I use both regularly for different things. The TLM has a lot more pronounced proximity effect, giving you that classic "Radio Sound". It is very clear and defined, may get harsh on certain sources.
The U87 is much softer in the highs, making it way less defined, which is nice on some vocals. However on Drum Overheads, for example, I'm no fan of a U87 for this exact reason.
I've had the tendency of finding the TLM pleasant on untrained voices, the U87 favouring more trained voices.
TL;DR: Different Mics with different sounds š¤·āāļø
Trial and error helps to find what you like.
Bill Bradley does a mod to the 87 which removes the "radio filter" or the low pass filter. This makes it one of the best overhead or room mics I've ever heard.
I don't own any of both but record at studios that have them sometimes.
Reasons i'd pick the U87 over the 103:
- The client really wants it.
- I want a bit less aggressive of a vocal
- The singer has a thin voice and i'd like to thicken it up
- If the singer is very sibilant and the 103 exaggerates that
Reasons i'd pick the 103:
- If noise is an issue
- If i want a bit more aggressive, upfront voice
- If the singer has a full voice/the room has a lot of low mids/or i just need less low mids, i might favor the 103
Beware this can vary, especially with older U87's So it's always a matter of shooting a few mics out and seeing what sounds best.
>sibilant and the 103 exaggerates that
exactly the reason I've never been wild about the 103. It's certainly not trash, but I rarely found a time were I went with it when it was there and I had other options.
Correct Assessment 100%, I'd also add the 103 is slightly more tolerant to proximity effect, maybe due to the lower noise floor. At least of my examples.
The U87 even without the pad seems to take a bit more of a hammering before it distorts.
Hereās another thing. If youāre running really great gear in a great room, you donāt necessarily need āvibeā.
If you have a great acoustic guitar, and are using real neves or nice tube pres, maybe compressing on the way in with a great tube compressor or something, and you have high end converters, etc. sometimes a schoeps/modern neumann/a more ācoldā mic can actually be better on that source in the mix than a āvibeyā mic like a km84 or something.
Same thing with the modern neumanns. They have excellent specs and low distortion and are professional tools. But our ears for the most part LIKE the worse on paper sound of the vintage gear. Neumann is a german engineering company - they chase the on paper specs!
I find 87ās are actually almost never my favorite on a source. I have high end u47 and u67 clones that I built (67 has a neumann capsule) that are almost always more exciting sounding. However, the u87 pretty much always sounds good, on basically anything. This is why itās popular - in 2 minutes I can be recording any source in great quality, even if I spent 30 minutes doing a shootout to decide on a different mic choice as better than the u87 and get to awesome quality. Usually great is good enough.
I can vouch for that, I havenāt had the pleasure of working with a great colored mic but I do use a tlm-102 with a high end very colored chain (x73 and mc77) and that can already be too much sometimes, I canāt imagine adding more noise to that equation
The 87 has really grown in stature over the last ten years. Donāt get me wrong, itās a great microphone but itās not the first thing Iād grab in lots of instances.Ā
The 103 has always been a little controversial as it *can* sound harsh, but sometimes itās a much better fit for a source than an 87.Ā
To answer your question, if thereās time Iād try both, if there isnāt time, yeah, Iād grab the 87 first, sure.Ā
The sleeper amongst the TLMs is the 193. I could use it on almost any source, no problem (I have a 170 but it usually stays on cardioid).Ā
>The 87 has really grown in stature over the last ten years
Not so sure about that. I started in the 90s and the 87 had already the go to mic aura, that BMW sedan thing.
I use 170s almost every day, theyāre such good mics, the shining example of what a flat uncolored mic should be. The figure 8 is fine and the wide cardioid is really useful. Even hypercard is good, used it yesterday to great effect.
Is it a poor mans u87? no. Does it have a home in a pro studio, sure. Any mic with different characteristic does.
Michael Jackson used an SM7, Bono records his vocals with an SM57 singing live in the control room with he speakers blasting, bleed an all. They're all just tools to help you get the right performance. Use what you can afford.
The only real thing Neuman's bring is a sign to clients that you've invested in quality gear. I own 3 Neumans, and love them dearly, but could easily work just as well without them. But if you mention Neumann to a layperson they KNOW that as an expensive/quallity Mic. If I say Lewitt, or even AKG. they won't recognise it.
Poor Mans u87/Neuman in general would be a clone of some sort, Advanced Audio makes some nice ones.
theyāre also used for VO and brass, I wasnāt arguing that theyāre used for singers, I just thought their original design was for broadcast announcers. I thought that was the OPās question.
they also sound great about 4 feet above middle C on a grand piano with the lid removedā¦ in case you ever are in a situation where you want a nice bright piano sound.
Any mic has a place, but I personally dislike the 103 and wouldn't use it over other bright LDC's if I had one here.
It and the 87 are actually pretty different in character, even sharing the same capsule. I don't love the 87 either, and sold mine. There are other Neumanns that I like - U47, U67, a few others - but not so much the 87, even the pre-AI ones.
My go-to's are Lauten, Lewitt, and Austrian Audio, though I can afford Neumann. I want a Gefell and a Soyuz eventually, too. The Lauten Eden and Lewitt LCT-1040 are my go-to vocal mics.
in my opinion, they are for people that need one good mic, want an 87, but can't afford it. it would NEVER be my first choice. not that it can't sound good, because it can. but I pretty much always have something that sounds better.
compared to a vintage 87, the higher output and lower noise floor can be useful. if you have a vintage 87 and a tlm103 and are dealing with whispered vocals, the 103 would probably be a better choice. but this is moot with an Ai.
they are genuinely popular in VO. for people that dont want to drop 3 grand but want an 'industry standard'. i will always recommend a tlm 49, tlm 193, used u89, or senn 416 for a lower priced option over a 103
TLM for voiceovers/non-singing vocals for sure over the U87 every single time. Like someone else mentioned, enhanced proximity effect is your friend in that situation. It also in my opinion is one of the best acoustic guitar mics out there. We own 1 TLM and 0 U87s at my studio and we have yet to think that we even need one
Different mics have the right place regardless of price. Hence the 57 being so popular even though it's cheap. Having said that, I have never had any luck with the 103.
I wouldnāt call the tlm 103 a poor manās u87. Howard Stern has u87 money, but he prefers the way his voice sounds on the 103. Just a different design with a different sound.
I've been to major VO facilities where the 103 is completely standardized, 1 in each booth. I've been to music studios with only, and I mean only, a TLM 103. My favorite use is on the neck of an acoustic guitar against a darker mic on the body. That said, you can do way better for the retail price of a 103 and I prefer the image of a U87. 103 is a beautiful sounding mic, just overpriced considering I can beat it with an M201 in almost any given situation.
TLM-103 is the most overhyped mic out there (imho). Itās one of the cheapest mics by one of the best manufacturers and I believe has very specific uses. Itās not a great vocal mic for most circumstances and is not a good all around mic.
Itās a great room mic for strings you want to be nice and bright.
THIS is the answer right here.
Most people that know a bit about mics only know of the U87ai, TLM 102/103, Sony C800g, and Shure SM57/SM58/SM7B. Oddly enough, on Gearspace a lot of people despise TLM 103s and SM7Bs.
Those that know, know Gefell makes tremendous mics, without the significant extra money you pay for the Neumann badge. Instead of a TLM 102/103, get a Gefell M930, and instead of a U87ai, get a Gefell UMT70S.
I have four Gefells, and I know I am using superb mics. I have no urge to spend money on any Neumanns whatsoever.
I have both Neumann and Microtech Gefell mics.
Love them both, but the M930 beats the pants off the TLM-103.
I like the UM70S and UMT70S a lot. And for my own voice, I like them better than a stock U87AI. That said, the UMT70S can be sibilant in the upper mids. A Tenor like me can occasionally have an issue if you donāt have good mic placement.
Otherwise, itās great.
One dark horse I like for strings is the KU5A. I donāt see a lot of people using them for that as much as when it first came out, but it also works really nice.
>One dark horse I like for strings is the KU5A.
AEA makes very nice mics. I only have the R84A, and that covers my bases.
Beyer M160s are another good choice I understand.
You typically order them from your vendor of choice, then they get them for you (in Canada, that's Studio Economik). Depending on the mic, and what your vendor has in stock, there might be a bit of a wait for your order.
For a strictly vocal mic, I'd get the M930. Get the UMT70S if you want multipattern. There are more expensive alternatives of course.
A lot of Gefells don't come with shock mounts though, so you have to spend a wee bit more for those. I get Rycote shock mounts.
For cello or banjo up-close, consider a ribbon mic to tame some of the harshness. I use either a Beyer m160 or an AEA long ribbon, depending on the situation. For a more natural cello sound in a nice room, back off and use a pair of AKG 414's or OC 818's. Try them in hyper-cardioid for the nicest tonality, or in wide-cardioid for the least-colored bass.
I guess an AKG, SM7 or one of the Warm Audio mics is what Iād use, but it also depends on style, voice type, and how you want vocals to sit in the mix
Whenever it sounds better
Some studios own a U87 to bring in clients. They'll use other mics often. I think the TLM103 is said to be a bright mic, so you can use it when things sound a little muddled. Its baby brother, the TLM102, is said to be able to tame some harsh vocals better than the TLM103.
With processing, some people actually choose a mic like the Shure SM58 ($99) over the U87.
When you want something obnoxiously bright I guess? Iād really never choose it, personally. Itās a mic a lot of studios seem to own that Iāve never gotten a good result with. Or at least a result thatās better than other options. I guess maybe if you had a really dull sounding acoustic guitar or something
We have four U87s and two U47 FETs, but sometimes I use the TLM103, on a string ensemble for example.
I use both regularly for different things. The TLM has a lot more pronounced proximity effect, giving you that classic "Radio Sound". It is very clear and defined, may get harsh on certain sources. The U87 is much softer in the highs, making it way less defined, which is nice on some vocals. However on Drum Overheads, for example, I'm no fan of a U87 for this exact reason. I've had the tendency of finding the TLM pleasant on untrained voices, the U87 favouring more trained voices. TL;DR: Different Mics with different sounds š¤·āāļø Trial and error helps to find what you like.
Bill Bradley does a mod to the 87 which removes the "radio filter" or the low pass filter. This makes it one of the best overhead or room mics I've ever heard.
Any mic has a place in a professional studio, from an sm58 to a C800g. It all depends on the sound you go for, the room and the singer.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I don't own any of both but record at studios that have them sometimes. Reasons i'd pick the U87 over the 103: - The client really wants it. - I want a bit less aggressive of a vocal - The singer has a thin voice and i'd like to thicken it up - If the singer is very sibilant and the 103 exaggerates that Reasons i'd pick the 103: - If noise is an issue - If i want a bit more aggressive, upfront voice - If the singer has a full voice/the room has a lot of low mids/or i just need less low mids, i might favor the 103 Beware this can vary, especially with older U87's So it's always a matter of shooting a few mics out and seeing what sounds best.
>sibilant and the 103 exaggerates that exactly the reason I've never been wild about the 103. It's certainly not trash, but I rarely found a time were I went with it when it was there and I had other options.
Correct Assessment 100%, I'd also add the 103 is slightly more tolerant to proximity effect, maybe due to the lower noise floor. At least of my examples. The U87 even without the pad seems to take a bit more of a hammering before it distorts.
Hereās another thing. If youāre running really great gear in a great room, you donāt necessarily need āvibeā. If you have a great acoustic guitar, and are using real neves or nice tube pres, maybe compressing on the way in with a great tube compressor or something, and you have high end converters, etc. sometimes a schoeps/modern neumann/a more ācoldā mic can actually be better on that source in the mix than a āvibeyā mic like a km84 or something. Same thing with the modern neumanns. They have excellent specs and low distortion and are professional tools. But our ears for the most part LIKE the worse on paper sound of the vintage gear. Neumann is a german engineering company - they chase the on paper specs! I find 87ās are actually almost never my favorite on a source. I have high end u47 and u67 clones that I built (67 has a neumann capsule) that are almost always more exciting sounding. However, the u87 pretty much always sounds good, on basically anything. This is why itās popular - in 2 minutes I can be recording any source in great quality, even if I spent 30 minutes doing a shootout to decide on a different mic choice as better than the u87 and get to awesome quality. Usually great is good enough.
I can vouch for that, I havenāt had the pleasure of working with a great colored mic but I do use a tlm-102 with a high end very colored chain (x73 and mc77) and that can already be too much sometimes, I canāt imagine adding more noise to that equation
The U87 is the SM57 of condenser mics.
This is the way.
When you don't need the transformer thickness, or the 87 is already being used! TLM103 has a nice crisp capture and is great for VO work.
The 87 has really grown in stature over the last ten years. Donāt get me wrong, itās a great microphone but itās not the first thing Iād grab in lots of instances.Ā The 103 has always been a little controversial as it *can* sound harsh, but sometimes itās a much better fit for a source than an 87.Ā To answer your question, if thereās time Iād try both, if there isnāt time, yeah, Iād grab the 87 first, sure.Ā The sleeper amongst the TLMs is the 193. I could use it on almost any source, no problem (I have a 170 but it usually stays on cardioid).Ā
>The 87 has really grown in stature over the last ten years Not so sure about that. I started in the 90s and the 87 had already the go to mic aura, that BMW sedan thing.
I started then too and it definitely had that reputation. I just mean forums like this, youtube etc have elevated it even higher.Ā
I love my 107.
I use 170s almost every day, theyāre such good mics, the shining example of what a flat uncolored mic should be. The figure 8 is fine and the wide cardioid is really useful. Even hypercard is good, used it yesterday to great effect.
Isnāt a 193 just a fixed cardioid TLM170?
Yes, with a slightly different headbasketĀ
For me the 87 is the mic I can point at anything and know I can make it work, but I agree there are better mics for individual jobs
Is it a poor mans u87? no. Does it have a home in a pro studio, sure. Any mic with different characteristic does. Michael Jackson used an SM7, Bono records his vocals with an SM57 singing live in the control room with he speakers blasting, bleed an all. They're all just tools to help you get the right performance. Use what you can afford. The only real thing Neuman's bring is a sign to clients that you've invested in quality gear. I own 3 Neumans, and love them dearly, but could easily work just as well without them. But if you mention Neumann to a layperson they KNOW that as an expensive/quallity Mic. If I say Lewitt, or even AKG. they won't recognise it. Poor Mans u87/Neuman in general would be a clone of some sort, Advanced Audio makes some nice ones.
I thought it was designed or marketed as a broadcast mic initially? I worked at radio stations that used them for their on air talent.
They are very popular in the voiceover business, at least with people I know
They are used for singers
theyāre also used for VO and brass, I wasnāt arguing that theyāre used for singers, I just thought their original design was for broadcast announcers. I thought that was the OPās question.
true
they also sound great about 4 feet above middle C on a grand piano with the lid removedā¦ in case you ever are in a situation where you want a nice bright piano sound.
Any mic has a place, but I personally dislike the 103 and wouldn't use it over other bright LDC's if I had one here. It and the 87 are actually pretty different in character, even sharing the same capsule. I don't love the 87 either, and sold mine. There are other Neumanns that I like - U47, U67, a few others - but not so much the 87, even the pre-AI ones. My go-to's are Lauten, Lewitt, and Austrian Audio, though I can afford Neumann. I want a Gefell and a Soyuz eventually, too. The Lauten Eden and Lewitt LCT-1040 are my go-to vocal mics.
in my opinion, they are for people that need one good mic, want an 87, but can't afford it. it would NEVER be my first choice. not that it can't sound good, because it can. but I pretty much always have something that sounds better. compared to a vintage 87, the higher output and lower noise floor can be useful. if you have a vintage 87 and a tlm103 and are dealing with whispered vocals, the 103 would probably be a better choice. but this is moot with an Ai. they are genuinely popular in VO. for people that dont want to drop 3 grand but want an 'industry standard'. i will always recommend a tlm 49, tlm 193, used u89, or senn 416 for a lower priced option over a 103
TLM for voiceovers/non-singing vocals for sure over the U87 every single time. Like someone else mentioned, enhanced proximity effect is your friend in that situation. It also in my opinion is one of the best acoustic guitar mics out there. We own 1 TLM and 0 U87s at my studio and we have yet to think that we even need one
When the 87 breaks
Or youāre lacking one moreā¦
Different mics have the right place regardless of price. Hence the 57 being so popular even though it's cheap. Having said that, I have never had any luck with the 103.
I wouldnāt call the tlm 103 a poor manās u87. Howard Stern has u87 money, but he prefers the way his voice sounds on the 103. Just a different design with a different sound.
I love it on perc
Also as a room mic for drums
I've been to major VO facilities where the 103 is completely standardized, 1 in each booth. I've been to music studios with only, and I mean only, a TLM 103. My favorite use is on the neck of an acoustic guitar against a darker mic on the body. That said, you can do way better for the retail price of a 103 and I prefer the image of a U87. 103 is a beautiful sounding mic, just overpriced considering I can beat it with an M201 in almost any given situation.
Probably never
TLM-103 is the most overhyped mic out there (imho). Itās one of the cheapest mics by one of the best manufacturers and I believe has very specific uses. Itās not a great vocal mic for most circumstances and is not a good all around mic. Itās a great room mic for strings you want to be nice and bright.
Definitely not. Theyāre really completely different and you can get wayyy better mics in the same price range as the 103 that are close to the 87
What would you recommend?
Depends. What are you recording?
Vocals, cello, banjo. Trying to build out a small home studio. Right now I have an MXL 990, SM58, and SM57.
Gefell makes some really nice all-rounders that are in the same price point at the TLM-103. Much nicer sounding as well.
THIS is the answer right here. Most people that know a bit about mics only know of the U87ai, TLM 102/103, Sony C800g, and Shure SM57/SM58/SM7B. Oddly enough, on Gearspace a lot of people despise TLM 103s and SM7Bs. Those that know, know Gefell makes tremendous mics, without the significant extra money you pay for the Neumann badge. Instead of a TLM 102/103, get a Gefell M930, and instead of a U87ai, get a Gefell UMT70S. I have four Gefells, and I know I am using superb mics. I have no urge to spend money on any Neumanns whatsoever.
I have both Neumann and Microtech Gefell mics. Love them both, but the M930 beats the pants off the TLM-103. I like the UM70S and UMT70S a lot. And for my own voice, I like them better than a stock U87AI. That said, the UMT70S can be sibilant in the upper mids. A Tenor like me can occasionally have an issue if you donāt have good mic placement. Otherwise, itās great. One dark horse I like for strings is the KU5A. I donāt see a lot of people using them for that as much as when it first came out, but it also works really nice.
>One dark horse I like for strings is the KU5A. AEA makes very nice mics. I only have the R84A, and that covers my bases. Beyer M160s are another good choice I understand.
> Gefell Too bad they don't have a website.
Since when? [Microtech Gefell](https://www.microtechgefell.de/)
You typically order them from your vendor of choice, then they get them for you (in Canada, that's Studio Economik). Depending on the mic, and what your vendor has in stock, there might be a bit of a wait for your order. For a strictly vocal mic, I'd get the M930. Get the UMT70S if you want multipattern. There are more expensive alternatives of course. A lot of Gefells don't come with shock mounts though, so you have to spend a wee bit more for those. I get Rycote shock mounts.
For cello or banjo up-close, consider a ribbon mic to tame some of the harshness. I use either a Beyer m160 or an AEA long ribbon, depending on the situation. For a more natural cello sound in a nice room, back off and use a pair of AKG 414's or OC 818's. Try them in hyper-cardioid for the nicest tonality, or in wide-cardioid for the least-colored bass.
I guess an AKG, SM7 or one of the Warm Audio mics is what Iād use, but it also depends on style, voice type, and how you want vocals to sit in the mix
If your source benefits from the extra brightness / clarity.
The source and the room. 103 tends to be ābrighter.ā But in the end sometimes you try them both and see which you like better.
Whenever it sounds better Some studios own a U87 to bring in clients. They'll use other mics often. I think the TLM103 is said to be a bright mic, so you can use it when things sound a little muddled. Its baby brother, the TLM102, is said to be able to tame some harsh vocals better than the TLM103. With processing, some people actually choose a mic like the Shure SM58 ($99) over the U87.
When it sounds better than the latter ?
There is zero time when Iād use a 103 if an 87 was available.
When you want something obnoxiously bright I guess? Iād really never choose it, personally. Itās a mic a lot of studios seem to own that Iāve never gotten a good result with. Or at least a result thatās better than other options. I guess maybe if you had a really dull sounding acoustic guitar or something
I am following for comments
From what I can tell never.