1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

diferences between U87 and U89

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by Aziel, Nov 11, 2004.

  1. Aziel

    Aziel Guest

    Hi...

    Kurt, AudioGaff or anybody...can you tell me the main diference between the U87 and U89? and what mic you prefer? i just found an oportunity to grab a U89( 197?) for around 600$ thanx in advance...

    Aziel
     
  2. johnwy

    johnwy Well-Known Member

    the u89 is a little smaller and lighter than the u87 but the u89 has 5 polar patterns and can handle a little bit more spl (134 dBspl for the u89 with the pad in, 127dBspl wi the pad in for the u87Ai.)
     
  3. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    From Neumann US website

     
  4. huub

    huub Guest

    I personally prefer , for vocals and drum oh's , the u89i....u87s sound a bit too 'real' for my taste..
    Also, in the long run, u89's seem to be more reliable than 87's..
    cheers
    huub
     
  5. Aziel

    Aziel Guest

    thanx a lot... :cool:
     
  6. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    FWIW, I have found the U87 [even the U87A though to a lesser degree] to be a great 'all purpose' lg. diaphragm FET condenser... and the U-89 to be absolutely worthless.

    Possibly the most boring microphone I have ever heard. I wouldn't waste $6- on one, never mind $600-
     
  7. huub

    huub Guest

    boring, really?..hmmm i think close miked vocals sound fat, and the snare sound coming from u89 oh's is supersweet..
    But i'm not sure my opinion on u87's is valid, we (the company i work for) have 2 u87's and 2 u89i's from the 80's, all 4 of them have never been sent to Neumann, possibly since they were new...
    I think there's something wrong with the 87's, they sound dull and, dunno, just wrong..the 89's still sound great after all these years though..And, like i said, the 89 vocal sound ( with modern ams-neve pre, and 1178 compression) I seriously like...

    I'm interested why you think they sound boring?
    thanx,
    huub
     
  8. huub

    huub Guest

    they might even be from the 70ies..i'm not sure..
    when did Neumann start producing 89i's?
     
  9. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    I like it when I can put a microphone in front of a source and it sounds a wee bit better than being there. There is a tactile event that is experienced when you're in the room with a sound that is not translated to the speakers unless you have good signal path with the right mic in the right place.

    I like it when the sound coming from the control room monitors has a bit more excitment, a bit more "sex", a bit of 'hyper reality'/'larger than life' kind of quality to it but still works and plays well with the other sounds that comprise the presentation.

    To me, the U-89 is like a beautiful woman that lies on her back like a dead fish during sex. It's still getting laid but overall it's just not that satisfying... same goes for the U-89... it'll transform variations in air pressure to magnetic pulses... but at the end of the day, it's just a very unsatisfying transfer.
     
  10. Clayphish

    Clayphish Active Member

    LOL Well said.


     
  11. shock

    shock Guest

    I'd prefer an U87 over an U89 anytime. And just because the U89 isn't able to deliver those brilliant highs does not necessarily make it sound warm.

    Huub: Personally, I find it hard to believe that you like them as drum OH mics as they sound really dark and boring IMO. I wonder how exactly you're using them and what kind of sound you get because I never had satisfying results with these mics.
     
  12. maintiger

    maintiger Well-Known Member

    Wow, after thousands and thousands of hit record vocals tracked through 87's there is something wrong with them???? The only thing wrong with the 87's IMHO is that they cost too much...
    but the sound is there, man. Maybe another mic will deliver better for a particular singer at a particular time but if the mic available is an 87 I'll take it, babe>>>:D
     
  13. radioliver

    radioliver Guest

    Maintiger, I think he was referring to the 87s at his studio. He thinks the 87s he heard have something wrong because they don't sound as good as he thought they would...makes sense??
     
  14. maintiger

    maintiger Well-Known Member

    he still saying there's something wrong with the 87's, not his 87... (or the one at his studio)
    The only thing wrong with an 87 IMHO is that they cost a lot. But you can't go wrong with their sound. This is an all around versatil mic that usually makes the source sound good. I am sure you can find better for an specific project, but if all I have is 87's I'll take'em anyday, anyway, anywhere and anyway! 8)
     
  15. frob

    frob Well-Known Member

    ive used 87's before and they still blowme away in our most resent recording they hooked one up and just talked into it to check it and it was like butter. let alone the where the singer got in there and did his thing. if you htink it sounded wronge it could have been used for the wrong thing, in the wrong direction or flat out the wrong way. and lastly hows the accoustics in your studio?
     
  16. huub

    huub Guest

    nono, i meant there's propably something wrong with OUR u87's..
    To answer the other question: my snare sounds really crispy through the u89i oh's.. I dont think they're dark?! not bright but certainly not dark..are there different 89 versions? any Neumann historians around?
    cheers
    huub
     

Share This Page