Ne*m@nn T L M 103 pix

[Guest]

[quote author="Gabriel Sousa"]i had used to mike a guitar amp, very close, had i broke the mic ?
[/quote]

That seems unlikely to me, though it's not impossible. The Neumann TLM103 can take sound pressure levels up to 138dB, big guitar cabs are quoted to have figures which are in the 130dB+ region as their maximum output, measured at 1m.

If the mic is continously subjected to high sound pressure levels at close ranges it will definitely degrade.

Cheers,
Frank

 

[rodabod]

[quote author="Frank Eleveld"]
TLM103 can take sound pressure levels up to 138dB, big guitar cabs are quoted to have figures which are in the 130dB+ region as their maximum output, measured at 1m.
[/quote]

The quoted 138dB will be with respect to when distortion occurs due to the electronics - not the capsule.

 

[Rossi]

Yeah, shouldn't be a problem. What really degrades mics of all sorts (even dynamics) is prologued exposure to kick drums. As a rule I don't buy mics off ebay that were likely to be placed in kick drums in their previous life. The air blow/pressure seems to strech the diaphragm. I have an old MD409 that the previous owner obviously used for kick. It's still okay for guitar amps, but it's definetely too dull in the high end for anything else.

 

[John Willett]

[quote author="Rossi"]What really degrades mics of all sorts (even dynamics) is prologued exposure to kick drums. [/quote]

What degrades condensers is cigarette smoke (especially pot) as the particles stick to the diaphragm.

They can be cleaned by an expert with a fine camel-hair brush and distilled water - but if tar particles have stuck to the diaphragm they pull off the gold when cleaned - which means a replacement (and often expensive) capsule.

So - don't smoke in the studio - and don't record vocals soon after smoking! :roll:

 

[jensenmann]

I experienced similar things with KM84s which were used in the PA company I worked for. When we got them they sounded wonderful but after years of being exposed to smokemachines the were dull compared to other (cheaper, originally worse sounding) SDCs.
Probably it´s the oil in the fog which sticks on the diaphragm that causes this.

 

[John Willett]

I'm not sure about the small diaphragm condensers - but it's certainly possible (in most cases) to clean up the large diaphragm Neumann Condensers (unless there's tar damage).

But it must be done by an expert, which we have in the UK (Martin Gathard).

 

[Rossi]

[quote author="John Willett"]
What degrades condensers is cigarette smoke (especially pot) as the particles stick to the diaphragm.
[/quote]

Well, I don't smoke, so no problem here.

John, is there a way to open an MD409 (the later XLR version)? I'd like to take a look at the capsule, but I can't seem to find a way to access the interior.

 

[transducr]

[quote author="soundguy"]I have a 103 which I bought when they were brand new on the market. Its certainly not a BAD sounding mic by any stretch of the imagination. It also is certainly not some godly neumann mic but to be fair, it came with a price tag that reflects what it sounds like. It doesnt sound bad and its not garbage, I'll say that, but I'll also say the last time I plugged it in was probably over two and a half years. Its a mic that is REALLY picky about the preamp you plug it into, you've really got to patch it into everything you have to see where it sounds best when working with a singer. Thats my experience with it at least. That mic was used a lot for overheads on lots of grunge records in the early 90's. [/quote]

Are you sure you're talking about the Neumann TLM-103? It's highly unlikely that it was used on *any* "grunge" records in the early 90s, as the mic didn't come out until '97.

 

[transducr]

[quote author="John Willett"][quote author="Gabriel Sousa"]why my tlm103 diafrag is so thin ? its good ou its bad.[/quote]

Neither - it passed QC and if it sounds OK it's fine.
[/quote]

Based on your answers to this and the other post, your argument is basically that your QC is so good that if a TLM-103 leaves the factory it's fine?

I say that since your first argument in both cases is that both of these mics passed QC. Although, based on the conversation earlier in this thread, it would seem that your QC was what was in contention. That being the case, the fact that it passed QC is probably not a valid argumet for some people here.

Also, I can understand the: "if it sounds OK it's fine." measurement. However, the TLM-103 is designed as an entry level mic and is exactly that for many people who have the budget for it when they get started. At the very least, it's an entry level into the "Big Leagues" for many. As such, don't you think that the response of: "if it sounds OK it's fine" is a little irresponsible? Maybe the user's ear is used to bad microphones. If there were a QC problem, and the mic sounded a little off...maybe a little ******...they might be scratching their heads going: "Well, it sounds OK...I just hoped it would sound better than what I had before...but I guess it sounds OK, it captures sound, I guess it's supposed to sound this way."

Just a few thoughts for discussion...

 

[dale116dot7]

The gold on the diaphragm really is supposed to be that thin. I've tested lots of mic diaphragms and the thickness of the gold layer is overshadowed by everything else. You have to realize that the gold layer is about 1/1500 the thickness of the diaphragm. It contributes virtually nothing to the mass of the diaphragm. And on top of that, manufacturing tolerances of the diaphragm thickness are certainly nowhere near that. They can't be and don't need to be. And those tolerances are far better than they were 40 or 50 years ago so don't get nostalgic here. Heck, the diaphragm thickness from one side of the capsule to the other is going to vary by far more than that amount.

Furthermore, if the diaphragm's gold spot is off by a lot - even up to 1mm, it really does have very little, if any, impact on the sound. It really does not. I've done probably about 40 or 50 mic diaphragms and I've never noticed a difference between different thicknesses of gold, nor with an off-centre diaphragm, and I've done plenty of both.

Granted, it looks bad to have the diaphragm off-centre. But does that change the sound? Less than the other tolerances involved when making a capsule. Even then, there is a lot of leeway on most capsule designs.

So if Neumann tests the mic for frequency response and sensitivity and distortion, and it passes, what more do you want? There is going to be a tolerance that is acceptable for an off-centre diaphragm, and it's likely bigger than you think it should be, but realistically, it's probably smaller than it has to be.

 

[mattmoogus]

Forget about the 103, has anyone here opened up an M149? I was really dissapointed and even alarmed with the construction of that mic, especially given its enourmous price tag. And its all surface mount so forget about trying to fix a broken one...


M

 

[russian]

Try schematic from rode nt 1 noise /floor ratio is excelent may be beter
It is avalable now

 

[soundguy]

[quote author="transducr"][quote author="soundguy"]I have a 103 which I bought when they were brand new on the market. Its certainly not a BAD sounding mic by any stretch of the imagination. It also is certainly not some godly neumann mic but to be fair, it came with a price tag that reflects what it sounds like. It doesnt sound bad and its not garbage, I'll say that, but I'll also say the last time I plugged it in was probably over two and a half years. Its a mic that is REALLY picky about the preamp you plug it into, you've really got to patch it into everything you have to see where it sounds best when working with a singer. Thats my experience with it at least. That mic was used a lot for overheads on lots of grunge records in the early 90's. [/quote]

Are you sure you're talking about the Neumann TLM-103? It's highly unlikely that it was used on *any* "grunge" records in the early 90s, as the mic didn't come out until '97.[/quote]

Yes Im quite positive.

dave

 

[SALSA]

Microtech Gefell !!!
Although more expensive than they used to be.
:grin:
Cheers,
Mike

 

[Svart]

yes, MG is nice stuff. the gold is thick to the point where you can't see through it!

 

[diegocowes90]

can someone send me the tlm 103 schematics please? my mail is [email protected]
thanks
Diego

 

[opacheco]

Hi,

Do somebody have the TLM103 Schematics?

I need this urgently!

Thanks
Opacheco.