This $400 Neumann U67 Clone is SHOCKINGLY Good! 

Wow, it sounds magical on your voice, and the saturation is so pleasing. I have the T47 and its by far my best mic but a little too dark for my voice. This will definitely be my next mic build.

Thank you for this!! It sounds really nice! It is at the top of my list. Im curious what it will be like on my vocals.

People clutching their $30,000 condenser pearls.

Sorry for the second comment but I loved it on everything but especially on the drums! Just that saturation is perfect!

Looks like the telefunken copperhead

It may sound good, but it's hardly a clone. No tube. No negative feedback circuit (which is the most distinctive part of a U67).

Shel Silverstein reviews mics

That mic is $599 tho?

This is a great video. You produced a wonderful video. This sounds like a worthy microphone to own. As something of an imitation emulation of something like a U-67. And for the price? It's a reasonable sounding emulation. I think it's a worthy purchase. Though below I have said some funny things. As an old timer of over 50 years in the industry. At the top. For many years. I'm just not a famous engineer I am Anonymous Engineer. And that's just fine. I'm really one of the best of the best that ever was. I really am. I can still hardly believe it, myself. But it is in fact, true. And I don't mind tooting my own horn. I've got an actual track record. I've got actual national recognition. I've had national award nominations. I've made history. So? In my comments below you will find another take from me. I leave no stone unturned. And I know more than most college professors know. That teach this stuff. Because I've had to teach some of them also. They have come to me. And asked how do I do this? I've got to teach my kids. That's why I'm a professor. Okey-dokey then! And I blow their minds each and every time. That's the way you do it? That's the way I do it. But I never thought? That's right you never thought. You couldn't. You had textbooks and mathematical formulas to follow. But they don't listen to anything nor evaluate anything. Because they are inanimate. DUH? No we have to do that. We were given that gift of hearing and a brain. Though most cannot connect both together properly. They don't really know what they are listening to. I've discovered through the years. But I do know what I'm listening to. I do know what the gear is supposed to sound like. How it was, conceived, designed and built. From the ground up. Because I have to know these things. Audio Jockeys, don't. They just play with the knobs and dials. Like it's a Video Game. Oh wait! It Is. A Video Game now. And they all know how to cheat to win! LOL. And so just use a SM-57 or 58. And select whatever emulation you want of anything. That's all you need. That's all you, gotta do. You don't need any of these Gobbledygook Microphones. They are highly unnecessary today. With Linear Digital Recording. It's linear. It's not, nonlinear like magnetic tape is. This is where everybody gets confused. Magnetic tape is a linear format. That records its signal, in a nonlinear fashion. Linearly. Whereas digital. Is a Nonlinear format. That records its signal, linearly. And that's why everybody gets confused between, Digital and Analog, sound. Nobody knows whether they are, going or coming? Coming or going? And how many bids? And what sample rate? I can tell you this much. You can record at 16-bit, 44.1 kHz. That's all you need. You've got 96 DB of dynamic range. And you don't need that much for Pop Music. You don't even need that much for Orchestral Music. We generally don't need much more than about, 20 DB of recorded dynamic range. To reproduce through an electronic amplified playback system. There is No Natural. With any Electronic Playback System. So it's merely our job as Audio Engineers. To take a boatload of sound. And squeeze it way down. So that it can come out, little speakers and earbuds. Follow? It's like Magic, I know. I make magic. For others. So you can sound great. And there are so many different techniques to use. It'll take you a lifetime to try them all out. So just use the simple one. It's always the best. SM-57 or 58's. Into your computer audio digital interface gizmo device. From one channel. Up to dozens of channels if you want. It all depends on how much money you got? I could have owned a house but no! I owned a mobile recording studio instead. For over 30 years. Now I'm broke and it's archaic. And I'm 68 and retired. And so is it. I'm the end of an era. I go back to Mono Full Track Analog Recording. That's 1 channel. RemyRAD

I'd say all in all. The song you, tracked, recorded, mixed. You did a great job on the vocals! It just sailed over the music! Yes LSD works very good like that. What happened to the lyrics? LMAO! RemyRAD

god this guy is good. anyone know if hes married??

lol dude no a u67 without a tube is not a u67. That is why they created the u87, which sounds NOTHING like the u67 either.

Yeah, Sonny boy. I think you said it all. Around 5 minutes in. When you played everything back. With no processing and just, RAW. Then you felt. Some of the instruments weren't balanced, just right. And you tweaked them. Yeah I didn't like your tweaking. I think the RAW version was best. Because that really shows off the microphone. It sounded Great! I liked that RAW version best. That's what it should sound like. Yeah! I would say that did a reasonable job of emulating a Neumann U-67. I was rather amazed at your RAW version. Yes! That's what it's supposed to sound like. That shows off what the microphone can do and sounds like. And so sure. I think a mix of your tracks by Bob Clearmountain would be quite different sounding. But that will cost you. And I've worked with Bob, briefly. Many years ago. I think he's one of the greatest in the world that ever was. Along with a few others. I also knew personally. I know personally. As some are still alive. A couple have passed on. And they were really famous. They all are. I'm just Anonymous. And I do not have the fame nor fortune they have. I was mostly a Union Audio Engineer. And you stay anonymous. Of course that does not mean. I didn't get to work with some of the greatest hit artists there are. I sure have. But it was all for Live Broadcasts and Live Album releases. And so I recorded their heads, live. After they became hits. I got to record the live versions! It was Awesome. To say the very least. And well? Most of it was all from my Control Room On Wheels a.k.a. the CROW Mobile Recording Facility. It's in a big diesel box truck. The biggest you can get. And kind of like a tour bus with a control room or two, inside. It was a Blast back in the day. To say the very least. But all good things come to an end. Time and Technology marches on. Go for it! RemyRAD

OK…… One thing about the EQ. While it's great to have, Parametric EQ capabilities. What kind of EQ is it? Is it, FIR? Or is it IIR? Whoops? What's that mean? Well? Most EQ. Varies the phase of all the frequencies. As you boost or cut. That's phase variable EQ. What we all basically know. That's the Bass and Tribal control on your hi-fi stereo. And EQ are all the knobs in between. But is it one or the other? Most EQ is FIR. Finite Impulse Response. But? Linear Phase EQ. Which is letter IIR or Infinite Impulse Response. Does not affect the phase of other frequencies. It's only boosting or cutting. The precise frequency you select. And it sounds way different. Much, much, different. The linear phase EQ is best done by software. And I can do stuff with that. I can't do with normal variable phase EQ. Because they do not sound alike. They can both be parametric. But they are not both linear phase. Only one is. I will frequently use both within a software mix. Because I can't!, do that, strictly in analog. And it lets me correct things. I couldn't ordinarily correct. And not every company. Tells you what kind of EQ, you have purchased or are using? And this can make a whale of a difference. I could go into specific uses and applications for the need of, linear phase EQ. But it would go beyond the scope of this conversation. Like how I could provide, chest resonance. On a woman who was speaking. Who didn't have a lavalier microphone on her. But there was one on the guy. Sitting, nearly 2 feet away from her. So I used his microphone for her. And regular EQ. Couldn't give me her chest resonance. Without turning the sound to total mud. But with the linear phase EQ. I was able to boost the resonant frequency. Of approximately her chest cavity,, frequency. And Voilà! It's a Miracle! Everybody wondered where her microphone was? I said it's on him next to her. It sounds like it's on her. With the linear phase EQ. Being used, parametrically. Yup. And of course this goes outside the scope of this demonstration here. But it's something everybody should know about. That is reading this. And wants to know. It's all in what you know. That lets you go farther. Where no one has gone before! RemyRAD

Well I think you have proved a point here, with this microphone. Yes. It can be used on, any instruments, all instruments, all vocalists. Both lyrical and spoken. And what you have proved here is? Any microphone that works. Will let you make a reasonable recording. Of most anything you want. You can certainly use this microphone on a Symphony Orchestra and/or Choirs. Yup. It'll work! Sound comes in. Sound goes out. It works! Now the cool thing about this microphone is the price. It's only, Four. SM-57 & 58's. Which is far more important to have than just one of those. So do that first. Get those, first. And then if you are still not happy? Get one of these, for, $400. But at least you will now have, five microphones! And now you will be able to record just about anything all at once! Oh but wait? So now you have to go and get yourself a, 8 XLR microphone input, computer audio USB Digital interface. So you can record up to 8 inputs all at once! But there's only one problem with this. It's a total Sickness! And once infected? We are DOOMED! Doomed to be Audio Junkies until we Die! Oh the horror! A life filled with music. I can't take it anymore! Give me microphones with thin diaphragms! Then I want to kill myself! Thin diaphragms really sound that bad. Take it from a history making multi-major music award nominee. And Top Audio Engineer for NBC-TV News in Washington DC for a couple of decades. And so people think I know what I'm doing. I don't know? I just do it. I know how to do it. And I can't get enough. Of that Funky Stuff. Why? I'm originally from Detroit where we created Funk. And cars. Lots of cars. Lots of Funk. How I love Funk. And I'm just a white Jewish guy. But it's only because I got infected with R&B. I caught it because of my daddy. My daddy got me infected. Daddy played violin for Motown and Stax records. When I was a kid growing up in Detroit. And so I grew up in their studios. Oh well? It happens to people. And it happened, to me. Oh well? My life has kind of gone like this: soundcloud.com/user-135130368/sets/live-at-electric-church-fm-sessions-vol-1 These are the first 14 of over 500. The remainder of which has yet to be posted. I'll get to it. RemyRAD

Roe K now. I mean, OK. Using it as your, VO, Voice Over, microphone. Yeah. It's popping and blasting a lot like my, U-67's. Without a Big Foam Pop Filter. I prefer the big foam pop filters. On my LDC microphones, all of the time. And my SDC microphones, all of the time. Not those stupid embroidery loop, pantyhose, screens. Those are stupid. The foam is much better. It's much better acoustically. And it's much better technically. How? Why? With the big Foam Pop Filters. You can kind of hear that, enlarged aura circumference. Of the size extension of that foam pop filter. And it gives you a fuller more round sound. Which you kind of want. On a microphone like that. And then how is it better technically? Well you see? True condenser microphones. Require a minimum of 48 volts of polarity. Be applied to the diaphragm. Generally it should actually be 52 volts. But it'll work with 48, still reasonably well. But in applying that polarization voltage to the diaphragm. It turns it into an, Electrostatic Air Cleaner. As a result of the polarization voltage turning your, 24 karat gold sputtered diaphragm. Into an electrostatic air cleaner. It's going to attract, all of this particular air pollution and vocal spittle. On to the diaphragm. And after a few years. Of leaving your microphones plugged in with phantom power polarizing their diaphragms. And uncovered. In short order time. Upon inspection. Your 24 karat gold sputtered diaphragms. Will now resemble, an, Everything Pizza. Your diaphragm will be caked with all sorts of gobbledygook. You might not even be able to see the gold sputtering much anymore? You will be shocked and horrified at what you see. Because it's been sitting out and working as an electrostatic air cleaner. It's very funny. Rest assured though. If you have, Permanently Polarized, Back Electret Condenser Microphones? That can even work on a simple AA battery. You don't have to worry about those. Those will attract no dirt, no pollution, no pizza beers cigarette spittle. Will become caked onto those. Only the True Condenser microphones requiring a minimum of 48 volts on the diaphragm for, polarization. Will have that issue. So I always make it a point. To have nice large oversized and colorful, Foam Pop Filters. On all of my true condenser microphones in my studio through the years. Because I learned this, about 40 years ago. And oh? Trying to clean them? Yeah no. That generally doesn't go well. There's just too much garbage caked onto the 24 karat gold sputtering. Which is only a molecule or so thick. And your diaphragm is screwed. Though you can try a small, new, camel hairbrush. And some water. But you will destroy your diaphragm. Once it looks like an, Everything Pizza. You're screwed. And then here's the hitch in the get along. All Neumann Microphones have 6 mil thick, diaphragms. Which keeps them from sounding overly hyped and fizzy crispy fried. Like everybody else's who are using 3 mil, diaphragms. Some even using superthin, 1.5 mil thick, diaphragms. And those sound truly horrid. Great for the entry-level beginner. That doesn't know any better. As to how awful that sounds. So this thing kind of sounds like it might have a, 6 mi thick diaphragm to it? And I'm kind of liking, that sound. Because it does not sound overly high-end hyped. It sounds relatively smooth. What it does not have. Is that compression you described. From that vacuum tube a.k.a. valve. Because yes. It had some of that character. And this doesn't, really. Though it seems to sound, reasonable. And it's not, unaffordable. It seems like a legit investment. So while it does not have a vacuum tube within it. That's okay. They stuck in an output transformer. Which does sound like it's taking the edge off. A purely, cheap, transformer less type. Would create. And kind of makes it like a, TLM-67. Kind of. As I barked at Neumann about that. It got me really upset. So in 2012. I went to the big Nashville Mix Magazine Audio Convention. And there was the Neumann/Sennheiser booth and folk representatives. I said to them. Since you came out with the TLM-67. You've just reduced the value of my U-67's. They asked me how so? I said look. The U-87 is $3300. And the new TLM-67. Is $2270. It's not even as expensive as the U-87! I said what are you doing to me? You are dropping the value of my U-67's. By making your new, 67, a substantial amount less then your U-87. Well I must have hit something? As I believe the following year. They created a Reissue of their famed U-67's. And it was over $5000. So more money than the U-87. Thank you! Though I still think they offer their, TLM-67? And they told me the reason for the difference in price. Was because the TLM-67. Is, Transformer Less. Which is what the TLM, means. And that the microphone output transformers in the U-87 are very expensive to make. I know. But still? Well after owning my beautiful Neumann microphone collection. From the early 1980s. They are now all being enjoyed by others. And I will dearly miss them all. Where I find. You really can't beat the sound of a, SHURE, SM-57. With the Optional Oversized Foam Pop Filter. And it can sound bigger, fuller, warmer. Than, any old Neumann microphone. And the recording no longer has to cut through the mushy sound, of analog tape anymore. Recording to Digital. The linear sounding digital recording. Because it is. It's not analog tape. So I'm a retired old-timer curmudgeon. Involved with recordings since the late 1950s. I can't believe how old I am? I'm senile! Did you know I'm senile? Hello my name is Remy what's yours? Don't purchase, thin large diaphragm condenser microphones. Don't! Bad! Bah! Ugh! Are you nuts? RemyRAD