Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is Neumann U87 still best all around vocal mic for $2200?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 8:47:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
vocal mics.

I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.

It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 8:47:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"J.W." wrote:

<snip>

>It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.

Another is that clients and, perhaps more improtantly, potential clients
are impressed by U87's.

--
========================================================================
Michael Kesti | "And like, one and one don't make
| two, one and one make one."
mkesti@gv.net | - The Who, Bargain
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 8:47:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:47:33 +0000, J.W. <jwngaa@att.net> wrote:

>
>
>I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
>I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
>haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
>vocal mics.
>
>I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
>I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
>variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
>CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.
>
>It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.

Well, I find myself reaching for my U47 fet all the time these days
and I have 2 87s a 414, m149 and many other goodies.

87 will give you more patterns - handy for opposing vocalists, but my
U47 sounds better out of the gate. It is optimized for cardoid, as it
were.




Kurt Riemann
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 9:00:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have one FS in like-new condition w/shockmount and box.
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 4:34:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:47:33 -0400, J.W. wrote
(in article <2djkh01lnk42su3bchrb4hml86439vb1ji@4ax.com>):

>
>
> I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
> I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
> haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
> vocal mics.
>
> I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
> I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
> variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
> CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.
>
> It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.
>



The specificity of your question limits the responses to mics that cost
around $2200. That makes a response both difficult and easy. There are mics
that cost less that can do the job.

The mic preamp into which you plug the U 87 (or ANY mic) makes a huge
difference.

All that said, it's exceedingly difficult to go wrong with a U 87.

I have heard U 67s with particular tubes that do sound quite wonderful, but I
think they cost more.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 8:48:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 12:34:57 -0400, Ty Ford <tyreeford@comcast.net>
wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 12:47:33 -0400, J.W. wrote
>(in article <2djkh01lnk42su3bchrb4hml86439vb1ji@4ax.com>):
>
>>
>>
>> I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
>> I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
>> haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
>> vocal mics.
>>
>> I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
>> I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
>> variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
>> CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.
>>
>> It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.
>
>
>The specificity of your question limits the responses to mics that cost
>around $2200. That makes a response both difficult and easy. There are mics
>that cost less that can do the job.
>
>The mic preamp into which you plug the U 87 (or ANY mic) makes a huge
>difference.

I have a the Aphex 1100 (which I believe you have also). The only
large condenser I've hooked up to it is the AT4033 which I don't
like---too harsh and edgy. (The mic is the problem not the Aphex
1100.)


>All that said, it's exceedingly difficult to go wrong with a U 87.
>
>I have heard U 67s with particular tubes that do sound quite wonderful, but I
>think they cost more.

So far, the U47 and U69 have been mentioned as alternatives to
U87---both of which cost a lot more. I guess the U87 bashing is
prevalent because it's such a common well-known mic.
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 8:48:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

J.W. wrote:
>
> I guess the U87 bashing is
> prevalent because it's such a common well-known mic.

People who have never heard one seem prone to that opinion--or the opinion that a U87 is the sine qua non vocal mic.

Some of us who have used them just prefer other microphones more often, particularly on today's recording chains.
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 8:48:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 11:20:29 -0700, Kurt Albershardt <kurt@nv.net>
wrote:

>J.W. wrote:
>>
>> I guess the U87 bashing is
>> prevalent because it's such a common well-known mic.
>
>People who have never heard one seem prone to that opinion--or the opinion that a U87 is the sine qua non vocal mic.
>
>Some of us who have used them just prefer other microphones more often, particularly on today's recording chains.
>


Hey JW
you are in Dallas?

I have both the Manley Ref Cardoid and Soundeluxe E47
I also have a couple U87s and a Fet 47

They are just a little more money

In my opinion, The Manley and the Soundeluxe both smoke the U87
Drop me an email if you want to hear them

Steve
www.dub1sound.com
Anonymous
August 13, 2004 2:16:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>I guess the U87 bashing is
>prevalent because it's such a common well-known mic.
>

The right mic is completely "voice dependent." Provided you match it
up with the right preamp!
I've had two U87's, one stock and one with a 3-micron diaphram mod.
I didn't like either one on my voice at all. I strongly preferred a Beyer M88.
I also strongly preferred an A/T 4050. YMWV.
Anonymous
August 13, 2004 11:46:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <cf7nh014mkj75qgbie9u52r0fehjiq2740@4ax.com>, J.W. <jwngaa@att.net>
writes:

>I have a the Aphex 1100 (which I believe you have also). The only
>large condenser I've hooked up to it is the AT4033 which I don't
>like---too harsh and edgy. (The mic is the problem not the Aphex
>1100.)

The 4033 is not a large diaphram. Its a 3/4".

Garth~


"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney
Anonymous
August 13, 2004 1:03:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>
>> All that said, it's exceedingly difficult to go wrong with a U 87.
>>
>> I have heard U 67s with particular tubes that do sound quite wonderful, but
>> I
>> think they cost more.
>
> So far, the U47 and U69 have been mentioned as alternatives to
> U87---both of which cost a lot more. I guess the U87 bashing is
> prevalent because it's such a common well-known mic.
>

I just reviewed the TLM 127. It sits sort of in the middle of the line. Not
quite here or there. The review will be out in PAR soon.

Regards,

Ty




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford
Anonymous
August 13, 2004 1:06:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:16:50 -0400, Hellenason7 wrote
(in article <20040812181650.19209.00003319@mb-m04.aol.com>):

>> I guess the U87 bashing is
>> prevalent because it's such a common well-known mic.
>>
>
> The right mic is completely "voice dependent." Provided you match
> it
> up with the right preamp!
> I've had two U87's, one stock and one with a 3-micron diaphram mod.

> I didn't like either one on my voice at all. I strongly preferred a Beyer
> M88.
> I also strongly preferred an A/T 4050. YMWV.
>
>

Your post makes it sound as though (opting for an M88) the U 87s were too
bright. That's very untypical. What preamp were you using?

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford
Anonymous
August 13, 2004 6:00:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Yes! Pound for pound it is the "best" mic out there. Irrespective of the
extravaganrt prices of other neumanns, manleys, lawson etc. etc., the U87
has already established a "forever" reputation as being the pro standard; so
you CANNOT go wrong in buying one.

All mics are almost merely mics, but in this business you have to flow with
the crowd if you want your incomings to be nice. :-)

Men and women with much more expensive mics will be touting their horns day
and night, but why buy a Toyato Camry if you can easily afford a 200k
Mercedes Benz without feeling a loss nor a spite.
Anonymous
August 13, 2004 6:37:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>> The right mic is completely "voice dependent." Provided you
>match
>> it
>> up with the right preamp!
>> I've had two U87's, one stock and one with a 3-micron diaphram
>mod.
>
>> I didn't like either one on my voice at all. I strongly preferred a Beyer
>> M88.
>> I also strongly preferred an A/T 4050. YMWV.
>>
>>
>
>Your post makes it sound as though (opting for an M88) the U 87s were too
>bright. That's very untypical. What preamp were you using?
>
>Regards,
>
>Ty Ford


I used a Tube Tech MP1A for most of the past ten years, so something
being overly "bright" wasn't really an issue.
I didn't like the texture of either of my U87's on my voice. They
didn't really sound "alive," for lack of a better term. They just didn't fit.
I've tried about 15 mics over the past few years, and I'm still
singing into the M88. I had to sell the MP1A to buy another Telecaster, so
lately I've been using an RNP.

I've been rather anxious to try some of the modern U47-types, but $$
hasn't (yet) permitted it!
August 15, 2004 9:57:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I would buy studio project C-1








J.W. <jwngaa@att.net> wrote in message news:<2djkh01lnk42su3bchrb4hml86439vb1ji@4ax.com>...
> I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
> I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
> haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
> vocal mics.
>
> I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
> I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
> variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
> CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.
>
> It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.
Anonymous
August 16, 2004 3:11:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I would not...

JP

"bj" <bluesjeon@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:1c7c168a.0408151657.4a0d389a@posting.google.com...
> I would buy studio project C-1
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> J.W. <jwngaa@att.net> wrote in message
news:<2djkh01lnk42su3bchrb4hml86439vb1ji@4ax.com>...
> > I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
> > I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
> > haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
> > vocal mics.
> >
> > I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
> > I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
> > variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
> > CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.
> >
> > It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.
Anonymous
August 16, 2004 4:46:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:57:11 -0400, bj wrote
(in article <1c7c168a.0408151657.4a0d389a@posting.google.com>):

> I would buy studio project C-1

You would get a massively inferior mic.

Regards,

Ty Ford


>
>
> J.W. <jwngaa@att.net> wrote in message
> news:<2djkh01lnk42su3bchrb4hml86439vb1ji@4ax.com>...
>> I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
>> I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
>> haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
>> vocal mics.
>>
>> I realize the "best mic will depend on the vocalist" but in this case,
>> I need the most general purpose mic that sounds the best across a wide
>> variety of male & female voices. I'm putting together a compilation
>> CD so I don't really know who my eventual singers will be.
>>
>> It seems like one compelling point for the U87 is its resale value.



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford
Anonymous
August 16, 2004 11:13:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"J.W." <jwngaa@att.net> wrote in message
news:2djkh01lnk42su3bchrb4hml86439vb1ji@4ax.com...
>
>
> I can get a new Neumann U-87 for $2240. But before I spend that much,
> I wanted to get feedback on the latest competitive vocal mics. I
> haven't been keeping up with the industry and technology advances in
> vocal mics.

A stock U-87 and a little eq. is a great setup for when you have no time to
experiment. If you have time to experiment, another mike without eq. will
usually sound better than an 87 with eq. but I know of nothing that's as
reliably good except for a stock U-67.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 3:10:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Ty Ford wrote:

> > I would buy studio project C-1
> You would get a massively inferior mic.

Please prove this.

--
Nathan

'What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about?'
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 3:10:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Nathan West <natewest@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>Ty Ford wrote:
>
>> > I would buy studio project C-1
>> You would get a massively inferior mic.
>
>Please prove this.

Sure. Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is
that the U87 will still work. If it doesn't, Neumann will overnight
you a replacement. I suspect the same will not be the case for the C-1
(although I'd love to be proven wrong).

Superiority doesn't all have to do with sound quality.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 9:25:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <4123391E.765E6C0A@nc.rr.com>, Nathan West <natewest@nc.rr.com>
writes:

>Ty Ford wrote:
>
>> > I would buy studio project C-1
>> You would get a massively inferior mic.
>
>Please prove this.
>
>--
>Nathan

You can prove it by listening.
Garth~


"I think the fact that music can come up a wire is a miracle."
Ed Cherney
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 10:54:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 18 Aug 2004 08:44:33 -0400, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Nathan West <natewest@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>>Ty Ford wrote:
>>
>>> > I would buy studio project C-1
>>> You would get a massively inferior mic.
>>
>>Please prove this.
>
>Sure. Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is
>that the U87 will still work. If it doesn't, Neumann will overnight
>you a replacement. I suspect the same will not be the case for the C-1
>(although I'd love to be proven wrong).
>
>Superiority doesn't all have to do with sound quality.

Yeah but if you aren't planning on dropping the mic you could probably
save some money...
Anonymous
August 18, 2004 11:01:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is that
> the U87 will still work.

This recalls the famous experiment performed in Pisa by Galileo, except
that he dropped both microphones simultaneously--muttering something
about maintaining the stereo image through coincident placement on the
long way down. Since playback systems hadn't been invented at the time,
the true intent of his efforts was misunderstood for centuries.

Still, I read your post as describing a hypothetical scenario rather than
an actual, practical suggestion that any of us should carry out at your
expense, no? --unless you mean the third story of a dollhouse standing
on a carpeted floor?


> If it doesn't, Neumann will overnight you a replacement.

Uh, yes--for the mere list price of a new U 87 plus shipping charges.
I know of no microphone manufacturer that offers warranty replacement
in cases of deliberate abuse of the product.
August 18, 2004 11:56:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Nathan West <natewest@nc.rr.com> wrote:
>>Ty Ford wrote:
>>
>>> > I would buy studio project C-1
>>> You would get a massively inferior mic.
>>
>>Please prove this.
>
> Sure. Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is
> that the U87 will still work. If it doesn't, Neumann will overnight
> you a replacement. I suspect the same will not be the case for the C-1
> (although I'd love to be proven wrong).


And if you plug a 50' or so cable into both before you drop them, & record
them through a Great River. The Neuman will capture a much more musical
pavement hitting sound as well.
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 2:33:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Sure. Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is
> that the U87 will still work. If it doesn't, Neumann will overnight
> you a replacement. I suspect the same will not be the case for the C-1
> (although I'd love to be proven wrong).

If that's how modern Mic test are done, I have to re-examine my methods!<G>

FYI Bret Casey ( formerly Marshall mic guy) now works with the Studio
Projects line. I imagine if you asked him, after that kind of *mic test* he
would replace it as well if you let him Neuman would replace there mic too.

I have both a U87ai and a C1. I haven't cracked either open as I'm not the
kind of guy who should be doing that. I do know that both have worked for
what I use them for quite flawlessly.

So if it is not about sound quality exclusively, and/or partially about
customer service, and partially about construction quality I would say they
are equal to the task one might use them for. Not replacements, but equals.

--
Nathan

'What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about?'
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 2:33:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Well Brent has been at the Stephen Paul lab, but since I caught wind of this
statement, I thought I would answer this one.

Did Scott really say this? If he did, the next question is, does he really
believe it? I can't believe he is even serious about that statement and
think he is just making an effort in the humor department. I wonder if he
ever opened a U87 and looked inside?

If Scott did say this, my reply would be that the C1 is a great mic for
under $200.00, which is $100.00 less than a U87 Shock Mount. Scott does not
have to believe my opinions, he can ask Steve Nathan, Julian King at
Oceanway Nashville, Tony Lindsay from Santana, and Simple Plan. They all
seem to like the mic quite a bit and think it is well worth the money, and
they seem to be doing well with it.

In either case, I disagree with Scotts comments and think the C1 is actually
built stronger than the U87. We use all steel top plates, not plastic, all
our switches are metal, not plastic, our frame is twice the thickness of a
U87 and our body is also about three times the thickness.

If anything, the C1 will work after that kind of drop and not the Neumann. I
am happy to put up a C1 for that test if Scott is happy to put up a Neumann.
Anyway, after that statement, I called Sennheiser and asked them to replace
my U87. They asked me why, and I said I dropped it off a third story window.
They said don't wait for a new U87 overnight anytime soon. So much for that.
Where did Scott get the idea they would replace it?

On the other hand, we have fixed our mikes that were in floods, fires,
dropped off stands, and many other types of damage, and have never charge a
penny for the repair. We do not replace them, but we fix them from parts we
have because that is our policy. I don't think Neumann would never do that.


Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
Joemeek Studio Projects Toft Audio Stephen Paul Microphones
23775 Madison Street
Torrance, CA 90505
toll free: 877-563-6335
e-mail: alan@pmiaudio.com

Joemeek, Studio Projects and Toft Audio are Registered Trademarks Of PMI
Audio Group


"Nathan West" <natewest@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4123D939.AA913822@nc.rr.com...
>
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
> > Sure. Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is
> > that the U87 will still work. If it doesn't, Neumann will overnight
> > you a replacement. I suspect the same will not be the case for the C-1
> > (although I'd love to be proven wrong).
>
> If that's how modern Mic test are done, I have to re-examine my
methods!<G>
>
> FYI Bret Casey ( formerly Marshall mic guy) now works with the Studio
> Projects line. I imagine if you asked him, after that kind of *mic test*
he
> would replace it as well if you let him Neuman would replace there mic
too.
>
> I have both a U87ai and a C1. I haven't cracked either open as I'm not the
> kind of guy who should be doing that. I do know that both have worked for
> what I use them for quite flawlessly.
>
> So if it is not about sound quality exclusively, and/or partially about
> customer service, and partially about construction quality I would say
they
> are equal to the task one might use them for. Not replacements, but
equals.
>
> --
> Nathan
>
> 'What if the hokey pokey is really what it's all about?'
>
>
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 3:53:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 13:25:52 -0400, Garth wrote
(in article <20040818132552.17790.00000278@mb-m04.aol.com>):

> In article <4123391E.765E6C0A@nc.rr.com>, Nathan West <natewest@nc.rr.com>
> writes:
>
>> Ty Ford wrote:
>>
>>>> I would buy studio project C-1
>>> You would get a massively inferior mic.
>>
>> Please prove this.
>>
>> --
>> Nathan
>
> You can prove it by listening.

Why thanks, I have!

I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the message on
my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the phrase?

(The above is NOT an OT comment. It's actually just an obtuse reference.)

Regards,

Ty Ford





-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
August 19, 2004 6:21:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <4123D939.AA913822@nc.rr.com>, Nathan West
<natewest@nc.rr.com> wrote:

> I have both a U87ai and a C1. I haven't cracked either open as I'm not the
> kind of guy who should be doing that. I do know that both have worked for
> what I use them for quite flawlessly.
>
> So if it is not about sound quality exclusively, and/or partially about
> customer service, and partially about construction quality I would say they
> are equal to the task one might use them for. Not replacements, but equals.


You should take a look inside your 87. You don't even need a
screwdriver and you pretty much can't hurt it.

Turn the bottom round ring piece counterclockwise and off it comes.
Slide out the big round metal section and presto: there's your
electronics.

If you squeeze the two metal posts on each side of the capsule, the
entire capsule assemble will slide up and off. Damn cool.

Don't worry, damn easy to put back together too. Check-it-out as Ali G
would say.

If you really believe the C1 has equal value, why hold onto your 87?
Sell it and buy a bunch more C1's and some other stuff your place
needs.




David Correia
Celebration Sound
Warren, Rhode Island

CelebrationSound@aol.com
www.CelebrationSound.com
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 6:41:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

George wrote:

> they were all just planks with frets! Vintage Fender, what a fraking JOKE

I have found a wide range of tone from various stylistically similar
Strats (regular ol' sunburst, rosewood fingerboard) over the years, and
some of the ones I liked best were not of recent manufacture. Joke about
it if you wish, but lots of folks can tell one from another when they're
playing and listening.

--
ha
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 6:41:43 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

George wrote:

> nothing special about a 56 that can't be made into a 2006 caster

And you know this because you have found a recent issue that sounds like
a '56 you've played? I assume you've not played a 2006 Strat, yet.

--
ha
August 19, 2004 6:57:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <1giqbr6.1x42dzjq88d6zN%walkinay@thegrid.net>,
walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich) wrote:

> George wrote:
>
> > nothing special about a 56 that can't be made into a 2006 caster
>
> And you know this because you have found a recent issue that sounds like
> a '56 you've played? I assume you've not played a 2006 Strat, yet.
>
> --
> ha

no 2006 yet , I doubt I will bother either
I see the guitar as one of the least important links in the chain
the pick-ups, amp or even the speaker having more personality than the
guitars
I seriously doubt I wll own any more electric guitars though a sarod may
be in my future
George
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 6:57:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 02:57:39 GMT, George
<g.p.gleason@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>In article <1giqbr6.1x42dzjq88d6zN%walkinay@thegrid.net>,
> walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich) wrote:
>
>> George wrote:
>>
>> > nothing special about a 56 that can't be made into a 2006 caster
>>
>> And you know this because you have found a recent issue that sounds like
>> a '56 you've played? I assume you've not played a 2006 Strat, yet.
>>
>> --
>> ha
>
>no 2006 yet , I doubt I will bother either
>I see the guitar as one of the least important links in the chain
>the pick-ups, amp or even the speaker having more personality than the
>guitars
>I seriously doubt I wll own any more electric guitars though a sarod may
>be in my future

Of course, it's the guy, not the gear... but, many players do prefer
the old guitars for a reason. They may not be "better" than new ones,
but they are different.
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 8:51:54 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hZmdnQR7WrvRubncRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
> I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the message
on
> my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the phrase?

"Ty Ford - he wrote great articles... for the price" :D 

"Ty Ford, RIP, he wasn't a bad husband... for the price" (Mrs. Ford)

"Ty Ford, a great voiceover guy... for the price"

Dude, you asked for it :) 
--


Neil Henderson
Saqqara Records
http://www.saqqararecords.com
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 12:11:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Alan Hyatt <ahyatt01@cox.net> wrote:
>
>If Scott did say this, my reply would be that the C1 is a great mic for
>under $200.00, which is $100.00 less than a U87 Shock Mount. Scott does not
>have to believe my opinions, he can ask Steve Nathan, Julian King at
>Oceanway Nashville, Tony Lindsay from Santana, and Simple Plan. They all
>seem to like the mic quite a bit and think it is well worth the money, and
>they seem to be doing well with it.

I did say it, and I agree with you completely about this. The C1 is a
pretty fine microphone, and I'd actually say it was a more useful microphone
than a U87 (but then I don't much like the U87 to be honest). But I do think
I disagree a bit about the ruggedness.

>If anything, the C1 will work after that kind of drop and not the Neumann. I
>am happy to put up a C1 for that test if Scott is happy to put up a Neumann.
>Anyway, after that statement, I called Sennheiser and asked them to replace
>my U87. They asked me why, and I said I dropped it off a third story window.
>They said don't wait for a new U87 overnight anytime soon. So much for that.
>Where did Scott get the idea they would replace it?

Because I've got that kind of service from them before. Somewhere around
here I even have a recording that was made on a Nagra as it fell off the
roof of a building. (What is most impressive is that it kept speed when
it hit). There was a sennheiser on it, though.

>On the other hand, we have fixed our mikes that were in floods, fires,
>dropped off stands, and many other types of damage, and have never charge a
>penny for the repair. We do not replace them, but we fix them from parts we
>have because that is our policy. I don't think Neumann would never do that.

That is impressive, and that is exactly the kind of support that folks
are willing to pay more money for.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 12:54:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <e6a68193.0408181801.47ae0ba7@posting.google.com> DSatz@msn.com writes:

> This recalls the famous experiment performed in Pisa by Galileo, except
> that he dropped both microphones simultaneously--muttering something
> about maintaining the stereo image through coincident placement on the
> long way down. Since playback systems hadn't been invented at the time,
> the true intent of his efforts was misunderstood for centuries.

Please move this to the Doppler thread.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 12:54:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <oBUUc.71726$Lj.58607@fed1read03> ahyatt01@cox.net writes:

> If anything, the C1 will work after that kind of drop and not the Neumann. I
> am happy to put up a C1 for that test if Scott is happy to put up a Neumann.

Since the U87 isn't one of Scott's favorite mics, he might take you up
on that, if he had one. <g>


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 12:54:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <hZmdnQR7WrvRubncRVn-hQ@comcast.com> tyreeford@comcast.net writes:

> I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the message on
> my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the phrase?

"They dug a pretty deep hole, for the price."

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 2:22:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:51:54 -0400, neil.henderson@sbcglobal.netNOSPAM wrote
(in article <KlWUc.8783$0B4.4876@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>):

> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:hZmdnQR7WrvRubncRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
>> I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the message
> on
>> my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the phrase?
>
> "Ty Ford - he wrote great articles... for the price" :D 
>
> "Ty Ford, RIP, he wasn't a bad husband... for the price" (Mrs. Ford)
>
> "Ty Ford, a great voiceover guy... for the price"
>
> Dude, you asked for it :) 
> --
>
>
> Neil Henderson
> Saqqara Records
> http://www.saqqararecords.com

I like #2. (the selection that is.)

Ty Ford




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
August 19, 2004 5:54:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

DSatz@msn.com (David Satz) writes:

>Scott Dorsey wrote:

>> Drop a C-1 out of a third story window. Drop a U87. My bet is that
>> the U87 will still work.

>This recalls the famous experiment performed in Pisa by Galileo, except
>that he dropped both microphones simultaneously--muttering something
>about maintaining the stereo image through coincident placement on the
>long way down. Since playback systems hadn't been invented at the time,
>the true intent of his efforts was misunderstood for centuries.


I hereby nominate this for RAP "Post of the Year".
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 8:35:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cfvivh$7gn$1@panix2.panix.com...
>...My bet is that the U87 will still work.

Mine too, I've seen one fall off a boom many times!

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 9:16:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 19 Aug 2004 08:54:49 -0400, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
wrote:

>
>In article <hZmdnQR7WrvRubncRVn-hQ@comcast.com> tyreeford@comcast.net writes:
>
>> I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the message on
>> my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the phrase?
>
>"They dug a pretty deep hole, for the price."

How about, "He complained a lot, for the price."
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 10:28:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have one....

Ty Ford...Not worth the price

Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
Joemeek Studio Projects Toft Audio Stephen Paul Microphones
23775 Madison Street
Torrance, CA 90505
toll free: 877-563-6335
e-mail: alan@pmiaudio.com


"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3Zadna-CgLgXKrncRVn-iQ@comcast.com...
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:51:54 -0400, neil.henderson@sbcglobal.netNOSPAM
wrote
> (in article <KlWUc.8783$0B4.4876@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com>):
>
> > "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> > news:hZmdnQR7WrvRubncRVn-hQ@comcast.com...
> >> I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the
message
> > on
> >> my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the
phrase?
> >
> > "Ty Ford - he wrote great articles... for the price" :D 
> >
> > "Ty Ford, RIP, he wasn't a bad husband... for the price" (Mrs. Ford)
> >
> > "Ty Ford, a great voiceover guy... for the price"
> >
> > Dude, you asked for it :) 
> > --
> >
> >
> > Neil Henderson
> > Saqqara Records
> > http://www.saqqararecords.com
>
> I like #2. (the selection that is.)
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>
Anonymous
August 19, 2004 10:30:56 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott,

I still say the C1 would hold up better on that drop. I guess we will just
have to try it somehow... but don't expect to get a new Neumann from
Sennheiser.....:) 


Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
Joemeek Studio Projects Toft Audio Stephen Paul Microphones
23775 Madison Street
Torrance, CA 90505
toll free: 877-563-6335
e-mail: alan@pmiaudio.com


"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:cg25cv$bci$1@panix2.panix.com...
> Alan Hyatt <ahyatt01@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >If Scott did say this, my reply would be that the C1 is a great mic for
> >under $200.00, which is $100.00 less than a U87 Shock Mount. Scott does
not
> >have to believe my opinions, he can ask Steve Nathan, Julian King at
> >Oceanway Nashville, Tony Lindsay from Santana, and Simple Plan. They all
> >seem to like the mic quite a bit and think it is well worth the money,
and
> >they seem to be doing well with it.
>
> I did say it, and I agree with you completely about this. The C1 is a
> pretty fine microphone, and I'd actually say it was a more useful
microphone
> than a U87 (but then I don't much like the U87 to be honest). But I do
think
> I disagree a bit about the ruggedness.
>
> >If anything, the C1 will work after that kind of drop and not the
Neumann. I
> >am happy to put up a C1 for that test if Scott is happy to put up a
Neumann.
> >Anyway, after that statement, I called Sennheiser and asked them to
replace
> >my U87. They asked me why, and I said I dropped it off a third story
window.
> >They said don't wait for a new U87 overnight anytime soon. So much for
that.
> >Where did Scott get the idea they would replace it?
>
> Because I've got that kind of service from them before. Somewhere around
> here I even have a recording that was made on a Nagra as it fell off the
> roof of a building. (What is most impressive is that it kept speed when
> it hit). There was a sennheiser on it, though.
>
> >On the other hand, we have fixed our mikes that were in floods, fires,
> >dropped off stands, and many other types of damage, and have never charge
a
> >penny for the repair. We do not replace them, but we fix them from parts
we
> >have because that is our policy. I don't think Neumann would never do
that.
>
> That is impressive, and that is exactly the kind of support that folks
> are willing to pay more money for.
> --scott
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 2:38:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 20:16:59 -0400, playonATcomcast.net wrote
(in article <angai0lbhf72b475g2o9o7gpgi0860349h@4ax.com>):

> On 19 Aug 2004 08:54:49 -0400, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers)
> wrote:
>
>>
>> In article <hZmdnQR7WrvRubncRVn-hQ@comcast.com> tyreeford@comcast.net
>> writes:
>>
>>> I'm thinking of having the phrase "for the price" carved into the message
>>> on
>>> my gravestone. Anyone have any good ideas that would include the phrase?
>>
>> "They dug a pretty deep hole, for the price."
>
> How about, "He complained a lot, for the price."

No. That would be, "He complained a lot, for free."

Ty



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 2:44:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:30:56 -0400, Alan Hyatt wrote
(in article <5vcVc.78351$Lj.67449@fed1read03>):

> Scott,
>
> I still say the C1 would hold up better on that drop. I guess we will just
> have to try it somehow... but don't expect to get a new Neumann from
> Sennheiser.....:) 
>
>
> Alan Hyatt
> PMI Audio Group
> Joemeek Studio Projects Toft Audio Stephen Paul Microphones
> 23775 Madison Street
> Torrance, CA 90505
> toll free: 877-563-6335
> e-mail: alan@pmiaudio.com

OK Alan,

It's about deeds and not words. Set it up. Drop 'em and see.

Regards,

Ty




-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 1:01:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <5vcVc.78351$Lj.67449@fed1read03> ahyatt01@cox.net writes:

> I still say the C1 would hold up better on that drop. I guess we will just
> have to try it somehow... but don't expect to get a new Neumann from
> Sennheiser.....:) 

It of course depends on how it lands and what it lands on. I suspect
that either would survive if it landed on a mattress, and neither
would survive if it landed on pavement. (I think we're still talking
about a third story drop)

On the other hand, I'm sure either would be fine after replacing the
capsule, electronics, and case. The cable, if attached, would probably
survive intact.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 9:58:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott,

What yellow cartridge brass are you referring to?


Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
Joemeek Studio Projects Toft Audio Stephen Paul Microphones
23775 Madison Street
Torrance, CA 90505
toll free: 877-563-6335
e-mail: alan@pmiaudio.com

Joemeek, Studio Projects and Toft Audio are Registered Trademarks Of PMI
Audio Group
<kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:200408200141.i7K1fL211932@panix2.panix.com...
> In article <5vcVc.78351$Lj.67449@fed1read03> you write:
> >
> >I still say the C1 would hold up better on that drop. I guess we will
just
> >have to try it somehow... but don't expect to get a new Neumann from
> >Sennheiser.....:) 
>
> Karl has left Sennheiser so we can't drop any of his....
> --scott
>
> Honestly, though, how about using something a bit harder than that yellow
> cartridge brass?
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
Anonymous
August 20, 2004 10:00:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott,

What yellow cartridge brass are you referring to?


Alan Hyatt
PMI Audio Group
Joemeek Studio Projects Toft Audio Stephen Paul Microphones
23775 Madison Street
Torrance, CA 90505
toll free: 877-563-6335
e-mail: alan@pmiaudio.com

Joemeek, Studio Projects and Toft Audio are Registered Trademarks Of PMI
Audio Group
<kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:200408200141.i7K1fL211932@panix2.panix.com...
> In article <5vcVc.78351$Lj.67449@fed1read03> you write:
> >
> >I still say the C1 would hold up better on that drop. I guess we will
just
> >have to try it somehow... but don't expect to get a new Neumann from
> >Sennheiser.....:) 
>
> Karl has left Sennheiser so we can't drop any of his....
> --scott
>
> Honestly, though, how about using something a bit harder than that yellow
> cartridge brass?
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 5:41:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

George wrote:

> this is exactly why I say vintage fenders are a scam

Which is why I wonder how many you've played and what your assessment
chops are, George.

--
ha
Anonymous
August 23, 2004 5:41:21 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

playon wrote:

> If you look at the back of a strat, you can see that the bridge never
> really connects to the wood in any solid way, which is why the steel
> block is so important for the sound. The only thing connecting the
> bridge to the body are the six small screws on top that line up the
> bridge, and then the springs on the back... that's why it's called a
> "floating" tremelo system.

Since I'm not a whammybar master I always took a wedge of maple the
width of the tremelo block and drove it between the body and that block.
Firmed things up nicely there.

--
ha
!