Neumann - TLM 107

I find the TLM107 to be miles above the 102 and 103, hits the sweet spot for certain vocalists, esp. female. It will always have a spot in my locker

Am I crazy or does it introduce a lot of weird resonances? Only used it in two different rooms, so they could be at fault, but every time I had to do a lot of narrow dips to combat some weirdness.

Vocals for me. And a violin once, cos it was the only mic available. Every time i got some pretty hefty resonances, static ones though, so pretty easy to deal with, and a good chance the room was the problem. IIRC the response is pretty similar to a 57 so it would give a pronounced high mids but my issue was more boxy mids.

For voice, 103. If you want more color options and multipattern, try 107. A pair of 414s could be good for piano, acoustic guitar, overheads, etc.

From the vocal description and references, OP is obviously female, so why do people keep suggesting a U87? That's a fairly safe bet for a *male* vocal mic, but it's unworkably harsh on many women. A U67 can sometimes work, but it requires a big HF shelf, so why bother? A Neumann TLM 107 gives you that enhanced top on its own, without the problems of a TLM 103, which I recommend avoiding at all costs. (Please spare me the Billie Eilish references! We're not cutting dry whisper vocals here.) Female voices, unless they are really piercing, often benefit from something in the C12 lineage: if not the original, then a '251, C800, and certain editions of '414. The thing to watch out for is sibilance. Pop producers often accept that in raw vocal tracks and simply process the hell out of them, but that's *way* too much work in a situation where one is likely to be stacking dozens vocal tracks. Since the university seems to have a deep locker, I'll mention that Manley Gold, Josephson C715 and C725 are also C12 lineage mics. Contributor u/peepeeland is spot on with his recommendation of a SDC and any university that owns a dummy head should have the usual suspects from Schoeps, DPA, and Neumann available. I think using a SDC is a particularly good idea for close-miked vocals in a studio; when tracking in a hall, I'd lean towards a LDC for better "reach"; use spaced SDC's for hall capture (and print them to separate tracks). Orinoco Flow was cut in a home studio, so all the reverberance heard on it is artificial. For the next decade or so, rackmount reverb processors often shipped with a preset called "Enya Vocals". Replacing the artificial reverb with the real thing is a super cool idea, but college auditoriums are busy places and the sheer quantity of overdubbing required may be unworkable under the schedule constraints. Here's an idea: any university that owns a dummy head has probably done some work with impulse response capture. (If it's McGill, they've done a *lot* of this work!) The strategy is to sample the hall acoustics for multiple stage locations and listening positions, then apply those impulses to the studio-captured vocal tracks. This kind of impulse capture is a big project on its own, but I'll give it even odds that some master's degree candidate already did it for their thesis project. When tracking, it's crucial that OP's pitch, timing, and diction are spot-on for each track. Autotune/Melodyne are *right* out! Enya didn't use them, and that kind of processing ruins the micro pitch variations that make this kind of vocal stacking so appealing. It's important to be really diligent and selective while tracking vocals and it could be very helpful to have a trusted (non-scary!) vocal coach present for these sessions.

Proximity effect can be problem for male singers but it's often a help for women, as it is with you. To get that at a reasonable singing distance, you need a mic with a pattern tighter than your C214, which happens to be cardioid. If you like the top-end presentation of your voice as it stands, then try borrowing a C414 and set it to hyper-cardioid pattern. That will give you the warmth you like at a more reasonable singing distance. A side benefit of using a tighter pattern is that it will pick up less room sound. AKG 414's have been made for many decades and different models are known to have different sounds. Because of that, used pricing is all over the map: some of the oldest ones go for stratospheric prices, while recent models can be found for as little as $600. Among these, the XLII and TLII variants have a brighter top end, while the XLS and ULS versions sound more neutral. Microphone condition can vary: I recommend that you try before you buy, or buy through a dealer with a no-fault return policy. Alternatively, you can find a cardioid-pattern mic that suits your voice a bit better to begin with. Many Neumann microphones have a characteristic upper-bass thickness that reaches into to bottom of the female vocal range. It's fairly common to find female vocals cut on U67's and U47's (Taylor Swift uses the latter), but these mics are way out of your price range. I find that U87's (still very expensive) are unsuitable for many female voices. Two Neumann mics that I have used with considerable success on women are the TLM 193 and the TLM 107. While I've recorded many women with both of these mics, the voices each mic works on are pretty much polar opposites. The TLM 193 has a gentle, un-hyped top end and a smooth, midrange that's made it my go to choice for women whose voices are naturally bright and interact badly with forward-sounding mics like the U87. The upper bass response is slightly larger than life. The overall impression sounds natural in a very classy way. New TLM 193's are out of your price range, but used ones sell for between $800-900. That's not chump change, so it's important to understand whether you have the correct type of voice for it. The TLM 107 is a five-pattern mic like modern '414's and can be set to the same kind of tight pattern. It has a very modern-sounding top end that can be helpful to bring out more detail when a mezzo soprano or alto is singing contemporary pop. It takes EQ very well and doesn't cause the extreme sibilance difficulties that its cheaper sibling, the TLM 103 is known for but, if your voice tends towards harshness, I'd direct you back to the TLM 193. Because it's rare to find used TLM 107's priced below $1200, your best choice for multi-pattern mic with similar versatility remains a used '414.

* TLM1xx would be on my list too - I think they sound "cheap in an expensive way", if that makes sense. * The SM57/58, largely because it *cannot* be as versatile as people ascribe. I still have people regularly tell me "you can track a whole album with it!" when you could do that with any mic. And there are other dynamics I like more, just as durable and sometimes even cheaper (though usually not, I'd always take an m201 over a 57 for instance). * On that same sacrilegious note, I don't like the U87 much, either (Ai or original flavor). I'm not going to say it is a *bad* mic, and I've owned three over time, but there's a reason I don't own one anymore. Like the 103 (which I actively despise rather then merely dislike), there is something about them that sounds like a stripper driving a Bentley to me (weird analogy, but I think it gets the point across). * RE-20 is too big and can be hard to get to sound right. Don't love or hate it, and I do have one, but people are way too attached to it. * Same goes for SM7, with the caveat that it *only applies for VO*. For music the SM7 can be great, I'd usually grab one over a 58 or RE20, but it is a tricky bugger for VO. * Neumann pencil mics (KM8x/18x) are just not that great compared to a lot of modern versions. It isn't a tech with "vintage prestige", the manufacturing has improved, so the KM184 in particular just comes off as overpriced, even compared to the *actual* industry standard SDC's these days in Schoeps, DPA, and Earthworks (and so on). I prefer either pure or colored SDC's, and the Neumann doesn't do either. * I have never understood the appeal of the MD421. One of the few mics I refuse to own/stock because of its idiotic mounting clip, and I just think other similar mics are better at doing what it says it does. * Pretty much every "unobtainium" mic is overrated, to me - yes, a great U47 or 251 is a really cool thing and piece of history, but you can get similar results with other mics. But I'm something of a "vintage-is-better" iconoclast... I'm sure there are more, and I know it sounds like I'm picking on Sennheiser/Neumann, but really every "hyped" mic has been a disappointment to me and those happen to be the ones people strive for so are more prone to being overrated.

Those are great for shows/touring. But for vocals, you definitely want a condenser. I used the MXL for years, and then I got a VERY good deal on Amazon on a Neumann.

I have an mxl condenser mic that works well, but just bought a Neumann condenser mic off Amazon. In the studio, they always said they used the $4k Neumann on me. Not sure that it is a knock off, but supposedly the same one Billie eillish uses and it sounds great. Under $400.

It matters massively and you’ll see that with experience your ears will learn to recognise the difference. It doesn’t matter how much you process a 57, it won’t compare to a Neumann, no matter what you do to it. It might sound cool in a different way, but you won’t get the high fidelity of a top notch condenser, if that’s the sound you’re going for. Think about this: If you go for an “expensive” vocal sound and have a U 87 and maybe a nice compressor, you won’t need to process it much, maybe a bit of eq and some reverb / delay. In that case you’d be MIXing. If you have a 57, you’ll have to use a ton of processing to make it sound more “expensive”. You’ll have to use multiple compressors, color eqs, cut resonances, etc. in that case you would be FIXing. Makes sense?