 |
VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD! Established November 10, 2004
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
DenaliDave Club 300

Joined: 09 Jan 2016 Posts: 307 Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2016 5:21 pm Post subject: It must be summer! |
|
|
Must be summer around here!
I say that because it's been quiet, I expect people are busy with projects, gigs and SUN!
Anyway, I wanted to share my experience with the new mic in my locker that is now my go-to mic, the venerable TLM-67:
I've had it long enough now and used it enough now to have a few thoughts on it. . .
I originally picked it up because I wanted something that flattered *my* voice. I watched the frequency responses of my voice through various mics and noticed where I tended to be sibilant. I also noted where my peaks were. Do I have a lot of mid-range, high-end, or low frequencies in my voice?
Since I live in Alaska and can't easily "try before you buy" I found analyzing my own voice this way to be the best solution in avoiding a mic mistake.
While the TLM-102 is a great mic -- it doesn't sound good on me personally. It sounded sizzling, or deep fried. I found it to have an artificial "presence" about it.
My CAD is ... well...finicky and I'm probably going to sell it for parts or something on ebay. Maybe someone can fix whatever's wrong with it.
The D87 clone I have is a great mic for what I paid. It doesn't, however, have the fidelity nor the richness I hear from higher-end mics. It was custom made for me, so there's some sentimental value there -- and it's a great backup LDC mic.
My LDC's bases are now covered with the TLM-67. I'll upload a sample comparing it to the D87 in a bit here, and I think you'll understand what I mean.
To me, the TLM-67 adds a "high def" (not artificially boosted presence) and a smooth, pleasing, natural sounding mid range. When I first started using it, I was a little bit shocked. To me, it sounded like how I sound inside my head! Clear, clean, and well -- me. It sounds like ME, not me speaking into a certain microphone known for a certain sound.
Pros:
-I like how I sound on it
-good detail
-fairly flat response curve from Neumann's own literature (yes, I know it's only a guestimate from them...LOL)
-built like a freaking tank
Cons:
-a bit pricey
-transformerless
-not to nuts about the color
I haven't ever used vintage U67, but apparently there's a conversion kit someone on Gearslutz has come up with that requires no soldering and is reversible to turn a TLM-67 into a U67. I think they add the correct.
I don't get a "vintage" sound when I hear myself on the TLM-67 either. Apparently, that only comes out at high SLP levels (loud singing or instruments). Since I'm not shouting, I doubt I'll ever hear that funky vintage distortion.
Until I can get a clean sample comparing my two LDC's side by side with the "announcer test" -- I did post a video on here that I made using the TLM-67 (you all just didn't realize it!).
Time: The Cosmic Currency
Yes..there's a music bed and it's YouTube so the sound quality is degraded. I encourage you to listen with studio monitors or headphones though...that'll have to do for a few until I get a proper sample for you guys.
I haven't seen the TLM-67 mentioned as a VO mic by anyone really, and I thought you guys might be interested to know that SOMEONE is using it
As I said, I took my own unique vocal characteristics into consideration and looked at the projected frequency responses from several mics, and the TLM-67 seemed to be the safest bet dipping where I was sibilant and not hyping where it didn't need to. So, for ME -- I think the hours and hours of painful research paid off! _________________ "The wise ones fashioned speech with their thought, sifting it as grain is sifted through a sieve." - Buddha
www.alaskamic.com |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
paulstefano Backstage Pass

Joined: 22 Sep 2015 Posts: 411 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dave, you're crazy! Maybe you should just be a full time equipment reviewer! _________________ http://www.paulstefano.com |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DenaliDave Club 300

Joined: 09 Jan 2016 Posts: 307 Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
paulstefano Backstage Pass

Joined: 22 Sep 2015 Posts: 411 Location: Baltimore, MD
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
1. D87 Clone
2. BCM-705
3. TLM-67
My guess _________________ http://www.paulstefano.com |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DenaliDave Club 300

Joined: 09 Jan 2016 Posts: 307 Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 9:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting guesses....
And yes, I would love to review gear for a living. If I ever find time I may make some video reviews for my YT channel. _________________ "The wise ones fashioned speech with their thought, sifting it as grain is sifted through a sieve." - Buddha
www.alaskamic.com |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
MBVOXX Been Here Awhile

Joined: 03 Jun 2008 Posts: 236 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
The TLM67 is a great mic for VO... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DenaliDave Club 300

Joined: 09 Jan 2016 Posts: 307 Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
MBVOXX wrote: | The TLM67 is a great mic for VO... |
I'm certainly finding that to be true! I haven't seen it mentioned on here, or any other online forum really.
It's very clear and smooth. There's a real feeling of "quality" I can hear when I compare it to other mics I've used.
When I playback some recordings (to my ears) it sounds like I'm standing right in front of myself talking, not listening to a recording.
And the thing is -- it might not sound like that for someone else! Everyone sounds different on different mics! For *me* this one matches my vocal range better than others I've tried. It seems to reproduce my voice more naturally than others without boosts or extra presence in areas it doesn't need.
And who knows, in 25-30 years it might be a collector's item since it's anniversary edition.
Something to consider -- A guy Ty Ford had this to say about the '67:
Quote: | For about 6 years, I’ve been suggesting that mic design needed to change because, with good digital recording, the extra HF boost needed to overcome analog tape HF loss is no longer needed. The TLM 67 does exactly that. It’s audibly more linear, more neutral, than the U 87, with more attention to the mid range. |
I think it's true. The U87 and 87Ai's became wildly popular before digital recording really took over. The HF boosts (to me) sound harsh at times and need to be tamed with de-essers and EQ.
The TLM-67 doesn't need that (for me), If I just leave it raw and alone, it sounds amazing. In fact, I'm more liable to screw the sound up by trying to EQ it. To me, that means I've got a personal winner!
He also compared the '67 to a TLM-49:
Quote: | The TLM 67 is smoother than the TLM 49 I reviewed a few years ago. There’s less proximity effect than I expected in either the cardioid or figure of eight pattern. Normally I have to pull out some low end when I work a mic at about three inches for voiceover. Not so much with the TLM 67. The low end is more balanced and there’s only a small presence lift, which means the source cuts though without getting edgy. After briefly auditioning the TLM 67 on my own voice, I felt comfortable using on “real work”; a recording of someone else’s voice for a narration and a workout with one of my voiceover students. |
The rest of that reivew is HERE
It's really one of the only comprehensive reviews I've seen, and I just re-read it for the first time since I've had the mic and worked with it. I'm finding the results he came up with to pretty much match the couple of months experience I've had now. _________________ "The wise ones fashioned speech with their thought, sifting it as grain is sifted through a sieve." - Buddha
www.alaskamic.com |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Lance Blair M&M

Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 2281 Location: Atlanta
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like, in this order:
1. #2
2. #2
3. #2 _________________ Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
DenaliDave Club 300

Joined: 09 Jan 2016 Posts: 307 Location: Anchorage, Alaska
|
Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And Lance....
There's a reason!
And all three are being run through the M5. I mentioned it someplace else on here but I had the M5 plugged into the "send" instead of the "return".
After feeling like I wasn't getting the sound I should, I double checked the FAQ for outboard preamps with Audient.
Sure enough, the FAQ states:
Quote: | You can easily bypass the mic pres on iD22 by simply patching the output of your other mic preamps or gear into the insert return, which is a very pure differential line stage into the ADC, therefore completely bypassing the on-board mic pres / HPF and line input stage. |
So that thread in here about my impressions of the M5 were a little off because the sound was being colored by the iD22's own internal preamps, as the signal was NOT being bypassed.
So, with the TLM-67 running through the M5 and straight to the ADC -- the resulting sound is stellar. I *almost* went with a True Systems P-Solo. They're certainly cheaper and apparently just as good or better. If anyone's used a P-Solo, I'd be interested in hearing how clear and clean it is? _________________ "The wise ones fashioned speech with their thought, sifting it as grain is sifted through a sieve." - Buddha
www.alaskamic.com |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|