I've read some great stuff about the AT4060 tube mic. I can get a
brand new one from and authorized dealer for just $750, which looks
to be a good deal. However, the Neumann U87 seems to be THE
reference standard by which all other mics are judged. Is the
Neumann worth over TWICE as much money? Or is the AT4060 every bit
as good? This is strictly for voice work; no singing, no
instruments. I have a deep, tenor-like speaking voice -- if that
matters.

I'm looking to buy my "flagship" mic that I will use for most, if
not all, of my work. Would I be better off getting the 4060 and
putting the hefty sum saved into a higher-end pre? Genelec
monitors? etc?

Thanks, and sorry for so many newbie questions, but I'm BRAND new
at all this.



Brendan

The Horta wrote:
I've read some great stuff about the AT4060 tube mic. I can get a
brand new one from and authorized dealer for just $750, which looks
to be a good deal. However, the Neumann U87 seems to be THE
reference standard by which all other mics are judged. Is the
Neumann worth over TWICE as much money? Or is the AT4060 every bit
as good? This is strictly for voice work; no singing, no
instruments. I have a deep, tenor-like speaking voice -- if that
matters.

I'm looking to buy my "flagship" mic that I will use for most, if
not all, of my work. Would I be better off getting the 4060 and
putting the hefty sum saved into a higher-end pre? Genelec
monitors? etc?

Thanks, and sorry for so many newbie questions, but I'm BRAND new
at all this.



Brendan

Since you're new, you should TRY several mics and pick the one that
sounds best on your voice. A lot of voice work is done on Electrovoice
RE-20, which is a dynamic mic. The U87 and AT4060 are condensor mics.
Know the difference? You might even prefer a ribbon mic. Do some
research then try them out.

Also, invest in a decent mic-pre. As with most quality gear, cheaper
is not usually better.

BTW, how does one have a DEEP TENOR voice, anyway?

"The Horta" wrote in message
. ..
I've read some great stuff about the AT4060 tube mic. I can get a
brand new one from and authorized dealer for just $750, which looks
to be a good deal. However, the Neumann U87 seems to be THE
reference standard by which all other mics are judged. Is the
Neumann worth over TWICE as much money? Or is the AT4060 every bit
as good? This is strictly for voice work; no singing, no
instruments. I have a deep, tenor-like speaking voice -- if that
matters.

I'm looking to buy my "flagship" mic that I will use for most, if
not all, of my work. Would I be better off getting the 4060 and
putting the hefty sum saved into a higher-end pre? Genelec
monitors? etc?

Thanks, and sorry for so many newbie questions, but I'm BRAND new
at all this.

I must be in the minority because I'm not a huge fan of the U87 myself. You
owe it to yourself to try a EV RE/PL20.

"will" wrote in
oups.com:


BTW, how does one have a DEEP TENOR voice, anyway?

Well, I am the manager of my company's department of redundancy
department ;-)

Thanks for the advice. I'm not sure where I could check out such
mics. Any thoughts? I'm a short drive away from NYC.



Brendan

"The Horta" wrote in message
. ..
I've read some great stuff about the AT4060 tube mic. I can get a
brand new one from and authorized dealer for just $750, which looks
to be a good deal. However, the Neumann U87 seems to be THE
reference standard by which all other mics are judged. Is the


Well the AT is a tube mic and the U87 is a solid state one. I have a U87,
but prefer my RODE K2 tube on most things over the U87.


geoff

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:19:01 -0400, The Horta wrote
(in article ):

I've read some great stuff about the AT4060 tube mic. I can get a
brand new one from and authorized dealer for just $750, which looks
to be a good deal. However, the Neumann U87 seems to be THE
reference standard by which all other mics are judged. Is the
Neumann worth over TWICE as much money? Or is the AT4060 every bit
as good? This is strictly for voice work; no singing, no
instruments. I have a deep, tenor-like speaking voice -- if that
matters.

I'm looking to buy my "flagship" mic that I will use for most, if
not all, of my work. Would I be better off getting the 4060 and
putting the hefty sum saved into a higher-end pre? Genelec
monitors? etc?

Thanks, and sorry for so many newbie questions, but I'm BRAND new
at all this.



Brendan


If you can't hear the difference with your gear, then it's not. If you can,
it is.

Through a mackie, behringer or less stellar mixer, you may not be able to
tell much difference. That's because they compromise the quality of the mic.
BTW, The 4060 is one pattern, right? The U 87 is three.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

In article writes:

I've read some great stuff about the AT4060 tube mic. I can get a
brand new one from and authorized dealer for just $750, which looks
to be a good deal. However, the Neumann U87 seems to be THE
reference standard by which all other mics are judged. Is the
Neumann worth over TWICE as much money? Or is the AT4060 every bit
as good? This is strictly for voice work; no singing, no
instruments. I have a deep, tenor-like speaking voice -- if that
matters.

If you can get a U87 brand new from an authorized dealer for twice the
price of a 4060, buy it. It's a good investment. Generally they're
around $2500 new now.

Since you know exactly what you'll be using the mic for, you have
every reason to audition mics and pick the one that you think sounds
best (and fits your budget). Take a day trip if you have to. Or stay
overnight in a hotel in a city that has a decent pro audio shop if you
really live in the boondocks. It will cost you less than buying the
wrong mic, and you may even find one that costs half what an AT4060
costs that sounds just fine on your voice. Buy a good dinner with half
the money you save.

If you insist on buying a mic by mail without listening to it first,
buy two or three and make it clear to the dealer that you want to
audition them in your studio and will decide which one works best and
return the others for a refund. Any decent dealer will do this. While
a Guitar Center store will tell you that you can't return a
microphone, their mail order outlet, Musician's Friend, will. Not a
recommendation for MF in particualr, just an example of an
easy-to-find dealer who will let you try a mic before committing to
owning it for live.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Since you're a short drive to NYC, it'd be worth it to make the trip.
There are many places there that should be able to let you try a large
selection of mics. Anyone in NYC feel free to chime in with some
recommendations. Doesn't B&H have a large selection of mics and a room
to try them in? BTW, B&H's address: B&H PhotoVideo, 420 Ninth
Avenue, New York, NY 10001.

In article , JP Gerard
wrote:

The older ones (87/87i/87p48 etc) don't sound the same, the capsules have to
be rebuilt, the earlier u87s had serious saturation problems, etc etc.
They're good mics if you know how to mod them and don't mind changing the
capsule or having it rebuilt.



I have a pair I've been using *constantly* for 25 years. They sound
very, very much alike. They've never had to be rebuilt, ever had
"saturation problems" whatever that is, and I would never mod them or
wanna change their capsules.

During the past two days I've used them as drum overheads, female
background vocal, grand piano, acoustic guitar, & clave.

(I also used about 15 other mics ...)

Couple weekends ago I spent 3 days recording a chorus, with occasional
pipe organ, typani and a horn section, in a wonderful sounding church
in Providence. It was one of the best sounding recordings I have ever
done. I used only 2 87's in omni, a GML pre and a Waves L2 converter
direct to dat.



All that said, if I were starting a home studio today, and I didn't
have lotsa $ to throw around, my first high end mic purchase would be a
Soundelux U195.





David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island


www.CelebrationSound.com

"JP Gerard" wrote in message
...
What series are they?

I had an original series (no battery level indicator - real early ****) a
couple of weeks ago, and it did NOT sound like a 70's U87 or an 80's U87.
It also distorts on peaks, and that's a well-known problem. I've been told
that a particular batch of early U87s had been called back in because of
this.


My U87 is of this vintage ( recon capsule), and the overload is one
characteristic (of several) that I've noticed that doesn't appeal to me.
What to fix on it ?

geoff

In article writes:

My U87 is of this vintage ( recon capsule), and the overload is one
characteristic (of several) that I've noticed that doesn't appeal to me.
What to fix on it ?

Move the mic a greater distance from the source. Remember that in the
early days of the U87, people didn't close-mic as a rule. One or two
U87s far enough away to cover an orchestra didn't bottom out. It's
considerably louder three inches away from a guitar amplifier.

The U87, like any other microphone, has things that it's not good at.
Don't use it for them. If overloading a mic on peaks is a problem for
you, then find a mic that will take those peaks, then see that it the
things that it doesn't do well don't affect your work.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 04:11:03 -0400, JP Gerard wrote
(in article ):

What series are they?

I had an original series (no battery level indicator - real early ****) a
couple of weeks ago, and it did NOT sound like a 70's U87 or an 80's U87.
It also distorts on peaks, and that's a well-known problem. I've been told
that a particular batch of early U87s had been called back in because of
this.

You have a pair that match well, that's GREAT!

But you will admit that finding two U87s of different vintage that match
well is not an easy task.

mics age and their sound changes, U 87 or not.

If I had to have a matched pair of old ones I'd have the capsules rebuilt to
good specs, measured and matched.

OTHO, I 'd send them in for a peek and tweek as I did with my U 89. They
found a few minor things. Find out first before you pay to rebuild.


Also, I met a Swiss guy at the AES Barcelona who told me he had a pair of
U87s from the late 70's, and they both failed around the same time - a few
days apart. They're not indestructible.

Maybe they were both in front of the howitzer.

Read again my comment on polar patterns: I'm not saying that you can't get a
good sounding recording when using U87s as distance mics.
But they DO sound weird (very) funky off axis, even in omni, the 90 and 270°
axis sounding really muffled and midrange-odd compared to the 0 and 180°
axis.

JP

The Omni pattern from any mic is going to be noticeably directional at high
frequencies. It's just physics. Don't damn the U 87 for that.

Regards,

Ty Ford

-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 09:49:40 -0400, Mike Rivers wrote
(in article znr1119094398k@trad):


In article writes:

My U87 is of this vintage ( recon capsule), and the overload is one
characteristic (of several) that I've noticed that doesn't appeal to me.
What to fix on it ?

Move the mic a greater distance from the source. Remember that in the
early days of the U87, people didn't close-mic as a rule. One or two
U87s far enough away to cover an orchestra didn't bottom out. It's
considerably louder three inches away from a guitar amplifier.

The U87, like any other microphone, has things that it's not good at.
Don't use it for them. If overloading a mic on peaks is a problem for
you, then find a mic that will take those peaks, then see that it the
things that it doesn't do well don't affect your work.


Well put Mike.

Ty Ford




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

It could be the fet crapping out. Send it to Neumann. I have an old one and
had a distorting problem. They repaired it and it sounds fine now.
--Lou Gimenez
The Music Lab
2" 24track w all the Goodies
www.musiclabnyc.com



From: "Geoff Wood"
Organization: CLEAR Net New Zealand http://www.clear.net.nz - Complaints

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:34:37 +1200
Subject: AT4060 vs. Neumann U87?


"JP Gerard" wrote in message
...
What series are they?

I had an original series (no battery level indicator - real early ****) a
couple of weeks ago, and it did NOT sound like a 70's U87 or an 80's U87.
It also distorts on peaks, and that's a well-known problem. I've been told
that a particular batch of early U87s had been called back in because of
this.


My U87 is of this vintage ( recon capsule), and the overload is one
characteristic (of several) that I've noticed that doesn't appeal to me.
What to fix on it ?

geoff

On 6/18/05 4:11 AM, in article , "JP
Gerard" wrote:
I'm not saying that you can't get a
good sounding recording when using U87s as distance mics.
But they DO sound weird (very) funky off axis, even in omni, the 90 and 270°
axis sounding really muffled and midrange-odd compared to the 0 and 180°
axis.

And your point? You have this problem trying to drive nails with a
screwdriver? This is like damning a Camaro cause it doesn;t ride like a
Bentley, or can;t haul as much as a 350 series van. The 87's SOUND is all
ABOUT that inaccuracy and off-axis response. You don;t like that... You
should be using a 170.
Don;t complain when a tool does what it's good at.

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:38:31 -0400, Ty Ford wrote:

Well put Mike.

Is that anything like a well placed mic?

JP Gerard wrote:
Huh?

I can't imagine the guys at Neumann in the 60's going "let's make a really
inaccurate mic, yeah, cool!".

It wasn' designed to be inaccurate.

It wasn't designed to be. It was designed to be as accurate as possible.

But, in this age of far more accurate mikes, the reason the U87, and in
fact the reason most of the large diaphragm mikes continue being popular
is their inaccuracy.

The off-axis response on the U87 is a great tool for close-miking vocals
because you can shift the mike position to change the tone. You can get
a huge variety of different tonal characteristics out of one mike. That
is a great tool. It wasn't deliberate on Neumann's part, but it's still
nice.

The capsule is what it is, I'll give you that.

I'm not complaining.

I don't own a U87.

I do, and I use it every once in a while. It's not my favorite vocal
mike, but it is surprisingly versatile because of the way it's inaccurate.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:40:32 -0400, JP Gerard wrote
(in article ):


The Omni pattern from any mic is going to be noticeably directional at
high
frequencies. It's just physics. Don't damn the U 87 for that.

Right, but the K87 gets really wiggly off axis, it's just duller, the
midrange is all funky too.

I prefer the CK12, especially the original version. Very good for a LD
capsule.
Since we're talking LD capsules, the K89 walks all over these in terms of
pattern response. Very very smooth all around.

JP



Show me an LD that doesn't get weird off axis.

Yah! That's why I like it. It's 3/4" versus 1", I recall.

Also the 1" capsule in the TLM 103 is not that wonky. I'm guessing the
headgrille being part of the solution there.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 16:10:24 -0400, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:38:31 -0400, Ty Ford wrote:

Well put Mike.

Is that anything like a well placed mic?


only in the government.

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

"Ty Ford" wrote in message ...
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 16:10:24 -0400, Agent 86 wrote
(in article ):

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 10:38:31 -0400, Ty Ford wrote:

Well put Mike.

Is that anything like a well placed mic?


only in the government.

Ty Ford


WHA....? Is this _political_ ? ;-)

Ty Ford wrote:

Show me an LD that doesn't get weird off axis.

TLM50. It's beamy all, right, but the treble dropoff is pretty even and
consistent off-axis.
--scott

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

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 04:01:43 -0400, JP Gerard wrote
(in article ):

Show me an LD that doesn't get weird off axis.

Wish I could!
I do like the K47 though, and the Gefell M7 is really decent as far as LD
capsules go. But it's no K89 when it comes to linearity.

Yah! That's why I like it. It's 3/4" versus 1", I recall.

Yes, and the main reason why the off-axis response is nicer.
It's a nice design, more of a "textbook" backplate BTW, simpler but in many
ways technically "better" than a K87.

Also the 1" capsule in the TLM 103 is not that wonky. I'm guessing the
headgrille being part of the solution there.

It's a single diaphragm capsule using a phase shift network at the back
(like an SM57) to achive a cardioid (sort of) pattern.
It's also quite thin (physically) compared to a K87.
The grille is almost identical to the U87's so there's no major difference
here.

The capsule is totally different though. It's smoother off-axis but I find
the KK103 proximity effect kind of weird.

JP



I did some coincident X/Y stereo recording of a madrigal group with a pair a
few years back. We were very happy with the results. With the low self noise,
they DO hear a lot.

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

JP Gerard wrote:
But it's a small diaphragm capsule - the sphere is big but the capsule is a
1/2".

Sheesh, next thing you know, you'll be saying the AT 4033 is a small diaphragm
mike.

Okay, how about the DPA 4040, then? It's bigger, but it's also an omni with
a similar configuration.
--scott

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

JP Gerard wrote:

So, back to the original discussion for a sec: I was talking about the K87
capsules's funky off axis response, which can be a problem in omni.
Remember, it's really two cardioid (sort of cardioid) systems, back to back.
I would of course expect a pure pressure transducer like the DPA to have
much better response off-axis, even though its diaph. is 1" wide.
The problem with the K87 in omni is that the two diaphragms aren't exactly
at the same position in space.

Again, this isn't a problem, this is an advantage, and it's the reason folks
use those capsules today. The omni is VERY much not omni at all, with really
bizarre response off-axis. But that can be a powerful tool.

A pure pressure system, having only one side of a single diaphragm exposed
to sound obviously doesn't suffer from the problems of a dual system.

Right, but you'll notice you don't see too many of those sold, because people
want the ragged off-axis response for vocal work.

Please don't ask me for fancy formulas to back this up, I'm still studying
all this!

If you want them, I _think_ they are to be had in the Sank article that is
in the AES Microphone Compendium.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 19 Jun 2005 14:21:22 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

If you want them, I _think_ they are to be had in the Sank article that is
in the AES Microphone Compendium.

If anyone has a spare copy of this, please keep me in mind; cash or
trade. AES is out. Much thanks,

Chris Hornbeck

On 6/19/05 2:21 PM, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

JP Gerard wrote:

So, back to the original discussion for a sec: I was talking about the K87
capsules's funky off axis response, which can be a problem in omni.
Remember, it's really two cardioid (sort of cardioid) systems, back to back.
I would of course expect a pure pressure transducer like the DPA to have
much better response off-axis, even though its diaph. is 1" wide.
The problem with the K87 in omni is that the two diaphragms aren't exactly
at the same position in space.

Again, this isn't a problem, this is an advantage, and it's the reason folks
use those capsules today. The omni is VERY much not omni at all, with really
bizarre response off-axis. But that can be a powerful tool.

A pure pressure system, having only one side of a single diaphragm exposed
to sound obviously doesn't suffer from the problems of a dual system.

Right, but you'll notice you don't see too many of those sold, because people
want the ragged off-axis response for vocal work.

What's your thought on how the TLM170 handles this?

SSJVCmag wrote:
On 6/19/05 2:21 PM, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

JP Gerard wrote:

So, back to the original discussion for a sec: I was talking about the K87
capsules's funky off axis response, which can be a problem in omni.
Remember, it's really two cardioid (sort of cardioid) systems, back to back.
I would of course expect a pure pressure transducer like the DPA to have
much better response off-axis, even though its diaph. is 1" wide.
The problem with the K87 in omni is that the two diaphragms aren't exactly
at the same position in space.

Again, this isn't a problem, this is an advantage, and it's the reason folks
use those capsules today. The omni is VERY much not omni at all, with really
bizarre response off-axis. But that can be a powerful tool.

A pure pressure system, having only one side of a single diaphragm exposed
to sound obviously doesn't suffer from the problems of a dual system.

Right, but you'll notice you don't see too many of those sold, because people
want the ragged off-axis response for vocal work.

What's your thought on how the TLM170 handles this?

I don't know, having really no experience with it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."