Sammas
Well-known member
Hey chaps!
I just finished reading an interesting thread over at gearslutz. Originally it was a "whats all the fuss over vintage nuemann's" thread, but there have been sparks of interesting conversation in regards to what specifications and philosophy drove the microphone design of the classics. Mics like the U67 and U47?
Some engineers have declared those vintage mics about as good as it gets. I find it interesting the pathways that some equipment has taken since conception, construction, to 10, 20, or 50 years later where the people using them are essentially doing it with no real understanding of what the aim of behind the design. Like a Neve 80 series desk for example. By all accounts from Geoff Tanner, there was zero mention of "colour" in the signal path. It was designed to meet strict BBC specifications. There was no intention of creating a colourful and tone-rich mixing console from what I have read. Just a great, clean, well performing mixing console.
Or in this instance, the original U47 tube mic that hasn't been produced in almost 50 years yet remains so highly desired and praised. I have never used a U47, but some many accounts it isn't a clean, transparent microphone. I am no microphone designer so I have no idea how tricky it is to create a microphone that meets a myriad of specifications like low distortion, multiple polar patterns, SPL levels, noise levels, power consumption, budget, and size... and their effects on things like the frequency response. For example, was the 12k bump intentional? Or a tradeoff in favour of another benefit. Less distortion perhaps? An overall flatter response between both polar patterns?
What were the engineers at Neumann thinking when the first U47 rolled off the line? Was it "this is going to be one of the most musical, mojo filled mics in history!"... or was it a true engineers stance? "This is one of the cleanest, clearest, lowest distortion mics we have made yet!" ...with history taking it on an entirely different path.
To me it seems on that people on gearslutz have basically stated it was the former... and that no microphone designer is currently capable for doing it again. If you ask them, microphone design and manufacturing has suffered from a devolution. Which is very odd, if you ask me.
I just finished reading an interesting thread over at gearslutz. Originally it was a "whats all the fuss over vintage nuemann's" thread, but there have been sparks of interesting conversation in regards to what specifications and philosophy drove the microphone design of the classics. Mics like the U67 and U47?
Some engineers have declared those vintage mics about as good as it gets. I find it interesting the pathways that some equipment has taken since conception, construction, to 10, 20, or 50 years later where the people using them are essentially doing it with no real understanding of what the aim of behind the design. Like a Neve 80 series desk for example. By all accounts from Geoff Tanner, there was zero mention of "colour" in the signal path. It was designed to meet strict BBC specifications. There was no intention of creating a colourful and tone-rich mixing console from what I have read. Just a great, clean, well performing mixing console.
Or in this instance, the original U47 tube mic that hasn't been produced in almost 50 years yet remains so highly desired and praised. I have never used a U47, but some many accounts it isn't a clean, transparent microphone. I am no microphone designer so I have no idea how tricky it is to create a microphone that meets a myriad of specifications like low distortion, multiple polar patterns, SPL levels, noise levels, power consumption, budget, and size... and their effects on things like the frequency response. For example, was the 12k bump intentional? Or a tradeoff in favour of another benefit. Less distortion perhaps? An overall flatter response between both polar patterns?
What were the engineers at Neumann thinking when the first U47 rolled off the line? Was it "this is going to be one of the most musical, mojo filled mics in history!"... or was it a true engineers stance? "This is one of the cleanest, clearest, lowest distortion mics we have made yet!" ...with history taking it on an entirely different path.
To me it seems on that people on gearslutz have basically stated it was the former... and that no microphone designer is currently capable for doing it again. If you ask them, microphone design and manufacturing has suffered from a devolution. Which is very odd, if you ask me.
