Measured VF14 characteristic

[o3misha]

0.02 %  is audible in that part of mic. Non-leaner distortions are in audible frequenies.

 

[granger.frederic]

Not for us, sorry.

 

[o3misha]

You can hear my sound example if you want. Sorry for bad singing of my college.
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/ee2330b7a6f4/Sound%201.wav
If you can not hear the difference,- we stop argue ok?

 

[granger.frederic]

yes there's a big difference.the first part is painfully sibilant.
but did you take this shootout in one time with 2 U47 ?
do you have a matched pair of U47 with 2 different C1 ?
otherwise this shootout is USELESS.
When we did some tests with C1 , as we have only unmatched U47, we've recorded a few tracks to compare.We didn't ear such a big difference.very WEIRD....

 

[o3misha]

No, it was one mic, with only one changed part -c1
Of great importance is the type of dielectric , set of harmonic distortion, dissipation factor,-everything, even inductance.  All film capacitors have very similar characteristics , so in most cases, no noticeable difference. However, another types like : mica, PIO differ from ceramic and film caps. Hence the difference in the sound.

 

[granger.frederic]

1 mic=near 0 utility shootout, that's why i don't like shootouts even in 1 recording, because even 2° of the capsule angle variation affects the sound.i add that you can't be sure that the position of your voice and guitar, was identical.

you're right about capacitor quality variation, but in coupling caps position, and with very low voltage/current amplitude.the rest is theory and nitpickings.

 

[o3misha]

I can't get the sound 1 with cap from sound 2 ,- we tried million takes and the charachter of difference remain the same. It is difference between caps. When I using EQ and compression I better hear the same difference in sound in all takes. Period.
https://cloud.mail.ru/public/4eec4ff45460/Sound%201%20no%20low%20freq.wav
I was expecting the same objection from you. However, my clients - the best judges . When different singers tell me : "this is  better then that",  without knowing that something has changed in the microphone - this is the best proof for me.
BTW, very similar character of difference is between different types of caps in C2 position.

 

[granger.frederic]

at a pinch, if you put a non linear and weird capacitor in C1 you'll have a sound modification, but why doing such a sacrilege  ?

 

[o3misha]

Hooray! This is great progress. You finally admitted that you was wrong, and that C1 affect the sound! Thank you, I would prefer your simple apology for the for the hurtful accusations of amateurism, which I heard from you. It touched me and I gave you a full comprehensive answer, based on theory and practice.  8)
For me the microphone - part of my Instruments to create the track, not the icon or something like that. Sacrilege and deliberate upgrade of the tool - two different things.
btw: if you did the test of c1s,- where are your audio results? Let us to judge : is there any difference between caps. Speaking your words : testing without conducting and recording the results of analysis-a waste of time.

 

[granger.frederic]

let me rephrase that...

why creating amateurish non linearities, in one of the most precious, popular, expensive, and refined mic on the earth ?

i can't see the point really.

 

[o3misha]

I'm about the same - why stick to "treasure" quite far from the sound of VF14 the lamp EF14? I can't see the point. Maybe because you like it and can't get necessary result with other tube.

BTW: the Ceramic cap is even more non-leaner, then my examples..Neumann use ceramic until they have possibility to use good film caps for C1. And they did not think about the merits of sound capacitors when used PIO. In U47 they use PIO caps not because of sound, but because there were no good film caps those days. In their later microphnes Neumann used polystirol and styrolex capacitors as more reliable and less expensive. But today most of users prefer PIO, though there are many more leaner and reliable caps because of its "non-leaner amateurish" sound properties. Think about it.

 

[granger.frederic]

EF 14 (and this thread) is used because of the VF14 extinction.

but i didn't know that film capacitors were threaten by extinction .

i can assure you that there WAS good film caps in 1950 (perhaps better than today btw)

polystyrol and styroflex are synonyms

PIO are good caps when they are well built, in C1 they should produce more or less the same sound than a good film cap.

 

[o3misha]

Why using other components unchanged if you use other tube? If U47 is icon for you,- find and buy VF14. If U47 is just the tool,- use everything for getting better result. Going back to my original advice: if you do not like very much highs, you can try to change something in the electronics. Capacitors, as you've already made ​​- greatly affect the sound. In the case where it amplifies the signal lamp, is not it better to form signal a little  before it comes on the grid? This is the essence of my advice, which is not for you anymore,- but for the others, who are interested.

 

[granger.frederic]

right, find me a V14m NOS NIB for 500€ ...

i add that i actually use a Neumann stock U47n with a 13CW4 and yours is NO MORE a U47 with its weird caps, the varnish, EF12, and with the probable  other amateurish modifications you've done.

Sorry misha, but you're not credible, for me.

 

[o3misha]

I haven't got EF12 in my two U47s. My both mics with VF14s. And I have only one mic with PIO cap in C1, and the other with standart polystirol cap. And I am happy to have two different sound in my studio. Both mics are real U47s with very good tubes, M7s  x-formers and PSUs (I have three different PSUs including one original NG and all of them give different sounds). Also I have one mic with modern Haufe transformer and VF14er Andreas Grosser tube replacement. But I have buisness partner with EF12's U47, so I can use it from time to time. It is a bit another animal but it  still has fanatstic U47's sound for my ears.
BTW, if you think that different  C1 decrease the value of my mic - you are wrong. I can put back orinal C1 if it is necessary at any time.

Sorry misha, but you're not credible, for me.

I see it is your " thank you" for my orinal advice to use nuvistor ?
You are so grateful, pal, - I have no words .. I wish you ,in the future, in response to your advices to get the same answers, which I received from you. This is my lesson on future developments:
"Do not do good - do not get a response evil". This is a saying, proverb.
Cheers

 

[granger.frederic]

After all your posts for the EF12 cause, you're saying to us that you have two V14s ...

it shows well your contradictions .

For the 13CW4,i thought it was Neumann's techs idea and Moby for the tweak.

I don't think that you have a difference because of C1 (if you really have 2 U47 with VF14....but let's say that you have this), more probable that you have a difference because of the capsule.

 

[o3misha]

For the 13CW4,i thought it was Neumann's techs idea and Moby for the tweak.

Reply #92 on page 5. Stop lying, mate.
Moby just gave you a right value of the cathode resistor. Before me, - I was absent ( fortunately, see next sentence). I got the idea to use nuvistor with different cathode resistor from Andreas Grosser . That's why I decided to connect you with Andreas. It is more honest. Moby saved me from having to disclose the secrets of others.

 

[granger.frederic]

i've just read the post...
you've said that the 13CW4 is a good tube in a U47.what a scoop !
but neumann's tech had the same idea in 1968.
that's all
Moby's given the hot bias trick.

Sorry again

i'll close the conversation because i have more important things to do but it was very funny ...lol

 

[o3misha]

i've just read the post...
you've said that the 13CW4 is a good tube in a U47.what a scoop !

Scoop? I can't translate this word in translator...
You are lying again? Here is the quote from my message:
// I'll tell you more about all despised nuvistor that everyone (especially on forum of Klaus Heine ) considered bad for U47 -  it's great tube for U47. Neumann's engineers made ​​a mistake in mode with nuvistor. The value of the cathode resistor is not optimal , because of what has changed with the correct matching transformer. Andreas proved it when he was approached for help with nuvistor U47 owners. Simple selection of the cathode resistor causes that nuvistor U47 sounds great. Andreas can help you in this . Just get in touch with him.//
I said they use wrong value of the cathode resistor ! And I  gave you an advice to contact Andreas, who gave me that info!!
Neumann did bad mode with nuvistor.  Thats why you and many others did refuse this tube . Without my advice to you, Moby  will never give you right value of the resistor because he was not in topic before that, is not it? I was absent when you ask me to upload Andreas's schematic for 13CW4 , so my fellow decided to continue my conversation with you. Without us you would continue think that nuvistor is bad tube for U47.  You'd never return it back to your U47- you have to admit it.
Sorry, but your sorry is not accepted. You just type the ungrateful. Do not expect that your actions will not result in the return of negative energy back to you. The world is interconnected. If you will continue to provoke,- I will report to moderators.

 

[granger.frederic]

look in another 10 000$ mic, an ELECTROLYTIC decoupling cap on the backplate capsule: http://www.sdiy.org/oid/mics/SonyC800G.gif or

http://gyraf.dk/schematics/Sony_C800G_Schematic.gif

what all this pro mic designers are thinking !!!!They are really incompetent, aren't they misha ?