NEUMANN mic choice

[bcfromfl]

..................

 

[moresound]

^^^^^^^^+1^^^^^^^^^

 

[PhilGood]

How about saying something like, "This has not been my experience," or, "I have a different opinion," etc. Why resort to this level of incivility?

Back in the days when Neumann was "the" mic manufacturer, there was a world of difference between what they offered and what was available elsewhere. I don't believe this is the case any longer, and a few minutes spent on Google searching reviews will find plenty of dissatisfied owners -- especially when comparisons are made between "old" and "new" designs of the same model. Today you can purchase amazing mics for considerably less than top-end offerings, with comparable build quality, with sound quality that is as good...some arguing better...than currently available Neumanns.

If your point had to do with top-end Neumanns, then I concede your point. If you want to spend $5,000 on a single mic, then you are purchasing a difficult-to-quantify sound quality that perhaps is worth the premium. But if you re-read the original poster's question, and the mics he asks about, I stand firm in what I say.

-Bruce

I have to agree with John with the quality and not "the badge" as far as hardware (e.i. capsule testing and rejection), up until the TLM 103 and 102 series. Those use surface mount components and are at the low end for Neumann, even with Sennheiser being the current owner. The capsules are not sub-standard by any means. Whereas a top Neumann mic is a work of art, the TLM 103 just barely makes the cut. It still out performs other brands in the same price level, but as far as the upper end Neumann's, the capsule rejection rate speaks volumes for the level of quality when combined with a really good circuit and high quality components. The whole TLM line (meaning transformerless) losses that wonderful color and just falls short period soundwise. Nothing sounds better than a good transformer and the whole TLM line is just Neumann on the cheap.

 

[ALS]

Hey, looking to get my first neumann mic, but really need to keep the price down. The primary purpose is recording trumpet, but would also like something that's useful for vocals, perhaps piano?
So far the choices are:
TLM 102: $799
TLM 103: $1,699
KM 184: $1,200

Any thoughts? For the primary purpose of recording trumpet is it worth the extra 400 to go to the KM 184 or the extra 900 to go to the TLM 103?

if you're going to primarily be recording vocals I'd go with the 103, but if you were to want to do percussion I'd go with two 184's. For the uses you listed 103 is sweet sounding.

 

[John Willett]

How about saying something like, "This has not been my experience," or, "I have a different opinion," etc. Why resort to this level of incivility?

Back in the days when Neumann was "the" mic manufacturer, there was a world of difference between what they offered and what was available elsewhere. I don't believe this is the case any longer, and a few minutes spent on Google searching reviews will find plenty of dissatisfied owners -- especially when comparisons are made between "old" and "new" designs of the same model. Today you can purchase amazing mics for considerably less than top-end offerings, with comparable build quality, with sound quality that is as good...some arguing better...than currently available Neumanns.

If your point had to do with top-end Neumanns, then I concede your point. If you want to spend $5,000 on a single mic, then you are purchasing a difficult-to-quantify sound quality that perhaps is worth the premium. But if you re-read the original poster's question, and the mics he asks about, I stand firm in what I say.

My issue was with "paying for the badge" - not that there are also now other good microphones.

If you build cheaper you have to make compromises - building in a third-world country, accepting lower tolerance and consistency, etc....

Not saying that you can't make good mics this way - but you see a lot of manufacturers saying "matched pairs" which implies their tolerances are rather wide if they have to specifically match a pair of microphones - with a Neumann you can take two at random and they'll be matched.

Whereas a top Neumann mic is a work of art, the TLM 103 just barely makes the cut. It still out performs other brands in the same price level, but as far as the upper end Neumann's, the capsule rejection rate speaks volumes for the level of quality when combined with a really good circuit and high quality components.

It depends what you are looking for - the TLM 103 is a great mic. for some things - it's just a tool. For other things there may be a better choice. And - when it was released the TLM 103 had the lowest self-noise around.

The whole TLM line (meaning transformerless) losses that wonderful color and just falls short period soundwise. Nothing sounds better than a good transformer and the whole TLM line is just Neumann on the cheap.

So you are saying that you like distortion.

You like the distortion that a transformer adds to the sound.

Personally I do *not* like this distortion and my microphone choice is based around capturing the sound as it is and changing it as little as possible.

I totally disagree with "Nothing sounds better than a good transformer and the whole TLM line is just Neumann on the cheap." I feel the total opposite.

TLM microphones are a different type of tool, that's all, and I know several people who say that Neumann's best microphone is the TLM 170.

TLM is nothing about being "on the cheap", it's about removing the distortion of a transformer - for those that like this transformer distortion, Neumann make several mics. with a trasformer, for those that don't, they make the TLM line - and for those who want the ultimate, they make the "Solution-D" digital microphone series.

It's a toolkit of different microphones to suit a wide number of people.

You don't say a Porsche 911 is crap because you prefer a Range Rover - they are just different - that's all.

Sorry - I just get worked up when people say something is bad when all they really mean is that it it not suitable for what they want to do at the time.

 

[mshilarious]

I also take issue with those who say that any mic with surface mount components must be crap. That's absurd. I could make a similarly absurd statement that such persons must be incapable of working with SMT, but I won't do that

Anyway, there are some very high quality parts available in SMT, and SMT has inherent advantages over thru-hole, especially when it comes to the digital side of the circuit--I don't know of any ADC IC manufacturer who recommends use of thru-hole parts with their chips.

Heck, a C414 has a microcontroller in it, might as well throw all those in the garbage eh? No, it's a clever idea. How about pattern selection via software, with a control signal riding on the signal pins? That's clever.

The bottom line is that consumers demand high performance circuits in very small form factors, and that trend will only increase in the future. SMT fills that need at no cost to audio performance. There really isn't any need for a microphone body to look like it did in 1950. How about a microphone where the lollipop capsule is the entire microphone, with an XLR where the bayonet mount would be? Simple, just stick a circuit board on the backplate.

Also, with the rise of portable recording, consumers will demand mics that run on less power, which means P12 and mics with internal oscillators (which with SMT take up about the space of a fingernail). And, of course, mics with internal ADC.

So I'd say Neumann is probably heading in the smart direction.