GoMano said:
One of those "Oh yeah, you imposter! - Prove it!" Replies..
I apologize if it came off sounding that way, but some of your claims are meant to be taken at face value without any substantiation. For example, you state that "Neumann uses S.E. parts". Karl Winkler of Neumann says that isn't true. Who should I believe, you or Neumann?
Sorry - had the query been more professional and respectful -I'd respond more thoroughly, but that out-of -the-gate defensive "prove yourself" stuff is just so lame... albeit I will tell you we used both a female and male vocalist, an alto and an alto-tenor rock singer respectively, thru Neve 1272 pre's direct to Pro Tools HD monitored thru a Euphonix C-3000 and KRK monitors.
Thank you, that's exactly what I was asking for - some information about the rest of your listening chain and conditions. It wasn't so much a "prove yourself" as much as "how did you do your testing?". I'm sorry if it came off as defensive.
The S.E. was just as good - close to being commensurate sonically at least to our ears (no measuring equipment - sorry) as the Sony.
We all hafta make judgements based on what our ears tell us - "no measuring equipment" is fine with me.
My colleague, and good friend, and publisher, and award-winning engineer / major installer and all-around amazing guy, has used it more on different sources since he's had it for awhile. I wouldn't have had any problem going into depth, but your response is full of presumptuous, sarcastic posturing, almost vitriol, so I choose to just let this go...I don't need to prove anything nor qualify myself to that sort of "and your partner's name would be?" demand to anyone. I apologize for even bringing the issue up now, and for taking the position I did as qualifiers - I felt in like company - but was mistaken. My bad.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but if you use your un-named partner as a credential for your tests, I'd like to know who the hell he is. I again apologize if the tone of my query offended you - that was not my intent. As an example, when I listened to the Marshall MXLV67's, I was very impressed with them. I asked Marshall to send a pair to Al Schmitt, who was very impressed with them. I didn't say "a well-known engineer with many hits" - I simply said "Al Schmitt liked them".
Sorry for any disruptions. If any of you would like further answers to questions about these mics and my experience with them ("it" - the H3500), - feel free to email me, or, log onto S.E.'s site itself; I'm sure there is a wealth of info there (although I haven't looked myself) - I am limited in sharing to what I heard, although I DO have that same mic here in MY studio now (I bought it) , and have used it on all kinds of things - I am waiting to aquire one of their new dual-tube "Gemini" mics, too.
but for those in the market, my S.E. claims are true - I heard it myself - give 'em a try - I was so impressed I bought the H3500 on the spot - but ultimately, it's your ears, and they should decide based on needs and criteria such as budget to. Good luck
This is the Ted Perlman review I saw on the C1 when it first came out, and you might see some similarities to it:
Last January I got a frantic call from Pete Leoni, ?You?ve got to get over here to NAMM and hear this mic! It?s only $299.00 and it?s exactly like a U87?.
I was intrigued, so I made plans to meet Pete at NAMM here in Los Angeles. ?Where?s this amazing mic?? I asked, eager to finally hear the thing. There it was, next to a Neumann U87. Peggi, Pete, Alan, and myself put on the headphones and Peggi started singing into the 87. Awesome, that classic Neumann sound that is heard on probably 90% of the records ever made. She then moved over to the C1 and sang into that. EXACTLY the same, no difference. We were all amazed. [
Later in the same review, he says:
Over the next week I tried the mic on male singers, female singers, young singers, old singers, singers who could really sing, singers who couldn?t sing very good ? everybody. We did country, pop, rock, rap, hip-hop, R&B, everything. The mic just killed! It didn?t sound like a U87 ? it actually sounded better!
So here we have a mic that when compared to a U87, sounds "EXACTLY the same, no difference." in one paragraph, and "It didn?t sound like a U87" in a later paragraph - in the same article.
That the H3500 holds up well to more expensive mics on some sources, I have no doubt. That it compared favorably to the Sony 800 in your tests, I also believe. That you are sincere in your belief about the S.E., I don't question.
But, when you make the claim that Neumann uses S.E. parts, I have to ask for a little more information than just your word on that. And if a recognized, well-respected engineer concurs with your evaluation, curiosity drives me to ask who that might be. Ted Perlman is a "recognized, well-respected engineer", but I find it difficult to believe him when he says that a mic is "exactly the same" and "completely different" in the same article.
Again, I apologize for the "tone" of my post, but I've heard a lot of similar claims before. I'm a staunch believer in the value of many of these microphones, but I tend to be very cautious when it comes to reading accolades without a lot of information about how, and who's, doing the testing. I'm sorry if you were offended by my post.
Those sounded a little out there to me, too.
