what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and the ai
version

do the new ones still have transformers in them or are they transformerless
like the tlm series

of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better than
others

anon wrote:
what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and the ai
version

At some point the ability to run off of battery power was removed, but they
all are pretty close to one another.

do the new ones still have transformers in them or are they transformerless
like the tlm series

No, the electronics haven't really changed much over the years. They still
have the same transformer.

of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better than
others

I can't answer that since I never really liked any of them all that much.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

anon wrote:
what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and the ai
version

At some point the ability to run off of battery power was removed, but they
all are pretty close to one another.

do the new ones still have transformers in them or are they transformerless
like the tlm series

No, the electronics haven't really changed much over the years. They still
have the same transformer.

of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better than
others

I can't answer that since I never really liked any of them all that much.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

anon wrote:

what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and the ai
version

Google's Advanced Group Search is your friend:

http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?hl=en

--
ha

anon wrote:

what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and the ai
version

Google's Advanced Group Search is your friend:

http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?hl=en

--
ha

"anon" wrote:

what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and
the ai version

The difference is primarily in the electronics. The original U 87 used
the (filtered) 48 Volt phantom supply voltage to polarize its dual-
membrane capsule; the U 87 Ai uses a DC/DC converter to generate
+/- 60 Volt polarization for the three different patterns.

The audio circuitry was also revised. The sensitivity of the Ai version
is 10 dB higher than that of the original version, and the equivalent
noise is 6 dB lower.

But while the maximum output voltage was also increased by 5 dB, that
isn't as much of an increase as the increase in sensitivity--so the
overload point of the U 87Ai is 5 dB lower than that of the original
U 87 (117 dB SPL vs. 122 dB SPL). Personally I find it hard to see
why they boosted the gain quite so much--especially if they could have
gotten the lower equivalent noise level without reducing the maximum
SPL, as I suspect they could have done.

There is a difference in the capsule's wiring which doesn't affect its
sound--the U 87Ai uses the same capsule arrangement as the U 67 and
M 269, etc., in which the two backplates are connected electrically,
whereas in the original U 87 they were insulated from one another.
Thus the capsules for the older U 87 have four wires while all the
other capsules of this series have three.


do the new ones still have transformers in them

Yes.


or are they transformerless like the tlm series

No. Also, the circuitry still draws rather low current from a 48-Volt
phantom supply (about 0.8 mA), while the 48 Volt phantom-powered TLMs
draw current in the 2 - 3 mA range.


of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better
than others

There was only one older model of U 87 (the original), though it was sold
with two different surface finishes, two different output connectors, and
with the output transformer strapped in three different ways for a total
of 12 different order numbers from Neumann.

Prior to the U 87, Neumann used the same capsule type in the U 67, M 269,
M 367 and U 77. All those models had equalization built in to shape the
frequency response of the microphone, and the response curves chosen for
that equalization were different from each other. The U 87 and U 87Ai
also have built-in equalization of that kind, but it, too, differs in its
specifics from that of all its predecessors.

So even apart from the differences in amplifying devices (FET vs. two
different kinds of vacuum tube), the amplifiers do not sound the same
and neither do the resulting complete microphones. Which characteristics
you would prefer is an individual matter, I think. In general the older
microphones curtailed the high frequency response of the capsule more--
except for the stereo microphones of this series (SM 69, SM 69fet, USM 69)
and the M 269, all of which were intended for more distant placement.

"anon" wrote:

what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and
the ai version

The difference is primarily in the electronics. The original U 87 used
the (filtered) 48 Volt phantom supply voltage to polarize its dual-
membrane capsule; the U 87 Ai uses a DC/DC converter to generate
+/- 60 Volt polarization for the three different patterns.

The audio circuitry was also revised. The sensitivity of the Ai version
is 10 dB higher than that of the original version, and the equivalent
noise is 6 dB lower.

But while the maximum output voltage was also increased by 5 dB, that
isn't as much of an increase as the increase in sensitivity--so the
overload point of the U 87Ai is 5 dB lower than that of the original
U 87 (117 dB SPL vs. 122 dB SPL). Personally I find it hard to see
why they boosted the gain quite so much--especially if they could have
gotten the lower equivalent noise level without reducing the maximum
SPL, as I suspect they could have done.

There is a difference in the capsule's wiring which doesn't affect its
sound--the U 87Ai uses the same capsule arrangement as the U 67 and
M 269, etc., in which the two backplates are connected electrically,
whereas in the original U 87 they were insulated from one another.
Thus the capsules for the older U 87 have four wires while all the
other capsules of this series have three.


do the new ones still have transformers in them

Yes.


or are they transformerless like the tlm series

No. Also, the circuitry still draws rather low current from a 48-Volt
phantom supply (about 0.8 mA), while the 48 Volt phantom-powered TLMs
draw current in the 2 - 3 mA range.


of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better
than others

There was only one older model of U 87 (the original), though it was sold
with two different surface finishes, two different output connectors, and
with the output transformer strapped in three different ways for a total
of 12 different order numbers from Neumann.

Prior to the U 87, Neumann used the same capsule type in the U 67, M 269,
M 367 and U 77. All those models had equalization built in to shape the
frequency response of the microphone, and the response curves chosen for
that equalization were different from each other. The U 87 and U 87Ai
also have built-in equalization of that kind, but it, too, differs in its
specifics from that of all its predecessors.

So even apart from the differences in amplifying devices (FET vs. two
different kinds of vacuum tube), the amplifiers do not sound the same
and neither do the resulting complete microphones. Which characteristics
you would prefer is an individual matter, I think. In general the older
microphones curtailed the high frequency response of the capsule more--
except for the stereo microphones of this series (SM 69, SM 69fet, USM 69)
and the M 269, all of which were intended for more distant placement.

Now I remember why I first began visiting rap.

Great informative post David!



David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island


www.CelebrationSound.com



DaveIn article ,
David Satz wrote:

"anon" wrote:

what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and
the ai version

The difference is primarily in the electronics. The original U 87 used
the (filtered) 48 Volt phantom supply voltage to polarize its dual-
membrane capsule; the U 87 Ai uses a DC/DC converter to generate
+/- 60 Volt polarization for the three different patterns.

The audio circuitry was also revised. The sensitivity of the Ai version
is 10 dB higher than that of the original version, and the equivalent
noise is 6 dB lower.

But while the maximum output voltage was also increased by 5 dB, that
isn't as much of an increase as the increase in sensitivity--so the
overload point of the U 87Ai is 5 dB lower than that of the original
U 87 (117 dB SPL vs. 122 dB SPL). Personally I find it hard to see
why they boosted the gain quite so much--especially if they could have
gotten the lower equivalent noise level without reducing the maximum
SPL, as I suspect they could have done.

There is a difference in the capsule's wiring which doesn't affect its
sound--the U 87Ai uses the same capsule arrangement as the U 67 and
M 269, etc., in which the two backplates are connected electrically,
whereas in the original U 87 they were insulated from one another.
Thus the capsules for the older U 87 have four wires while all the
other capsules of this series have three.


do the new ones still have transformers in them

Yes.


or are they transformerless like the tlm series

No. Also, the circuitry still draws rather low current from a 48-Volt
phantom supply (about 0.8 mA), while the 48 Volt phantom-powered TLMs
draw current in the 2 - 3 mA range.


of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better
than others

There was only one older model of U 87 (the original), though it was sold
with two different surface finishes, two different output connectors, and
with the output transformer strapped in three different ways for a total
of 12 different order numbers from Neumann.

Prior to the U 87, Neumann used the same capsule type in the U 67, M 269,
M 367 and U 77. All those models had equalization built in to shape the
frequency response of the microphone, and the response curves chosen for
that equalization were different from each other. The U 87 and U 87Ai
also have built-in equalization of that kind, but it, too, differs in its
specifics from that of all its predecessors.

So even apart from the differences in amplifying devices (FET vs. two
different kinds of vacuum tube), the amplifiers do not sound the same
and neither do the resulting complete microphones. Which characteristics
you would prefer is an individual matter, I think. In general the older
microphones curtailed the high frequency response of the capsule more--
except for the stereo microphones of this series (SM 69, SM 69fet, USM 69)
and the M 269, all of which were intended for more distant placement.

Now I remember why I first began visiting rap.

Great informative post David!



David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island


www.CelebrationSound.com



DaveIn article ,
David Satz wrote:

"anon" wrote:

what is the difference between the older u87's and the newer ones and
the ai version

The difference is primarily in the electronics. The original U 87 used
the (filtered) 48 Volt phantom supply voltage to polarize its dual-
membrane capsule; the U 87 Ai uses a DC/DC converter to generate
+/- 60 Volt polarization for the three different patterns.

The audio circuitry was also revised. The sensitivity of the Ai version
is 10 dB higher than that of the original version, and the equivalent
noise is 6 dB lower.

But while the maximum output voltage was also increased by 5 dB, that
isn't as much of an increase as the increase in sensitivity--so the
overload point of the U 87Ai is 5 dB lower than that of the original
U 87 (117 dB SPL vs. 122 dB SPL). Personally I find it hard to see
why they boosted the gain quite so much--especially if they could have
gotten the lower equivalent noise level without reducing the maximum
SPL, as I suspect they could have done.

There is a difference in the capsule's wiring which doesn't affect its
sound--the U 87Ai uses the same capsule arrangement as the U 67 and
M 269, etc., in which the two backplates are connected electrically,
whereas in the original U 87 they were insulated from one another.
Thus the capsules for the older U 87 have four wires while all the
other capsules of this series have three.


do the new ones still have transformers in them

Yes.


or are they transformerless like the tlm series

No. Also, the circuitry still draws rather low current from a 48-Volt
phantom supply (about 0.8 mA), while the 48 Volt phantom-powered TLMs
draw current in the 2 - 3 mA range.


of the older models are there some that are considered to sound better
than others

There was only one older model of U 87 (the original), though it was sold
with two different surface finishes, two different output connectors, and
with the output transformer strapped in three different ways for a total
of 12 different order numbers from Neumann.

Prior to the U 87, Neumann used the same capsule type in the U 67, M 269,
M 367 and U 77. All those models had equalization built in to shape the
frequency response of the microphone, and the response curves chosen for
that equalization were different from each other. The U 87 and U 87Ai
also have built-in equalization of that kind, but it, too, differs in its
specifics from that of all its predecessors.

So even apart from the differences in amplifying devices (FET vs. two
different kinds of vacuum tube), the amplifiers do not sound the same
and neither do the resulting complete microphones. Which characteristics
you would prefer is an individual matter, I think. In general the older
microphones curtailed the high frequency response of the capsule more--
except for the stereo microphones of this series (SM 69, SM 69fet, USM 69)
and the M 269, all of which were intended for more distant placement.

"David Satz" wrote in message
om...

But while the maximum output voltage was also increased by 5 dB, that
isn't as much of an increase as the increase in sensitivity--so the
overload point of the U 87Ai is 5 dB lower than that of the original
U 87 (117 dB SPL vs. 122 dB SPL). Personally I find it hard to see
why they boosted the gain quite so much--especially if they could have
gotten the lower equivalent noise level without reducing the maximum
SPL, as I suspect they could have done.

Many of us suspect the first generation of87s didn't meet their distortion
specs. Gotham always claimed there were no changes but many of us heard
otherwise and I'd even go so far as to suggest comparisons of 67s and early
87s were responsible for the mystique of tube microphones.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com

"David Satz" wrote in message
om...

But while the maximum output voltage was also increased by 5 dB, that
isn't as much of an increase as the increase in sensitivity--so the
overload point of the U 87Ai is 5 dB lower than that of the original
U 87 (117 dB SPL vs. 122 dB SPL). Personally I find it hard to see
why they boosted the gain quite so much--especially if they could have
gotten the lower equivalent noise level without reducing the maximum
SPL, as I suspect they could have done.

Many of us suspect the first generation of87s didn't meet their distortion
specs. Gotham always claimed there were no changes but many of us heard
otherwise and I'd even go so far as to suggest comparisons of 67s and early
87s were responsible for the mystique of tube microphones.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com

Bob Olhsson wrote:

[ ... ] I'd even go so far as to suggest comparisons of 67s and early
87s were responsible for the mystique of tube microphones.

I've noticed your previous postings about the sound of the very first
U 87s; it's very interesting. One of the people who really studies the
different versions of the circuit, and collects all the old schematics
like a fiend (because he has to service and modify these microphones)
is Klaus Heyne--I should probably ask him what he knows about this.

But I can certainly confirm that even today when I talk to engineers of
our generation about tubes vs. solid state, the formative experience
which influenced many of their opinions was hearing their first U 87
after having used U 67s for however many years.

That's a deceptive comparison, as I've said. The circuitry of the U 87
has more high-frequency emphasis (actually, less high-frequency rolloff)
than the circuitry of the U 67 does. Since the capsules are acoustically
identical, the transistorized microphone has 3 - 4 dB more output at
16 kHz, relative to its nominal sensitivity, than its tube counterpart.
There were other basic differences between those circuits, too, such as
the output transformers and the polarization voltages used in each.

If I'm not mistaken the U 67 was about 5 dB more sensitive overall than
the U 87 (perhaps to give the U 87 a 5 dB higher maximum SPL). So there
again the U 67 would tend to sound better overall, unless the gains were
lined up quite precisely for the comparison--which, unfortunately, few
people take the time to do accurately in a studio situation.

It's a little like the situation when U.S. record companies put out their
first reissue CDs in the early 1980s (I did a fair amount of the mastering
for some of those releases)--they wanted the new product to have an edge
(literally!) over the older product, so that people would hear this
"advantage" right away and buy more of the new product. It took _years_
to straighten that mess out, and in the meantime CDs (and digital audio
generally) got an undeserved reputation for harsh, fatiguing sound.

But if someone had both a vinyl LP and its CD reissue, and played them
both and compared the sound, they generally believed that they were
comparing the two _media_ unless they were well versed in engineering.
Similarly, people who knew the U 67 and heard the U 87 believed that
they were hearing "the difference between tube and solid-state."

--best regards