Just got some C4's from John Mayes (Review and clips coming)!

[Brent Casey]

Just pointing out that if the mic is changed in sound, it becomes harder to judge what a used one will sound like in the future.
According to the late Stephen Paul, contrary to poular belief, the U87 never changed at all except for some minor power supply re-design. The capsule and it's components never changed and were and are still one of the best capsules out there. Absolutely his words, not mine.

Those are absolutely not Stephen Paul's words, my friend. Stephen knew better than most all of the changes and iterations of the Neumann U87, including major changes to both the circuit and the capsule.

Brent Casey

 

[DJL]

Hmm, now that PMI-AG marketing and their internet supporters are here... I'm bailing out of this thread before it all blows up like a bomb.

 

[alanhyatt]

I think we all wish you would have bailed out a long time ago DJL....

Change is always good. Let me give you an example. There was the AKG C414, then it became the C414E, then the C 414EB, then the C414ULS, and since then, there have been a few more revisions.

The fact is new parts and technology are always becoming available to designers. As such, we take advantage of them to offer better product when and when we can. Like the Neumann U87, many other microphone models that have been around for many years has changed many times. RODE has changed as well. The old NT1 is not like the new NT1A. How many people are complaining about that?

If we think a newer version of any of our products will improve them, we do it. I don't think anyone cares that a new model is better than the old. If they did, Neumann and AKG would long be out of business.

 

[crazydoc]

Alan

Most mics in the past that have undergone significant revisions have had some identfier appended to the model number, as you note in your post above. Are you planning on doing this?

 

[sdelsolray]

Alan

Most mics in the past that have undergone significant revisions have had some identfier appended to the model number, as you note in your post above. Are you planning on doing this?

This is truly the question. Have the changes, if any, to the C4 small diaphragm condenser microphone been significant enough to warrant a change is model/number designation (e.g., C4 to C5, or C4 to C4b)? It either (i) has or (ii) has not. Sorry for trying to be too logical or clinical, but it's really a simple question. I give credit o DJL for asking this question, in essence, in the first place, notwithstanding the way he did so.

 

[Yareek]

Wow this thread got off topic!

Anyways, I can't get these clips up yet due to the lack of a cable to connect my minidisc to my soundcard (and 20 inches of snow preventing me from going anywhere)...so it'll have to wait until the sun peeks out.

Does anyone have any real evidence or knowledge that the C4's have changed (moreso in sound than anything else)? I guess I don't care because they sound real nice, but it'd be nice to know.

- Jarick

 

[DJL]

Alan

Most mics in the past that have undergone significant revisions have had some identfier appended to the model number, as you note in your post above. Are you planning on doing this?

Hi crazydoc... now that I have told everyone about this PMI-AG might start doing that... but just for the record... PMI-AG has not done that in the past. For example... when they changed the C1. Anyway, take care bro... I'm back out of this thread again. Don

 

[alanhyatt]

Wow this thread got off topic!

Does anyone have any real evidence or knowledge that the C4's have changed (moreso in sound than anything else)? I guess I don't care because they sound real nice, but it'd be nice to know.

- Jarick

You will always get off topic when DJL is around.

The C4's have not changed. They will not change. We will introduce a new CS-4 a few months after we release the new CS1 and CS3. We have no plans to change the current C4 as they are very good just as they are...

 

[sdelsolray]

You will always get off topic when DJL is around.

The C4's have not changed. They will not change. We will introduce a new CS-4 a few months after we release the new CS1 and CS3. We have no plans to change the current C4 as they are very good just as they are...

Thanks Alan for the direct, concise answer. That answers my question.

 

[DJL]

Thanks Alan for the direct, concise answer. That answers my question.

Hmm, does it really... check this out.

Quote:
Originally posted by DJL
I bet Alan and or Brent have had the B5 apart too... and I'd love to see pictures of inside the C4 and B5 too.

Actually, you would lose that bet!

Brent should answer this one, but it is ot the same mic. Same factory which pissed us off a bit, but not the same mic. According to the people at Behringer and the inside details from 797, it is a different capsule and thickness, and different electronics. Brent keeps updating the C4's along the way.

It was nice for Behringer to honor us by taking our model numbers and look....

And note: "Brent keeps updating the C4's along the way."

 

[Gidge]

bump......

 

[noisedude]

You'd be the man to know about these things now, I hear.

Heh. Heh. Hmmm. *nervous cough*

 

[DJL]

I give credit o DJL for asking this question, in essence, in the first place, notwithstanding the way he did so.

Thanks... but, it was a statement, not a question.

 

[John Mayes]

Hmm, John Mayes use to swear by the Studio Projects C4 mics on his acoustic guitars... Oh well, he must have out grown the C4's and upgraded, so he sold his old C4's to you. Anyway Yareek, I hope you enjoy and have fun with your new mics.

PS... about the shockmounts... here's a quick link to the "PMI-AG Support" forum... http://www.pmiaudio.com/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=5&sid=cdc1f0196f9d2ba66921e12c455d9306

Actually I just needed some money for mastering a project I'm putting the finishing touches on. When I go to buy some more I will most likely get the C4's again. I used them all over the new album.

 

[acorec]

Those are absolutely not Stephen Paul's words, my friend. Stephen knew better than most all of the changes and iterations of the Neumann U87, including major changes to both the circuit and the capsule.

Brent Casey

There were changes, but acoustically they are transparent to the user. The U87 of the past and today have the same tonal characteristics. This is not to be confused with "aging". The older capsules went from sounding bad to some form of mellowness due to aging of the diaphrams. Stephen Paul makes it a point to explain that there are no "vintage original" mics that come even close to sounding like Neuman intended without an overhaul. That is why so many think that the older vintage mics are either better sounding, or worse sounding than the current model. "

"Both U87 mics, old and new, use in principle and construction the same identical capsule. The only difference is that in the old model the spacer between the two capsule halves is made of plastic (to accommodate the pattern selection process through varying amounts of voltages applied to the halves) and in the new model it's made of aluminum.
In either case there are no sonic differences between the two capsule models."




.."The U 87 and the U 87Ai use the same type of capsule, but in two slightly different forms. Acoustically the two are identical for any given era of production at Neumann; there have, of course, been some changes during the nearly 45 year history of this type of capsule! The only difference is that in the K 87 form used in the U 87, the backplates of the two halves of the capsule are electrically insulated from one another--thus the capsule as a whole has four distinct electrical terminals. In the K 67/K 870 form used in all the other models (e.g. U 67 and U 87Ai), the backplates are electrically bonded together such that the capsule as a whole has only three distinct terminals. The difference has to do with the set of voltages available in the amplifier for polarizing the capsule for the three directional patterns. The U 87 had only ca. +45 V and 0 V available to work with, so it charged the front membrane with the +45 V in all three patterns, and varied the relationship of the rear backplate with the rear membrane to produce the different patterns; that's more complicated than one might wish, but it's the only way to do it without a DC converter or a special power supply. The U 87Ai has a DC converter so it can leave the combined backplates at 0 V potential, charge the front membrane at +60 V at all times, and then simply set the charge on the rear membrane to +60 V, 0 V or -60 V to determine the overall directional pattern.

 

[noisedude]

John - thank you for posting here. Not because of anything to do with this thread, but because your name always reminds me of John Mayer, and I just went to dig out Room For Squares because of your post. Cheers!!!

 

[DJL]

Actually I just needed some money for mastering a project I'm putting the finishing touches on. When I go to buy some more I will most likely get the C4's again. I used them all over the new album.

Oh ok... and I'm sorry to hear money is that tight for you... I guess "Mayes Guitars" isn't doing very well. Anyway, I wish you the best with your new CD.

 

[John Mayes]

Oh ok... and I'm sorry to hear money is that tight for you... I guess "Mayes Guitars" isn't doing very well. Anyway, I wish you the best with your new CD.

I'll skip over your thinly veiled attempt at getting a rise out of me. Thanks for wishing me well with the CD.

Peace

 

[noisedude]

Oh ok... and I'm sorry to hear money is that tight for you... I guess "Mayes Guitars" isn't doing very well.

Truly you are sinking to new depths with posts like this. Do you have any threshold when you plan to stop because you are just too pathetic?

 

[DJL]

I'll skip over your thinly veiled attempt at getting a rise out of me. Thanks for wishing me well with the CD.

Peace

Sorry about that, I was just thinking out loud... my bad. Anyway John, I do wish you and your new CD the best.