Which Neumann Microphone Should You Buy?! (Neumann TLM Series Comparison)

Hey Neumann company y’all know for damn sure y’all messed up the TLM 102 this microphone sounds very narrow and thin.

TLM 67 in the mix.

The TLM 103 has such a familiar sound

Interesting how we all hear things differently. I thought the 49 and 103 were the harshest on your voice. I felt the 107 sounded best on you. It's also amazing to me how little the TLM49 sounds like a M49. Completely different. An M49 is sweet and the TLM49 just sounded too forward and harsh. Just my take on it.

The tlm49 the best dude mic in town

What capsule is in the tlm102? Its so tiny

Feeling the 67. Love the bottom end

I've owned a 49 for 3+ years and I'm always surprised how amazing it sounds for the price. On your track specifically, the 49 tamed the dynamics and captured the airiness of your voice.

Thank you for this amazing review

Nice- it's subtle but I think agree w/the 49 being best on your vox.

The 67 sounds horrible

Ok so 103 it is

Nice review! I've heard that Ray LaMontagne used the tlm-49 to record Gossip in the Grain.

Hey @Edward Smith :) Thanks for the amazing content! I'm torn between a tlm 107 and tlm 193? It's mostly for vocals and the singer has a high-pitched voice. What would you recommend?

the tlm 49 just hits different

My TLM 49 crapped out on me with much care and minimal use. Anyone know where I can get it repaired? Don't seem too durable.

Bro u gotta record clean vocals to compare the sound

The answer is : if you get that kind of money buy whatever you want that fits your voice and your style. At this level you should know for yourself. Me, I know that the AKG C414 is my all time favorite. For some it's the U87, one of those, or maybe the Sony or U47 (but those are absurd at the price they got) or a D112 or a Schoeps, telefunken... pricier than a 102 or 103, probably. But then again, past this pricepoint, today, really it's a matter of taste.

The 49 is a standout for vocals, but it's the 67 that won me over for its unique character and versatility; it sounds equally good on acoustic instruments as it does on vocals. The 67 is my choice for the "one mic to do it all" winner. It has something special that the other mics are missing- its own signature voicing. The other mics are trying to emulate another classic, but the 67 is a hybrid...almost a "best of" blend. Love it!

hey man mind if you share your tracking compression/eq?

tlm 107 and 103 all the way

67 is amazing sounding .... big body ...

They all sound the same. I am a professional music producer and REALLY can't hear any difference. And IF there is a difference, I don't know i it's better or worse.

Actually I would just buy the most expensive one to flex with it in front of the vocalist.

But in reality, I appreciate the compactness and low price of the 102 and go with it.

The TLM 103 just sound so warm and bright using the dt 990 headphones, It was my choice from the beginning and now from this comparison, I cannot go wrong with my next purchase.

Eduard, seria muy bueno que incluyas descargas por ejemplo en sound Cloud u opta plataforma de los audios en mp3 o wav para poder comparar mejor, ya que la compresión de you Tube los hace con mínimas diferencias . saludos.. Good videos !!

TLM 103 sounds the best imo!

Fun fact: The lower-end Neumann TLM series mics are lacking balanced outputs. They convert your balanced mic input to unbalanced. That's OK for a 20 foot mic cable or less, but if you're going to run long cables (like in a studio), it's no good.

Could not disagree about the 102 vs 103 more. The 103 sounded like shattering glass it was so harsh in the top end. The 102 was pretty harsh too, but I feel that top end could be dialed back in post with Soothe2. The only one that sounded good to me was the TLM67. I'd use an Austrian Audio OC18 over any of them though

You missed the TLM193 and / or TLM170 :)

Wonderful video! i'm a session musician and in my studio i use the tlm 102 + Electro voice EV re 20. I play and record all saxophones and flute..The tlm 102 for me is better than 103 because is clear , a little bit more flat than 103.
The 103 has more high frequences ( saxophone doesn't need ) and in some case 103 sounds more "muddy" in the mix because has even low frequences push up. So the 102 for instrumental use is incredibly good !!

Can you please teach how you record and mix? Please

Your voice would benefit much more from a tube mic and/or preamp, and not one of these.
As your volume increases, the upper mids become overly-strident and fatiguing.

What’s the song called?

I can hardly tell the difference. I would just go with the 103 or 7

in between TLM 103 is the best, bul all ways u87 sounds magic 🙏🏽

ive had my 103 for almost 10 years and ive loved every moment of our journey. amazing video my friend, subbed!

Going further into your video here. You start to sing. I think it's singing? You're not really a singer. You're making no sound. You're moving no air. You are not breathing. You have no support. You don't move your mouth. You're not using your lips. Your articulation is absent. And where did you learn how to do that? Was it in church? Singing to your parakeet? How about your hamster?

And here… Within your culture. You had Opera Singers. That's where these microphones would make a difference. It won't make any difference on your sort of voice. And so how many years did you have to practice to sound like that? Negative one year?

And so how could any microphone possibly have a difference with your lack of voice? You're making no sound. Have you ever heard of breathing? It's really good when you do. And if you clench your ass muscles. You can sing out some notes actually. You might want to try it? I think you did it in elementary choir? When you were in the fourth grade. Because singing like that for your elementary school performance of, The Music Man. Would never cut it. They would never hear you. You are not singing. You are whispering. Some musical whispers. Oh boy! What, talent! You're singing just blows me away! If maybe you were singing into my crotch? But otherwise, you're not really singing kiddo. So don't sweat the small stuff with expensive microphones. You don't need them. They will make no difference for you. Get yourself in SM 57. You'll thank me later. You like the sound better. It'll make you sound better. We won't be able to hear the inefficiencies in your glottal delivery. Because you have no glottal. Though you do have a garble. You sound wonderfully garbled. Your tongue might be moving, possibly I think? And your eyes do look open so I think you are awake? You didn't fall into the microphone and bump your head. So that's good. You might do better by finding some hot looking chick to replace you. It's not like you're really pretty to look at. And you sound pained. Trying to sing this song sort of. It would be better if you could breathe. Air really helps. Now work with me on this.

Breathe in. And breathe. Breathe in deeply. Breathe out slowly. That's good, that's good. Keep it up. And do not hyperventilate. Because then it would be funny to see you pass out on stage. You would be a big hit. Onto the floor. And I'm certain everybody would love that performance. Because we would know you would still be initially alive at first. And we might hear some words? Maybe? But you have to use your lips for that. Lips work great. You can move them a lot. They make the sounds of the letters you're trying to sound out.

I mean maybe you can sit down and listen to a little Mozart? Maybe even listen to, Westside Story? They actually sing in that. You can hear them! You can learn how to sing by listening. As obviously you have never heard any before. You might even want to listen to, George Gershwin's, Porgy and Bess. They actually sing in that. You can hear them actually singing. And you can learn what that sounds like. And try to imitate that sound. Because they're not whispering. And you are. Normally people sing out. Because originally. We didn't have microphones and we didn't have PA systems. Back in the day. It's only been lately. In the past 70 or so years. That you had a microphone to sing into. Not whispering to. Whispering into your microphone is not professional and it is not sexy. It might be to your girlfriend? But not to John Brown or Debbie Dallas. And because we usually like to hear people singing with voices. I think you left your voice at home? You forgot your voice when you left this morning. Cat got your voice?

Look. Just because you are having problems with, Erectile Dysfunction. Doesn't mean you should also try and sound that limp on microphone. No. I mean your singing delivery. Is suffering from a terrible case of, Erectile Dysfunction. I mean you just can't get your vocal cords up! Have you tried taking some Viagra before you sing it? And if not? Would you, See-Alice? Or is that C-Alice? I don't know the difference? Obviously you don't either.

I know, I know. You were wounded in Afghanistan. And you haven't a phallus or testicles anymore. I understand. Neither do I. But I have a great singing voice. Especially during sex. At almost 68 years of age. I can still move some air. Your air where you live must be heavily taxed? And that's why you're not breathing. Though you should. Otherwise you could die. Even though some people think breathing is highly overrated. Like Donnie Trump and Vladimir Puking. Neither of which. Should be breathing anymore. Just like you. Because you're going to die. If you think you are breathing while singing. Because you are not singing and you are not breathing. You have to do both, kind of together. First you inhale. Then you sing out. But you must inhale first. Before you start singing. Otherwise you will have no air to sing with. Like you are showing us here. No air. No breath. No breathing. No mind. No runs. No hits. No errors. And you got balls. Thinking you are singing.

Not with that great, European background in music. Where do you get off with this trash and zero practice and zero effort. You do not know how to perform for an audience. It requires both talent, musical intelligence and practice. It actually requires, no teacher. If you are in the enormously talented. And well you are not. You have virtually, no talent. And you are ready to bring the world your lack of talent. Why? Is there something there you think we would want to listen to? Have you played your stuff or anybody else and ask them what they thought. Of course not. YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH! Or maybe you can? But you must first Bend Over.

One day. You'll realize. It won't make any difference. What Neumann microphone you used to record your voice with. Nobody's going to want to listen to you. You have no talent. You do not know how to deliver a moving and stellar, musical performance of anything. You look like you are sitting on the toilet with constipation. While singing this. And obviously you do. That's why you can't kick out the jams. You really can't sing out. You are in too much pain you are so badly constipated. And no way could you sing out like that. You obviously need a colon cleanse. I recommend, bottled sauerkraut. I'm sure you're familiar with it. It's an American delicacy. In a Vlasic pickle jar. Filled with vinegar. And it's crunchy. Great at room temperature or refrigerated. Eat a small bowl of that. And it will clean you right out. You need it. Then you might be able to sing? You might be able to take an actual breath? You won't be filled with so much poop! That prevents you from breathing, deeply.

You could also take a drink of the Rhine River. And that should clear constipation. Quickly. Explosively. E boliy. I think anything would help you get rid of all your poop. Because you need to. You should move your bowels and your voice. Both are related. And you laugh out loud loudly. To cover the sound of your, FARTS. And no one will ever know. It'll only be our secret.

And so how many Deutschmark's are you paying for your, Recordin' Corse? Is it a good SKOOL? And did they give you your free Tape Recorder? Because they are free. You can't get any more tape! Agfa, 3M, Ampex, Sony, Memorex, Maxell ain't making tape anymore! BASF might still be? But who wants that? Certainly not here in the USA. That's crappy sounding tape.

Oh but you get to play with your little digital thingies now. All the little kids love their digital thingies. How's that microphone on your smart phone? You know that's the one all you kids are using today. It sounds better than those Neumann ones. Those are really old technology from nearly 100 years ago. Why would you purchase anything like that? I mean would you take a Model-T Ford onto I-95 or the German autobahn? Of course not! You would get killed! You're lucky. If that can do 45 miles an hour. And your singing is a little bit like that Model-T. You're not ready to take it out in front of an audience. You will get hit with Rotten Tomatoes. In Korea may be they would throw kimchi at you? I don't know? I like kimchi too much. I would throw that at you. I would eat it. I would throw something else at you. I mean it's just spicy coleslaw. It's great! Get some at your local Asian food market. And you won't need to bury it in your backyard. They already did that. It should be well fermented. Because everybody thought you had a problem. If you were drinking. And they wouldn't know that you were getting drunk from eating sauerkraut. You could just pour vodka in also. Nobody would know. And you're just having sauerkraut. To clear out your constipation. So you can sing better. So you can learn how to sing. You don't know how to sing. If you did? You would.

I guess you were only homeschooled as a kid? Your mother was a lousy singer. And so you never saying any songs at home. And your mommy never taught you how to sing. And never took you to church to tell you to sing. You really did suffer terrible abuse from your mother and/or father. They never let you sing. And see what happens?

The only reason not to sing? Is, when people plead with you to stop. As I am pleading now.
RemyRAD

Okay, okay, kiddo. You don't got it all right.

The TLM-103 is the, Front Capsule. To their, U-87. In that respect it is identical. And it does require the full, +48 volt, phantom power polarization. As any lower than 48. And it gets mushy and nondescript sounding. And that can happen. If your audio mixer/preamp. Cannot deliver a solid, +48 volts of phantom power polarization on the capsule. And that is a microphone known. Along with the U-87. To drop more current. Than, other popular condenser microphones. And some are weaklings. Not able to deliver enough current for those couple of microphones.

And of course the TLM series stands for Transformer Less Microphone. As Neumann, prides themselves. On the expensive, internal microphone transformers. Of the purple label logo transformer equipped classic versions. Like the U-87.

Now you probably also know of their legendary, Vacuum Tube, earlier versions. Such as the, famous, original, U-47. Then the later, U-67. And the offshoot from that vacuum tube microphone was the brand-new FET transistor, U-87's. When, Phantom Power, was introduced. There were other methods used earlier. That were similar but incompatible. Sennheiser had some of those. They were called AB Powered. And were similar but incompatible. And went by the wayside to the standardization of, 48 Volt Phantom, powered microphones. Ushering in the transistor age.

And so let me tell you about that TLM-103. While I didn't personally own one. My good buddy and colleague did. And he frequently hired me. To do recordings for him. With his gear. As much of it was the same as mine. But not that microphone. I didn't have one of those. I had the, Original issue, U-87's and the U-67's. 4 total. And yes. I loved them dearly. And owned them for over 40 years. Since, 1983 or so. And only sold them last year. Why? I'm basically retired. And I don't use those on, cheap, inexpensive, rock 'n' roll bands. I just don't. They were too valuable and too fragile and too old. And I don't need that kind of audio quality. As the, SHURE, SM-57's. Can actually sound, virtually as good. As one of those U-87. And I have proved it many times. In fact. People frequently pick the 57. Because it sounds warmer. Not as crispy. You have to add crispy by adding high-end. 2-3 DB at, 10-12 or 15 kHz. And Bingo! Is that a U-87 I'm hearing? No. It's a $100 SM-57. With the oversized, open cell, gray foam, Pop Filter. Which keeps your lips. The proper distance. From the diaphragm of the microphone. So it doesn't go overboard with the Proximity Effect. And therein lies the difference with the SM-7B.

Nobody realizes this. The SM-7B. Uses the identical microphone cartridge capsule. As that used in the SM-57! And the fucking joke is on you all! For spending an additional $250 US. To acquire the SM-7B over the SM-57. Which can't possibly be as good? Because it costs $250 less. Au contraire! The wool has been pulled over everybody's ears.

Yes and you will hear other guys like yourself. Doing shootouts. Between the SM-57 or the 58 or earlier 56. And the SM-7B. And they can prove. There is most definitely an audible difference. Yes there is not. The only difference. Is the distance your lips can get from the diaphragm of the microphone. That is the only difference. And that's an astounding sounding difference. Of far less, bass boosting, Proximity Effect. And so move your lips further away from the SM-57, diaphragm. And what do you hear? You hear the SM-7B. For only $100. And you might spend an extra $40 or so. On that oversized, approximately 6 inches long. Whatever that is in centimeters? And about 3 inches in circumference. So it's real thick and very porous and relatively transparent sounding. And the only thing you don't get. Are the switches on the back of the microphone. Which are really highly not necessary. A presence boost. And a low frequency cut. And you will only have to rolloff the low-end. Because it already has the presence boost, on. Which is very desirable for spoken word and singing.

And since we have grown up. For the past 40 years now. Into Digital Recording. Which is Linear Recording. We don't have to cut through the analog tape mushy sound anymore. Which those condenser microphones really helped to do. Back in the day. Of a bygone era, kiddo.

And while they are still very nice to use. Yes. I find the SM-57 with the big pop filter. To be really spectacular. For cutting vocals with. When you have it plugged into a reasonably good microphone preamp. Such as an API or a Neve or even an SSL. Which is not my first pick. Or somebody else's whizbang microphone preamp. Like George Massenburg's. Those SM-57's will then sound, no less than Stellar. As they used the SM-7 (original). To cut all of Michael Jackson's, Lead Vocals. And he cut all of his backup vocals. On those German and Austrian, condenser microphones. To get that extra zippy air in the high-end. But that all of those recordings were recorded to, Analog Tape. And not digital originally. And so sure!

You have to understand things a little bit better kiddo. I mean I know you're German or something? Swiss? Swedish? I don't know? And you guys really do know what sounds good. No bullshit. But I think you're barking up the wrong tree these days with the condenser microphones. Sure they are quality sounding. So is an, Studio Microphone-57. Because that's what the SM means.

And by actually using that microphone for your lead vocals. It will provide you with a warmer tonality overall. Still a beautiful amount of Proximity Effect but not overdone. And it may be less Sibilant. Than that of a condenser microphone. Which can get pretty wispy with sibilance. And then you're going to need a de-esser. And that which de-esser do you choose? Asked Bob Clearmountain that question. Because he uses a lot of de-esser. But he has no de-esser. He only has an SSL-4000. And he knows how to set up de-essing. Without a de-esser. And it's a unique way he does it. But I just use regular de-esser's. Like Orban and DBX and side chaining a limiter. To make my own de-esser. But I'm very intrigued. With the way Bob Clearmountain goes about that. And I think he's got a method that does sound more natural. And he's using no de-esser. It's an interesting process he set up. It makes sense. I haven't tried it yet for myself. I just use the other types. Which have worked out well for me. They are quite good. They do the job.

But you might be able to get away without a de-esser. If you don't use a condenser microphone anymore. To cut lead vocals with. And another reason to use the, SM-57 or 58's? That's the one everybody uses on stage, Live. That's the way everybody has heard them and loves them. And why would you want to reinvent their wheel? Because it introduces this additional colored variable. That doesn't match the microphone they perform live with. And you have to take this all into account when making a recording for someone. You don't just grab the best microphone the cost the most.

But now that TL and-103 is rather fascinating. I really loved it. It was wild. It had a much higher output level. Than any other microphone I have ever used! It was kind of weird. It was almost too much output. And so you will never get a noisy recording from that microphone ever. Because you barely have to use any preamp! It practically comes out at line level! It's kind of strange.

But many people don't know this about Neumann microphones. They were all padded down, internally. They put out so much output level. That was too much. For most preamps. And would overload microphone preamps. So to prevent that. They built in pads. Inside the microphones. That took the level down, substantially. And if removed. You didn't need a microphone preamp. That's a hot output. That's a line level output from a microphone. And that wouldn't work with most audio consoles and mixers.

And so I found that TLM-103 to have more output level. Than anything I have ever used to date. It was just amazing. And what a beautiful clear open and transformer less, sound! Though some will miss that transformer sound inside their other microphones. Because that imparts a very characteristic sound to their microphones. They make their own transformers. They are not made like others. They are very costly to make. That's why the 87 costs nearly $1500 more than the TLM-103. It's the cost of the transformers Neumann, told me. Because I discussed other things with them regarding my, original, U-67's. As they had just come out with a, TLM-67. And I got angry over that one.

(More condensers in next post)

Why did I get angry over that one? After seeing it at the, 2012, Nashville, AES Audio Convention. It's because… They had introduced this new 67 version microphone. At only $2700. Meanwhile. The U-87 was $3300. And I said what were you guys thinking? You just devalued my original Vacuum tube, U-67's! By charging less than the 87!

Well apparently, what I said to them. Then my arguments thereof. Took hold. They rereleased the U-67! A brand-new version! And it's like $5000! Which just blew my mind. I guess I made some sense to them? And they figured out everybody wanted the original back more. And why would you want a discount version of a 87 when it wouldn't exactly sound like an 87? Because it was a transistor 67. And they do use a different set of capsules for those two microphones. The 67 capsules are not the same as the 87 capsules. There is a variation. It's something about the backplate of the capsules. One is common to both. The other one has two separate. And that helps to introduce their characteristic differences. In their associated sound.

I also unfortunately discovered. While the original vacuum tube U-67 calls for a EF-86 Pentode Vacuum tube a.k.a. Valve. And the original was shipped with a TELEFUNKEN.

But if replaced with a brand-new, RCA, GE, Sylvania, Raytheon or any other EF-86. It sounded so horrible. I deemed the microphone not usable.

It was only the TELEFUNKEN vacuum tubes. That could be used. Because everything else sounded just dreadful. I was dumbfounded by that. I grew up with American vacuum tubes. All of these sounded absolutely atrocious. And that was back in the 1980s. 40 years ago! When we were still making those tubes. They were still in production. They were still American-made. And the Chinese and the Russian ones are just an order of magnitude worse.

Oh sure they are just fine. For your average guitar amplifiers. And for those brain dead audiophiles. That insist on vacuum tubes. What a bunch of morons! Because if you're not going to use TELEFUNKEN vacuum tubes. There's no reason to use any vacuum tubes! And those vacuum tubes are out of production and the company long closed. What is known as TELEFUNKEN today. Is an American company. Trying to manufacture something similar. That really doesn't come close. As they also make no vacuum tubes. They are all made in Russia and China. And we know what their quality control is. Nonexistent. And so if I thought the American tube sounded bad. And they do. The Chinese and Russian tubes leave me cold. They are vacuum tubes that sound, cold. I had some 12 AX 7's in a preamp of mine. With brand-new Chinese tubes. Yuck! I mean it works. The sound is nothing to write home about, nothing.

So you freaks. Think the Norman microphone sound is the holy Grail. And will revolutionize the sound of your recordings. No it will not. They will sound nice. They always do. They have thick diaphragms. Another thing you don't find in other manufacturers condenser microphones. Therein lies the biggest issue in sound.

Everybody else has gone to using, 3 mil thick, diaphragms. Which is half the thickness of the Neumann's. Which are 6 mil's. And one of the reasons they sound slightly darker. Than, many other condenser microphone manufacturers. That are all using those thinner diaphragms. Some are using thinner still more diaphragms. Such as 1.5 mil. Oh my God! It sounds as crispy as shattering glass. Ugh! The sound of Amateur Recording! Thin Diaphragms! And they sound like crispy metallic junk. That's why you like the sound of the Neumann's. They are thick.

(More condensers in next post)

I think it was M-Audio came out with a, EF-86 vacuum tube-based, 1 inch gold sputter diaphragm. Modern, updated, 67 style microphone. And I thought oh wow! But they didn't seem to catch on? And I believe that was due to the, EF-86 they were using. Because the TELEFUNKEN's are out of production. For years now. And while you can still find some NOS a.k.a. New Old Stock. Those will cost you a couple hundred dollars each if not more today. And that was impractical. Because you can't count on those being available. And they probably used a Chinese or Russian permutation of that EF-86. That probably sounded like unusable garbage. As I experienced years earlier. And so bye-bye! And that's what they were selling it as. A, U-67 replacement. Which was no replacement.

Yes you see I've also worked in manufacturing. In Pro Audio with a couple of the most legendary American companies. One I was quality control manager of. Of one of the most legendary called, Scully Recording Instruments Inc. Or that was their original name. Later known just as Scully. Or Scully/AMPRO. Between 1978 and 1981. Before I hopped over to NBC. For the next 20 years.

And so when you've grown up with all of these microphones. From the very beginning of their time. I've gotten rather intimate. More than most. Along with the microphones I've owned.

And on the opposite side of that condenser sounding spectrum. The other microphone technology. I haven't been able to live without. When I first learned about them at 15 years of age. You know what they are. They are called Velocity Microphones. We call them, Ribbon Microphones. And they were the first high fidelity microphones ever developed. For RCA. The company I originally went to work for in 1981. For, NBC, which, they owned.

So I'm an old timer in the business of over 50 years more than five decades. And I know what you're attracted to those microphones, over. And they are great. But with digital recording today. I am finding them slightly more problematic in the recording process. Because they can get overly crispy sounding. And wispy and sibilant. And that does not excite me. I do not appreciate that. I do not care to hear that. And Ribbon Microphones won't give that to you. And they accept a lot of EQ very pleasantly. Without horrible sounding peaky aberrations.

And where are the, Phantom Powered, Ribbon Microphones. Will have a recognizable sound to you. Sounding more like a condenser microphone. Because the output is now active and buffered. And your microphone can't get destroyed due to a bad microphone cable. Since it now requires phantom power to operate. And they sound kind of wild. They sound like ribbon microphones but they don't. They are not quite as mellow sounding as a passive, classic, ribbon microphone a.k.a. velocity microphone. And you should be using one.

A lot of folks like the Royer's. And they are kind of pricey. Just like those U-87's. And just as worthy. And those are very rugged. Designed for regular punishment. But also not cheap.

For the other ribbon microphone manufacturers. I definitely recommend the German Beyer ribbon microphones. I've had 6 of those guys. They are wonderful. They are smaller more compact look like normal microphones. They are short geometry, dual ribbons. Some are single ribbons. I like the dual ribbons they make the best. M-160's and M-130's. My mentor had a, M-260 single ribbon. That's decent also. But certainly not the same and sound as their, dual ribbon M-160 and the 130. The 160 is Hyper Cardioid and the 130 is, Figure of 8 a.k.a. Bidirectional. And with those 2 together. I would always be doing, MS, Middle-Side, stereo microphone technique, with those. It was a breathtaking sound to behold. On a choir or a Symphony Orchestra. Even for jazz. Even rock 'n' roll. It's a great stereo microphone technical way to go. If you want to start doing a lot of stereo microphone stuff with a solo singer? This is the only way to do it. You don't want XY. You certainly wouldn't want Spaced Omnis. You don't want ORTF. You want MS. So you have a solid center mono image. That is 100% Mono Compatible. With no phase cancellations. No timing errors. And an adjustable, stereo width. A fabulous way to go. And it's all or nothing at all. Because collapsed to mono. That side channel microphone cancels completely out. And you only hear the center Mono, microphone. And you get an incredibly solid sound that way. And then back to stereo it's going to take your breath away. And no phase cancellation. Because that's how it works. With phase cancellation.

Aunt that can be done going into a fixed, transformer based matrix decoder. Or through an audio console. Or in software. You have choices. I love the audio console method. Since it's all hands on. But the software method also works incredibly well. And with greater versatility. But doesn't come off as organic sounding. It's more sterile that way. More precisely accurate sounding. And I don't like overly crispy. I like big fat full and lush. That's where it's at for me. We don't need screaming overhyped high-end. For deaf boys. Who played too loud in rock bands too long. And whenever the high-end gets hyped. Then they can hear it. And girls walk away from it. They don't care for that sound much. It's, overly metallic sounding. We don't need metallic sounding. That's like over fried audio.

I mean if you really want a purely aggressive sound? Then yeah yeah yeah! Plenty of condenser microphones. All condenser microphones. Small diaphragm condenser microphones! I mean I loved my, KM-83-84's. I loved my KM-86's. I loved my KM-56 vacuum tube version. And yes we all love the sound of condenser microphones. But they can get overly crispy sounding together. And that's not a quality sound. That's an amateur sound. That's a budget sound.

And so there's many things to consider about microphone selection.
RemyRAD

I used the U87 and akg c414 on a lot of records but one day a friend told me to try a mic called Audix.... It blow them both away. It was like having an Akg c12 or a top end Sony mic for the price of $299. I use that mic all the time now. Sad part is they don't make my model anymore but they do have the next gen of it and it sounds great Audix A133

Please make a video about xlr cable 🙏

packs up TLM 170s and 193s and goes home

That song is fire thats for one all mic sound good

I would say none mostly because of the price, but also 102 and 103 are a bit brighter than perfect. I like how the TLM 193 sounds, but all those microphones are actually very good.

Nice vocal ❤

Excellent comparison. Ultimately, it's what matches your voice -- your instrument. We came to the same conclusions. Too add, for your voice -- and thanks for emphasizing that -- the crispy 103 would also stand out in a mix. The 49 was a close 2nd, but its presence silking might disappear you in a dense final.

I felt very much in the same ballpark. Thanks for doing that!