| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Philip Banks
Je Ne Sais Quoi
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 11049
Location: Portgordon, Scotland
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 2:41 am Post subject: My mic has shrunk or has it? |
 |
|
Oh the joys of technology! I noticed on Thursday that my mic was making a low level noise like an unshielded location mic picking up a light breeze. It was possible to gate it out but that was never going to be a long term solution.
1 - Get in touch with Sennhieser/Neumann to arrange a repair/service.
2 - As this was going to take 3 weeks I also needed to get a Stunt mic
pro tem.
It seemed silly to buy another U87 so I opted for a TLM103 which will serve me for 3 weeks and act as a stunt mic in the future. For the record, it's fabby-doo.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Dan-O
The Gates of Troy
Joined: 17 Jan 2005
Posts: 1636
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 5:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Just curious if Mike's Mic Comparison (MMC) helped make that decision for you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcm
Smart Kitteh
Joined: 10 Dec 2004
Posts: 2600
Location: w. MA, USA
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 5:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cool.
It makes your face look slim. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck Davis
M&M
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 2389
Location: Where I love to be...Between the Vineyards and the Cows.
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 6:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Phillip,
Now that you've had time to really a/b the two mics. What are your thoughts?
I'd like to own a Neumann someday...and use a 103 regularly in my radio gig. But have the feeling I'd be happier with the 87 long term.
Chuck D
_________________
Wicked huge.....in India.
www.chuckdaviscreative.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jowillie
Lucky 700
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 714
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
I understand your concern. I had to break out an old stand-by mic and thought it had shrunk in storage. Then my wife reminded me that perhaps it was the 20lbs I gained sinced last using it that made it look smaller.
It is the same size--I am bigger! 
_________________
Wild Willie Edwards
www.hometowntvtoday.com
http://vomictest.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VO-Guy
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:21 am Post subject: Re: My mic has shrunk or has it? |
|
|
| Banksey wrote: | | Get in touch with Sennhieser/Neumann to arrange a repair/service. |
Phillip,
Just FYI I've sent my MKH-416 and U87 back to Sennhieser/Neumann for services at different times and they were great. Quick about getting it back.
Russ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip Banks
Je Ne Sais Quoi
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 11049
Location: Portgordon, Scotland
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mike's comparison didn't do it for me, the BBC have been upgrading the studios for radio stations in the regions and the mic of choice was the 103. If it was good enough for the expert ears at BBC engineering then it's good enough for me. Out of interest the national music based stations use U87s.
Doing the A/B test then the U87 has it all plus a little bit more. Any pro voice who buys a TLM103 is not short changing their clients at all. Whilst the latter favours certain frequencies we really are dealing with subtleties. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TC
Club 300
Joined: 21 May 2006
Posts: 397
Location: Iowa City
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I've got a serious case of TLM-103 fever right now. First Mike's mic test, then an audition with one on Thursday, and now this. I don't know how much longer I can hold out... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diane Maggipinto
Spreading Snark Worldwide
Joined: 03 Mar 2006
Posts: 6679
Location: saul lay seetee youtee
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sheeesh! I thought the shrinking mic might have something to do with aging! My grandmother died a few inches shorter than at her peak (as it were).
_________________
sitting at #8, though not as present as I'd like to be. Hello!
www.d3voiceworks.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip Banks
Je Ne Sais Quoi
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 11049
Location: Portgordon, Scotland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike
Nasty Brit
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 475
Location: Tomorrowland
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Banksey wrote: | | Any pro voice who buys a TLM103 is not short changing their clients at all. Whilst the latter favours certain frequencies we really are dealing with subtleties. |
Subleties indeed. The 103 does drive certain frequencies a little harder, but so what? Pretty much all the valid reasons for favouring a U87 over a 103 have nothing to do with recording VO. A VO doesn't need a pad switch, the HPF is hardly essential, and the U87s ability to sound good on almost any instrument doesn't apply (Kate Bush would record every instrument on her albums except the kick drum with a U87. Something you would/could never do with almost any other mic, including a 103).
If you were looking to get a Neumann for VO and had the budget for a U87, I would recommend going for a TLM 103 and then put the rest of your budget into getting a decent pre-amp. Give me a 103 through an Earthworks over a U87 through an M-Box anyday.
Actually. That will probably be part two in the Mike's mics section; Pre-amps.
Maiku.
_________________
www.michaelrhys.com
"If grass could run, cows would look like tigers."
Murray Wiggle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jowillie
Lucky 700
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 714
Location: North Carolina
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PREAMPs.....Yesss!!!!
Thank you. I appreciate the fact that you have the resources and experience to share this knowledge with us.
Pick one high end mic and one low-mid level and let the games begin.
_________________
Wild Willie Edwards
www.hometowntvtoday.com
http://vomictest.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck Davis
M&M
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 2389
Location: Where I love to be...Between the Vineyards and the Cows.
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 28, 2006 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mike,
Point well taken. I use the 103 several days a week in Boston. I've recorded with an 87...but only as a singer..not a VO.
Would love to have the chance to a/b the two someday. Also curious about the 193.
Totally agree on the quality pre. The Voicemaster does a nice job for the most part. But I know there's much better to be had. Just takes $$.
Chuck D
_________________
Wicked huge.....in India.
www.chuckdaviscreative.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Philip Banks
Je Ne Sais Quoi
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 11049
Location: Portgordon, Scotland
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Is it important to have THE processor if you are not producing? I have a Focusrite Penta which is a glorified extension lead/phantom power source. 17 buttons and pots, 17 presets (16 of which make me sound worse). This processor spends 99% of its life in By-pass. The test for me would be which pre-amp/processor sounds best in By-pass; not being facetious.
Whilst everything in the mic chain colours the sound very subtley at waht point would I be making a decison on behalf of client as to how his audio sounds. Think of me as a painter and decorator, no one requests a specific brush but they get to pick the colour of the paint, not me.
For people on here who are producers as well as voices I appreciate that compression/processing is part of the production. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike
Nasty Brit
Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 475
Location: Tomorrowland
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Banksey wrote: | | Is it important to have THE processor if you are not producing? |
Not in the slightest. But I'm not talking about a processor, I'm talking about the preamp which is simply for getting the signal loud enough to be recorded or squeezed down an ISDN line or whatever.
I use the built in soft-limit on my Apogee to guard against the occasional peak. Chances are it never kicks in because I don't run the signal too hot. I certainly don't use it for any obvious effect it has on the signal. My other pre is an Earthworks. All it does is straight wire gain. That's it. It's simply designed to bring the weak mic signal up to line level. Yet it costs about 4 times the price of an M-Box. Why? 'cause you'll never know how good a decent mic really sounds until you run it through a quality preamp.
Personally I imagine that most producers would rather use one of these straight wire gain amps to capture the best possible signal first and then think about what processing is required, if any.
| Banksey wrote: | | The test for me would be which pre-amp/processor sounds best in By-pass |
Or preferably a unit that doesn't even have a bypass switch, because there is simply nothing to by-pass. Sometimes, paying more for less is the way to go.
Cheers.
Maiku
_________________
www.michaelrhys.com
"If grass could run, cows would look like tigers."
Murray Wiggle |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
