Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site.
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86643 is a reply to message #86638] |
Thu, 14 June 2007 18:37   |
![Deej [4] is currently offline](/theme/PARIS_Forum_Template/images/offline.png "Deej [4] is currently offline")
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) and
Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have to
wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube and
shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they are
more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium was
over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant. They
are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's a
stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address 1"
capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and the
mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these
and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a bit
to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
;o)
Deej
970-769-0488
animix at animas dot net
"Neil" <IUOI@OI.com> wrote in message news:4671e52e$1@linux...
>
> These are fucking great prices for those mics - I can attest
> that if these mics are as good as the one I had from Mike C.,
> no one here will be disappointed... kinda regret selling the
> one I had to Thadster, in fact. <snif>
>
>
> Neil
>
>
>
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>Check 'em out
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86649 is a reply to message #86643] |
Thu, 14 June 2007 19:39 |
Cujjo
Messages: 325
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hmm Deej, I have the 2247 shorty, I'd say get the long body. I like mine
alot, but it is DARK. I really want a U99 or some other U67 type of mic and
a P1.
So these mics are too mismatched for OH duty?
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) and
>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
to
>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
and
>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they are
>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
was
>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
They
>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's a
>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address 1"
>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and the
>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these
>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a bit
>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>
>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>;o)
>Deej
>970-769-0488
>animix at animas dot net
>
>
>"Neil" <IUOI@OI.com> wrote in message news:4671e52e$1@linux...
>>
>> These are fucking great prices for those mics - I can attest
>> that if these mics are as good as the one I had from Mike C.,
>> no one here will be disappointed... kinda regret selling the
>> one I had to Thadster, in fact. <snif>
>>
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>Check 'em out
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86652 is a reply to message #86649] |
Thu, 14 June 2007 19:58 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0288_01C7AEC6.B32284D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"Cujo" <chris@applemanstudio.com> wrote in message =
news:4671fbef$1@linux...
>=20
>=20
> Hmm Deej, I have the 2247 shorty, I'd say get the long body. I like =
mine
> alot, but it is DARK. I really want a U99 or some other U67 type of =
mic and
> a P1.=20
>=20
> So these mics are too mismatched for OH duty?
According to the owner, who I know and trust implicitly:..........
"The mic was a one off tweaking in which I asked John Peluso to make me =
a mic that was sonically and performance smack dab between a U47 and =
U67...To this end, I think he did just that...it sounds like no other =
Peluso I've heard, and compares very favorably with the Pearlman =
(actually a bit warmer than the Pearlman)...I am fairly certain the mic =
has a 5 star 6072 essentially a very high quality 12AY7...the power =
supply is fully regulated"
I haven't opened it up and checked the tube, but that's not really a big =
issue with me after having heard it. I't a "larger than life" kinda' mic =
and fits my focusrite RED7 like they were made for each other. the RED7 =
has a bit of brightness and agressiveness to it so maybe the preamp is =
offsetting some of the darkness you refer to. Having never heard another =
2247 or the 2247 SE, I can't really compare, but I have heard a real U47 =
and a real U67 and if memory serves, this mic is in that kind of league. =
I'm not really looking for a U47 as much as I'm looking for a vocal mic =
with big league characteristics. This mic is very flattering to the =
human voice, isn't overly dark and sounds HUGE!!
Thanks for the heads up though. I will be looking into a U47 clone =
sometime in the future,I'm sure. Have you compared the 2247SE to a U47 =
or any of the existing hig end clones?
;o)
>=20
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of=20
>>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) =
and
>=20
>>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would =
imagine
>=20
>>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at =
some
>=20
>>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably =
be
>=20
>>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll =
have
> to=20
>>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the =
tube
> and=20
>>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a =
>>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room =
mics
>=20
>>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they =
are
>=20
>>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed =
Stasium
> was=20
>>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left =
them
>=20
>>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally =
preferred
>=20
>>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more =
*solid
>=20
>>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be=20
>>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics =
>>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC=20
>>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit =
redundant.
> They=20
>>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's =
a
>=20
>>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail =
(and
>=20
>>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), =
though
>=20
>>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address =
1"
>=20
>>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and =
the
>=20
>>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with =
these
>=20
>>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same =
general
>=20
>>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a =
bit
>=20
>>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>>
>>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>>;o)
>>Deej
>>970-769-0488
>>animix at animas dot net
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <IUOI@OI.com> wrote in message news:4671e52e$1@linux...
>>>
>>> These are fucking great prices for those mics - I can attest
>>> that if these mics are as good as the one I had from Mike C.,
>>> no one here will be disappointed... kinda regret selling the
>>> one I had to Thadster, in fact. <snif>
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>Check 'em out
>>>>
>>>>;o)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>=20
>>
>>
>
------=_NextPart_000_0288_01C7AEC6.B32284D0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"Cujo" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:chris@applemanstudio.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>chris@applemanstudio.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>> wrote in=20
message </FONT><A href=3D"news:4671fbef$1@linux"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>news:4671fbef$1@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> <BR>> Hmm Deej, I have =
the 2247=20
shorty, I'd say get the long body. I like mine<BR>> alot, but it is =
DARK. I=20
really want a U99 or some other U67 type of mic and<BR>> a P1. =
<BR>>=20
<BR>> So these mics are too mismatched for OH duty?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>According to the owner, who I know and =
trust=20
implicitly:..........</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><EM>"The mic was a one off tweaking in =
which I=20
asked John Peluso to make me a mic that was sonically and performance =
smack dab=20
between a U47 and U67...To this end, I think he did just that...it =
sounds like=20
no other Peluso I've heard, and compares very favorably with the =
Pearlman=20
(actually a bit warmer than the Pearlman)...I am fairly certain the mic =
has a 5=20
star 6072 essentially a very high quality 12AY7...the power supply is =
fully=20
regulated"</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><EM></EM></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I haven't opened it up and checked the =
tube, but=20
that's not really a big issue with me after having heard it. I't a =
"larger than=20
life" kinda' mic and fits my focusrite RED7 like they were made for each =
other.=20
the RED7 has a bit of brightness and agressiveness to it so maybe the =
preamp is=20
offsetting some of the darkness you refer to. Having never heard another =
2247 or=20
the 2247 SE, I can't really compare, but I have heard a real U47 and a =
real U67=20
and if memory serves, this mic is in that kind of league. I'm not really =
looking=20
for a U47 as much as I'm looking for a vocal mic with big league=20
characteristics. This mic is very flattering to the human voice, isn't =
overly=20
dark and sounds HUGE!!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanks for the heads up though. I will =
be looking=20
into a U47 clone sometime in the future,I'm sure. Have you compared the =
2247SE=20
to a U47 or any of the existing hig end clones?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>;o)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> <BR>> "DJ" <</FONT><A=20
href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>>=20
wrote:<BR>>>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these =
are a=20
couple of <BR>>>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very =
first=20
Royer build) and<BR>> <BR>>>Claytor is very consistent and an =
excellent=20
circuit man. I would imagine<BR>> <BR>>>we're talking =
apples to=20
apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some<BR>> =
<BR>>>point for=20
selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be<BR>>=20
<BR>>>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went =
so I'll=20
have<BR>> to <BR>>>wean them on to a different one. I even =
thought=20
about replacing the tube<BR>> and <BR>>>shell on one or the =
other (the=20
coating on the grill affects the tone a <BR>>>little) of these and =
matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics<BR>> =
<BR>>>but I=20
couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they =
are<BR>>=20
<BR>>>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When =
Ed=20
Stasium<BR>> was <BR>>>over here last, he brought over a =
matched pair=20
of AT 4060's and left them<BR>> <BR>>>here for a few days. I =
compared=20
these to them and I personally preferred<BR>> <BR>>>either of =
these=20
mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid<BR>>=20
<BR>>>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I =
would=20
be <BR>>>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod =
LDC tube=20
mics <BR>>>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for =
stereo=20
LDC <BR>>>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a =
bit=20
redundant.<BR>> They <BR>>>are every bit in the same league =
with the=20
Manleys, IMO. I know that's a<BR>> <BR>>>stretch to believe, =
but to my=20
ears, they are at that level of detail (and<BR>> <BR>>>these =
Manleys=20
cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though<BR>>=20
<BR>>>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being =
front=20
address 1"<BR>> <BR>>>capsules. I am needing the =
flexibility that=20
multipatterns provide and the<BR>> <BR>>>mic I'm buying is a =
Peluso=20
2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these<BR>> <BR>>>and =
they=20
have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general<BR>>=20
<BR>>>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. =
Probably has=20
a bit<BR>> <BR>>>to do with the Peluso capsules in these=20
mics.<BR>>><BR>>>They are going up on EBay this weekend if =
there are=20
no takers=20
here.<BR>>>;o)<BR>>>Deej<BR >>>970-769-0488<BR>>>a=
nimix=20
at animas dot net<BR>>><BR>>><BR>>> "Neil" =
<</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:IUOI@OI.com"><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>IUOI@OI.com</FONT></A><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2>> wrote in message </FONT><A=20
href=3D"news:4671e52e$1@linux"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>news:4671e52e$1@linux</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>...<BR>>>><BR>>>> These are fucking great =
prices for=20
those mics - I can attest<BR>>>> that if these mics are as good =
as the=20
one I had from Mike C.,<BR>>>> no one here will be =
disappointed...=20
kinda regret selling the<BR>>>> one I had to Thadster, in =
fact. =20
<snif><BR>>>><BR>>>> <BR>>>>=20
Neil<BR>>>><BR>>>> <BR>>>><BR>>>> =
"DJ"=20
<</FONT><A href=3D"http://www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com"><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>>=20
wrote:<BR>>>>>Check 'em=20
out<BR>>>>><BR>>>>>;o) <BR>>>>><BR>>=
;>>><BR>>>>=20
<BR>>><BR>>><BR>></FONT ></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0288_01C7AEC6.B32284D0--
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86674 is a reply to message #86643] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 08:10 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hey DJ,
As a sidebar to this, what's your opinion on the 4050's in general. I
have been thinking about picking up a pair to have something different
from the U89's I use frequently.
Thanks,
David.
DJ wrote:
> I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
> extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) and
> Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
> we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
> point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
> coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have to
> wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube and
> shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
> little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
> but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they are
> more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium was
> over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
> here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
> either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
> state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
> keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
> (Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
> multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant. They
> are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's a
> stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
> these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
> the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address 1"
> capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and the
> mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these
> and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
> ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a bit
> to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>
> They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
> ;o)
> Deej
> 970-769-0488
> animix at animas dot net
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86675 is a reply to message #86643] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 08:20 |
TCB
Messages: 1261
Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I can confirm much of what Deej says here, though of course we don't know
for sure how apples to apples the comparison is. I've been using the Claytor
mostly as a room mic for the drum kit but also on some other things where
I'm doing scratch tracks of guitars or something. It's not hyped at all,
not bright and not dark, but it has a little gravitas to it that kind of
sneaks up on you. It's not easily noticed until you try a different mic on
the same source.
It's pretty ecumenical about preamps as well, I've used it with everything
we have, from the built in pres on the Firebox to my Langevin.
It will be interesting to see if we use it for vocals. So far we've been
using the Baby Bottle for demos but I think when it comes time to actually
track I'll try the Claytor and the Bottle on each of us and see what works
best. We have three male vocalists and if I had to handicap it I'd say I'll
go through the bottle (I have the lowest speaking voice and usually sing
a part under the lead vocal), Russell will use the Bottle (very loud, full
voice), and Nick will use the Claytor (much thinner, higher voice than the
rest of us). But it will be interesting to see.
TCB
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) and
>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
to
>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
and
>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they are
>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
was
>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
They
>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's a
>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address 1"
>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and the
>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these
>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a bit
>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>
>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>;o)
>Deej
>970-769-0488
>animix at animas dot net
>
>
>"Neil" <IUOI@OI.com> wrote in message news:4671e52e$1@linux...
>>
>> These are fucking great prices for those mics - I can attest
>> that if these mics are as good as the one I had from Mike C.,
>> no one here will be disappointed... kinda regret selling the
>> one I had to Thadster, in fact. <snif>
>>
>>
>> Neil
>>
>>
>>
>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>Check 'em out
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86677 is a reply to message #86675] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 08:45 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thad, make sure you try the Claytorbuilt on any softer vocals,
with the preamp gain cranked up. That's definitely one of it's
stronger applications.
Neil
"TCB" <nobody@ishere.com> wrote:
>
>I can confirm much of what Deej says here, though of course we don't know
>for sure how apples to apples the comparison is. I've been using the Claytor
>mostly as a room mic for the drum kit but also on some other things where
>I'm doing scratch tracks of guitars or something. It's not hyped at all,
>not bright and not dark, but it has a little gravitas to it that kind of
>sneaks up on you. It's not easily noticed until you try a different mic
on
>the same source.
>
>It's pretty ecumenical about preamps as well, I've used it with everything
>we have, from the built in pres on the Firebox to my Langevin.
>
>It will be interesting to see if we use it for vocals. So far we've been
>using the Baby Bottle for demos but I think when it comes time to actually
>track I'll try the Claytor and the Bottle on each of us and see what works
>best. We have three male vocalists and if I had to handicap it I'd say I'll
>go through the bottle (I have the lowest speaking voice and usually sing
>a part under the lead vocal), Russell will use the Bottle (very loud, full
>voice), and Nick will use the Claytor (much thinner, higher voice than the
>rest of us). But it will be interesting to see.
>
>TCB
>
>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) and
>
>>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>
>>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>
>>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
>
>>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
>to
>>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
>and
>>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
>>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
>
>>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they are
>
>>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
>was
>>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
>
>>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>
>>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>
>>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
>They
>>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's a
>
>>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
>
>>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>
>>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address
1"
>
>>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and
the
>
>>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these
>
>>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>
>>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a
bit
>
>>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>>
>>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>>;o)
>>Deej
>>970-769-0488
>>animix at animas dot net
>>
>>
>>"Neil" <IUOI@OI.com> wrote in message news:4671e52e$1@linux...
>>>
>>> These are fucking great prices for those mics - I can attest
>>> that if these mics are as good as the one I had from Mike C.,
>>> no one here will be disappointed... kinda regret selling the
>>> one I had to Thadster, in fact. <snif>
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>Check 'em out
>>>>
>>>>;o)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86681 is a reply to message #86674] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 13:10 |
|
|
I'm not DJ, but I've been using a pair of 4050's for a while now... I find
them to be comparable to my old AKG 414's, but w/ a subtle flavor of their
own. Lighter and brighter than my U87. I like them a lot for piano, acoustic
guitars, vocals - all the things I'd also like my 414's for. also, i had
one die on me and sent it back to Audio Technica for repair. They fixed
it for free. Pretty amazing considering that they were long out of warranty
and I was not the original owner!
Gantt
EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>Hey DJ,
>
>As a sidebar to this, what's your opinion on the 4050's in general. I
>have been thinking about picking up a pair to have something different
>from the U89's I use frequently.
>
>Thanks,
>
>David.
>
>DJ wrote:
>> I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>> extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build)
and
>> Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>> we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>> point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
>> coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
to
>> wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
and
>> shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
>> little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
>> but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they
are
>> more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
was
>> over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
>> here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>> either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>> state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>> keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>> (Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>> multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
They
>> are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's
a
>> stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
>> these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>> the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address
1"
>> capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and
the
>> mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with
these
>> and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>> ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a
bit
>> to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>>
>> They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>> ;o)
>> Deej
>> 970-769-0488
>> animix at animas dot net
>>
>>
Gantt Kushner
Gizmo Recording Company
Silver Spring, MD
www.gizmorecording.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86682 is a reply to message #86681] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 13:20 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
414's!!!! they sound like 414's!?!?!?! Yuck! ;-)
Thanks Gantt... never much cared for the 414, so maybe I'll give *one*
4050 a shot before I get a pair... :-)
David.
Gantt Kushner wrote:
> I'm not DJ, but I've been using a pair of 4050's for a while now... I find
> them to be comparable to my old AKG 414's, but w/ a subtle flavor of their
> own. Lighter and brighter than my U87. I like them a lot for piano, acoustic
> guitars, vocals - all the things I'd also like my 414's for. also, i had
> one die on me and sent it back to Audio Technica for repair. They fixed
> it for free. Pretty amazing considering that they were long out of warranty
> and I was not the original owner!
>
> Gantt
>
>
>
> EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>Hey DJ,
>>
>>As a sidebar to this, what's your opinion on the 4050's in general. I
>>have been thinking about picking up a pair to have something different
>
>>from the U89's I use frequently.
>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>David.
>>
>>DJ wrote:
>>
>>>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>>>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build)
>
> and
>
>>>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>
>
>>>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>
>
>>>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
>
>
>>>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
>
> to
>
>>>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
>
> and
>
>>>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone a
>
>
>>>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room mics
>
>
>>>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they
>
> are
>
>>>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
>
> was
>
>>>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left them
>
>
>>>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>
>
>>>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>
>
>>>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>
>
>>>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>
>
>>>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>>>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
>
> They
>
>>>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's
>
> a
>
>>>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail (and
>
>
>>>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>
>
>>>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address
>
> 1"
>
>>>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and
>
> the
>
>>>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with
>
> these
>
>>>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>
>
>>>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a
>
> bit
>
>>>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>>>
>>>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>>>;o)
>>>Deej
>>>970-769-0488
>>>animix at animas dot net
>>>
>>>
>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86683 is a reply to message #86682] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 13:29 |
|
|
Funny, I've always liked my 414's. Mine are older ones and I think the capsules
have been made significantly differently in the last 10 - 15 years.
Gantt
EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>414's!!!! they sound like 414's!?!?!?! Yuck! ;-)
>
>Thanks Gantt... never much cared for the 414, so maybe I'll give *one*
>4050 a shot before I get a pair... :-)
>
>David.
>
>Gantt Kushner wrote:
>> I'm not DJ, but I've been using a pair of 4050's for a while now...
I find
>> them to be comparable to my old AKG 414's, but w/ a subtle flavor of their
>> own. Lighter and brighter than my U87. I like them a lot for piano,
acoustic
>> guitars, vocals - all the things I'd also like my 414's for. also, i
had
>> one die on me and sent it back to Audio Technica for repair. They fixed
>> it for free. Pretty amazing considering that they were long out of warranty
>> and I was not the original owner!
>>
>> Gantt
>>
>>
>>
>> EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hey DJ,
>>>
>>>As a sidebar to this, what's your opinion on the 4050's in general. I
>>>have been thinking about picking up a pair to have something different
>>
>>>from the U89's I use frequently.
>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>David.
>>>
>>>DJ wrote:
>>>
>>>>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>>>>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build)
>>
>> and
>>
>>>>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>>
>>
>>>>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>>
>>
>>>>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably
be
>>
>>
>>>>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
>>
>> to
>>
>>>>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
>>
>> and
>>
>>>>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone
a
>>
>>
>>>>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room
mics
>>
>>
>>>>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they
>>
>> are
>>
>>>>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
>>
>> was
>>
>>>>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left
them
>>
>>
>>>>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>>
>>
>>>>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>>
>>
>>>>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>>
>>
>>>>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>>
>>
>>>>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>>>>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
>>
>> They
>>
>>>>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's
>>
>> a
>>
>>>>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail
(and
>>
>>
>>>>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>>
>>
>>>>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address
>>
>> 1"
>>
>>>>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and
>>
>> the
>>
>>>>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with
>>
>> these
>>
>>>>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>>
>>
>>>>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has
a
>>
>> bit
>>
>>>>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>>>>
>>>>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>>>>;o)
>>>>Deej
>>>>970-769-0488
>>>>animix at animas dot net
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Gantt Kushner
Gizmo Recording Company
Silver Spring, MD
www.gizmorecording.com
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86686 is a reply to message #86683] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 14:18 |
EK Sound
Messages: 939
Registered: June 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I always found them to be "too vanilla", not even french vanilla...
just DQ soft serve if you know what I mean... ;-)
David.
Gantt Kushner wrote:
> Funny, I've always liked my 414's. Mine are older ones and I think the capsules
> have been made significantly differently in the last 10 - 15 years.
>
> Gantt
>
> EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>414's!!!! they sound like 414's!?!?!?! Yuck! ;-)
>>
>>Thanks Gantt... never much cared for the 414, so maybe I'll give *one*
>>4050 a shot before I get a pair... :-)
>>
>>David.
>>
>>Gantt Kushner wrote:
>>
>>>I'm not DJ, but I've been using a pair of 4050's for a while now...
>
> I find
>
>>>them to be comparable to my old AKG 414's, but w/ a subtle flavor of their
>>>own. Lighter and brighter than my U87. I like them a lot for piano,
>
> acoustic
>
>>>guitars, vocals - all the things I'd also like my 414's for. also, i
>
> had
>
>>>one die on me and sent it back to Audio Technica for repair. They fixed
>>>it for free. Pretty amazing considering that they were long out of warranty
>>>and I was not the original owner!
>>>
>>>Gantt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>EK Sound <askme@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hey DJ,
>>>>
>>>>As a sidebar to this, what's your opinion on the 4050's in general. I
>
>
>>>>have been thinking about picking up a pair to have something different
>
>
>>>>from the U89's I use frequently.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>David.
>>>>
>>>>DJ wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>
>
>>>>>extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build)
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>>>
>>>
>>>>>we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>>>
>>>
>>>>>point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably
>
> be
>
>>>
>>>>>coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
>>>
>>>to
>>>
>>>
>>>>>wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the tube
>>>
>>>and
>>>
>>>
>>>>>shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the tone
>
> a
>
>>>
>>>>>little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or room
>
> mics
>
>>>
>>>>>but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two of. they
>>>
>>>are
>>>
>>>
>>>>>more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When Ed Stasium
>>>
>>>was
>>>
>>>
>>>>>over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT 4060's and left
>
> them
>
>>>
>>>>>here for a few days. I compared these to them and I personally preferred
>>>
>>>
>>>>>either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were brighter and more *solid
>>>
>>>
>>>>>state* sounding by comparison. If these were multipattern, I would be
>>>
>>>
>>>>>keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched cardiod LDC tube mics
>>>
>>>
>>>>>(Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's for stereo LDC
>>>>>multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a bit redundant.
>>>
>>>They
>>>
>>>
>>>>>are every bit in the same league with the Manleys, IMO. I know that's
>>>
>>>a
>>>
>>>
>>>>>stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that level of detail
>
> (and
>
>>>
>>>>>these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were making them), though
>>>
>>>
>>>>>the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile, being front address
>>>
>>>1"
>>>
>>>
>>>>>capsules. I am needing the flexibility that multipatterns provide and
>>>
>>>the
>>>
>>>
>>>>>mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247 (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with
>>>
>>>these
>>>
>>>
>>>>>and they have their tonal differences, but they are in the same general
>>>
>>>
>>>>>ballpark as far as detail and smoothness are concerned. Probably has
>
> a
>
>>>bit
>>>
>>>
>>>>>to do with the Peluso capsules in these mics.
>>>>>
>>>>>They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>>>>>;o)
>>>>>Deej
>>>>>970-769-0488
>>>>>animix at animas dot net
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: My Claytorbuilt tube mics on FS site. [message #86704 is a reply to message #86674] |
Fri, 15 June 2007 20:21 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292
Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The 4050's are very versatile. They sound a bit flatter to my ears than the
414's I'v used (don't have a TEF for them thought) and smoother as well.
They don't impart the honky mids of a U87 in cardioid and you can also work
the proximity effect without getting overly boomy unless you swallow it.
They open up nicely in omni and just sorta get out of the way and let the
sound through without adding a bunch of color. Great utility mics.
;o)
"EK Sound" <askme@nospam.com> wrote in message news:4672ad58$1@linux...
> Hey DJ,
>
> As a sidebar to this, what's your opinion on the 4050's in general. I
> have been thinking about picking up a pair to have something different
> from the U89's I use frequently.
>
> Thanks,
>
> David.
>
> DJ wrote:
>> I can't compare these to yours/Thad's mic, but these are a couple of
>> extremely good builds (the green one is Mikes very first Royer build) and
>> Claytor is very consistent and an excellent circuit man. I would imagine
>> we're talking apples to apples. I'm prolly going to kick myself at some
>> point for selling these. There are some singers that will inevitably be
>> coming back here and wanting to know where *their mic* went so I'll have
>> to wean them on to a different one. I even thought about replacing the
>> tube and shell on one or the other (the coating on the grill affects the
>> tone a little) of these and matching them up for extra duty as OH's or
>> room mics but I couldn't decide which of the voicings I would want two
>> of. they are more useful having a little difference in the voicings. When
>> Ed Stasium was over here last, he brought over a matched pair of AT
>> 4060's and left them here for a few days. I compared these to them and I
>> personally preferred either of these mics to the AT's. The AT's were
>> brighter and more *solid state* sounding by comparison. If these were
>> multipattern, I would be keeping them. As it is, I have a pair of matched
>> cardiod LDC tube mics (Manley Baby Blues) and a matched pair of AT 4050's
>> for stereo LDC multipattern duties so these, being tube cardiods, are a
>> bit redundant. They are every bit in the same league with the Manleys,
>> IMO. I know that's a stretch to believe, but to my ears, they are at that
>> level of detail (and these Manleys cost over $1600.00 new, when they were
>> making them), though the Manleys are a bit more mechanically versatile,
>> being front address 1" capsules. I am needing the flexibility that
>> multipatterns provide and the mic I'm buying is a Peluso 2247
>> (multipattern). I have A/B'ed it with these and they have their tonal
>> differences, but they are in the same general ballpark as far as detail
>> and smoothness are concerned. Probably has a bit to do with the Peluso
>> capsules in these mics.
>>
>> They are going up on EBay this weekend if there are no takers here.
>> ;o)
>> Deej
>> 970-769-0488
>> animix at animas dot net
>>
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Dec 20 04:20:09 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02334 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
