magic bubble and thinking I don't know much about microphones but you are simply deluding yourself to think any mic has magic that cannot be recreated. Magic is really a great way to describe something special going on but it doesn't mean it's not recreatable.

Moon Rocks ! http://mashable.com/2013/09/20/8-spa.../#jZIvkndMkSqU

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
I'm sorry, but you are showing yourself to not really know much about microphones. I don't mean to sound harsh but some microphones very much do a kind of magic and that magic is NOT easy to duplicate. Just used a great 70's U87 for two days and there was a large shovel of beautiful, husky magic in it that no one today is able to recreate. The W1's here however get in the ballpark of the overall shape of that sort of tone, which in itself is pretty amazing, especially for the price. But they ain't a great 70's 87. If you think along the lines of 'should be easy to replicate' about any 'magic' studio gear you are fooling yourself with lazy 'what seems like logic'. Really.

Last edited by bringmewater; 6th May 2016 at 01:52 PM..
Old 6th May 2016
  #2954
I just got this in from Guosheng at 3U regarding the CM1 Teal and the SDC.

"Hi Phil,

Thank you for your kind words. Hope you continue to enjoy using the Teal CM1s.

The Black CM1 will be available again in one month. We are still waiting for mic bodies.

For SDC mic, we just got PCB sample for test. The mic will be available in two months. We are discussing mic body with a guy. So we'll get final price later.

Thanks

Your sincerely,

Guosheng Zhuang

Director | 3U AUDIO "
Old 6th May 2016
  #2955
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
For SDC mic, we just got PCB sample for test. The mic will be available in two months. We are discussing mic body with a guy. So we'll get final price later.
Please, let it be one with a transformer.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2956
Lives for gear
 
Ragan's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by legato View Post
Please, let it be one with a transformer.
+1

I told Guosheng there's a huge appetite for a good KM84 substitute. I think he could really do well with one.

I think it'll be the KM184 style that comes out first though.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2957
Lives for gear
 

Why bother? There are too many trannyless SDCs already. Affordable ones included.
He can make a difference.
Wide open goal.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2958
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
Sorry but you are wrong. The term magic can mean a 3 dimensional quality or whatever you want it to mean. But it's a totally vague term. Coming down to reality......the reality is that every U87,47,12,251 was made by machines and humans using materials from this earth (hey, new idea ! moon rock mics) and as such using SCIENCE can be recreated exactly into a clone if someone KNOWS the process. I'm sorry to burst your magic bubble and thinking I don't know much about microphones but you are simply deluding yourself to think any mic has magic that cannot be recreated. Magic is really a great way to describe something special going on but it doesn't mean it's not recreatable.

Moon Rocks ! 8 Space Products You Can Buy Online
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
Old 6th May 2016
  #2959
Gear Guru
 
Karloff70's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragan View Post
+1

I told Guosheng there's a huge appetite for a good KM84 substitute. I think he could really do well with one.

I think it'll be the KM184 style that comes out first though.
I reckon you'e spot on, a good km84alike would sell .....
Old 6th May 2016
  #2960
Lives for gear
 

OK, let's vote then.

I count three for a KM84-style.

Do we have more?

Old 6th May 2016
  #2961
Gear Addict
 
bringmewater's Avatar
 

So for the record just so I'm clear......you are saying there is a MAGIC that cannot be reproduced no matter how much engineering information is made available ? Seriously ? Is that what you mean ?

<snip - check yourself please>

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karloff70 View Post
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

Last edited by psycho_monkey; 7th May 2016 at 02:46 PM..
Old 6th May 2016
  #2962
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
Sorry but you are wrong. The term magic can mean a 3 dimensional quality or whatever you want it to mean. But it's a totally vague term. Coming down to reality......the reality is that every U87,47,12,251 was made by machines and humans using materials from this earth (hey, new idea ! moon rock mics) and as such using SCIENCE can be recreated exactly into a clone if someone KNOWS the process. I'm sorry to burst your magic bubble and thinking I don't know much about microphones but you are simply deluding yourself to think any mic has magic that cannot be recreated. Magic is really a great way to describe something special going on but it doesn't mean it's not recreatable.

Moon Rocks ! 8 Space Products You Can Buy Online
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.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2963
MYN
Gear Addict
 
MYN's Avatar
Yeah man. I'm totally down for a KM84 style SDC.

You know what else I'd love to eventually see? A 3U shotgun mic, kinda like the Sennheiser 416 with that big booming proximity effect for VO promos, but with a transformer for girth so you can really hit the thing without having to eat it to get that sound.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2964
Lives for gear
 

Four and counting.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2965
Gear Nut
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragan View Post
+1

I told Guosheng there's a huge appetite for a good KM84 substitute. I think he could really do well with one.

I think it'll be the KM184 style that comes out first though.


which ever comes out first. I'm in!!
Old 6th May 2016
  #2966
Gear Addict
 
bringmewater's Avatar
 

Thank you for taking the time to explain this in a very meaningful way. It really makes more sense though I'm surprised that after so many years the recipe is not easy to replicate. It's amazing what goes into these mics. I forget if you have already told me but do you have a recommendation for a rock and roll mic like for classic rock? Thanks!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Piedpiper View Post
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.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2967
Lives for gear
 

Drumslinger wrote:
Quote:
which ever comes out first. I'm in!!
Five to one.
Old 6th May 2016
  #2968
Gear Addict
 
bringmewater's Avatar
 

Deleted post here
Old 6th May 2016
  #2969
Lives for gear
 
Piedpiper's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by bringmewater View Post
Thank you for taking the time to explain this in a very meaningful way. It really makes more sense though I'm surprised that after so many years the recipe is not easy to replicate. It's amazing what goes into these mics. I forget if you have already told me but do you have a recommendation for a rock and roll mic like for classic rock? Thanks!
You're welcome. What you were saying made sense except for those pesky details. And the problem is not just making a good mic, but one that captures those particular flavors just so. And those flavors really are worth capturing, though there is plenty of room for other useable mics, and yes, even "better" ones, depending on your definition of better in a given context. There are a number of companies that do varying degrees of capturing the originals, with some serious attempts at cloning per se, and some do get close. More are simply inspired by them, and most of these are approximations that get you in the neighborhood on a budget. The 3U mics obviously fit into this category but are unusual in their quality of parts and sound, given their price. How close they come to the originals seems to be an afterthought.

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.

Re: a good rock mic, in my experience you have to match the mic to the voice and song. And since this is a 3U thread, I'll leave further suggestions to those who own them.

Last edited by Piedpiper; 7th May 2016 at 07:39 AM..
Old 6th May 2016
  #2970
Lives for gear
 

Thanks, Tim.



Henk
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
Forum Jump