| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
WTB: Telefunken U47 (Original)
Hi. I am looking for an original, unmodified Telefunken U47 with a
vf14 tube and a m7 capsule. Please include the serial number in your email to me, so I can confirm that it has not been reported stolen. Must see pictures of the inside and have original power supply. I can pay with Paypal, or other methods which provide financial protection, do not ask for a cashier's check without proof from a third party(ie Klaus Heyne) that the mic works very well. I will consider mics with a problem if discounted accordingly and disclosed from the beginning. Thank you for you time, |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gear Lust wrote:
Hi. I am looking for an original, unmodified Telefunken U47 with a vf14 tube and a m7 capsule. I hope you're aware that Telefunken acted solely as the distributor for this microphone, and that it is in fact simply a Neumann U 47 with a Telefunken badge on it; there is no other difference between a Neumann and a Telefunken U 47 from any given period of the microphone's production. I hope you're also aware that very nearly all M 7 capsules which were ever originally installed in Neumann CMV 3, U 47, U 48 or M 49 microphones have deteriorated severely by now; the PVC substrate of the membranes dries out and develops cracks, causing drastic changes in the tensioning and thus the resonant properties of the capsule. No U 47 of today can sound like the U 47 originally sounded, and insisting on an M 7 capsule is a sure way to make sure that you do NOT get a sound much like that of the original U 47. A Mylar-based Neumann K 47/49 replacement capsule, in good condition (which an M 7 will almost certainly not be) won't sound identical to the original M 7--but it is likely to be closer than any deteriorated and cracked M 7 that you're likely to find for sale used. As I said, just making sure that you aren't deluding yourself about these matters ... --best regards |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
mark wrote:
I have 6 restored U- 47's and my favorite is one rebuilt by BLUE w/ a KK-47 capsule and an EF-14 tube (same sound easier to replace) Mic has a Tele badge but as the writer said that's only a cosmetic diff. I actually have a U-67 w/ a Tele badge. Not sure how that could have happened, but it is cute. Telefunken was still distributing Neumann in much of the world when the U 67 was introduced--though not in the United States any more--so there definitely were (and are) U 67s with Telefunken labels on them. I have Telefunken sales literature for the U 67 from this time; the same series of brochures also includes Telefunken-labeled Beyer and Sennheiser microphones. But: My understanding, and the fairly clear wording in BLUE's literature and on their Web site, is that their restorations always use their own capsules, not Neumann's. How did your restored U 47 come to have a Neumann Mylar capsule in it? Did they install that, or did you? (It's not KK 47, by the way--that would be the entire screened capsule head of a U 47. "KK" = "Kapselkopf" in German while "K" = "Kapsel". The two are equivalent only in the small-diaphragm models in which the entire capsule head is the only interchangeable unit, e.g. the KK 84.) I have one dead mint original 47 w an M-7 "glue"capsule. Haven't used it in years, but it sounded fantastic last time I heard it (maybe 6 years ago). The glue capsules can survive if the mic was well cared for. Mine came from Gotham audio and had been in storage since the early 60's. Still has the factory decals and instruction labels btw. My point was that for the microphone to approach what a U 47 was meant to sound like originally, there's a higher probability at this point that a new K 47/49 capsule would have closer behavior to the design ideal than an M 7 in the condition which one typically finds these days. It's a statistical "bell curve" type of situation--and the main part of the bell has long since tolled for most Neumann (Berlin) M 7 capsules, all of which are 40+ years old by now. 40 years is a plausible life span for a Mylar diaphragm, but very unlikely for one that is PVC-based. Even a diaphragm that doesn't have spider cracks will no longer have the tension and elasticity which it had originally, and thus will not have the same resonant properties. Certainly there's a thrill value to owning an old, original microphone--but on average, one would probably get a closer approximation of the original U 47 sound from a new Mylar capsule. Besides, it isn't quite realistic to speak of one original U 47 "sound" since all the responsible manufacturers change the materials and methods used in the production of their microphone as times change--so the "sound" of that series of microphone (generically) will change over time anyway. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gord wrote:
How about this one? Are you serious? Copyright, patent and trade mark law are complicated, and they differ in different countries. Several years ago, a provision (some would call it a loophole) in the U.S. trademark law allowed someone who, as far as I know, had no previous relationship to Telefunken or AEG, to acquire the Telefunken name and trade marks in North America. Those trade marks weren't being used here and hadn't been renewed by their owner (which, as far as I can determine from a few hours' research on the Web, might actually be Daimler/Chrysler). Then a Mr. Fishman who, as far as I know, also had no previous relationship to Telefunken or AEG, licensed the use of those trademarks in North America (only) from the first person, and began to make and sell copies of various discontinued Neumann and AKG microphone models with "Telefunken" markings. Wow, that sure is gonna make his copies sound just like the originals! I mean, as long as they are used in North America (only). Because, like, paying someone a fee to license those trademarks--that carries some very potent magic, man. Here, now, have another toke ... OK, for real: Telefunken acted as North American distributor for the Neumann U 47, but apart from the Telefunken VF 14 tube in the amplifier circuit, they played no known role in the design or production of the microphone. So even if the original Telefunken company still existed, there'd be nothing to license from them except the name and logo. And even those things were never really original in the case of the U 47; they were only added on to the Neumann product for its distribution via Telefunken. A similar arrangement existed with Schoeps, Sennheiser and Beyer--stock microphones of all those companies were sold with Telefunken logos on them, but [AEG] Telefunken had no clue about how to make them. And other companies played roles similar to Telefunken's, such as Siemens and Philips; that doesn't mean that Siemens or Philips knew, let alone determined, what went into the products. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Are you serious?
Their Elam 251 has received nothing but praise from absolutely every review I've ever read of it. Don't you think that with the reissue 251 they might deserve some credit for knowing how to accurately reproduce a vintage classic? If they can build a replica 251 that, to the best of my knowledge, everyone thinks it sounds *exactly* like an original, could they not replicate a great sounding example of a U47? What's the difference? At the risk of sounding stupid, I am serious. I am planning on ordering a 251 this year, and was contemplating their U47, but it seems like no one here's tried it and I'd be afraid to be the first, unless they have a cool return policy. I've noticed that http://www.mistyhillaudio.com has a bunch of cool old mics. Are they reputable? Cheers, Gord |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gord wrote:
Are you serious? Their Elam 251 has received nothing but praise from absolutely every review I've ever read of it. Don't you think that with the reissue 251 they might deserve some credit for knowing how to accurately reproduce a vintage classic? If they can build a replica 251 that, to the best of my knowledge, everyone thinks it sounds *exactly* like an original, could they not replicate a great sounding example of a U47? What's the difference? They got some things right about the 251 copy, and they got some things wrong. I can't really talk about either one right now. But, I'll say that making a 251 is easier than making a U47, especially when you have the original drawings for the 251 and some of the original tooling. The 251 tube is a current production item and not a big deal. The U47 tube is unobtainable. We also have the marketing issue that everybody out there has a different sense of what the U47 should sound like, since they have all been listening to mikes with a huge variation in sound due to poor aging. No matter what you do, you can't please all of them. At the risk of sounding stupid, I am serious. I am planning on ordering a 251 this year, and was contemplating their U47, but it seems like no one here's tried it and I'd be afraid to be the first, unless they have a cool return policy. They do have a cool return policy, as do most of the high end mike manufacturers. You have to, in order to sell into that market. I've noticed that http://www.mistyhillaudio.com has a bunch of cool old mics. Are they reputable? Dunno them, but there are a lot of these things out there. Unfortunately there is an even larger market for them now. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
I wrote:
[lots of stuff that was on the hotter side of cool] and I'd just like to add, since no one else seems to have done so: The "U 47M" offered by "Telefunken USA" is said to be a good microphone. My rant was aimed solely at their branding strategy, which repulses me since I perceive it as a particularly gross form of hype. In fact it is hype on top of hype, since the entire notion of "vintage" microphones is, to my way of thinking, more or less a trap for fools. Unfortunately my marketing instincts tell me that it is also a relatively effective form of hype, and that is the biggest reason for me to hate it. I sympathize with those who struggle hard to put out a decent product, who do not necessarily put a big promotional gloss on that product, and who now have to compete with this image-based, borrowed-name-brand approach. And I hate the fact that a person who has enough money and ambition can buy his way into what I consider an unfair position of advantage. But it is only a position of advantage to the extent that people _buy_ the hype, and that's the very sorriest piece of the whole sorry picture. The parallels (and the practical overlap) between contemporary American product marketing and contemporary American politics upset me greatly. We are living in a time in which so many people have bought so much hype for so long that enormous damage is being caused on a daily basis. I don't wish to spell it out more plainly than that here, and should not need to do so. I probably shouldn't let those feelings determine my reactions to a microphone which I've never used or heard--but in this case, I did. I think I would be too embarrassed to own such a microphone even if one were given to me for free. I would be more inclined (at least in my imagination) to auction it off and donate the proceeds to a cause such as Amnesty International. If anyone, including Mr. Fishman, would like to test my resolve on that score, I'm available to play my part in the experiment. --best regards |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
Bob Chandler wrote: (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news: But, I'll say that making a 251 is easier than making a U47, especially when you have the original drawings for the 251 and some of the original tooling. The 251 tube is a current production item and not a big deal. The U47 tube is unobtainable. They mention on their website that they have a limited amount of NOS VF 14 tubes. The model they sell with the VF 14 is about $1500 more than without a tube for BYO VF 14 tube owners I presume.. I think they're offering it with a nuvistor as well. Yup. This makes sense. There's no mention of the capsule except that it's made in Germany. I've been under the impression that the PVC capsules don't sound the same as mylar capsules even if they're brand new. They haven't addressed the diaphragm material on their site. Absolutely. Doesn't Geffel make the M7 capsule with either PVC OR mylar available? Yes, and the PVC one is probably as close as you can get to the original. The Telefunken reissue capsule is most definitely not made by Geffel, though. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks, guys. I really appreciate your help.
So.....What current new microphone on the market today best approximates the sound of a good old U47? Blue Bottle? E47? Take care, Gord |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gord wrote:
So.....What current new microphone on the market today best approximates the sound of a good old U47? Blue Bottle? E47? This is a hard question because I'm not sure what a good old U47 really sounds like. I've heard dozens of U47s, and they all sound different. I suspect most of this has to do with aging. The process by which the PVC diaphragms get brittle and fail produces a particular sound that a lot of people seem to like and some people don't like. The thing is that the folks who have made modern U47 copies have basically all started with their notion of what the U47 should sound like, from the mikes they have preferred. A lot of folks have told me how dull-sounding the Lawson is, for example, compared to their idea of what a U47 should sound like, but I think it's close to what I remember the U47s at Master Sound as being like years ago. It doesn't have the sharpness from the brittle diaphragm. Is it accurate? I dunno. Is my memory accurate? I dunno that either. But it matters less that it's accurate than that you like it. We don't have any U47s today that sound like they did originally so it's hard to know what is accurate. Don't get caught up in all the hype, just buy a microphone that you like the sound of. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
To Mr. Satz,
Talk is cheap & so are most microphones made today. I don't post to the forums often but some of you thoughts & views have got my attention. If you would like to demo our current microphone line up you can call on us any time. We'll be happy to put any of our mic's up against Original's or even your personal microphones. We're sure you will be able to hear a difference in our capsules, see, feel the quality craftsmanship of our products. As to some of your comments and thoughts & views posted in this forum. You seem to have many opinions concerning our business practices, marketing & US Trademark. We would like to meet you face to face & go over the fact's. That way you will be clear as to how this all came to light. You can call my private LA cell # if you wish (323)823-0104 I'm currently located in Hollywood California. We have sold aprox. 75) Ela M251's, 8) Ela M270's 15) U47 M & 12) Ela M12's this year. "So many of our microphones have made there way to the recording industries top Producer's and Artist's." -- Kind Regards, Toni Fishman www.telefunkenusa.com Telefunken North America, LLC. 300 Pleasant Valley Road Suite (E) South Windsor Ct. 06074 USA Office (860)882-5919 Fax (860)882-5980 Cell (860)306-8080 (David Satz) wrote in message . com... I wrote: [lots of stuff that was on the hotter side of cool] and I'd just like to add, since no one else seems to have done so: The "U 47M" offered by "Telefunken USA" is said to be a good microphone. My rant was aimed solely at their branding strategy, which repulses me since I perceive it as a particularly gross form of hype. In fact it is hype on top of hype, since the entire notion of "vintage" microphones is, to my way of thinking, more or less a trap for fools. Unfortunately my marketing instincts tell me that it is also a relatively effective form of hype, and that is the biggest reason for me to hate it. I sympathize with those who struggle hard to put out a decent product, who do not necessarily put a big promotional gloss on that product, and who now have to compete with this image-based, borrowed-name-brand approach. And I hate the fact that a person who has enough money and ambition can buy his way into what I consider an unfair position of advantage. But it is only a position of advantage to the extent that people _buy_ the hype, and that's the very sorriest piece of the whole sorry picture. The parallels (and the practical overlap) between contemporary American product marketing and contemporary American politics upset me greatly. We are living in a time in which so many people have bought so much hype for so long that enormous damage is being caused on a daily basis. I don't wish to spell it out more plainly than that here, and should not need to do so. I probably shouldn't let those feelings determine my reactions to a microphone which I've never used or heard--but in this case, I did. I think I would be too embarrassed to own such a microphone even if one were given to me for free. I would be more inclined (at least in my imagination) to auction it off and donate the proceeds to a cause such as Amnesty International. If anyone, including Mr. Fishman, would like to test my resolve on that score, I'm available to play my part in the experiment. --best regards |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
To Mr. Satz,
Talk is cheap & so are most microphones made today. I don't post to the forums often but some of you thoughts & views have got my attention. If you would like to demo our current microphone line up you can call on us any time. We'll be happy to put any of our mic's up against Original's or even your personal microphones. We're sure you will be able to hear a difference in our capsules, see, feel the quality craftsmanship of our products. As to some of your comments and thoughts & views posted in this forum. You seem to have many opinions concerning our business practices, marketing & US Trademark. We would like to meet you face to face & go over the fact's. That way you will be clear as to how this all came to light. You can call my private LA cell # if you wish (323)823-0104 I'm currently located in Hollywood California. We have sold aprox. 75) Ela M251's, 8) Ela M270's 15) U47 M & 12) Ela M12's this year. "So many of our microphones have made there way to the recording industries top Producer's and Artist's." -- Kind Regards, Toni Fishman www.telefunkenusa.com Telefunken North America, LLC. 300 Pleasant Valley Road Suite (E) South Windsor Ct. 06074 USA Office (860)882-5919 Fax (860)882-5980 Cell (860)306-8080 (David Satz) wrote in message . com... I wrote: [lots of stuff that was on the hotter side of cool] and I'd just like to add, since no one else seems to have done so: The "U 47M" offered by "Telefunken USA" is said to be a good microphone. My rant was aimed solely at their branding strategy, which repulses me since I perceive it as a particularly gross form of hype. In fact it is hype on top of hype, since the entire notion of "vintage" microphones is, to my way of thinking, more or less a trap for fools. Unfortunately my marketing instincts tell me that it is also a relatively effective form of hype, and that is the biggest reason for me to hate it. I sympathize with those who struggle hard to put out a decent product, who do not necessarily put a big promotional gloss on that product, and who now have to compete with this image-based, borrowed-name-brand approach. And I hate the fact that a person who has enough money and ambition can buy his way into what I consider an unfair position of advantage. But it is only a position of advantage to the extent that people _buy_ the hype, and that's the very sorriest piece of the whole sorry picture. The parallels (and the practical overlap) between contemporary American product marketing and contemporary American politics upset me greatly. We are living in a time in which so many people have bought so much hype for so long that enormous damage is being caused on a daily basis. I don't wish to spell it out more plainly than that here, and should not need to do so. I probably shouldn't let those feelings determine my reactions to a microphone which I've never used or heard--but in this case, I did. I think I would be too embarrassed to own such a microphone even if one were given to me for free. I would be more inclined (at least in my imagination) to auction it off and donate the proceeds to a cause such as Amnesty International. If anyone, including Mr. Fishman, would like to test my resolve on that score, I'm available to play my part in the experiment. --best regards |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
To Mr. Satz,
Talk is cheap & so are most microphones made today. I don't post to the forums often but some of you thoughts & views have got my attention. If you would like to demo our current microphone line up you can call on us any time. We'll be happy to put any of our mic's up against Original's or even your personal microphones. We're sure you will be able to hear a difference in our capsules, see, feel the quality craftsmanship of our products. As to some of your comments and thoughts & views posted in this forum. You seem to have many opinions concerning our business practices, marketing & US Trademark. We would like to meet you face to face & go over the fact's. That way you will be clear as to how this all came to light. You can call my private LA cell # if you wish (323)823-0104 I'm currently located in Hollywood California. We have sold aprox. 75) Ela M251's, 8) Ela M270's 15) U47 M & 12) Ela M12's this year. "So many of our microphones have made there way to the recording industries top Producer's and Artist's." -- Kind Regards, Toni Fishman www.telefunkenusa.com Telefunken North America, LLC. 300 Pleasant Valley Road Suite (E) South Windsor Ct. 06074 USA Office (860)882-5919 Fax (860)882-5980 Cell (860)306-8080 (David Satz) wrote in message . com... I wrote: [lots of stuff that was on the hotter side of cool] and I'd just like to add, since no one else seems to have done so: The "U 47M" offered by "Telefunken USA" is said to be a good microphone. My rant was aimed solely at their branding strategy, which repulses me since I perceive it as a particularly gross form of hype. In fact it is hype on top of hype, since the entire notion of "vintage" microphones is, to my way of thinking, more or less a trap for fools. Unfortunately my marketing instincts tell me that it is also a relatively effective form of hype, and that is the biggest reason for me to hate it. I sympathize with those who struggle hard to put out a decent product, who do not necessarily put a big promotional gloss on that product, and who now have to compete with this image-based, borrowed-name-brand approach. And I hate the fact that a person who has enough money and ambition can buy his way into what I consider an unfair position of advantage. But it is only a position of advantage to the extent that people _buy_ the hype, and that's the very sorriest piece of the whole sorry picture. The parallels (and the practical overlap) between contemporary American product marketing and contemporary American politics upset me greatly. We are living in a time in which so many people have bought so much hype for so long that enormous damage is being caused on a daily basis. I don't wish to spell it out more plainly than that here, and should not need to do so. I probably shouldn't let those feelings determine my reactions to a microphone which I've never used or heard--but in this case, I did. I think I would be too embarrassed to own such a microphone even if one were given to me for free. I would be more inclined (at least in my imagination) to auction it off and donate the proceeds to a cause such as Amnesty International. If anyone, including Mr. Fishman, would like to test my resolve on that score, I'm available to play my part in the experiment. --best regards |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...
Gord wrote: Are you serious? Their Elam 251 has received nothing but praise from absolutely every review I've ever read of it. Don't you think that with the reissue 251 they might deserve some credit for knowing how to accurately reproduce a vintage classic? If they can build a replica 251 that, to the best of my knowledge, everyone thinks it sounds *exactly* like an original, could they not replicate a great sounding example of a U47? What's the difference? They got some things right about the 251 copy, and they got some things wrong. I can't really talk about either one right now. Hello, I'd like to know what exactly you "think" we got wrong? Absolutely every part is the same as the original in every way. We even tested & sampled all of original materials in a forensic laboratory. We have the documentation to prove it. The only two changes in the entire system are in the Power Supply. 1) We deleated the world band voltage treminal. 2) We updated the termination between the power supply / mic cable? If there is any questions please feel free to call me. -- Kind Regards, Toni Fishman Telefunken North America, LLC. 300 Pleasant Valley Road Suite (E) South Windsor Ct. 06074 USA Office (860)882-5919 Fax (860)882-5980 Cell (860)306-8080 But, I'll say that making a 251 is easier than making a U47, especially when you have the original drawings for the 251 and some of the original tooling. The 251 tube is a current production item and not a big deal. The U47 tube is unobtainable. We also have the marketing issue that everybody out there has a different sense of what the U47 should sound like, since they have all been listening to mikes with a huge variation in sound due to poor aging. No matter what you do, you can't please all of them. At the risk of sounding stupid, I am serious. I am planning on ordering a 251 this year, and was contemplating their U47, but it seems like no one here's tried it and I'd be afraid to be the first, unless they have a cool return policy. They do have a cool return policy, as do most of the high end mike manufacturers. You have to, in order to sell into that market. I've noticed that http://www.mistyhillaudio.com has a bunch of cool old mics. Are they reputable? Dunno them, but there are a lot of these things out there. Unfortunately there is an even larger market for them now. --scott |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...
Gord wrote: Are you serious? Their Elam 251 has received nothing but praise from absolutely every review I've ever read of it. Don't you think that with the reissue 251 they might deserve some credit for knowing how to accurately reproduce a vintage classic? If they can build a replica 251 that, to the best of my knowledge, everyone thinks it sounds *exactly* like an original, could they not replicate a great sounding example of a U47? What's the difference? They got some things right about the 251 copy, and they got some things wrong. I can't really talk about either one right now. Hello, I'd like to know what exactly you "think" we got wrong? Absolutely every part is the same as the original in every way. We even tested & sampled all of original materials in a forensic laboratory. We have the documentation to prove it. The only two changes in the entire system are in the Power Supply. 1) We deleated the world band voltage treminal. 2) We updated the termination between the power supply / mic cable? If there is any questions please feel free to call me. -- Kind Regards, Toni Fishman Telefunken North America, LLC. 300 Pleasant Valley Road Suite (E) South Windsor Ct. 06074 USA Office (860)882-5919 Fax (860)882-5980 Cell (860)306-8080 But, I'll say that making a 251 is easier than making a U47, especially when you have the original drawings for the 251 and some of the original tooling. The 251 tube is a current production item and not a big deal. The U47 tube is unobtainable. We also have the marketing issue that everybody out there has a different sense of what the U47 should sound like, since they have all been listening to mikes with a huge variation in sound due to poor aging. No matter what you do, you can't please all of them. At the risk of sounding stupid, I am serious. I am planning on ordering a 251 this year, and was contemplating their U47, but it seems like no one here's tried it and I'd be afraid to be the first, unless they have a cool return policy. They do have a cool return policy, as do most of the high end mike manufacturers. You have to, in order to sell into that market. I've noticed that http://www.mistyhillaudio.com has a bunch of cool old mics. Are they reputable? Dunno them, but there are a lot of these things out there. Unfortunately there is an even larger market for them now. --scott |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...
Gord wrote: Are you serious? Their Elam 251 has received nothing but praise from absolutely every review I've ever read of it. Don't you think that with the reissue 251 they might deserve some credit for knowing how to accurately reproduce a vintage classic? If they can build a replica 251 that, to the best of my knowledge, everyone thinks it sounds *exactly* like an original, could they not replicate a great sounding example of a U47? What's the difference? They got some things right about the 251 copy, and they got some things wrong. I can't really talk about either one right now. Hello, I'd like to know what exactly you "think" we got wrong? Absolutely every part is the same as the original in every way. We even tested & sampled all of original materials in a forensic laboratory. We have the documentation to prove it. The only two changes in the entire system are in the Power Supply. 1) We deleated the world band voltage treminal. 2) We updated the termination between the power supply / mic cable? If there is any questions please feel free to call me. -- Kind Regards, Toni Fishman Telefunken North America, LLC. 300 Pleasant Valley Road Suite (E) South Windsor Ct. 06074 USA Office (860)882-5919 Fax (860)882-5980 Cell (860)306-8080 But, I'll say that making a 251 is easier than making a U47, especially when you have the original drawings for the 251 and some of the original tooling. The 251 tube is a current production item and not a big deal. The U47 tube is unobtainable. We also have the marketing issue that everybody out there has a different sense of what the U47 should sound like, since they have all been listening to mikes with a huge variation in sound due to poor aging. No matter what you do, you can't please all of them. At the risk of sounding stupid, I am serious. I am planning on ordering a 251 this year, and was contemplating their U47, but it seems like no one here's tried it and I'd be afraid to be the first, unless they have a cool return policy. They do have a cool return policy, as do most of the high end mike manufacturers. You have to, in order to sell into that market. I've noticed that http://www.mistyhillaudio.com has a bunch of cool old mics. Are they reputable? Dunno them, but there are a lot of these things out there. Unfortunately there is an even larger market for them now. --scott |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| f.S. Tons of cheapgear | Pro Audio | |||
| McIntosh C 22 Tube Preamp, In original Box! | Marketplace | |||
| Toft / Trident A Range..anyone got 'em?? | Pro Audio | |||
| McIntosh C 22 Tube Preamp, original box and docs... | Marketplace | |||
| McIntosh C 22 Tube Preamp, original box and docs... | Marketplace | |||
Linear Mode
