Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Mic question
|
Re: Mic question [message #83427 is a reply to message #83422] |
Thu, 19 April 2007 19:09 |
Neil
Messages: 1645 Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a
>modded U67 which they like a lot but it's out of the price
>range.
If they like the "modded" u-67's (assuming you're referring to
the very popular Stephen Paul sub-micron mod), then I would
recommend trying the Mojave MA200. Not exactly like the "S.P.-
67's" (which I've heard & used before), but very warm & fuzzy &
in the same kinda balpark. The diaphragm on the MA-200 is only
3 microns - so, not as thin as Stephen's 0.9-micron mod, but
still half the thickness of most common LDC diaphragms, and in
that regard, is coser to "that" sound, and at a grand, is
about a third of the price you'd pay for what I've seen clean
UM57's priced out at recently.
>If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk
>band, would you select the UM57?
Dunno, never used one - only answering the portion of your query
that I'm able to :)
>What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the
>price of a UM57 or lower)?
Not knowing if you've found a bitchin' clean minty-fresh
UM57 for $500 somewhere I will assume you mean in the "$3k-ish
or less" range. Here's my list:
Neumann M-149:
Sometimes can be found in the $3k range, sometimes more, but if
you can find a good clean affordable one, go for it. Very
smooth, almost round-ish tone (not nasal, or boomy, nor "peaky"
up top), no real peaks or valleys, very even, yet open sound.
Multi-pattern feature is nice to have, too.
Soundelux E251C:
One of my favorite mics, without a doubt, the 251C is the
cardioid-only version. Tough to find used, but if you do find
one it'll be in the high end of the price range we're talking
about. KILLER high end (VERY smooth & airy!), and great
presence, too... proximity effect is very noticeable if you
want it to be (ie: if worked in-close).
Soundelux E47C:
Another cardioid-only version. Absolutely kicks ass. I can't
say as I've ever seen one used for sale, but I would imagine
it'd possibly be in the same/similar price range as the 251C
used (even though it's more $$$ new). This mic has a less-
pronounced high end than the 251C and more proximity effect,
and it's a very BIG sound overall... just another super-high-
quality, low-noise tube mic.
Here's a multi-pattern version on e-bay now... only one bid -
weird... maybe your friend can snag it!
http://cgi.ebay.com/Soundelux-E-47_W0QQitemZ110114632536QQih Z001QQcategoryZ133011QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
B.L.U.E. Kiwi:
Easily one of the best mics you can buy for under $2k new. Right
now you can get one with a free "Robbie" tube Preamp thrown in
(never used one of those pre's so I dunno how they sound).
The sound to me is very reminiscent of a mix between a -67
the -149... best way I can describe it. It's not a tube mic,
though; just tonally, to me, it sounds kind of like a blend of
those two mics' characteristics - best way I can describe it,
anyway... warm bottom end, but not wooly or fuzzy, and open
top end, but not hyped, either, and very clean there, too.
B.L.U.E. Cactus:
I have a Cactus capsule in my M149 (the original worked fine,
but really was poorly-maintained & had some of the sputtering
coming off), and I can only assume that the Cactus with it's
electronics would at least sound somewhat reasonably close to
my -149, since the capsule is the main voice of the mic anyway.
The guys at B.L.U.E. told me that the Cactus Capsule would be
the closest to the M149's stock one and honestly I think they
were right-on, because I don't hear much difference, if any,
except for better articulation now. You can get the Cactus for
about $2500 new.
B.L.U.E. Blueberry:
If it's the high end of that modded -67 your friend liked
(again, assuming it was the common S.P. mod), maybe try a
Blueberry! A grand new, and $600-$800 used.
Regular ol' U87 (new or used):
New they're $2800-ish... used you can sometimes snag 'em for as
low as $1300 - still a good mic that never totaly sucks on
anything.
There's a few anyway.
Neil
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83428 is a reply to message #83427] |
Thu, 19 April 2007 19:32 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115 Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Awesome, thanks Neil! I'll pass your advice along. They need to jump
quickly so this is really helpful!
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
Neil wrote:
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a
>> modded U67 which they like a lot but it's out of the price
>> range.
>
> If they like the "modded" u-67's (assuming you're referring to
> the very popular Stephen Paul sub-micron mod), then I would
> recommend trying the Mojave MA200. Not exactly like the "S.P.-
> 67's" (which I've heard & used before), but very warm & fuzzy &
> in the same kinda balpark. The diaphragm on the MA-200 is only
> 3 microns - so, not as thin as Stephen's 0.9-micron mod, but
> still half the thickness of most common LDC diaphragms, and in
> that regard, is coser to "that" sound, and at a grand, is
> about a third of the price you'd pay for what I've seen clean
> UM57's priced out at recently.
>
>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk
>> band, would you select the UM57?
>
> Dunno, never used one - only answering the portion of your query
> that I'm able to :)
>
>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the
>> price of a UM57 or lower)?
>
> Not knowing if you've found a bitchin' clean minty-fresh
> UM57 for $500 somewhere I will assume you mean in the "$3k-ish
> or less" range. Here's my list:
>
> Neumann M-149:
> Sometimes can be found in the $3k range, sometimes more, but if
> you can find a good clean affordable one, go for it. Very
> smooth, almost round-ish tone (not nasal, or boomy, nor "peaky"
> up top), no real peaks or valleys, very even, yet open sound.
> Multi-pattern feature is nice to have, too.
>
> Soundelux E251C:
> One of my favorite mics, without a doubt, the 251C is the
> cardioid-only version. Tough to find used, but if you do find
> one it'll be in the high end of the price range we're talking
> about. KILLER high end (VERY smooth & airy!), and great
> presence, too... proximity effect is very noticeable if you
> want it to be (ie: if worked in-close).
>
> Soundelux E47C:
> Another cardioid-only version. Absolutely kicks ass. I can't
> say as I've ever seen one used for sale, but I would imagine
> it'd possibly be in the same/similar price range as the 251C
> used (even though it's more $$$ new). This mic has a less-
> pronounced high end than the 251C and more proximity effect,
> and it's a very BIG sound overall... just another super-high-
> quality, low-noise tube mic.
>
> Here's a multi-pattern version on e-bay now... only one bid -
> weird... maybe your friend can snag it!
> http://cgi.ebay.com/Soundelux-E-47_W0QQitemZ110114632536QQih Z001QQcategoryZ133011QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>
> B.L.U.E. Kiwi:
> Easily one of the best mics you can buy for under $2k new. Right
> now you can get one with a free "Robbie" tube Preamp thrown in
> (never used one of those pre's so I dunno how they sound).
> The sound to me is very reminiscent of a mix between a -67
> the -149... best way I can describe it. It's not a tube mic,
> though; just tonally, to me, it sounds kind of like a blend of
> those two mics' characteristics - best way I can describe it,
> anyway... warm bottom end, but not wooly or fuzzy, and open
> top end, but not hyped, either, and very clean there, too.
>
> B.L.U.E. Cactus:
> I have a Cactus capsule in my M149 (the original worked fine,
> but really was poorly-maintained & had some of the sputtering
> coming off), and I can only assume that the Cactus with it's
> electronics would at least sound somewhat reasonably close to
> my -149, since the capsule is the main voice of the mic anyway.
> The guys at B.L.U.E. told me that the Cactus Capsule would be
> the closest to the M149's stock one and honestly I think they
> were right-on, because I don't hear much difference, if any,
> except for better articulation now. You can get the Cactus for
> about $2500 new.
>
> B.L.U.E. Blueberry:
> If it's the high end of that modded -67 your friend liked
> (again, assuming it was the common S.P. mod), maybe try a
> Blueberry! A grand new, and $600-$800 used.
>
>
> Regular ol' U87 (new or used):
> New they're $2800-ish... used you can sometimes snag 'em for as
> low as $1300 - still a good mic that never totaly sucks on
> anything.
>
>
> There's a few anyway.
>
> Neil
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83431 is a reply to message #83428] |
Thu, 19 April 2007 20:51 |
Neil
Messages: 1645 Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Thought of 4 more possibilities:
Neumann M-147:
This mic gets a bad rap, IMO, from a lot of "big-time"
engineers; I think they're comparing it to a vintage -47 or
something... well, it's not a vintage -47, it's
a ONEfourtyseven, and it's a different mic. Anyway, you can
find these used for $1200 to $2000 - it's a very smooth mic as
long as you don't try to drive it hard where the high end
doesn't come across so well. Use it with a good quality pre and
you'll like it, use it with something dirty & lo-end & you'll
hate it. I had one, but it honestly sounded too close (not
exactly, but really, pretty darn close) to my E47C to keep
both, so I did a partial trade/cash deal with someone on this
NG for their...
RODE K2:
Just starting to play with this mic & I gotta say I really am
starting to like it... it sounds VERY reminiscent of my E251C,
but perhaps with a little less high end - a bit more "rounder"
tone, but still has some decent highs there. Nice proximity
effect if you want it, but really also works well if you back
off a bit - smoe mics tend to like one or the other, this one
seems to be able to work well either way. They're like $699 new
& $400 to $500 used, that I've seen anyway. I have a feeling
this mic would work well with both male & female vox, but have
only had a chance to try it on my own voice so far, so that's
just a "hunch".
B.L.U.E. Babybottlebluebird:
No, this is not one mic, it's two... someone else here (Dave,
or Gene, I think) said that the Bluebird is great on female
vocals - I have a pair, but haven't tried 'em on female vox
yet, but I can see how they'd say that - to me they sound like
a 414 with less "hard" midrange presence & actually a tad more
warmth. The Baby Bottle absolutely fucking rocks on male
vocals, and I can personally attest that on one occasion I've
auditioned it up against as many as 4 mics that cost as much as
(literally) more than ten times it's price for that application
& it's won. Doesn't mean it's going to be the best for every
male voice app, but that still says a lot, I think.
Point is: If you've got both a male & a female voice to please,
why settle for just one mic for recording them if you don't
necessarily have to? BabyBottleBluebirdBothBrandnew...
$1,100 total.
Something to think about.
OK, now I'm done.
:)
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Awesome, thanks Neil! I'll pass your advice along. They need to jump
>quickly so this is really helpful!
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>Neil wrote:
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a
>>> modded U67 which they like a lot but it's out of the price
>>> range.
>>
>> If they like the "modded" u-67's (assuming you're referring to
>> the very popular Stephen Paul sub-micron mod), then I would
>> recommend trying the Mojave MA200. Not exactly like the "S.P.-
>> 67's" (which I've heard & used before), but very warm & fuzzy &
>> in the same kinda balpark. The diaphragm on the MA-200 is only
>> 3 microns - so, not as thin as Stephen's 0.9-micron mod, but
>> still half the thickness of most common LDC diaphragms, and in
>> that regard, is coser to "that" sound, and at a grand, is
>> about a third of the price you'd pay for what I've seen clean
>> UM57's priced out at recently.
>>
>>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk
>>> band, would you select the UM57?
>>
>> Dunno, never used one - only answering the portion of your query
>> that I'm able to :)
>>
>>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the
>>> price of a UM57 or lower)?
>>
>> Not knowing if you've found a bitchin' clean minty-fresh
>> UM57 for $500 somewhere I will assume you mean in the "$3k-ish
>> or less" range. Here's my list:
>>
>> Neumann M-149:
>> Sometimes can be found in the $3k range, sometimes more, but if
>> you can find a good clean affordable one, go for it. Very
>> smooth, almost round-ish tone (not nasal, or boomy, nor "peaky"
>> up top), no real peaks or valleys, very even, yet open sound.
>> Multi-pattern feature is nice to have, too.
>>
>> Soundelux E251C:
>> One of my favorite mics, without a doubt, the 251C is the
>> cardioid-only version. Tough to find used, but if you do find
>> one it'll be in the high end of the price range we're talking
>> about. KILLER high end (VERY smooth & airy!), and great
>> presence, too... proximity effect is very noticeable if you
>> want it to be (ie: if worked in-close).
>>
>> Soundelux E47C:
>> Another cardioid-only version. Absolutely kicks ass. I can't
>> say as I've ever seen one used for sale, but I would imagine
>> it'd possibly be in the same/similar price range as the 251C
>> used (even though it's more $$$ new). This mic has a less-
>> pronounced high end than the 251C and more proximity effect,
>> and it's a very BIG sound overall... just another super-high-
>> quality, low-noise tube mic.
>>
>> Here's a multi-pattern version on e-bay now... only one bid -
>> weird... maybe your friend can snag it!
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/Soundelux-E-47_W0QQitemZ110114632536QQih Z001QQcategoryZ133011QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>>
>> B.L.U.E. Kiwi:
>> Easily one of the best mics you can buy for under $2k new. Right
>> now you can get one with a free "Robbie" tube Preamp thrown in
>> (never used one of those pre's so I dunno how they sound).
>> The sound to me is very reminiscent of a mix between a -67
>> the -149... best way I can describe it. It's not a tube mic,
>> though; just tonally, to me, it sounds kind of like a blend of
>> those two mics' characteristics - best way I can describe it,
>> anyway... warm bottom end, but not wooly or fuzzy, and open
>> top end, but not hyped, either, and very clean there, too.
>>
>> B.L.U.E. Cactus:
>> I have a Cactus capsule in my M149 (the original worked fine,
>> but really was poorly-maintained & had some of the sputtering
>> coming off), and I can only assume that the Cactus with it's
>> electronics would at least sound somewhat reasonably close to
>> my -149, since the capsule is the main voice of the mic anyway.
>> The guys at B.L.U.E. told me that the Cactus Capsule would be
>> the closest to the M149's stock one and honestly I think they
>> were right-on, because I don't hear much difference, if any,
>> except for better articulation now. You can get the Cactus for
>> about $2500 new.
>>
>> B.L.U.E. Blueberry:
>> If it's the high end of that modded -67 your friend liked
>> (again, assuming it was the common S.P. mod), maybe try a
>> Blueberry! A grand new, and $600-$800 used.
>>
>>
>> Regular ol' U87 (new or used):
>> New they're $2800-ish... used you can sometimes snag 'em for as
>> low as $1300 - still a good mic that never totaly sucks on
>> anything.
>>
>>
>> There's a few anyway.
>>
>> Neil
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83460 is a reply to message #83428] |
Fri, 20 April 2007 07:08 |
TCB
Messages: 1261 Registered: July 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jamie,
I bought what is basically a Mojave MA-200 and a Baby Bottle from Neil. I
don't have the same range of experience that Neil does with high end mics
(One doesn't need much to get a Prophet 10 into a DAW) but I can back up
his description on those two mics. The MA style mic is tubey and round sounding
without being fuzzy and the Baby Bottle is the best effin male vocal mic
I've ever been around. I really don't know why Neil sold it. The band I'm
in has three male vocalists. We initially were planning on using the MA for
the lead vox and the Baby Bottle for the backing vox but might use just the
BB for everything. It's also not a one trick pony, it's great anywhere you
want something that sounds solid state (in a good, fast way) and bright but
not hyped.
TCB
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Awesome, thanks Neil! I'll pass your advice along. They need to jump
>quickly so this is really helpful!
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>Neil wrote:
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a
>>> modded U67 which they like a lot but it's out of the price
>>> range.
>>
>> If they like the "modded" u-67's (assuming you're referring to
>> the very popular Stephen Paul sub-micron mod), then I would
>> recommend trying the Mojave MA200. Not exactly like the "S.P.-
>> 67's" (which I've heard & used before), but very warm & fuzzy &
>> in the same kinda balpark. The diaphragm on the MA-200 is only
>> 3 microns - so, not as thin as Stephen's 0.9-micron mod, but
>> still half the thickness of most common LDC diaphragms, and in
>> that regard, is coser to "that" sound, and at a grand, is
>> about a third of the price you'd pay for what I've seen clean
>> UM57's priced out at recently.
>>
>>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk
>>> band, would you select the UM57?
>>
>> Dunno, never used one - only answering the portion of your query
>> that I'm able to :)
>>
>>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the
>>> price of a UM57 or lower)?
>>
>> Not knowing if you've found a bitchin' clean minty-fresh
>> UM57 for $500 somewhere I will assume you mean in the "$3k-ish
>> or less" range. Here's my list:
>>
>> Neumann M-149:
>> Sometimes can be found in the $3k range, sometimes more, but if
>> you can find a good clean affordable one, go for it. Very
>> smooth, almost round-ish tone (not nasal, or boomy, nor "peaky"
>> up top), no real peaks or valleys, very even, yet open sound.
>> Multi-pattern feature is nice to have, too.
>>
>> Soundelux E251C:
>> One of my favorite mics, without a doubt, the 251C is the
>> cardioid-only version. Tough to find used, but if you do find
>> one it'll be in the high end of the price range we're talking
>> about. KILLER high end (VERY smooth & airy!), and great
>> presence, too... proximity effect is very noticeable if you
>> want it to be (ie: if worked in-close).
>>
>> Soundelux E47C:
>> Another cardioid-only version. Absolutely kicks ass. I can't
>> say as I've ever seen one used for sale, but I would imagine
>> it'd possibly be in the same/similar price range as the 251C
>> used (even though it's more $$$ new). This mic has a less-
>> pronounced high end than the 251C and more proximity effect,
>> and it's a very BIG sound overall... just another super-high-
>> quality, low-noise tube mic.
>>
>> Here's a multi-pattern version on e-bay now... only one bid -
>> weird... maybe your friend can snag it!
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/Soundelux-E-47_W0QQitemZ110114632536QQih Z001QQcategoryZ133011QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
>>
>> B.L.U.E. Kiwi:
>> Easily one of the best mics you can buy for under $2k new. Right
>> now you can get one with a free "Robbie" tube Preamp thrown in
>> (never used one of those pre's so I dunno how they sound).
>> The sound to me is very reminiscent of a mix between a -67
>> the -149... best way I can describe it. It's not a tube mic,
>> though; just tonally, to me, it sounds kind of like a blend of
>> those two mics' characteristics - best way I can describe it,
>> anyway... warm bottom end, but not wooly or fuzzy, and open
>> top end, but not hyped, either, and very clean there, too.
>>
>> B.L.U.E. Cactus:
>> I have a Cactus capsule in my M149 (the original worked fine,
>> but really was poorly-maintained & had some of the sputtering
>> coming off), and I can only assume that the Cactus with it's
>> electronics would at least sound somewhat reasonably close to
>> my -149, since the capsule is the main voice of the mic anyway.
>> The guys at B.L.U.E. told me that the Cactus Capsule would be
>> the closest to the M149's stock one and honestly I think they
>> were right-on, because I don't hear much difference, if any,
>> except for better articulation now. You can get the Cactus for
>> about $2500 new.
>>
>> B.L.U.E. Blueberry:
>> If it's the high end of that modded -67 your friend liked
>> (again, assuming it was the common S.P. mod), maybe try a
>> Blueberry! A grand new, and $600-$800 used.
>>
>>
>> Regular ol' U87 (new or used):
>> New they're $2800-ish... used you can sometimes snag 'em for as
>> low as $1300 - still a good mic that never totaly sucks on
>> anything.
>>
>>
>> There's a few anyway.
>>
>> Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83470 is a reply to message #83467] |
Fri, 20 April 2007 09:13 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292 Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Whenever I drop by Gearslutz, I see all kinds of raving going on about the
Peluso mics. My kit built MA-200's have Peluso cardioid capsules in them. I
like them, but I've never tried comparing the exact same mic with the
Marshall capsule, then swapping out the capsule for the Peluso capsule and
trying that.......though I guess I should, just so I can pretend to be some
sort of authority on the differences in Chinese cardioid capsules.
;o)
"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
news:4628e362$1@linux...
> They might want to demo mics by Peluso, the cheaper new Telefunkens, and
> possibly Microtech Gefell. Maybe talk to http://atlasproaudio.com/ or
> Mercenary to see what they'd suggest? I really recommend trying before
> buying.
>
> Regards,
>
> Graham
>
> Jamie K wrote:
>>
>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a modded U67
>> which they like a lot but it's out of the price range.
>>
>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk band, would
>> you select the UM57?
>>
>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the price of a
>> UM57 or lower)?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83472 is a reply to message #83470] |
Fri, 20 April 2007 09:25 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056 Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
I tried the peluso capsules and they do not differ from the chinese...
If that helps...
Regards,
Dimitrios
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>Whenever I drop by Gearslutz, I see all kinds of raving going on about the
>Peluso mics. My kit built MA-200's have Peluso cardioid capsules in them.
I
>like them, but I've never tried comparing the exact same mic with the
>Marshall capsule, then swapping out the capsule for the Peluso capsule and
>trying that.......though I guess I should, just so I can pretend to be some
>sort of authority on the differences in Chinese cardioid capsules.
>
>;o)
>
>
>
>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>news:4628e362$1@linux...
>> They might want to demo mics by Peluso, the cheaper new Telefunkens, and
>> possibly Microtech Gefell. Maybe talk to http://atlasproaudio.com/ or
>> Mercenary to see what they'd suggest? I really recommend trying before
>> buying.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Graham
>>
>> Jamie K wrote:
>>>
>>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a modded U67
>>> which they like a lot but it's out of the price range.
>>>
>>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk band, would
>>> you select the UM57?
>>>
>>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the price of
a
>>> UM57 or lower)?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> -Jamie
>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83473 is a reply to message #83472] |
Fri, 20 April 2007 09:37 |
Deej [4]
Messages: 1292 Registered: January 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
They *are* Chinese capsules, for sure. They're just different Chinese
capsules and since they have the Peluso stamp of approval, they are bound to
be superior to a Geffel M7, right?. Now my mics are worth $2000.00
each......
I accept PayPal.
;oD
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:4628e981$1@linux...
>
> Hi,
> I tried the peluso capsules and they do not differ from the chinese...
> If that helps...
> Regards,
> Dimitrios
>
> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>Whenever I drop by Gearslutz, I see all kinds of raving going on about the
>
>>Peluso mics. My kit built MA-200's have Peluso cardioid capsules in them.
> I
>>like them, but I've never tried comparing the exact same mic with the
>>Marshall capsule, then swapping out the capsule for the Peluso capsule and
>
>>trying that.......though I guess I should, just so I can pretend to be
>>some
>
>>sort of authority on the differences in Chinese cardioid capsules.
>>
>>;o)
>>
>>
>>
>>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>news:4628e362$1@linux...
>>> They might want to demo mics by Peluso, the cheaper new Telefunkens, and
>
>>> possibly Microtech Gefell. Maybe talk to http://atlasproaudio.com/ or
>
>>> Mercenary to see what they'd suggest? I really recommend trying before
>
>>> buying.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>>> Jamie K wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a modded U67
>
>>>> which they like a lot but it's out of the price range.
>>>>
>>>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk band,
>>>> would
>
>>>> you select the UM57?
>>>>
>>>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the price of
> a
>>>> UM57 or lower)?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> -Jamie
>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83513 is a reply to message #83473] |
Sat, 21 April 2007 01:59 |
Dimitrios
Messages: 1056 Registered: August 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
He it is funny how many times what you declare is what you are !
There is so much literature on interenet as how good peluso capsules sound
as aopposed to the chines ones...etc..
I tried the best they make and the more expensive one on a Neumann M149 taking
out the neumann capsule to hear how it sounds.
Man the sound was so bad !
Thin distorted on highs no low mids at all...
Thats why my microphones will have the M7 capsule from Neumann...
Regards,
Dimitrios
"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>They *are* Chinese capsules, for sure. They're just different Chinese
>capsules and since they have the Peluso stamp of approval, they are bound
to
>be superior to a Geffel M7, right?. Now my mics are worth $2000.00
>each......
>
>I accept PayPal.
>
>;oD
>
>
>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:4628e981$1@linux...
>>
>> Hi,
>> I tried the peluso capsules and they do not differ from the chinese...
>> If that helps...
>> Regards,
>> Dimitrios
>>
>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>Whenever I drop by Gearslutz, I see all kinds of raving going on about
the
>>
>>>Peluso mics. My kit built MA-200's have Peluso cardioid capsules in them.
>> I
>>>like them, but I've never tried comparing the exact same mic with the
>>>Marshall capsule, then swapping out the capsule for the Peluso capsule
and
>>
>>>trying that.......though I guess I should, just so I can pretend to be
>>>some
>>
>>>sort of authority on the differences in Chinese cardioid capsules.
>>>
>>>;o)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>>news:4628e362$1@linux...
>>>> They might want to demo mics by Peluso, the cheaper new Telefunkens,
and
>>
>>>> possibly Microtech Gefell. Maybe talk to http://atlasproaudio.com/
or
>>
>>>> Mercenary to see what they'd suggest? I really recommend trying before
>>
>>>> buying.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Graham
>>>>
>>>> Jamie K wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a modded
U67
>>
>>>>> which they like a lot but it's out of the price range.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk band,
>>>>> would
>>
>>>>> you select the UM57?
>>>>>
>>>>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the price of
>> a
>>>>> UM57 or lower)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
Re: Mic question [message #83521 is a reply to message #83513] |
Sat, 21 April 2007 07:14 |
Neil
Messages: 1645 Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
FWIW, I have a Peluso CK-67 capsule... I've had it in two mics;
an M147, and my -149, and it sounded fine. Nothing like the
stock capsules that were in there (and that was the point of me
trying it), but nothing like what you're describing, either...
in both cases it gave the mic a very open sound, a little bit
of "scoop", and some decent, but not overly noticeable warmth.
It sounded better in the -149 than it did the -147, but then
the electronics in each mic are very different from one
another, but in the case of the -147 it turned the mic into a
whole 'nother animal... no longer smooth & on the darkish side,
but wide open & articulate.
I have heard that there has been consistency issues with Peluso
capsules, so maybe you got a crap one. Someone else here (can't
recall who) got two of the same kind from Peluso for a pair of
mics they had and I remember them posting that one sounded
great, the other was crap.
Neil
"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>He it is funny how many times what you declare is what you are !
>There is so much literature on interenet as how good peluso capsules sound
>as aopposed to the chines ones...etc..
>I tried the best they make and the more expensive one on a Neumann M149
taking
>out the neumann capsule to hear how it sounds.
>Man the sound was so bad !
>Thin distorted on highs no low mids at all...
>Thats why my microphones will have the M7 capsule from Neumann...
>Regards,
>Dimitrios
>
>"DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>They *are* Chinese capsules, for sure. They're just different Chinese
>>capsules and since they have the Peluso stamp of approval, they are bound
>to
>>be superior to a Geffel M7, right?. Now my mics are worth $2000.00
>>each......
>>
>>I accept PayPal.
>>
>>;oD
>>
>>
>>"Dimitrios" <musurgio@otenet.gr> wrote in message news:4628e981$1@linux...
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> I tried the peluso capsules and they do not differ from the chinese...
>>> If that helps...
>>> Regards,
>>> Dimitrios
>>>
>>> "DJ" <www.aarrrrggghhh!!!.com> wrote:
>>>>Whenever I drop by Gearslutz, I see all kinds of raving going on about
>the
>>>
>>>>Peluso mics. My kit built MA-200's have Peluso cardioid capsules in them.
>>> I
>>>>like them, but I've never tried comparing the exact same mic with the
>>>>Marshall capsule, then swapping out the capsule for the Peluso capsule
>and
>>>
>>>>trying that.......though I guess I should, just so I can pretend to be
>
>>>>some
>>>
>>>>sort of authority on the differences in Chinese cardioid capsules.
>>>>
>>>>;o)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Graham Duncan" <graham@grahamduncan.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:4628e362$1@linux...
>>>>> They might want to demo mics by Peluso, the cheaper new Telefunkens,
>and
>>>
>>>>> possibly Microtech Gefell. Maybe talk to http://atlasproaudio.com/
>or
>>>
>>>>> Mercenary to see what they'd suggest? I really recommend trying before
>>>
>>>>> buying.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Graham
>>>>>
>>>>> Jamie K wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A friend is asking me about the Neumann UM57. They've used a modded
>U67
>>>
>>>>>> which they like a lot but it's out of the price range.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you were buying a mic for female and male vocals in a funk band,
>
>>>>>> would
>>>
>>>>>> you select the UM57?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What else would you consider (from any manufacturer, at the price
of
>>> a
>>>>>> UM57 or lower)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> -Jamie
>>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Dec 28 17:25:40 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.03126 seconds
|