DIY Microphone

[JimsGoldtop]

Has anyone tried to build one of the kits or has bought one of the microphones from Microphone-Parts dot com?

I'm currently looking at building the S-87, a clone of the Neumann U-87. This kit is only $349.00, about ten times less than a new U-87...

https://microphone-parts.com/collections/microphone-kits/products/s87-microphone-kit

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/de...t-large-diaphragm-condenser-microphone-nickel

 

[JimsGoldtop]

Almost 50 views, it seems not many have had any experience with this company.

Okay, would it be really helpful if I just went ahead and built the mic, do a build video and review? Of course, someone needs to lend me their U87.

 

[yeti]

From their website
"It is a premium studio condenser based on the sound of the Neumann U87 / U87 Ai."

The U 87 and U 87 Ai are very different from each other so I'm not sure what to make of this statement.
Also the guy in the video review proudly proclaims that the Voice over was done with the kit mic. It sounds like a typical cheap Chinese LDC to me, spitty, spikey and brittle, very unpleasant and nothing like a Neumann. Just my 2 cents.

 

[mudfinger]

The diaphragm of the S-87 looks very similar to the diaphragms in the U-87 and U-87 Ai, but that's a small part of the overall equation, no?

 

[JimsGoldtop]

From their website
"It is a premium studio condenser based on the sound of the Neumann U87 / U87 Ai."

The U 87 and U 87 Ai are very different from each other so I'm not sure what to make of this statement.
Also the guy in the video review proudly proclaims that the Voice over was done with the kit mic. It sounds like a typical cheap Chinese LDC to me, spitty, spikey and brittle, very unpleasant and nothing like a Neumann. Just my 2 cents.

The comparisons I've seen on the 87 and 87ai are very similar, literally one turn of an eq knob and they sound like one another.

The comparisons of the S87 and U87 were very good, I could barely tell them apart.

 

[JimsGoldtop]

The diaphragm of the S-87 looks very similar to the diaphragms in the U-87 and U-87 Ai, but that's a small part of the overall equation, no?

I think so, that's pretty much what I'm trying to find out.

 

[yeti]

The diaphragm of the S-87 looks very similar to the diaphragms in the U-87 and U-87 Ai, but that's a small part of the overall equation, no?

Of course they look similar, the Chinese RK -87 used here is a knock-off of Neumann's K67/87 capsule. And no, that's a large part of the equation.

The comparisons I've seen on the 87 and 87ai are very similar, literally one turn of an eq knob and they sound like one another.

I'm by no means a mic expert but have to disagree here, EQ will not turn a U87 Ai into a U87.
The U 87Ai is more sensitive but at the price of reduced headroom. The capsule's polarization voltage is different too. The original 87 is already prone to unpleasant breakup but the Ai is much worse. I had David Brown clean/ rebuild 2 mid 80's Ais for me and before proceeding he warned me that many of his customers are disappointed that his faithful restoration doesn't eliminate the "cheap raspy Chinese sounds" this mic can produce when hit hard. It comes with the territory.
From my personal experience I find the U87 Ai only useful in lower SPL environments, for vocals, even some Voice over work it has a nasty distorted edge that is a result of the reduced headroom, both the capsule and the preamp distort when hit hard. According to Klaus Heyne the Ai will distort 6 dB before the older U 87.
I will say that despite it's shortcoming the U 87 Ai is a great mic because of its very good off axis response and great reach. It's great as section mic in orchestral work, especially woodwinds. None of the mics using the Chinese clone capsules come close.

The comparisons of the S87 and U87 were very good, I could barely tell them apart.

I've done comparisons with $99.00 mics vs a U87Ai where nobody could tell the difference. It means very little. I put an MXL next to the U87Ai in a dead room and had someone speak into it a moderate level on axis. The difference was minimal, certainly not worth the extra expense, so if you're pod casting from your bedroom's closet the diff may be irrelevant. But as soon as you move off axis or present the mics with a more challenging source the Chinese mics fall apart.

 

[JimsGoldtop]

Of course they look similar, the Chinese RK -87 used here is a knock-off of Neumann's K67/87 capsule. And no, that's a large part of the equation.




I'm by no means a mic expert but have to disagree here, EQ will not turn a U87 Ai into a U87.
The U 87Ai is more sensitive but at the price of reduced headroom. The capsule's polarization voltage is different too. The original 87 is already prone to unpleasant breakup but the Ai is much worse. I had David Brown clean/ rebuild 2 mid 80's Ais for me and before proceeding he warned me that many of his customers are disappointed that his faithful restoration doesn't eliminate the "cheap raspy Chinese sounds" this mic can produce when hit hard. It comes with the territory.
From my personal experience I find the U87 Ai only useful in lower SPL environments, for vocals, even some Voice over work it has a nasty distorted edge that is a result of the reduced headroom, both the capsule and the preamp distort when hit hard. According to Klaus Heyne the Ai will distort 6 dB before the older U 87.
I will say that despite it's shortcoming the U 87 Ai is a great mic because of its very good off axis response and great reach. It's great as section mic in orchestral work, especially woodwinds. None of the mics using the Chinese clone capsules come close.



I've done comparisons with $99.00 mics vs a U87Ai where nobody could tell the difference. It means very little. I put an MXL next to the U87Ai in a dead room and had someone speak into it a moderate level on axis. The difference was minimal, certainly not worth the extra expense, so if you're pod casting from your bedroom's closet the diff may be irrelevant. But as soon as you move off axis or present the mics with a more challenging source the Chinese mics fall apart.

You certainly seem to know your stuff. Any mics around the $500 range you would recommend. Our keyboard player recommends a used AT 4050.

 

[yeti]

You certainly seem to know your stuff. Any mics around the $500 range you would recommend. Our keyboard player recommends a used AT 4050.

Like I said, I'm no expert and I'm not following the market too closely but I'd say it all depends on what you want to do with it. With mics there are so many opinions, self appointed gurus, clowns like me and all that, so it's really hard to use the internet as a reliable source. My opinion is that you get what you pay for. There are some "safe" mics I'd recommend without hesitation like Gefell's M930 at around a Grand but the $500 range is a really tricky once you've heard what a really great mic can do. If you believe the hype a good number of $500 LDCs from China will get you "there and beyond" but from what I've heard this is not the case. I had the good fortune a few weeks ago to spend some time @ Shannon Rhodes ' place and hearing a couple of mid priced ( above a grand) stock mics vs his modded or custom builds vs a few vintage classics was a real eye opener. Like I said, you get what you pay for, sometimes less but never more, especially with microphones. As the applications become more demanding the good to great mics will reveal themselves in not too subtle ways.
None of this means that you can't use cheap mics and get decent recordings. I use 12 year old ADK Viennas at home, there are not particularly good but in the end what matters is what happens in front of the mic. One cheap mic I routinely hear good things about is the old CAD M179.
Regarding the AT 4050, I don't know every AT model, I've heard about some that are supposedly good but everyone I've tried was awful. Rode might be a better choice but what do I know.
Ask yourself this: do I really need a condenser? I'd prefer a great dynamic mic over a run-of-the-mill budget condenser any day. A used MD 441 or a Shure SM7 (the original version) will be a better vocal mic than some LDC where the sales pitch sounds better than the mic, kiss my gold-sputtered a#s.

Good luck

 

[yeti]

One more thing, I couldn't remember where I saw it but I found it, the Soundpure shootout, Neumann U87, U87Ai and Peluso U87 clone. Without reading the comments, listening to my IMAC speakers the Ai stands out like a sore thumb, ratty distortion that many apparently like (see comments), it's not a good vocal mic in my view but very good in other applications. And to be specific, that is exactly what every Ai I've ever used sounds like, it's not a bad test setup or anything.
I'm not opposed to some "hair" on a vocal mic, U 67s have a lovely grit when pushed but the Ai 87s just sound clipped.

 

[Freddy G]

Regarding the AT 4050, I don't know every AT model, I've heard about some that are supposedly good but everyone I've tried was awful. Rode might be a better choice but what do I know.

I've been recording Stephen Fry for the past couple of months....strictly voiceover work for documentaries (BBC) and commercials (Apple and Sony). After going through my mic locker the winner for his voice was the AT 4050. Of course being VO work the mic was not challenged in off axis duties....

 

[yeti]

I've been recording Stephen Fry for the past couple of months....strictly voiceover work for documentaries (BBC) and commercials (Apple and Sony). After going through my mic locker the winner for his voice was the AT 4050. Of course being VO work the mic was not challenged in off axis duties....

Good to hear. In VO work it's really good to have a few options since certain voices and mics just don't go together very well. That said, many big time VO guys record at home these days and usually just use a TLM 103 or the old 416 shotgun.
Some top brands of mics are really consistent through their lineup, Schoeps and DPA come to mind while others (Neumann especially) are all over the place. The worst mic I've ever used is a recent Neumann ( hint: it's not a condenser) while my award for most ridiculous overhyped mic ever made goes to Audio Technica (AT 895) so go figure. I personally prefer brands that offer consistency throughout their range but that's really hard to find.

 

[Freddy G]

Good to hear. In VO work it's really good to have a few options since certain voices and mics just don't go together very well. That said, many big time VO guys record at home these days and usually just use a TLM 103 or the old 416 shotgun.
Some top brands of mics are really consistent through their lineup, Schoeps and DPA come to mind while others (Neumann especially) are all over the place. The worst mic I've ever used is a recent Neumann ( hint: it's not a condenser) while my award for most ridiculous overhyped mic ever made goes to Audio Technica (AT 895) so go figure. I personally prefer brands that offer consistency throughout their range but that's really hard to find.

Ha....yeah. I have a couple of AT 4033 mics in the locker and they are NOT nice! I've never heard a DPA I didn't like.

 

[JimsGoldtop]

Like I said, I'm no expert and I'm not following the market too closely but I'd say it all depends on what you want to do with it. With mics there are so many opinions, self appointed gurus, clowns like me and all that, so it's really hard to use the internet as a reliable source. My opinion is that you get what you pay for. There are some "safe" mics I'd recommend without hesitation like Gefell's M930 at around a Grand but the $500 range is a really tricky once you've heard what a really great mic can do. If you believe the hype a good number of $500 LDCs from China will get you "there and beyond" but from what I've heard this is not the case. I had the good fortune a few weeks ago to spend some time @ Shannon Rhodes ' place and hearing a couple of mid priced ( above a grand) stock mics vs his modded or custom builds vs a few vintage classics was a real eye opener. Like I said, you get what you pay for, sometimes less but never more, especially with microphones. As the applications become more demanding the good to great mics will reveal themselves in not too subtle ways.
None of this means that you can't use cheap mics and get decent recordings. I use 12 year old ADK Viennas at home, there are not particularly good but in the end what matters is what happens in front of the mic. One cheap mic I routinely hear good things about is the old CAD M179.
Regarding the AT 4050, I don't know every AT model, I've heard about some that are supposedly good but everyone I've tried was awful. Rode might be a better choice but what do I know.
Ask yourself this: do I really need a condenser? I'd prefer a great dynamic mic over a run-of-the-mill budget condenser any day. A used MD 441 or a Shure SM7 (the original version) will be a better vocal mic than some LDC where the sales pitch sounds better than the mic, kiss my gold-sputtered a#s.

Good luck

You're a very demanding guy when it comes to quality, which in itself is a good quality so guys like me who know virtually nothing about mics can get some understanding. Thanks very much.

Interesting you say the SM7, pretty tough to find those considering they were made in the 70's, but that said, many folks have recommended the SM7B to me, although I do believe this is a dynamic mic.

 

[JimsGoldtop]

I've been recording Stephen Fry for the past couple of months....strictly voiceover work for documentaries (BBC) and commercials (Apple and Sony). After going through my mic locker the winner for his voice was the AT 4050. Of course being VO work the mic was not challenged in off axis duties....

Our keyboard player owns 2 of those and he keeps telling me to just get one and don't look back. It's a mic he says I won't ever outgrow.

 

[yeti]

Interesting you say the SM7, pretty tough to find those considering they were made in the 70's, but that said, many folks have recommended the SM7B to me, although I do believe this is a dynamic mic.

I've never tried an original SM 7 (The Bruce Swedien/ Michael Jackson mic) but I have tried several SM7Bs and I'm making assumptions that my experiences with SM 57 type mics over the years translate to the close relative called SM7. I have found myself dumbfounded many times by the fact that SM57s are still popular. I have used Unidyne III 545s and SM57s from the 60's and 70s extensively and those mics were all wonderful, very detailed on guitar amps, better than anything new, you can hear the paper of the speaker, every nuance of the player and they are more forgiving as far as placement goes as well. I've used USA made SM57s from the 80s and they were close, not identical but robust and they are the mic that built the 57s reputation. But the mexican made 57s (and 58s) don't impress me at all, no wonder people like the Audix I5 better (including myself) New SM7Bs don't do anything for me either but since the original is so highly thought of I assume that it too was a different mic than what Shure peddles these days, hence my recommendation. I had no idea they were that expensive though, like I said, I don't follow the market.
And yes, SM7s are dynamic.
And just to throw in one more unscientific "opinion" of mine, I believe the difference lies in the magnets used. I remember receiving a couple of RE 50s for work (stick mics for sportscasters) and when I listened to the announcers with those new pics I went "woah, sounds like s@#t, wonky midrange and all", I had the mic changed to the old RE50s (a really nice Omni mic, basically a 635 that folks like to use for drum overheads these days) and everything was fine. What happened? Turns out the new mics were RE50N ( neodymium magnet), same mic as the conventional except for the magnet.
I can't prove it but it's the same with speakers, you can recone an old Jensen P10 R with anything, the sweetness is still there ( because of the old magnets, what else could it be?) while a new speaker clone of this model never delivers the same open chimey sound. I'm currently dinking around with several old and broken dynamics from the 60s (EVs mostly) and they do have a sweetness that many new mics just don't have. Love the old 666, a great vocal mic IMO.

 

[bp-plickner]

I have built micparts 12-251 and t-47 kits and can say that in my limited experience the 12-251 is the best sounding mic I have ever heard and the most expensive mic I have ever bought. On guitar cabs and drum overheads it is the best. Micparts support and documentation is excellent.


The T47 is less expensive mic with a different capsule that also sounds great on guitar cabs.

If you can spare the cash you might like the results.