Apex 460 vs Neumann U87ai hear for yourself

  • Thread starter Thread starter mustardeer
  • Start date Start date
"should" and reality are two different things unfortunately.
when people don't know they go for the brands - it's safer.

pardon me changing topics but just realized Spoon is using my Neumann U87 or at least it looks like it in their video. Can someone try to figure out effects the lead is using on the vocals? Is it just lots of compression? I don't hear any reverb. Is he distorting the signal somehow? Would love to know. I like how subtle it is and not over the top like Jack White yelling through the copperphone. Fast forward a bit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYWlg9iHHlY
 
Last edited:
"should" and reality are two different things unfortunately.
when people don't know they go for the brands - it's safer.

pardon me changing topics but just realized Spoon is using my Neumann U87 or at least it looks like it in their video. Can someone try to figure out effects the lead is using on the vocals? Is it just lots of compression? I don't hear any reverb. Is he distorting the signal somehow? Would love to know. I like how subtle it is and not over the top like Jack White yelling through the copperphone. Fast forward a bit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYWlg9iHHlY

It sounds to me like perhaps a little tube drive at the preamp, (input gain turned up some, output turned down some.) Then of course, lots of compression. And a small amount of reverb just to give it ambiance.

In this type of song, (medium tempo to faster) reverb should not be strong enough for the average listener to really notice. Depending on the song, it should be kept subtle, (slower songs are the exception.) I try to apply just enough so that I can hear a definite difference when A/B'ing the vocal track, but so it tends to disappear when in the mix.

If you listen closely, you can notice some verb at around 4 minutes in.
 
that makes total sense. You're probably right.
I have tons of quality tube plug-ins but I'm sure he's using the real thing.

Just listened to it again, and yes I hear a touch of reverb but I don't think it's on the vocals just the instruments. I might be wrong of course.
 
If you owned U87 for 20 yrs you should be able to tell it apart from a two hundred dollar mic, but no pressure.

Well, if you bought a $3,000 mic, you should know how to spell the manufacturer's name and have some general clue as to it's specs.

See what I did there?
 
just realized Spoon is using my Neumann U87 or at least it looks like it in their video.
Never pay attention to what someone is using in a video.
 
why not, i was always curious how they got that sound and the video clearly shows some clues. I doubt the art department rented that mic just to use as a prop.

SuperCreep -> :laughings:
nice name by the way, i'm sure it helps with the ladies.
 
I doubt the art department rented that mic just to use as a prop.
A) Most videos (perhaps not this one, but most) are almost guaranteed to *not* be shot in the same place where the recording was made.

B) Props are rented all the time - Including microphones. Or the video may be shot in a more "video friendly" recording studio. Also very common. Assuming there are "studio shots" in the video, anyway...

C) I can tell you with a certain level of experience that when bands were in and we were using RE20's or SM7b's for vocals and they wanted to take "studio pictures" for their web sites and what not, they'd want the U87 or something on the stand. And you can bet that if there was a C800 lying around, they'd want that in the photos.
 
I doubt the art department rented that mic just to use as a prop.



Why is that so hard to believe. You bought a mic so people would take you more seriously. Maybe they used a "dummy" mic so people wouldn't really know that he used a SM57? :eek::D

I'm not saying that he actually used a SM57, but you see what I'm saying.
 
The rest of the band was shown using 58s. But the sound didn't really match a live studio recording as they were showing. It sounded like everything was more isolated than that.




:cool:
 
why not, i was always curious how they got that sound and the video clearly shows some clues. I doubt the art department rented that mic just to use as a prop.

SuperCreep -> :laughings:

I don't know, how many times have you seen a video of someone singing into one of these, and I can tell you from experience that the sound you were hearing was not from this mic. The U87 is a mighty fine mic so don't get caught up in the "Have I bought the right thing," rubbish.

Alan.
 

Attachments

  • SHURE_55s_MICROPHONE.webp
    SHURE_55s_MICROPHONE.webp
    11.8 KB · Views: 83
I don't know, how many times have you seen a video of someone singing into one of these, and I can tell you from experience that the sound you were hearing was not from this mic. The U87 is a mighty fine mic so don't get caught up in the "Have I bought the right thing," rubbish.

Alan.
Yeah, I am seeing that mic all over a thousand different TV ads, videos, and Internet websites. I wonder what it really sounds like.
 
I don't know, how many times have you seen a video of someone singing into one of these,

Most people are familiar with an SM57 and SM58, that mic is a Shure SM55. I've used one and it has a dull "police announcement" sound, actually kinda nice but completely lacking any high end.

In the last while people have taken a lot of those and put modern guts in them so that doo-wop groups and Elvis types can use them at gigs. I think they now sell new upgraded ones. It looks like the front of a '49 Buick, or maybe a drive-in theatre speaker.

Judging what a mic sounds from a video heard over a tv speaker is ... well, most mics in videos are props. Judging anything from only hearing an mp3 is kinda bonkers.
 
yeah, they just put stuff like that in videos because it looks cool or because someone said it was the best of the best. Every detail is about awing the audience. They don't put honda accords in videos, they're in bentleys, drinkin cristal, singin into a U87. Plus everyone knows they record the song with the video camera's mic during the video shoot, that's why lots of shots don't have a mic in them at all.
 
hmm. well all pop bands record a song first and then do a music vid later mos (not rolling sound). they just play their song back to them and artists act/sing it out. (i'm a film director)
however there has been a trend in the indie world of recording live instead of stupid flashy mtv style vid. Spoon is an established and respectable band and I doubt they would flash a Mic that they didn't use on the record.

at the very beginning 20 sec in it's obvious that we're hearing the room. Maybe they switch to a pre-recorded track and all lyp-sync but i doubt it. It might be a different take on the vid but I have a feeling it's real.
 
For sure there's been a trend like that for quite awhile. There's probably lots of musicians who would feel phony using a prop mic. Then the Beyonce types where the mic is a fashion accessory.

Plus nowadays it's so cheap to get amazingly good video that a lot of bands probably video a lot of their recording just so that they have stuff to edit into videos later. It's not like the 80's when it took a major film crew. So it's probably more common in these last few years to see the actual recording... it's hard to lip sync perfectly and sometimes you can pretty much say for sure that they aren't.
 
Yeah, I am seeing that mic all over a thousand different TV ads, videos, and Internet websites. I wonder what it really sounds like.

The newer versions SM55SH, have a SM58 capsole in them, however they don't sound the same as the body of the mic and the fact that the capsole is further away from the mouth than a SM58 changes the sound. The eairly models were different and proberbly had a capsole from a 545. Some info on it here.

My Wife used to sing on stage with one (she loved the look of it) and it was never as good as a SM58, I was going to do some mods on it but in the end I bought her a beta 58 for her birthday (engraved with her name on it) and she admitted that it sounded a lot better.

Cheers
Alan.
 
You know something that has more effect than you'd think is the grille.

One time, I took one of those old 50's black desk phones apart, put a 1/4" jack on it and replaced the stock mic in the handset with the element from a Shure Unidyne mic, like Hendrix used at Woodstock.

I checked it to see if it worked as I was putting it together and the second I screwed that round plastic grille on the handset the whole timber of the mic changed drastically and it sounded like a telephone. I was really surprised at that.

We used it at gigs, we were playing a shit hole gig where people were getting stabbed in the bathroom (we pissed outside) and we'd stop a song abruptly and answer the phone, do some dumb bullshit that nobody got, then go back into Clapton's "Cocaine". I still have it.
 
Could someone explain to me how mumbling into a microphone constitutes a "shootout" or reveals a mics strengths or weaknesses?

How the hell can you tell from that?:confused:

Do me a favor, try singing some loud 'S' sounds into both as hard as you can, then lets hear that? Try some acoustic guitar, or a saxophone? I'll bet dollars for donuts you'll be able to tell those mics apart in a heartbeat!
 
Well, if you bought a $3,000 mic, you should know how to spell the manufacturer's name and have some general clue as to it's specs.

See what I did there?

Hey, Supercreep, I'm right with you. I just purchased my first three mics, and they came to a grand total of $215. I did a ton of research, found out as much as I could, and tried to understand as much about the mics as is possible for someone brand-new to home recording.

Oh, what I would give to be able to purchase $2,000 worth of mic on a whim....then again, I wouldn't learn anything.

But hey, I'm not trying to bash the OP....if I had thousands to spend on equipment, I'd probably do the same. Who knows.
 
Back
Top