D-M269B Build Thread.

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
Just a sneek peek and an entry on the D-M269b i  will put everything now and cut the grease soon enough ,


All the info here : http://www.groupdiy.com/index.php?topic=49675.0


Everything went smooth but i the End In did not realized the installation of the trim pot  :eek:  the way it was installed first would be too much shaky  :(

it is really important to not  install R10 as suggested in the build at first

When everything else is installed except the trim pot and R10  ;)

---->  install R10 with some creative bending to clear about 1/4 of an inch on the side to clear the trim pot and then trim pot can be soldered close enough to the pcb  so it will not wiglle when adjusting.  , ;)

The very last Picture in the Build is an example 

Note : R14 = 100K.

Schematic: https://cdn.groupbuilder.com/groupdiy/u/39511/58d1402a04517.pdf

Overall connection: https://cdn.groupbuilder.com/groupdiy/u/39511/58d1402a0454a.jpeg

Another Piece of advice : when soldering the Tube to the Turret make sure you use the gravity in your advantage so the turret does not comes out of the hole when heating.


Note :  Not in BOM Styroflex Capacitor 100pf/630V    and Stryoflex Capacitor 560pf/630V



The Safety Manual and Considerations.https://cdn.groupbuilder.com/groupdiy/u/39511/58d1402a0455a



U67 Mic part :        http://www.mouser.com/ProjectManager/ProjectDetail.aspx?AccessID=83ad963d23
M269 b or C option http://www.mouser.com/ProjectManager/ProjectDetail.aspx?AccessID=6bb38c7d28
PSU :                       http://www.mouser.com/ProjectManager/ProjectDetail.aspx?AccessID=532017ac2f


58d1402a0457a.jpg


58d1402a0458b.jpg



58d1402a0459c.jpg


58d1402a045ae.jpg



The connection trough the socket board is made with the pre existing lead from the component ( Do not cut them until the bridge connection is actually made )

58d1402a045bf.jpg


58d1402a045d0.jpg


58d1402a045e1.jpg


58d1402a045f2.jpg


58d1402a04604.jpg


58d1402a04611.jpg


58d1402a04622.jpg


58d1402a04634.jpg


58d1402a0465f.jpg


58d1402a04670.jpg


Cleaning the boards : Get Clean Isopropyl alcool  with a tooth brush  then with another tooth brush rinse out with distilled water  and then blow with air.

58d1402a04683.jpg



To insert the isolation pin bore the hole a little with a 1/16 drill bit but do not drill trough or shave a little bit of teflon arround the pin

58d1402a04695.jpg


58d1402a046a6.jpg


58d1402a046b7.jpg


58d1402a046c8.jpg


58d1402a046d9.jpg


58d1402a046ec.jpg


58d1402a046fd.jpg


58d1402a0470e.jpg


Deposit a Generous amount of solder in the turret,  So when it is time to solder the tube leads the turret will be morelikely to stay in place ,Beware when soldering the tube leads

58d1402a0471f.jpg


58d1402a04730.jpg


58d1402a04743.jpg


58d1402a04754.jpg


58d1402a04765.jpg


Cut the extra trimmer pin flush.


58d1402a04776.jpg


58d1402a04789.jpg


58d1402a0479a.jpg


58d1402a047ab.jpg


58d1402a047bd.jpg


58d1402a047ce.jpg


58d0281993afe.jpg










 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
Build Part 2.   Switching wiring For ( Pad, Low Cut, and Pattern switch.)

This is a more detailed Build pictorial for the switchboard and all the switching connection and the capsule ,

the switching wiring is the same as the  D-U67 So it can serve as an aid for the D-U67 . There is only a difference for Pattern Switch Pin 1

58d1402a0481c.jpg


58d1402a04830.jpg


58d1402a0485a.jpg


58d1402a0486b.jpg


58d1402a0487c.jpg


58d1402a0488e.jpg


58d1402a0489b.jpg


58d1402a048ac.jpg


58d1402a048be.jpg


58d1402a048cf.jpg


58d1402a048e1.jpg


58d1402a048f2.jpg


58d1402a04904.jpg


For D-U67 only
58d1402a04915.jpg


For D-M269 Only
58d1402a04927.jpg





58d1402a04938.jpg


58d1402a04949.jpg


58d1402a0495b.jpg


58d1402a0496c.jpg


58d1402a0497d.jpg


58d1402a04991.jpg


58d1402a049a2.jpg


58d1402a049b5.jpg


58d1402a049c6.jpg


58d1402a049d9.jpg


58d1402a049eb.jpg


58d1402a049fc.jpg


58d1402a04a0d.jpg


58d1402a04a1f.jpg


58d1402a04a33.jpg


58d1402a04a61.jpg


58d1402a04a72.jpg


58d1402a04a84.jpg


58d1402a04a95.jpg


58d1402a04aa4.jpg


58d1402a04ab6.jpg


58d1402a04ac7.jpg


58d1402a04ad8.jpg


58d1402a04aec.jpg


58d1402a04afd.jpg


58d0281993b0e.jpg




Missing Transformer and Bypass Cap To be continued,  and fire up :)

Dan.
 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
With 5840W , Grid Bias 1.9V plate Current 0.6ma,  Had to change R14 from the original schemo to 100K  ;)

So different than the U67 and yet reminds me the M49 on steroid ,  this is the biffyier mic i have ever heard but this is me  :)

you can also hear my computer Fans  :eek:

Here is a quick sample to have your touhgts  :) half foot from the mic with pop screen

https://cdn.groupbuilder.com/groupdiy/u/39511/58d0281993b2c.wav

Best,
Dany,
 

micaddict

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
1,792
Location
The Netherlands
Yes, it's nice but somehow I have a feeling this capsule doesn't do the circuit full justice. I have a lot of faith in your work and here I feel there's some definition missing as compared to the earlier D-U67 samples with the Neumann capsules. Could be the tube, but if anything, you'd expect those to be cleaner than your typical EF86.
A little darkish, too, even for a "67". I know, unlike the Peluso CEK-367, which has a tamed presence peak, the P-K67 should be as bright as the Neumann (before de-emphasis). This could be the tuning of the circuit, too. I'm just telling what I'm hearing.
On the other hand, you said this mike even picks up your computer fan (unlike others, I conclude) so may be I got it all wrong. Anyway, my gut tells me there's even more potential in this one.

That said, you are killing me with all this, Dany. I have a wife, you know. Not mention my mic addiction.
So what's next. U77?  :eek:


Henk
 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
micaddict said:
Yes, it's nice but somehow I have a feeling this capsule doesn't do the circuit full justice. I have a lot of faith in your work and here I feel there's some definition missing as compared to the earlier D-U67 samples with the Neumann capsules. Could be the tube, but if anything, you'd expect those to be cleaner than your typical EF86.
A little darkish, too, even for a "67". I know, unlike the Peluso CEK-367, which has a tamed presence peak, the P-K67 should be as bright as the Neumann (before de-emphasis). This could be the tuning of the circuit, too. I'm just telling what I'm hearing.
On the other hand, you said this mike even picks up your computer fan (unlike others, I conclude) so may be I got it all wrong. Anyway, my gut tells me there's even more potential in this one.

That said, you are killing me with all this, Dany. I have a wife, you know. Not mention my mic addiction.
So what's next. U77?  :eek:


Henk

Thanks For the comment Henk,  With all my experience building mics i have found that there is 2 world of difference between self biased tube circuit(c) and filament biased tube circuit (b) ,  When i built the pair of 49 b and 49c  i could see a world between the 2 ,  from what i have seen so far and all my reasearch self bias microphone will be much more airy and the register will be shifted on the air , I could hear the difference  very well just listening to the ambient noise,  the filament bias type as in a U47 per example will have much more bass response and biff to it  than a self bias version , Well noted also that filament bias microphone are very sensitive to power supply noise and that i did learned it the hard way  :),  i cannot speak generally for this as some other mic , but my comparison was between the exact same model or very very  close ( M49 b, c) and (U67c and M269b) ,  in both case that is what the difference was in both case ,  with same capsule and transformer
IMO we would have had a totally different scenario if that would be the M269C  self bias later version ,  in my case i needed somthing different and complementary to the U67 and by doing the earlier filament bias M269 (1962) i think this will be the perfect complement to the U67 ,one grabs the air and the other one the bottom but in a very nice way  :), the final application will be the judge but i cannot wait to stick the M269 in front of a piano  :) and listen.


by the Way , My next microphone will be the  U-take a break.  ;D,  So tell your wife you will be fine  :) or maybe i should give a shot to a U-571  ;D

once again thanks for your input , i will keep you posted as i go along i am a the point where i will be doing a shoutout of all my microphone side to side to have a really goog idea of the end results but i am already super happy  :)

Best,
Dan.
 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
micaddict said:
Yes, it's nice but somehow I have a feeling this capsule doesn't do the circuit full justice. I have a lot of faith in your work and here I feel there's some definition missing as compared to the earlier D-U67 samples with the Neumann capsules. Could be the tube, but if anything, you'd expect those to be cleaner than your typical EF86.
A little darkish, too, even for a "67". I know, unlike the Peluso CEK-367, which has a tamed presence peak, the P-K67 should be as bright as the Neumann (before de-emphasis). This could be the tuning of the circuit, too. I'm just telling what I'm hearing.
On the other hand, you said this mike even picks up your computer fan (unlike others, I conclude) so may be I got it all wrong. Anyway, my gut tells me there's even more potential in this one.

That said, you are killing me with all this, Dany. I have a wife, you know. Not mention my mic addiction.
So what's next. U77?  :eek:


Henk

I noticed that my S2 internal did not have the jumper,  that reduces the bass response ratio and proximity affect  considerably but still some beef  :)
the same S2 switch should be jumpered by default in the U67 wich i dont think i did  ;D
I will try posting a sample with and without S2 engaged,
To give you a better idea,
Best Dan,


 

micaddict

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
1,792
Location
The Netherlands
Yep, S2 makes a big difference, especially when getting closer. It's one of the key ingredients for vocalists using U67-family mics.
And of course "dark" is a relative thing. Added bass does not take away treble, but the net result is more darkness. I guess this is what threw me off a bit. Still I think I hear the esses somewhat less fast than in the earlier samples with the Neumann capsules, but perhaps I'm (self) biased.  ;) Let's hear the "jumpered" sample first.

Interesting stuff this, though. If the filament biased version is indeed bassier to begin with, then with S2 not jumpered, the microphone will have some serious proximity (and reach). Well, we heard a bit of that already. Presumambly not quite like the U47 with its 40 volt tube heater, but hefty nonetheless. That could be really nice in some cases.

Most M269(c) users claim their microphone sounds a little more hi-fi (not that a U67 is lo-fi!) and defined, with more clarity. Clarity is not necessarily the same as brightness, but the frequency plots do show some extra treble over the U67.
http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Neumann/U-67
http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/Neumann/M-269
On the other hand an EF86 will add that subtle velvety character that can be oh so musical.
In any case, even a stock U67 (if healthy) is not dark, despite many stating otherwise.

If the switch to self bias took place in the early sixties, then I guess most will have the self bias version. (?)

Now of course, after all this, everyone will want you to do both versions, just like you did with the M49 b and c.
So here's the deal. You take care of that and then we will allow you your break.  ;D
 

Melodeath00

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
416
Guys, please correct me if I'm wrong:

I don't think there is a U67c, just a U67, unless you've altered the circuit in the DU-67. Is your U67 "b" or "c"?

According to Klaus, the U67 and the M269b sound basically the same. The M269c is less dense with more top-end clarity. Klaus has said the difference between non-c and c versions of the M269 is bigger than the difference between the U67 and M269 non-c

In other words, your U67 and new M269b should sound very similar. One wouldn't expect the U67 to sound brighter than this M269b.
 

micaddict

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
1,792
Location
The Netherlands
I don't think there is a U67c, just a U67, unless you've altered the circuit in the DU-67. Is your U67 "b" or "c"?

I didn't (mean to) suggest that there's such an animal as a U67c. I'm not sure if you're addressing me or Dany, but FWIW I have a vintage U67 and Dany made two D-U67s (one AMI and one ioaudio tranny version), with original Neumann capsules, sound samples of which were posted in the D-U67 thread.
Sorry if I caused confusion anywhere.


According to Klaus, the U67 and the M269b sound basically the same. The M269c is less dense with more top-end clarity. Klaus has said the difference between non-c and c versions of the M269 is bigger than the difference between the U67 and M269 non-c

That's interesting info and after the discussion here, it makes sense, too. Thanks for posting.  :)





 

Melodeath00

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
416
micaddict said:
I don't think there is a U67c, just a U67, unless you've altered the circuit in the DU-67. Is your U67 "b" or "c"?

I didn't (mean to) suggest that there's such an animal as a U67c. I'm not sure if you're addressing me or Dany, but FWIW I have a vintage U67 and Dany made two D-U67s (one AMI and one ioaudio tranny version), with original Neumann capsules, sound samples of which were posted in the D-U67 thread.
Sorry if I caused confusion anywhere.
Actually I was addressing Danny. He mentioned a U67c in his post, which confused me.

Just to be more thorough about the U67 and M269b comparison, Klaus used the same capsule, and switched the mic amps. There was a slight softening of the dynamics on the 269 (I guess a slight bit of compression in the AC701k?), but the difference was extremely small, smaller than c and non-c difference, and on a much "smaller scale than the differences encountered when comparing two different K67 capsules."
 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
I don't think there is a U67c, just a U67, unless you've altered the circuit in the DU-67. Is your U67 "b" or "c"?

correct this was just a way of describing that the heateer voltgae is indeed isolated from the kathode in a U67,  the circuit do not have any alteration just the old U67 .

Sorry for the confusion ,
Dan,
 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
Now of course, after all this, everyone will want you to do both versions, just like you did with the M49 b and c.
So here's the deal. You take care of that and then we will allow you your break. 

Consider this has a done deal,  ;D 
i finished the M269C design yesterday , it will become available in the near future. so everyone will be able to eventually see the difference and i am convinced there is one,

Best,
Dan,
 

poctop

Well-known member
White Market Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
2,269
dmp said:
If you could fit a dpdt switch in the mic you could switch between b & c modes...

If pcb Space would not be an issue that might be possible but there are 2 different cathode Network with different components and Overall connection to the tube are also different specially to the cathode.  Also the HZ bridge is different ,  i will be building one soon  :) so you could see.

Best,
Dan,
 

Melodeath00

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2012
Messages
416
poctop said:
I don't think there is a U67c, just a U67, unless you've altered the circuit in the DU-67. Is your U67 "b" or "c"?

correct this was just a way of describing that the heateer voltgae is indeed isolated from the kathode in a U67,  the circuit do not have any alteration just the old U67 .

Sorry for the confusion ,
Dan,
Well this is a tiny bit over my head, because I'm basically a n00b, so I don't know if that means self bias or not. Apologies.

I guess what I'm saying though is that your U67 and M269b should sound almost the same.  Unless 1) the capsules in both mics that you're comparing are not consistent with each other, or 2) the 5840 results in a darker sound than the AC701k
 

Latest posts

Top