Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Blue Kiwi vrs. Neumann U87ai

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Central FL, USA
    Posts
    378
    Originally posted by Revelation:
    <STRONG>I would not want to buy an old U87 as you don't know who dropped or spit into the mic through out the years. </STRONG>

    Hey that's fine, just means more for me to buy and enjoy!!
    Nathan Eldred

    The Store:

    AtlasProAudio.com

    The Studio:

    AtlasRecording.com

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    710
    Originally posted by Revelation:
    <STRONG>I would not want to buy an old U87 as you don't know who dropped or spit into the mic through out the years. The U87Ai seems to have a little more of that popular high end which I prefer.

    True I tested it on my lunch break, but again like they said above, you need to get closer with Blue mic's to get that proximity effect. I guess by you saying thin it means it does not have the rich mid range sound of the U87. In that case you are right. There is something though about Blue mic's that I just love. Not sure if it is about the tight quality control, that I was able to talk to them directly with questions I had, or just the sound of the mic's. I think it is a combination of all of them.

    For me they are both great mic's. I just can't see paying $2,800 for one and $1,999 for the other. Since they are so close (as in sounding great), I would go with the Kiwi.</STRONG>
    From Sound on Sound's review of the Kiwi
    The Kiwi is as smooth as silk never harsh or aggressive yet it is precisely detailed and has a very fast, accurate transient response. Whereas many mics have substantial presence peaks, the Kiwi's HF lift is very subtle and, as a result, I found the mic worked equally well on both male and female voices, combining a beautiful warmth with a clear airy top end, and lots of clarity in diction. It all translates to getting the sound right at source, and I found I didn't need to EQ the mic at all any minor tonal changes could be effected by moving and pointing the mic, or by changing the polar pattern a couple of clicks.

    It's easy to see why this is BLUE's solid-state flagship model I can't fault it at all.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    350
    Originally posted by atlas:
    <STRONG>....On the BLUE, it's not just about proximity effect. It's about the way the capsule is tuned in general...on axis, at a reasonable distance. And the electronics also. I'll take a transformer on the output of a microphone any day of the week for anything other than classical (even then it can be very nice). The BLUE is transformerless, the Soundelux and my older Neumanns have transformers.</STRONG>

    Nathan,

    You are correct that the Kiwi is transformerless. But, I'm pretty sure that among Blue's solid state mics, the Blueberry and one of the two versions of the Mouse both have transformers.

    John

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    710
    The Mouse is a cardioid condenser which employs our hand-built single-membrane, large diaphragm capsule. Enclosed within a rotating spherical grille, the capsule can be positioned and adjusted in the smallest of spaces. Perfectly suited for broadcast and voiceover work, you'll find The Mouse equally at home in front of a kick drum, acoustic bass, electric bass amplifier, snare drum and any other sources where accurate reproduction of low frequency transients is desired.

    Characteristics
    Polar pattern: Cardioid
    Transformer balanced Class A discrete amplifier circuit
    Blue's famous hand-built large diaphragm capsule
    Larger-than-life sound with a boost in the upper and lower frequencies and a strong presence
    Integrated suspension shockmount and rotating head for optimal placement
    Hand-tuned and tested-includes cherrywood storage box

    Winner of Electronic Musician's 2000 Editors' Choice Award for Best Microphone, the Blueberry consists of a Class A discrete transformer based microphone amplifier perfectly chosen to compliment our cardioid pattern, hand- built large diaphragm capsule.
    Looks like your right!

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    350
    Originally posted by Revelation:
    <STRONG>

    Looks like your right! </STRONG>

    Well, that makes me one for two today.

    John

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Boca Raton FL
    Posts
    132
    Originally posted by Revelation:
    <STRONG>

    How can you say that? You do a vocal track, and by the time you add eq (Waves Ren, Cambridge or Oxford) and compression (LA2-A, their own color would make it almost impossible to tell which mic you used. They really are both very big and full. I just found the U87ai just a little more rich in the lower mid's while the Kiwi had a little more sparkle.</STRONG>

    Well, I think that's very true in popular music.

    Listen, there is NO ONE up here who could listen to a typical pop recording...and by pop I mean anything like Country, Rock, "Pop" etc....and tell me what microphone is being used. There is so much processing going on that it's ridiculous. Yes I think it's important to start with a basically good mic, but beyond that, a lot of this is probably in the realm of personal preference and not a little bit of anal retentiveness. There is more variation in a singers voice from day to day than there is the ability to hear the difference in many microphones....and pres...that are out there....on a final mix. JMHO.

    Much voodoo out there. I saw one post on rec.audio.pro where an engineer did a shoot out and listed an AT4060 as coming in 2nd only to a C12. Some of the engineers couldn't hear much difference. Between a C12, and an AT4060. Go figure.

    TH

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Boca Raton FL
    Posts
    132
    Originally posted by Revelation:
    <STRONG>I would not want to buy an old U87 as you don't know who dropped or spit into the mic through out the years. The U87Ai seems to have a little more of that popular high end which I prefer.

    True I tested it on my lunch break, but again like they said above, you need to get closer with Blue mic's to get that proximity effect. I guess by you saying thin it means it does not have the rich mid range sound of the U87. In that case you are right. There is something though about Blue mic's that I just love. Not sure if it is about the tight quality control, that I was able to talk to them directly with questions I had, or just the sound of the mic's. I think it is a combination of all of them.

    For me they are both great mic's. I just can't see paying $2,800 for one and $1,999 for the other. Since they are so close (as in sounding great), I would go with the Kiwi.</STRONG>

    You will not pay 2800 for a U87ai unless you are insane

    TH

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    710
    Originally posted by oceantracks:
    <STRONG>


    Well, I think that's very true in popular music.

    Listen, there is NO ONE up here who could listen to a typical pop recording...and by pop I mean anything like Country, Rock, "Pop" etc....and tell me what microphone is being used. There is so much processing going on that it's ridiculous. Yes I think it's important to start with a basically good mic, but beyond that, a lot of this is probably in the realm of personal preference and not a little bit of anal retentiveness. There is more variation in a singers voice from day to day than there is the ability to hear the difference in many microphones....and pres...that are out there....on a final mix. JMHO.

    Much voodoo out there. I saw one post on rec.audio.pro where an engineer did a shoot out and listed an AT4060 as coming in 2nd only to a C12. Some of the engineers couldn't hear much difference. Between a C12, and an AT4060. Go figure.

    TH</STRONG>

    This brings up another question, if you have a quality mic and pre, do you really need so many different pre's and mic's if you can't tell much of a difference. Bear in mind the singer still must sound good with the mic their using, and not just using any mic.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Boca Raton FL
    Posts
    132
    Well, just remember that for a few decades or so records were made in a studio with a console, and all the tracks went through that console. Seldom were there racks of different mic pres to "layer" during the building of a song.

    That's been great for marketing, but the reality is that no, you don't need a few hundred mics and pres

    TH (again, JMHO)

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    23
    I've been curious myself and have wanted to do this for a while and now this thread has given me the impetus to actually make the phone call ... my reservation is in place to rent a U87ai and an ifet7 this weekend for my own mini shoot out with my Kiwi and a few other mics I own.

    For what my opinion is worth, I will report back after the weekend.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Opinions on the Blue Kiwi
    By Donnie Christian in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-05-2004, 11:33 PM
  2. Blue Kiwi for vocal
    By Daymor Moses in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-22-2004, 03:10 PM
  3. FS: Neumann U87ai
    By Michael Hoddy. in forum 3D Classifieds
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-23-2003, 04:11 AM
  4. Focusrite / Blue giveaway
    By 3daudioinc in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-12-2002, 06:12 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •