[John Phillips]

In reading the reviews and comments, the Neumann TLM67 appears to be a
mic that I would like to have. It is described as smooth and
complementary to digital recording, which I interpret as no big presence
peak (it does have a small one). I tend to like a relatively "flat" mic
and add the peaks myself depending on the singer. I also like the "in
you face" sound that some mics can produce. I would also point that
much of my favorite vocals have been done on a U47 which I will never
own. I am curious about any other comments or experience that the group
has, I also read Ty's article which really peaked my interest.

Thanks,

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Paul Stamler[_2_]]

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In reading the reviews and comments, the Neumann TLM67 appears to be a mic
that I would like to have. It is described as smooth and complementary to
digital recording, which I interpret as no big presence peak (it does have
a small one). I tend to like a relatively "flat" mic and add the peaks
myself depending on the singer. I also like the "in you face" sound that
some mics can produce. I would also point that much of my favorite vocals
have been done on a U47 which I will never own. I am curious about any
other comments or experience that the group has, I also read Ty's article
which really peaked my interest.

Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine on a
TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went to 24-track
2" analog.

Peace,
Paul

[John Phillips]

Paul Stamler wrote:
"John Phillips" wrote in message
...I would also point that much of my favorite vocals
have been done on a U47 which I will never own...



Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine on a
TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went to 24-track
2" analog.

Peace,
Paul




I was especially curious about female voices so thanks for the input Paul.

I should have included the U48 and U67 on my favorite vocal list also.

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[John Phillips]

Paul Stamler wrote:

Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine on a
TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went to 24-track
2" analog.

Peace,
Paul



Have you done something similar with the TLM103? It has some of the
same parts and it is much less expensive. The presence peak is broad on
the 103.

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Joe Mama]

John Phillips wrote:
Paul Stamler wrote:

Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine
on a TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went
to 24-track 2" analog.

Peace,
Paul


Have you done something similar with the TLM103? It has some of the
same parts and it is much less expensive. The presence peak is broad on
the 103.

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

I've used a TLM103 quite a lot, and in my experience, it's nice, but
nowhere in the same league as the others you mentioned (you seem to have
expensive tastes). Odd as it sounds, I actually almost always prefer
the sound of our Studio Projects T3 on most voices - especially females
- for some reason.

YMMV + the usual grains of salt, etc.

Also:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/peaked.html

Cheers,
-joe.

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:29:50 -0500, Joe Mama wrote
(in article ):

John Phillips wrote:
Paul Stamler wrote:

Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine
on a TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went
to 24-track 2" analog.

Peace,
Paul


Have you done something similar with the TLM103? It has some of the
same parts and it is much less expensive. The presence peak is broad on
the 103.

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

I've used a TLM103 quite a lot, and in my experience, it's nice, but
nowhere in the same league as the others you mentioned (you seem to have
expensive tastes). Odd as it sounds, I actually almost always prefer
the sound of our Studio Projects T3 on most voices - especially females
- for some reason.

Many reasons: the TLM 103 is a way better sounding mic.

YMMV + the usual grains of salt, etc.

Also:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/peaked.html

Cheers,
-joe.

The TLM 103 and TLM 67 are different in sound. The TLM 67 is more buffed than
a TLM 103. I have samples of the TLM 67 on my online server. Help yourself.

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

[Joe Mama]

Ty Ford wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:29:50 -0500, Joe Mama wrote
(in article ):

John Phillips wrote:
Paul Stamler wrote:
Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine
on a TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went
to 24-track 2" analog.

Peace,
Paul

Have you done something similar with the TLM103? It has some of the
same parts and it is much less expensive. The presence peak is broad on
the 103.

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
I've used a TLM103 quite a lot, and in my experience, it's nice, but
nowhere in the same league as the others you mentioned (you seem to have
expensive tastes). Odd as it sounds, I actually almost always prefer
the sound of our Studio Projects T3 on most voices - especially females
- for some reason.

Many reasons: the TLM 103 is a way better sounding mic.

Well. Setting aside for a moment the absurdity of an absolute statement
like "...is a way better sounding mic." (implied: on any source), not to
mention the fact that that's still only ONE reason, what I actually
wrote was, even though the 103 maybe /should/ be better, I almost always
prefer the Studio Projects T3. The TLM I find usually too "nasal" or
"honky", and not in a nice way like a 47 has that amazing nasal midrange
that never sounds...well, nasal. My other "go-to" mic when the TLM
isn't doing it for me is our KM86. An odd choice for vocals, sure, but
for some voices, it just works.

If, on the other hand, you're saying (without knowing a thing about me,
I might add) that the reason I prefer the SP to the TLM is *because* I
prefer mics that are somehow "worse", then I'd kindly invite you to go
**** yourself.

Anyway, still with the YMMV and whatnot...

Cheers,
-joe.

[John Phillips]

Joe Mama wrote:


I've used a TLM103 quite a lot, and in my experience, it's nice, but
nowhere in the same league as the others you mentioned (you seem to have
expensive tastes). Odd as it sounds, I actually almost always prefer
the sound of our Studio Projects T3 on most voices - especially females
- for some reason.

YMMV + the usual grains of salt, etc.

Also:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/peaked.html

Cheers,
-joe.

I like the expensive ones but the TLM67 is about the most that I will
ever pay for a mic and not more than one. If you are on their mailing
list, Musicians Friend has had at least two days where they were
offering 20% discounts on sales over $1k, there are some exceptions but
I did not find Neumann as an exception. If they run the sale again, I
can get the mic for less than $2K.

Thanks,

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[John Phillips]

Ty Ford wrote:

-joe.

The TLM 103 and TLM 67 are different in sound. The TLM 67 is more buffed than
a TLM 103. I have samples of the TLM 67 on my online server. Help yourself.

Regards,

Ty Ford




What does buffed mean? Is that better? I appreciate your review, it is
probably going to cost me a lot of money. I have also read others that
are also complementary to the 67.

Thanks,

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 21:12:41 -0500, Joe Mama wrote
(in article ):

Ty Ford wrote:
On Wed, 24 Dec 2008 20:29:50 -0500, Joe Mama wrote
(in article ):

John Phillips wrote:
Paul Stamler wrote:
Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine
on a TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went
to 24-track 2" analog.

Peace,
Paul

Have you done something similar with the TLM103? It has some of the
same parts and it is much less expensive. The presence peak is broad on
the 103.

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
I've used a TLM103 quite a lot, and in my experience, it's nice, but
nowhere in the same league as the others you mentioned (you seem to have
expensive tastes). Odd as it sounds, I actually almost always prefer
the sound of our Studio Projects T3 on most voices - especially females
- for some reason.

Many reasons: the TLM 103 is a way better sounding mic.

Well. Setting aside for a moment the absurdity of an absolute statement
like "...is a way better sounding mic." (implied: on any source), not to
mention the fact that that's still only ONE reason, what I actually
wrote was, even though the 103 maybe /should/ be better, I almost always
prefer the Studio Projects T3. The TLM I find usually too "nasal" or
"honky", and not in a nice way like a 47 has that amazing nasal midrange
that never sounds...well, nasal.

Well it is a way better sounding mic than a T3. The TLM 103 is never nasal
here unless the source is. What preamp? What space?


My other "go-to" mic when the TLM
isn't doing it for me is our KM86. An odd choice for vocals, sure, but
for some voices, it just works.

OK

If, on the other hand, you're saying (without knowing a thing about me,
I might add) that the reason I prefer the SP to the TLM is *because* I
prefer mics that are somehow "worse", then I'd kindly invite you to go
**** yourself.

Anyway, still with the YMMV and whatnot...

Cheers,
-joe.

I wasn't the OP, but thanks for that nice jesture on Xmas day.

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, 24 Dec 2008 21:57:02 -0500, John Phillips wrote
(in article ):

Ty Ford wrote:

-joe.

The TLM 103 and TLM 67 are different in sound. The TLM 67 is more buffed
than
a TLM 103. I have samples of the TLM 67 on my online server. Help yourself.

Regards,

Ty Ford




What does buffed mean? Is that better? I appreciate your review, it is
probably going to cost me a lot of money. I have also read others that
are also complementary to the 67.

Thanks,

John Phillips
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

I was the guy who mentioned the mic solves a lot of the problems people have
had with condenser mics and digital recordings.

Buffed, as in smoothed. As in not irritating.

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

[Joe Mama]

Ty Ford wrote:

Well it is a way better sounding mic than a T3. The TLM 103 is never nasal
here unless the source is. What preamp? What space?


Neve/API/etc, and a good space. I'd elaborate further, but I'm sure
you'd miss the point completely again (see below).


If, on the other hand, you're saying (without knowing a thing about me,
I might add) that the reason I prefer the SP to the TLM is *because* I
prefer mics that are somehow "worse", then I'd kindly invite you to go
**** yourself.

Anyway, still with the YMMV and whatnot...

Cheers,
-joe.

I wasn't the OP, but thanks for that nice jesture on Xmas day.


Who said you were the OP? Anyway, I'm not going to bother trying to
explain it - I don't think you could've missed the point any further if
you'd actually understood what I was saying and /tried/ to.

Merry Christmas.

[Paul Stamler[_2_]]

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
Paul Stamler wrote:

Recent experience recording female vocals, baritone sax and tambourine on
a TLM 67 was very enjoyable. Not just on digital, either; we went to
24-track 2" analog.


Have you done something similar with the TLM103? It has some of the same
parts and it is much less expensive. The presence peak is broad on the
103.

Nope; only thing I've ever used a 103 on was my own voice. On which it did
okay, but I had nothing with which to compare it. The university has a bunch
of Neumanns but, surprisingly, not a 103.

Peace,
Paul