Contrary to what most people are saying I actually really enjoyed most of the narration! It has a really vintage, tube radio vibe and really gives a cool "listening to Regan on the radio" feeling well done!
It is wrong that Naumann has stopped producing legendary U 47 FET, U47 vintage, U67 VINTAGE, U87 FET condenser microphones. These mics should be recreated with same components and same sound texture.
Great and well done video bro. More please. Would love to see full maintenance how to videos on these mics and others. I for one dig the spaceman narration. Cool
This was indeed a cool little production. The voiceover was nicely funky. With the telephone effect filter. Very cute. Very highly processed. Processed very well. But let's get down to the nitty-gritty here. We are showing, vintage Neumann microphones. And the one I didn't own, personally. Was an original, U-47 with that TELEFUNKEN, VF-14, metal envelope valve/vacuum tube. While I owned a pair each of original, U-67's and a first release original, U-87's. Along with a pair of KM-86's and a KM-56 valve. Along with a little-known, lavalier, KML. Battery powering only. No phantom for that. No batteries available anymore. It was a KM-84 capsule. But I digress. For those of you that need a new diaphragm. Do not get those, Thinner Diaphragms. No! That is patently, stupid to do. That's how you make your expensive Neumann Microphones sound like a, $85 Chinese version! And if that's the sound you want? You'll have no problem getting it. The Neumann diaphragms are, 6 mil, thick. They are, in short, thick. And they sound thick. Compared to a thinner, 3 mil, diaphragm. And the really super hyper crispy fried sounding ones are the, superthin, 1.5 mil, thin, diaphragms. Ugh! They are beyond fizzy and metallic sounding! And totally great if you like amateur hour sound. I don't. That's why I purchased Neumann microphones. They have thick diaphragms. For thick sound. That takes EQ, very well. Now when it comes to, Valves and Vacuum Tubes. Forget about it! There aren't any good ones anymore. Unless you can find some New Old Stock, German-made, TELEFUNKEN's. You don't got shit. In fact. That's all you got is, shit, vacuum tubes today. That are not worth the materials they are made with. Let me explain. A, U-47 is only a U-47. With that, VF-14 original TELEFUNKEN metal envelope tube. Because any other tube, Nuvistor. Ain't going to sound like a, U-47. It just won't. It'll sound like something else. Using a, M-7 capsule. But it will not sound like a, U-47. Even if it has 47 in its model number by its manufacturer. It's not really a 47, at all. Not even close. And the difference is Jaw Dropping! Would you have adhered the real thing. Compared to anything else. You will need an airsickness bag handy. It's really that different that bad. Not even a Neumann U-47 FET sounds like a U-47. With a VF-14 valve in it. Nope! Ha ha! Now that U-67. Yeah I had a nice pair of those with original TELEFUNKEN, EF-86 Pentode. As mine got noisy over the years. So it was time to replace them both. Thankfully, companies like, RCA, Raytheon, GE, Sylvania, were still making them. Plenty were available. And they were still reasonably priced. So since I had the money back then. I purchased a pair of each of those manufacturers. Brand-new, EF-86 Pentode, tubes. And I could hardly wait to hear which ones sounded the best! So I took my microphones over to a buddies studio. It was a real fine place. It had been designed and built by, API Audio Products Inc. And had been their own studio. And then sold to my colleague Buddy friend. And he had a, U-47 original. It sounded very nice. So I opened up my U-67's. An eye-popping a couple of new tubes into each one. The RCA and the Raytheon. And we let them warm up. As we play back some other mixes. And now the microphones are warmed up. I can hardly wait! And we take a listen. Having a, U-87 on the side. As an additional reference. And oh wow! Both U-67's sound like total crap! Unusable! What the hell? This sounds awful! This brand-new RCA and Raytheon tube, sounds awful.. Something must be wrong with them? So I grabbed GE and Sylvania, EF-86's. And I pop those into both U-67's. And let them warm up briefly. We take another listen. And what do you know? They sound just as horrible. Just as bad. Just as unusable. And we are both sitting there dumbfounded. What the hell is going on? These are brand-new. Something must've gone wrong with the power supplies? I take out the old voltmeter. Everything is fine. So now what? Something has happened to the diaphragms? So. I pop the old noisy TELEFUNKEN EF-86's back in. I switch on the microphones. Let them warm up briefly. And aside from the background noise. It sounds Spectacular! What the hell? With the brand-new vacuum tubes. Both U-67's didn't sound anywhere near as usable as the U-87. They sounded like crunchy distorted mud. I've never heard anything like that before. Out of a Neumann microphone. And I was shocked to my core. What did this mean? This meant. German TELEFUNKEN vacuum tubes. Were obviously built. With ingredients. Not necessarily healthy to human beings. And why that VF-14 went out of production so quickly? When there were thousands of U-47's out there around the world. Why would they stop making the valves/vacuum tubes for them? When both companies were actively involved with one another. What the hell? And then even my TELEFUNKEN EF-86's. Sounded way different. Way better. Than any of the brand-new American versions. Today. You can only find the, Russian and Chinese versions of those valves/vacuum tubes. And I've heard those also. They are even worse sounding! They are fine for guitar amplifiers. They are fine for your hi-fi amplifiers. They are not fine for microphones of any kind. They sound dreadful. Now I had a number of lovely, classic vacuum tube microphone mixers. They were 4 inputs each. And they all used the popular, dual triode, small glass envelope, 12 AX 7, type tubes. And in one mixer I had the TELEFUNKEN, vacuum tubes. In the other one. I put in brand-new, Russian and Chinese versions. While the Russian and Chinese versions, did work. And I deemed them usable. They just seemed to lack, the warmth I expected. The fullness that was absent. The air, that was frozen sounding. And I was left disappointed. While those Russian and Chinese tubes could work, can work. The sound of them left me cold. They had no depth, to the sound. The sound was there, sure. It was ice cold sounding. And I looked at the tube to see if it was actually glowing? Yes it was. But the sound didn't sound like it. It just sounded, metallic. And so I realized. Some years back. If you want vacuum tubes? You only want TELEFUNKEN vacuum tubes. Nothing else really sounds great like TELEFUNKEN vacuum tubes. And they are no longer made. That German company no longer exists. They exist in the USA in name only. The clone classic microphones they are making are nice. They are not worth the money. Because you can no longer get the right tubes. And everybody is making thin diaphragms. That make them all sound like they are $80 each from China. So my advice to you youngsters. Stick with, Transistorized Condenser Microphones. With thick, diaphragms of 6 mil, thickness.. And don't worry if they don't sound, all bright and fizzy sounding. They will be far more listenable for the listeners. And so for my retirement. I sold off my lovely Neumann microphones I've had for over 40 years. And I made a nice chunk of change on them. I shall miss them dearly. I used them for decades. And if you want a Neumann microphone? You don't want somebody else's bargain replacement capsule. You don't even want an expensive thin one. Do not do that. As if you want an airy sound? Get a small diaphragm condenser microphone. Not a large diaphragm condenser microphone. You'll get more air from the smaller ones. And more low-end. And more precise sounding. More linear sounding. You get from, SDC's. It's a known fact. The smaller the diaphragm the better. But noise increases. Versus output. But hey.... If you haven't used a Sennheiser, MKE-2, micromanager, lavalier microphone, tie tack microphone. As a full-blown, omnidirectional, recording microphone? You haven't lived. They are great! And you can clip them and tape them on to most anything! Really great to use. And great sounding. Very linear. I never had any problems with noise. And they have a, 2 position, low cut switch. Very handy with excessive AC rumble and a swift breeze. Whereas I've actually taped them on to music stands. Because my TV Director said…… I don't want to see any microphones on camera. Okey-dokey then! And of the 12 or so microphones I was using. You could never see one of them. And there were solo singers and a full Symphony Orchestra. And a, 200 voice choir. All in NBC-TV Studio A, Washington DC. And I received an, Emmy Nomination for that production. For best audio category. And it was not my best audio. It was my compromised audio. It was all a compromise. Because my director didn't want to see any microphones on camera. And so I used lavalier/tie tack, microphones. Some were even hidden in, Poinsettia, Christmas plans. That had the microphones for the vocal soloists. And it was down near their feet. But it sounded like it was in their face where it needed to be. And those crappy little lavalier/tie tack microphones sound incredible! And so easy to use. You don't need microphone stands. You just need duct tape. And that's much easier. Stick with transistorized microphones in the New Millennia. You can't go back in time. RemyRAD
Thanks for this excellent video , every mic review should also include a strip down showing everything inside the mic including the capsule. The sound mojo on the u67 and u87 is based on the grill basket design that is what makes it sound the way it does. By having the flat diamond shape on the front instead of round you get a more darker sound since the sound waves can not go around the grill as fast as a rounded basket!!!. I took an MXL v67 G and dented the front of the basket to match the U87, the MXL now has a completely different sound without even changing capsules or electronics inside.
Is this actually true??? I thought that microphone baskets (and pop screens) were designed to be "acoustically transparent" or something like that... (meaning they will baffle high amplitudes, but not affect the actual waveform). Or are you saying that actual natural resonance of the basket/casing of the microphone affects the sound picked up by the capsule? The reason I ask is because I just bought a MXL V67G (because of it's built-in high end attenuation modeled after the Neumann U87) for it's supposed "warmer" sound (and low cost =P). But that is supposedly done through circuitry - I've never heard of basket shape affecting how the capsule pick up sound.
question how do you dissasemble the neumann u67 ? i have one but i have never been able to dissassemble it. i dont want to ruin it. could you make a video dissasembling neumanns? thank you
It’s a battery level meter. Old U87’s, (before the current U87a model), could be powered by two 22volt flash tube batteries instead of phantom power. I have never tried it.
It's a voltmeter for the optional battery. Believe it or not, an original U87 can be run from a battery! You need two 22.5 Volt batteries, rarely seen now… I looked up on ebay and found some: Exell A221 505A Alkaline 22.5V Battery $12.88
Thanks for the reply now it all make sense.Great Microphone i own a m149 and love it i just replaced the tube myself cost £40 to do it with a cryo tube form a company here in the UK watford valve. Philips Jan series still burning it in before i glue it down .Neumann want £300 plus to change the tube i have done lots of tube rolling I'm pretty good at soldering so for me it was easy.But feel sorry for the people having to send a microphone in for a tube change at hat price .Cheers
Using a printing press they printed the copper conductor pattern and then etched away the remaining copper, drilled holes, mounted then soldered the components and the copper tracks for protection.
These are enormously overpriced microphones.That being said, I have never had the privilege of using one. So I speak from no experience. An AT4050 is my best mic.
@@Jjf109nine Nah... Not quite with you. I've used a lot of M49's, some C12's and a couple of really pristine U47's, and I've got to say. While some of them (not all, as some sound quite shit objectively, but still cost the same) sound incredible, they are not 20.000 dollars incredible. At most I would pay 500 dollars more for a good Neumann U47 than I would say a Flea U47. It's just that a lot of otherwise rational people believe in magic. Many of those who do are the vintage recording equipment crowd. They genuinely believe in magic, like Harry Potter magic, but with microphones. It's crazy.
Michael Caplin Well, I have to disagree with factual knowledge. Neumann‘s capsule manufacturing process is unparalleled to any Flea (Thiersh M7) or Bock (Haun (Mbho) CK12). The capsule tension and diaphragm composite is more complex than the whole Flea U47. While the latter will sound good at first, it lacks the initial attack in which transients are sluggishly reproduced. The balance of low-mid-high frequencies is inferior as well as the resolution at which Neumann excels. All of this results in a less engaging, emotionally inferior and less articulate reproduction of sound. People without trained ears do not hear the difference but feel it. And this is only the capsule difference which neglects capacitance, THD and other decisive values.
@@Jjf109nine It doesn't sound like you disagree with me though. Nothing you said goes against anything in my comment. I said I would at most pay 500 dollars more for the sound of a good U47 (again, there are u47's out there that sound worse than any TLM 102 I've heard) than I would for a good Flea U47. The difference is so subtle that it's hardly worth anything more. Paying more than 500 dollars for that is the same as buying the Taj Mahal for 8 billion dollars, but realising that there is a slight difference in colour on one of the surrounding towers, and then spending 158 billion dollars to correct that. Sure, it makes it nicer when they are all the same colour, but is it really 158 billion dollars nicer? That's the only thing I've said, so tell me if you agree or disagree with that. No one has said the Flea sounds as good as the vintage one (a good vintage one, that is), but it's clear that paying 20.000 dollars for something that is pretty damn close is simply an idiotic thing to do unless you are swimming in money. I used to use mostly a couple of M49 pairs we had laying around for piano, and used to love the U47 and C12 on vocals. I even miced up a drumset with 8 vintage C12's a couple of times just because we had a lot of them. It sounded great, but so does less expensive microphones. The only difference really is that modern microphones work at all times and match each other, and there as no duds the same way as with the expensive vintage ones.
Michael Caplin Personally, I have to disagree in several aspects. But, the most important part is that modern mics do not catch the sound wave in the manner an original Neumann does. From 1949 until ca. 1960, all Neumann large diaphragm mics came with M7 PVC capsules. Due to the instability of PVC, the capsules were replaced with the K47, which was made from mylar. Mylar does not, at least up to now, seem to show any sign of aging or deterioration. PVC capsules might explain your bad sounding U47. In general, there are three capsule types: K47, K67 and CK12. All LDC mics up to this date have capsules based on these three. Some managed to come close but with tradeoffs. To this date, have I never heard a replica that sounded as good as the original Neumann capsule. Neumann‘s TLM line is another tradeoff for additional headroom. The sacrifice of musicality to for more headroom is unacceptable to me. However, I truly engage everybody to try and listen for themselves. My opinion is just as wrong as yours to me. I might listen to different sonics of the sound wave and thus interpret things differently. There are many factors that play a vital role in how we perceive sound waves. I am always open to learn new things and urge everyone to do the same. That’s how you grow and become better. This philosophy is true for every aspect in life I believe.
The video IMHO is almost worthless. It fails to properly describe or compare the units in question. About the only thing a novice might gain it that some of the mics have a vacuum tube. However that is only because one was picked up by the camera. Indeed a silent video about microphones...silly really.
