x
Big K 31 January 2011

Has any of you ever tried the Neumann PS87 pop screen by Neumann?

I am just asking, 'cause one was offered to me for a more reasonable price
and I have never used that before...

 

Comments

audiokid Thu, 02/03/2011 - 17:43

song4gabriel, post: 363193 wrote: oh man dont tell me there is a difference between brands and styles of pop filters now.....

the metal edge on my pop filter is a detriment??? iy yi yi...

learn something new here everyday

I can't say it is because I've never used one like that. It does seem to me though, that wide trim is an obstacle that reflects your breath and sound. I don't sing so targeted either so its a red flag for me.
The Royer pop screen is by far my favourite because it has nothing for trim and should last a lifetime.

RemyRAD Sat, 02/05/2011 - 03:49

I've been using a specialized type of frying Pan splatter screen. It's a punched aluminum creating hundreds of little louvers. It's the same as the Stedman. It costs around $10 US when you find that the food store and they are so large they come in 4 sizes. One of which is perfect taped to a microphone stand. Their aluminum in color instead of black. It's crazy to spend that kind of money on the German variety. I've seen these in photos through the years never played with one. Nobody knew these existed? I would imagine it's large frame wouldn't be ideal. I think they could've done a better job designing this. But hey! If your microphone is going to cost $3000 US I think you should spend $500 for a pop filter? It only makes sense, for Neumann. Sennheiser? Stockholders! I meant to say stockholders.

You can't pop my weasel
Mx. Remy Ann David

Big K Sat, 02/05/2011 - 04:22

I guess, they would be seen more often if it wasn't for the large foam windscreen that is mostly used and can't be pulled over it.
I totally agree ...this is nonsence money spent on a compromised design. I was offered it for only a fraction of the costs, but I turned the offer down, by now.
I have some great screens, already, and I was curious to get some info on this Neumann filter.

Pan splatter screen can work well, but somehow I can't get used to the idea to put them infront of a customer and a 3.000 $ mic...call me old fashion.
;-) I pop weasels all the time, but I always ask politely....

RemyRAD Sat, 02/05/2011 - 05:27

Well, you just make sure you don't cook any bacon first...

Personally, for approximately the 1/2 DB loss at around 15 kHz with the foam, it makes a lot more sense. I don't care if you can hear the difference. Don't pay any attention to the difference and you'll still like it. Besides, you get them in some pretty amazing decorator colors these days and as you know, I like blue, purple, red and anything in tie-dye. I'm not kidding! It's got to have the right color to sound right. When I'm done cooking pork sausage, anything is possible.

I like Sunnyside up personally and still pretty snotty
Mx. Remy Ann David

MrEase Tue, 02/08/2011 - 03:16

RemyRAD, post: 363765 wrote: I think you should call it " POPFILTER$$$$$ "?

What about recycling pantyhose, unwashed? What self-respecting man wouldn't pay a handsome price for that?

No I'm not! Don't even think about it.
Mx. Remy Ann David

While your suggestion may make a very effective pop filter, I doubt it would do much to suppress the sniffing! Hey, you started it! :tongue:

RemyRAD Tue, 02/08/2011 - 04:23

And that could add a much more highly stylized feel to a take so as to make it be fundamentally an important part of the performance. And isn't that what it's all about, the mood, the vibe, the ambience, the tantalizing enhancements from a pheromone enhanced aura. That all helps to develop a better product. So.... Others might prefer a jockstrap? Maybe? Maybe from a Green Bay Packer?

Those commercials.... And that National Hormonally Enhanced Anthem was a good performance.

Menopausal
Mx. Remy Ann David

ACIDMAN Tue, 02/08/2011 - 16:54

In all seriousness though, ( trying very hard to stop laughing), when I started recording, MANY years ago , I couldn't afford a PRO POP FILTER so I made one. And to this day still haven't come across a propper one that is any more effective. So why Neumann even bothered is beyond me !!

Sniff sniff :wink:

RemyRAD Tue, 02/08/2011 - 19:33

Why? You ask why? It's even more simple than you realize. How much does the screen cost to build? I bet it costs more than the $.98, that's 98 ¢ 2n3819 transistor inside the + $3000.00 U87. Isn't there a sucker born every minute? Of course, at least they were able to back it up with a pleasant sounding device. Heck, I remember when I was younger and I never knew how I was going to afford one of those expensive $325 US U87's ever? I'd have to sell an awful lot of greeting cards for that back in 1970. Then they went up to $600 when I finally got a little more than $300 together. Well now, you can buy an $80 version from China. Stick in a $100 transformer and you've got your own $3000 microphone.... But is it? In the right hands it is. How can a microphone cost $3000 + + it only has a $.98 transistor in it? They got us all buying those things. $.98! So, even before the $100 transformer option, at least half that microphone is worth half of $3000 shouldn't it? Especially if you put in that exact U87 replacement transistor you can get at Radio Shaft for $.98.

You do know a lot of Steinways are rebuilt with Japanese actions. What's with that? Is it a Steinway then? I think John might need to chime in here?

You do whatever you do to do whatever you do. And then it will all be right.

Better learn how to read Chinese schematics
Mx. Remy Ann David

My bad.
Of course there are plenty of folks here that can read Chinese schematics. Heck even I can.

Big K Wed, 02/09/2011 - 04:46

Does it sound like a Steinweg? Are the Japanese mechanical part of good quality? ....
So, why not??
A ton and a half of Chinese iron ore cost about 150$. Would you mind driving a BMW 6er Cabrio made from Chinese Iron ore? I would not, in fact, I do, because I drive an Audi A6
:-)
Do I mind if there is a 1 $ FET in a microphone that sound good enough to justifiy its prize? Nah,.. I would not. It is developement, engineering and marketing...
Never was any different on this planet.
If anybody thinks he can weld together a mic with spareparts that is on par with the more expensive ones..Go for it.
;-)

RemyRAD Wed, 02/09/2011 - 21:38

But BigK, they already have. Look at the incredible proliferation of all of these other microphones folks are using with Chinese capsules. Many actually have a compelling good quality sound to them. Do they sound like 87's? No, some sound better and so they have created great allure. Of course, many of these people are building microphones that have not really been developed but simply built. Hey, even my American-made Crown (of Elkhart Indiana now owned by Harmon) utilized Taiwanese/Chinese capsules made by the same manufacturer that were also manufacturing most Radio Shaft $30 condenser microphones. The difference between the Crown & the Radio Shaft capsules were that Crown tested each capsule to ensure that it meant their specifications. The Crown engineer I spoke to told me the Radio Shaft capsules were basically identical to the ones they were using but that they were a crapshoot. Meaning that if you purchased the Radio Shaft microphone, it might sound like a Crown? Or, it might sound like a piece of dog Doo Doo.So, to have some relatively decent sounding, for certain applications, that could also be expendable, have worked out quite well. Of course, I made a couple of minimal modifications such as replacing the output connector on the microphone which had been unbalanced. However, the microphone is actually internally wired for a balanced output. 2 batteries @ 6 V each were fitted in place of the 1 1/2 V AA penlight battery. The microphone with 12 Volts worth of battery help to lower noise and improve headroom along with output drive capability.

So kids, even crappy microphones can be used in professional applications with great success when utilized properly. When I say properly, these bargain microphones do not have features such as low-cut switches or microphone capsule pads. This means that both high sound pressure levels from instruments such as drums are not practical for these microphones. In addition, the higher-level of bass created by Proximity Effect can cause the microphones low-frequency output to level to exceed its output capability. So that can be a problem also. So when you need some extra microphones and can't afford $100 each for SM57/58's, you have a possible $30 alternative that can still produce adequate professional results. Not that I encourage the use of these microphones mind you. They are simply tools like everything else we use and you have to know how to utilize the tool.

Being able to utilize these bargain microphones simply requires a proper understanding of the equipment's capability. But when dealing with inexpensive microphones, thankfully, there's not too much to understand. So, diddling around with inexpensive microphones can also teach you a lot more about microphones.

Sure, there was a fair amount of R&D that went into the superior 87. But one also must remember that that R&D took place back in the 1960s when mass production for professionals was done in much smaller numbers than that for consumers. That same R&D technology is what allows these Chinese bargains to be so enticing. The homework has already been done. You can only redesign a tire (tyre) so many ways. Well, that's 2 right there, I guess, in a way. They're still the same even if they are spelled differently. Some microphones are spelled in German others are spelled in Chinese, some in Russian but they are all bread from the same R&D.

Of course anybody that wants a fine microphone will have to pay for it. Because, as it usually goes you generally get what you pay for but sometimes you get more or, less.

I never learned how to play craps. But I did buy some.
Mx. Remy Ann David

TheJackAttack Sat, 02/12/2011 - 22:28

RemyRAD, post: 363857 wrote: You do know a lot of Steinways are rebuilt with Japanese actions. What's with that? Is it a Steinway then? I think John might need to chime in here?

Well actually, those Japanese action parts are more faithful to original Steinway specifications than Steinway NY currently manufactures. The German Renner parts are defacto Steinway parts since that is what Steinway Hamburg uses anyway (and occasionally Steinway NY depending on the particular year). Steinway has just as much advertising mythos surrounding it to justify its cost. Does it make a "D" worth the money? Not to me, but I don't have to play a Rachmaninoff concerto competing with some jackass horn player like me leading the brass in the back of the orchestra.....;-)

For chamber music, a Bechstein is much superior.

RemyRAD Sat, 02/12/2011 - 23:51

Sure, I'm just lucky I have a lucky Yamaha C-3 that has an action more like a Steinway than a Yamaha due to a flaw in its hammer throw distance. Piano techs keep telling me they want to "fix it". I've told him to just leave it the heck alone as I've had numerous "Steinway only" guys offer to buy it on multiple occasions. So it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

Tinkle tinkle tinkle
Mx. Remy Ann David

x

User login