Gearslutz

Gearslutz (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   High End (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/)
-   -   Brauner Phantom C vrs Microtech M930 (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/high-end/10045-brauner-phantom-c-vrs-microtech-m930.html)

1484 1st January 2004 11:08 PM

Brauner Phantom C vrs Microtech M930
 
According to Mercenary Audio "Phantom C engineering targeted Lead Vocals and Voice Over applications, and Brauner tailored its sound for "big" up close with trademark Brauner transparency at distance."


I am not asking which one is better, as this is a personal taste, but how do they sound compared to each other. My understanding is the M930 is a rich full sound that is a little smoother than the TLM 103 and it has a little more headroom. So how does the Phantom C sound compared to the M930, Fletcher, anybody? The M930 should also have a big up close sound if it sounds similar to the TLM 103

NathanEldred 2nd January 2004 12:49 AM

Why don't you order them both from Fletcher and return the one you don't like? He sells both brands.

1484 2nd January 2004 01:22 AM

At this point l am searching for my next mic, and I wanted to see which one would have the character that woudl be best for my studio. Still looking at the U195 as well.

strauss 2nd January 2004 01:33 AM

Re: Brauner Phantom C vrs Microtech M930
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Revelation
. My understanding is the M930 is a rich full sound that is a little smoother than the TLM 103 and it has a little more headroom.... The M930 should also have a big up close sound if it sounds similar to the TLM 103
That description reminds me of a Microtech 990 when compared to a TLM103

Fletcher 2nd January 2004 01:49 PM

The M930 is a good measure rounder than the 'Phantom C'... and no where near as harsh as a TLM-103

cebolao 2nd January 2004 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fletcher
The M930 is a good measure rounder than the 'Phantom C'... and no where near as harsh as a TLM-103
in europe the M930 is half price of phantom c
i wanted to buy the brauncer phantom c mainly for vocals and VO's - is the M930 comparable in sound quality?

7rojo7 4th January 2004 11:16 PM

the phantom "v "doesn't cost much more than the "c" and why would you give up a mic capable of omni? the price? Brauner really makes great mics. period. it doesn't get much better, only "different".

RKrizman 5th January 2004 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by 7rojo7
the phantom "v "doesn't cost much more than the "c" and why would you give up a mic capable of omni? the price? Brauner really makes great mics. period. it doesn't get much better, only "different".
I was less than impressed with the Phantom C. Up close it seemed boomy, not warm. Back further it was too bright on everything. However, when we rolled off a lot of high end it sounded quite nice.

Actually, I was surprised I didn't like it more, considering the high praise it gets in these parts. However, from another thread I remember reading that there may have been a problem with a wrong resistor value during a certain run of the mics, which covered the period that I auditioned one. Fletcher may know about this. I'm curious if that resistor could have made the mic sound drastically different.

-R

studjo 5th January 2004 09:48 AM

I have not much experience with Brauner mics, but I did a shotout between the Brauner Valvet and some Horch mics (inquiering the direction I want to go with my micswworried ) I was less than inpressed with the Brauner. I liked a simple U87 better and the Horch was from a different planet (if I only had the moneymezed )

YMMV Jo

Brad Lunde 6th January 2004 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by studjo
I have not much experience with Brauner mics, but I did a shotout between the Brauner Valvet and some Horch mics (inquiering the direction I want to go with my micswworried ) I was less than inpressed with the Brauner. I liked a simple U87 better and the Horch was from a different planet (if I only had the moneymezed )

YMMV Jo

I gotta jump in here. Studjo, please excuse me for picking on this post. This is not about you- or your ears, but I have to set the record straight because someone might misunderstand what you said.

In the comparison above, a Horsch against a Brauner Valvet, or the U87 against a Valvet, you couldn't possibly pick microphones more different, mics destined for vastly different applications from each other. The comparison is not fair because what makes a Valvet a great mic is in no way close to what makes a U87 a worthwhile mic. Its really important to get mics in a comparison that share a similar "best application". Then you've got something to hang your hat on, because you are comparing apples to apples.

For example, one of the best applications of a stock Brauner Valvet is distant micing, especially strings/orchestra. Would you consider that a U87 or a Horsch mic's best application would be distant micing of strings? What would either of these mics best application be? Once you know that, you can compare to other mics that share the same strength, and only those. In doing so, you will receive very useful and meaningful information that will serve you well over time. Its almost impossible to think an apple fits in when its alone in a bunch of oranges.

There, rant over.
Brad

studjo 6th January 2004 08:13 AM

No problem Brad

I know they are quite different - that's why I chose em. I want to find the flavor of mic that I'll buy next.
I can imagine a Brauner for distant string micing but I won't use it a drum-room mic. Different uses - different mics.

Jo

Brad Lunde 6th January 2004 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by studjo
No problem Brad

I know they are quite different - that's why I chose em. I want to find the flavor of mic that I'll buy next.<SNIP>.

Jo

Hey, no problem with the opinion. Please try the idea of grouping mics by similar application for shoot outs/comparisons/evals. It will serve up much better results.
Brad

Brad Lunde 6th January 2004 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RKrizman
I was less than impressed with the Phantom C. Up close it seemed boomy, not warm. <SNIP> However, from another thread I remember reading that there may have been a problem with a wrong resistor value during a certain run of the mics, which covered the period that I auditioned one. Fletcher may know about this. I'm curious if that resistor could have made the mic sound drastically different.

-R

Indeed, the first Phantom C's I got had an issue. I was working with Brauner trying to get the sound out of the production mic that I heard in a prototype I received before they were shipping. There were specific changes we wanted made in the first US production versions, and Dirk was already selling C's in Europe successfully. But I thought the mic was too bright, too middy-I wanted a smoother mid and a little more low end. There were endless back and forth "try this" and "try that". We settled on a sound. The first shipment I received was of the German standard, not what I wanted. They were also defective, made to sound even worse, as a new solder man (a area Brauner normally excels in) got a part reversed, and the mics were not right. SO they had to go back and get fixed. Since then we have the sound we asked for, and Brauner changed production to fit our needs.

This is somewhat the same story (without the defects) on the Valvet to the Valvet Voice, and the development of the VM1 to the Vm1KHE. We have a new mic now in, called the VMA, which is finally spot on for the US market. I am pretty excited about that.....if only the darn Euro would cooperate.

I would be easy if manufacturers just built it perfect from the start, but from my little story you can see that it takes a lot of effort here to get stuff exactly right from the factory, stuff you will like. this is our real job, not so much "selling it", which is of course how most people think of us. We do not always win, but most of the time it improves the product. The Drawmer 1969 is another example of this, the Daking FET2, the Daking MicPre EQ, etc.
Brad

studjo 6th January 2004 08:52 PM

Hey Brad could it be that the US Brauner are not the same as the ones sold in Europe?
The Valvet I heard was very, very bright - I can't imagine to use it as a voc mic, no way.

Jo

toledo3 6th January 2004 10:10 PM

The umt70 looks a little more interesting than the M930, but I don't see anyone who sells it? mezed

RKrizman 6th January 2004 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brad Lunde
[B]Indeed, the first Phantom C's I got had an issue. I was working with Brauner trying to get the sound out of the production mic that I heard in a prototype I received before they were shipping. There were specific changes we wanted made in the first US production versions, and Dirk was already selling C's in Europe successfully. But I thought the mic was too bright, too middy-I wanted a smoother mid and a little more low end.
Great to know, Brad. The one I had was drop shipped from you very early on, and I was thinking I must be nuts not to like it considering the accolades it was getting from Mercenary et al. It was way bright, and although proximity gave it plenty of low end, it was of a fairly useless variety. Glad you stuck with it and apparently got it right.

-R

Brad Lunde 7th January 2004 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by studjo
Hey Brad could it be that the US Brauner are not the same as the ones sold in Europe?
The Valvet I heard was very, very bright - I can't imagine to use it as a voc mic, no way.

Jo

Jo:
That's what I was trying to say (and obviously failed) about the Valvet-its prime application is NOT as a vocal mic. I think its too bright too. Its a string/guitar mic. BUT

The ValvetVoice IS a vocal mic, and is only available in the US.

The Valvet BE (BE = bass extrension-a custom product we also bring in) is also useful for vocals AND strings.

This was my point, that you cannot compare a Valvet to a vocal mic, you'll think all Brauners are too bright-and this would be wrong! I had to post because I've seen the too bright thng floating once and while, and its because of demos like this, where you are comparing the wrong Brauner mic to other mics. Sort of like comparing a tube47 to an M50, they are just in two different worlds of application.

Brad

matucha 5th December 2004 01:07 AM

okok, now you got me really confused, so forgive me dumb question.

Is Phantom C or V made as Vocal mic?

James Lehmann 5th December 2004 03:56 PM

I own a Microtech Gefell M930 and I recently did a shoot out with a Brauner Phantom C. I would stress that this was a test on spoken voice-over only, I did not sing or play instruments into either mic. It's also worth re-iterating that we are comparing two mics, one of which is TWICE the price of the other.

OK, so given all that...

I like my M930 a lot for the price but IMHO the Brauner Phantom C is in a different league sonically. The Phantom C has a simply massive sound that is beautifully clear and uncoloured across the range - the bass response is just phenomenal and the high end is bright and clear without ever being harsh or un-natural.

I also shot out a Brauner Valvet and a Blue Kiwi in the same test and again, for voice-over work, the Phantom C was the clear winner. Once we started listening to singers opinions were less clear with the Kiwi giving a really good vocal sound and the Valvet adding huge amounts of very nice warmth. Preference was very much material dependant, ie the Kiwi worked really well on funky more aggressive tracks while the Valvet would suit a Jazz singer very well. Hardened sluts will need both! But these mics are nearly double the price of the Phantom C.

If you can afford it go for the Phantom C, no question, (I'll be buying one as soon as funds permit!) but meantime you won't be disappointed with the Gefell which represents excellent value for money for those on a tight budget who are fed up with or can't afford Neumann.

matucha 5th December 2004 04:27 PM

Quote:

The Phantom C has a simply massive sound that is beautifully clear and uncoloured across the range - the bass response is just phenomenal and the high end is bright and clear without ever being harsh or un-natural.
^ Sounds perfect to me ^


In this case both M930 and PhantomC are affordable, as well as UMT70... and secondhand 87....

well I'm going insane ;-), I read almost everything on 930-Phantom-UMT-87.... here, psw, google groups, lynns forum... it took me considerable time to go through and the result is I'm even more confused than before reading ;-). It seems the only chance is to listen...

I only heard brauner on ac. guitar Ruphus (if I remember correctly) sent here, but no vocal/voice recording.

I'm leaning towards Brauner afterall, but I'd like to stretch to V... I'd like to have omni for the future use in pair... well future ;-)

Still I'm very interested in hearing Brauner and Gefell mics side by side on spoken word or singing... maybe with a U87 included. If anyone has something, please share.

thanks
Matous

Knastratt 5th December 2004 09:24 PM

Not using Valvet for vocals? Gotta be kidding. Valvet into AMEK CIB has gotten me stellar results with various voices.

But I do agree that it's really good for distant micing. It's scarily detailed.

brownmouse 6th December 2004 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by matucha
^ Sounds perfect to me ^


In this case both M930 and PhantomC are affordable, as well as UMT70... and secondhand 87....

well I'm going insane ;-), I read almost everything on 930-Phantom-UMT-87.... here, psw, google groups, lynns forum... it took me considerable time to go through and the result is I'm even more confused than before reading ;-). It seems the only chance is to listen...

I only heard brauner on ac. guitar Ruphus (if I remember correctly) sent here, but no vocal/voice recording.

I'm leaning towards Brauner afterall, but I'd like to stretch to V... I'd like to have omni for the future use in pair... well future ;-)

Still I'm very interested in hearing Brauner and Gefell mics side by side on spoken word or singing... maybe with a U87 included. If anyone has something, please share.

thanks
Matous


i have owned a u87 and demo'd the brauner phantom-c and i bought the gefell m-930. this is just my personal taste, but the u-87 seemed very 'vanila' and boring to me, the brauner was pretty neutral (i liked it better than the u-87, but i passed on buying it), i recently picked up a gefell m-930 (also in the shootout was a gefell um-900 and a few other 'heavy weights). funny thing was i ended up liking the m-930 the best (as did the client who was recording at the time). the brauner and gefell um-900 were both very cool, but i actually am finding more uses for my gefell m-930. basically, i think i would get the gefell first and add the brauner (or??) later for another flavor. ymmv.
joshua

matucha 6th December 2004 10:35 AM

;-) it seems there is no bad choice, but may I ask, what sound are you into? I mean I don't understand rock esthetics of sound and I'm mostly electronic/jazz/hiphop/rnb oriented when it comes to sound. That's maybe a big decision factor, maybe not.

Is UMT800 a multipatern M930 or they are different beasts?

brownmouse 6th December 2004 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by matucha
;-) it seems there is no bad choice, but may I ask, what sound are you into? I mean I don't understand rock esthetics of sound and I'm mostly electronic/jazz/hiphop/rnb oriented when it comes to sound. That's maybe a big decision factor, maybe not.

Is UMT800 a multipatern M930 or they are different beasts?

i'm not sure this question is directed at me, but just in case... right now i'm working with an acoustic rock guy and a blue grass band, i'm getting ready to start a christian 80's rock band and have done a more 70's ish rock band, etc.. etc..... so a bunch of stufff (no rap/hip hop though).
joshua

brownmouse 6th December 2004 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by matucha
;-) it seems there is no bad choice, but may I ask, what sound are you into? I mean I don't understand rock esthetics of sound and I'm mostly electronic/jazz/hiphop/rnb oriented when it comes to sound. That's maybe a big decision factor, maybe not.

Is UMT800 a multipatern M930 or they are different beasts?

oops, i meant to add that the um-900 (which is what i auditioned) is a multi pattern mic and a different beast, but i only really needed one pattern and the m-930 flavor just fit my immediate needs better at the time ( i still thought the um-900 was a stellar mic... but i needed a flathead not a phillips at the time... )
joshua

sdelsolray 6th December 2004 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by matucha
;-) it seems there is no bad choice, but may I ask, what sound are you into? I mean I don't understand rock esthetics of sound and I'm mostly electronic/jazz/hiphop/rnb oriented when it comes to sound. That's maybe a big decision factor, maybe not.

Is UMT800 a multipatern M930 or they are different beasts?

The UMT800 uses the M7 capsule, the M930 does not (it uses a single mylar membrane capsule designed by MT Gefell). Any of the Gefell mics with a "U" in the designation use the M7 capsule. Those without the "U" do not, at least that's how I remember it.

matucha 6th December 2004 05:04 PM

thanks brownmouse, the question was directed at you...jummpp

matucha 6th December 2004 05:22 PM

Quote:

The UMT800 uses the M7 capsule, the M930 does not (it uses a single mylar membrane capsule designed by MT Gefell). Any of the Gefell mics with a "U" in the designation use the M7 capsule. Those without the "U" do not, at least that's how I remember it.
You're right... means that the M series doesn't have multipattern.

Skeetch 6th December 2004 05:29 PM

Anyone know the serial number range of the Phantom C's that had the goofed up resistor?

The Radioking 6th December 2004 06:16 PM

I own a Brauner Valvet ( be ) 1 of only 5 made this is a great mic and i highly reccomend it.I use it for all vocal work very warm and fat.hope this helps
David Keith
Gintown Studios