[geoff]

.... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, and tizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

Hopefully EQ is effective on the brightness .

Will get a chance for a real play this weekend.....

Thoughts ?

geoff

[Tobiah]

On 2/21/2012 4:09 PM, geoff wrote:
... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, and tizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

What are you recording with it, and in what configuration?

[geoff Wood]

On Feb 22, 2:55*pm, Tobiah wrote:
On 2/21/2012 4:09 PM,geoffwrote:

... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, andtizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

What are you recording with it, and in what configuration?

So far simply plugged into a little mixer , spoke into the mic, and
listened on headphones. However I do know this mixer, and the phone
pretty well.


geoff

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:58:32 -0800 (PST), geoff Wood
wrote:

On Feb 22, 2:55*pm, Tobiah wrote:
On 2/21/2012 4:09 PM,geoffwrote:

... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, andtizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

What are you recording with it, and in what configuration?

So far simply plugged into a little mixer , spoke into the mic, and
listened on headphones. However I do know this mixer, and the phone
pretty well.

Listening on phones while you speak is never a good test. You get a
mix of mic sound and bone conduction sound. Record then play back -
that's the only way to do it.

d

[PStamler]

Try it into a transformer-coupled preamp or board. If you still don't
like it, try a TLM 102 instead. Much nicer IMHO, and cheaper to boot.

Peace,
Paul

[geoff]

Don Pearce wrote:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:58:32 -0800 (PST), geoff Wood
wrote:

On Feb 22, 2:55 pm, Tobiah wrote:
On 2/21/2012 4:09 PM,geoffwrote:

... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly
overbright, sibilant, andtizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

What are you recording with it, and in what configuration?

So far simply plugged into a little mixer , spoke into the mic, and
listened on headphones. However I do know this mixer, and the phone
pretty well.

Listening on phones while you speak is never a good test. You get a
mix of mic sound and bone conduction sound. Record then play back -
that's the only way to do it.


As I said, just a quick rough checkout , so far.

Comparing against others on exact same setup, K2, C414B-XLS, AT2020.

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

geoff wrote:
... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, and tizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

Pop vocals. That peaky top end is just the thing to pull a vocal out of a
dense mix.

Hopefully EQ is effective on the brightness .

Don't think of it as brightness, think of it as air. It's an octave or so
above where the presence peak would be. It's not a very natural sound, but
it's a typical and classic one.

Will get a chance for a real play this weekend.....

Thoughts ?

If you don't like the top end, move off-axis until you find a place where
you do. The off-axis response is weird and it can be weird in a useful way.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:09:53 -0500, geoff wrote
(in article ) :

... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, and tizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

Hopefully EQ is effective on the brightness .

Will get a chance for a real play this weekend.....

Thoughts ?

geoff



Geoff,

The TLM 103 (and the AKG C414) have a documented issue with some preamps. Try
a different preamp.

Here's a tlm 103 in use. http://vimeo.com/2179144

Regards,

Ty Ford



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 01:50:32 -0500, PStamler wrote
(in article
):

Try it into a transformer-coupled preamp or board. If you still don't
like it, try a TLM 102 instead. Much nicer IMHO, and cheaper to boot.

Peace,
Paul

I habe two TLM 103s. It's not just about transformers. The TLM 103 works very
nicely into a GML. (which is transformerless)

Regards,

Ty Ford

--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[hank alrich]

geoff wrote:

... and at first preemptive listen it sounds just so incredibly overbright,
sibilant, and tizzy, I can't imagine what I'd use it on.

Hopefully EQ is effective on the brightness .

Will get a chance for a real play this weekend.....

Thoughts ?

geoff

What did you plug it into? They're sensitive to preamps, work well with
somne, nto se well with others.

Do you recall Harvey Gerst's track on a RAP CD compilation? He used a
TLM103 for several sources and got good results.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[vdubreeze]

On Feb 22, 5:07*am, "geoff" wrote:


Comparing against others on exact same setup, K2, C414B-XLS, AT2020.


Geoff, I bought mine when they first arrived on the scene, because it
was my first opportunity to own my own Neumann, and never quite warmed
to it. But I have discovered that as long as I don't use it for what
I don't like it on I'm not quite so disenchanted. My main gripe
isn't the highs but rather the mids, which kind of disappear. It's
actually really nice on unlikely things that might take nicely to such
a scoop, like acoustic bass. And it's an incredibly quiet and healthy
signal. But for me, even on instruments that I'd figure would benefit
from the brightness it's too tame feeling. It lacks aggression too
much, which is certainly not to say that I mean I'd be looking for an
"aggressive" sound from it, but on an acoustic guitar for example, or
as a piano mic, it's a bit receeded compared to a 414 or some other
similarly bright or even "sizzly" mics I sometimes use. Maybe I
should say instead that the highs are well defined and the lows are
also surprisingly also but the mids are much less well defined, so
while I may not be searching for "aggression" in a mic I might be
looking for a presence that it misses, even with it's brightness.

It's just one of those mics that has a very high quality signal but I
just don't care for it's character. Just never caught on with me. I
haven't found a guitar or voice that I didn't prefer something else I
have on it instead. All top and bottom? I use it when I need its
clean, high output. Or when something can sound tame. Not a popular
mic in my closet, but I'm terrible at getting rid of gear. But I
rarely see them when I'm out and about, and they've been around for
years. I find it hard to believe it's such a big seller for Neumann,
but who knows. It does fill a niche for me somewhat so I never sold
it, but it's my least used mic.

But I haven't used it with too many pres so I keep pulling it out
every once in a while when a different pre is within arms length. I
dunno. Not my cup of tea.

I'd be interested in success stories with particular applications.

v

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:12:42 -0800 (PST), vdubreeze
wrote:

Geoff, I bought mine when they first arrived on the scene, because it
was my first opportunity to own my own Neumann, and never quite warmed
to it. But I have discovered that as long as I don't use it for what
I don't like it on I'm not quite so disenchanted.

I think you just described every mic in existence.

d

[vdubreeze]

On Feb 23, 1:29*am, (Don Pearce) wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:12:42 -0800 (PST), vdubreeze

wrote:
Geoff, I bought mine when they first arrived on the scene, because it
was my first opportunity to own my own Neumann, and never quite warmed
to it. *But I have discovered that as long as I don't use it for what
I don't like it on I'm not quite so disenchanted.

I think you just described every mic in existence.

d


Well, sure : ) but the context is that I assumed it would be a go
to mic for acoustic instruments, winds, voice, everything I use a 414
for. But for me it's been a much more limited use mic than that. And
I'm philosophical about it being less versatile/useful than many
popular $600 condensers.

[Scott Dorsey]

Ty Ford wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:38:32 -0500, Don Pearce wrote
(in article ):

Heavy dependence on the preamp would suggest that the TLM103 has an
unusually high output impedance. If it were low enough, it would be
immune to whatever load was hung on it. I would have to say this is
not indicative of good design of the mics internal pre-amp.

gee, for the C414 as well. Who'da thunk it.

For the C414B/ULS, not for the TL or TLII.

Don't know about the EB.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[geoff]

Ty Ford wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 12:38:32 -0500, Don Pearce wrote
(in article ):


Heavy dependence on the preamp would suggest that the TLM103 has an
unusually high output impedance. If it were low enough, it would be
immune to whatever load was hung on it. I would have to say this is
not indicative of good design of the mics internal pre-amp.

d

gee, for the C414 as well. Who'da thunk it.


Having now played in the studio (through RNP) I can confirm that instead of
prominant highs, the effect is obtained by scooped out high mids. Winding
down the highs ~ 10K does make things less strident, but still a little odd
and 'spacey'.

So the TLM102 seems to have ostensibly the same specs and reputedly sounds
'better'. So is the only point of difference the 'voicing' ?

geoff